Emerging issues in Higher Education leadership in relation to liminal COVID-19 contexts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper aims to explore the positive and negative impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on Western higher education leadership, primarily as the pandemic either increased the existing challenges in higher education leadership or opened a pathway for innovation and experimentation due to the liminal environment. Understanding that leadership effectiveness centres on the tripartite elements of leader, follower and context, this qualitative study sought to understand how the liminal context of a global pandemic affected the leadership of higher education institutions. Accordingly, this qualitative study uses a phenomenological and grounded theory approach. The team facilitated semi-structured interviews, and at the height of COVID-19, when higher education leaders became less available due to the challenges posed by the emerging context, we hosted the interview questions in a Google Form and solicited written responses. Our sample included 18 higher education leaders from Canada, South Africa and USA: 5 semi-structured interviews and 13 Google Forms. The emerging issues in higher education leadership moved into sharper focus during the COVID-19 pandemic. As such, the emerging issues and the emergent leadership wisdom to address them accord well with the existing literature on skills leadership and emergent leadership in liminal contexts. The study uncovered the utility of the Polyhedron model of wise leadership as a meaningful mindset to drive effective leadership in the liminal pandemic context.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.005 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".