Personal construct change and collaborative reflective practice: An examination of the use of repertory grid technique for research in a middle years school in Manitoba
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis describes a research study that examined how collaborative reflective practice with three staff members in a middle years school affected their psychological constructs of what constitutes a good school. Using an action research design, the study made use of personal construct psychology and the methodology of repertory grid technique. Repertory grid results were analyzed using methods developed from personal construct theory (cluster analysis, principal components analysis and messy change grid analysis). This permitted insight into the nature and processes of changes that occurred. These processes were examined in light of Leithwood’s work on teacher development and Fullan’s thoughts on educational change. Using these models as an analytical framework, an evaluation was made of the potential uses and value of repertory grid technique in middle schools. The technique aligns well with the Leithwood and Fullan models and has notable benefits and advantages to offer the field of educational leadership.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it