How Canadian School Leaders Perceive Their Capacity To Foster Culturally Responsive School Practices To Influence Student Outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite numerous studies on race relations and racism in Canada, there is a relative paucity of research on school leaders’ perceptions of cultural responsiveness in the Canadian educational system. Racial diversity among students enrolled in Canadian schools has increased dramatically over the last few decades. The diversity gap between a racialized student population and White school leaders continues to widen, with more than 95% of Canadian school leaders being White (Turner, 2015). The primary objective of this qualitative phenomenological study was to explore school leaders’ perceptions of how culturally responsive practices improve student outcomes. This study was guided by the following question: How do Canadian school leaders perceive their capacity to foster culturally responsive practices to influence student outcomes? Semi structured interviews (30 to 70 minutes each) were conducted with five school leaders who identified as White, monolingual, cisgender, and able-bodied. Each participant had a master’s degree and had been in the field of education between 14 and 22 years. Data was analyzed using critical race theory, specifically culturally responsive school leadership, as a theoretical framework to examine school leaders’ perceptions through the lens of race and racism. The findings suggest that urgent changes in university educator programs, school leadership programs, and district professional development are necessary for preparing educators and school leaders to address issues of racial awareness, equity, and social justice in Canadian schools and improve student outcomes for all students.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".