MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7039433419

Meanings of success and successful leadership in Ontario, Canada, in neo-liberal time

2015· article· en· W7039433419 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarship@Western (Western University) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInsect and Arachnid Ecology and Behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)Educational leadershipClosing (real estate)Raising (metalworking)Leadership styleAcademic achievementInstructional leadershipQualitative research
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The provincial government of Ontario, Canada, has committed itself to raising student achievement, closing achievement gaps, and increasing the public’s confidence in public education. It has introduced many policies, including the Ontario Leadership Strategy (OLS), to support these goals. Our study examined how teachers, administrators, support staff, and parents in three elementary schools in Ontario understand and enact school success and successful school leadership within this (neo-liberal) context. Findings of a comparative analysis of Ontario policy texts and data from interviews with administrators, teachers, support staff, and parents in the schools demonstrate that the school-based participants defined success as academic learning, a positive school climate, and students’ well-being. This definition differs from the definition prioritised by Ontario’s government: high scores on standardised provincial and international tests. However, principals in the schools enacted leadership practices advocated by OLS to support locally defined notions of success

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.159
Threshold uncertainty score0.976

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0280.046
Scholarly communication0.0110.003
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.094
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.176 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholarship@Western (Western University)Same topicInsect and Arachnid Ecology and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207