School Plus: Creating Leadership Through Integral Development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On what philosophical basis can schools and communities address the Task Force and Public Dialogue on the Role of the School- School Plus for Saskatchewan educators, to build school, community, and human service partnerships? This report calls upon schools to offer a holistic focus for “meeting the needs of children ” in response to the “tectonic”shifts that have shaken the ground of much current schooling. It champions the distinctiveness of various learning needs and contexts, penetrates human meaning and purpose, and extends supportive relationships to include the marginalized. Like many traditional approaches to education, however, many holistic approaches are not sufficiently creative or critical to transform structures that resist change. This work reviews key concepts in an integral development approach for building toward the School Plus vision. The integral development approach was pioneered by Edmund O’Sullivan in Transformative Learning where he advances differentiation, subjectivity, and community as the key principles of creative evolutionary learning. This approach recognizes the need for a vital holistic consciousness and imaginative discernment that can allow new values to emerge into existence. In a discussion of how integral development is grounded in an ecological paradigm that understands human evolution as part of the much grander evolution of the universe, this discussion considers how systems can creatively renew themselves. An integral development framework may be helpful for enhancing the creative interpretation and
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 | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.016 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".