The Influence of Adaptive Schools Training on the Development of Principals' Leadership Identity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Leadership identity is currently viewed as a capacity precursor and necessary for principals to effectively lead learning in schools during today’s complex times. This study investigated the influence of Adaptive School (AS) training on the development of principals’ leadership identity. Through a basic interpretive qualitative approach, interviews took place with 12 North American public-school principals from elementary, secondary, or blended schools. Through semi-structured interviews, the principals shared their experiences and how they used what they learned in response to the AS training. The themes from the research revealed that the AS training had a clear influence on these principals’ leadership identity. They highly valued the training and found it helpful, and applicable to their leadership. In addition, they found the training format to be useful in providing clarity on how to facilitate learning in their schools, as a “leader for learning.” Seven of the participants described the AS training as transformative. Others relayed how it provided clarity for how to enact their already well-defined leadership identities. The principals used what they learned in meetings; in particular, they applied norms of collaboration, dialogue, and discussion structures in their schools after the AS training. They found understanding the concept of complex adaptive systems (CAS) helpful to manage complexity and uncertainty by being more calm, open, objective, and responsive. Some principals noted areas for development within the organization, Thinking Collaborative, in particular, the need for further racial equality, Canadian accessibility, and adaptivity in a pandemic.
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 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".