Principals' transformational leadership and teachers' collective efficacy

The study was designed to test the relationship of principals' transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership with teachers' collective efficacy. Bandura's theory of efficacy applied to the group and Bass's transformational leadership theory were used as the theoretical framework. Participants included 487 French Canadian teachers from 40 public high schools. As expected, there were positive and significant correlations between principals' transformational and transactional leadership and teachers' collective efficacy. Also, there was a negative and significant correlation between laissez-faire leadership and teachers' collective efficacy. Moreover, regression analysis showed transformational leadership significantly enhanced the predictive capabilities of transactional leadership on teachers' collective efficacy. These results confirm the importance of leadership to predict collective efficacy and, by doing so, strengthen Bass's theory of leadership.     

How Do Logics Explain?

Anti-exceptionalists about logic maintain that it is continuous with the empirical sciences. Taking anti-exceptionalism for granted, we argue that traditional approaches to explanation are inadequate in the case of logic. We argue that Andrea Woody's functional analysis of explanation is a better fit with logical practice and accounts better for the explanatory role of logical theories.     

Decidability of an Xstit Logic

This paper presents proofs of completeness and decidability of a non-temporal fragment of an Xstit logic. This shows a distinction between the non-temporal fragments of Xstit logic and regular stit logic since the latter is undecidable. The proof of decidability is via the finite model property. The finite model property is shown to hold by constructing a filtration. However, the set that is used to filter the models isn’t simply closed under subformulas, it has more complex closure conditions. The filtration set is akin to the Fischer–Ladner closure of a set used to show completeness and decidability of propositional dynamic logic.     

Against logical generalism

The orthodox view of logic takes for granted the central importance of logical principles. Logic, and thus logical reasoning, is to be understood as a system of rules or principles with universal application. Let us call this orthodox view logical generalism. In this paper we argue that logical generalism, whether monist or pluralist, is wrong. We then outline an account of logical consequence in the absence of general logical principles, which we call logical particularism.

     

Getting the Most Out of Inconsistency

In this paper we look at two classic methods of deriving consequences from inconsistent premises: Rescher-Manor and Schotch-Jennings. The overall goal of the project is to confine the method of drawing consequences from inconsistent sets to those that do not require reference to any information outside of very general facts about the set of premises. Methods in belief revision often require imposing assumptions on premises, e.g., which are the important premises, how the premises relate in non-logical ways. Such assumptions enable one to select a reasonable collection of formulas from all the formulas of the language (the set of consequences of an inconsistent set). Basic versions of the classic methods only use logical relations between the premises. We compare and criticize each of the classic views with an eye to combining the views to get the most out of inconsistent premises. We do this in a way that will respect the theoretical grounding of each view while meeting our other restrictions.     

Worlds and times

In the fourteenth century, Duns Scotus suggested that the proper analysis of modality required not just moments of time but also ??moments of nature??. In making this suggestion, he broke with an influential view first presented by Diodorus in the early Hellenistic period, and might even be said to have been the inventor of ??possible worlds??. In this essay we take Scotus?? suggestion seriously devising first a double-index logic and then introducing the temporal order. Finally, using the temporal order, we define a modal order. This allows us to present modal logic without the usual interpretive questions arising concerning the relation called variously ??accessibility??, ??alternativeness??, and, ??relative possibility.?? The system in which this analysis is done is one of those which have come to be called a hybrid logic.