This paper reports on a study of the recent curriculum reform of the Swedish upper-secondary school, Gy11. Although aesthetics were not made compulsory subjects by this reform, all students have a statutory entitlement to be offered a minimum of one course in an aesthetics subject. We wished to determine whether students are actually being given the opportunity of choosing such subjects.

The study is a theory-based and content-oriented evaluation. Data are based on curriculum studies and a comprehensive survey of upper-secondary school principals.

Our findings indicate that while principals have generally organized aesthetics courses, students seldom choose this kind of educational content. Instead, students’ selection is ruled by indirect methods of manipulation.

Hur kan det pedagogiska ledarskapet användas i skolans styrkedja för att ge de bästa förutsättningarna för elevers kunskapsutveckling? Hur kan ledarskapet förbättra elevers kunskapsutveckling? Vilka olika förväntningar finns på styrkedjans aktörer? 

Skolans styrkedja sträcker sig från den nationella nivån – riksdag, regering och skolmyndigheter – till varje lärare i klassrummet eller i barngruppen. I den här boken visar författaren att en väl fungerande styrkedja ger goda förutsättningar för elevernas kunskapsutveckling. I en sådan styrkedja omfattas alla av gemensamma värderingar och man samarbetar för att uppnå skolans och elevernas mål. Ett sådant strukturerat samarbete ger förutsättningar att stärka såväl det pedagogiska ledarskapets innehåll som tilliten mellan aktörerna. 

I bokens första del behandlas förskolans och skolans styrkedja, begreppet pedagogiskt ledarskap samt barns och elevers lärande och utveckling. I den andra delen presenteras en fallstudie, genomförd i en svensk kommun, och i den tredje delen kopplas bokens två första delar samman. I del tre diskuteras också hur de nya kunskaperna kan användas i arbetet med förskolans och skolans utveckling och förändring. I avslutningen beskriver författaren hur man utifrån hela styrkedjans perspektiv kan stärka och arbeta med det lokala pedagogiska ledarskapet.

This is a comparative study, drawing on data obtained from interviews conducted with headteachers, that compares the roles of Swedish and British headteachers as pedagogical leaders. For its analytical framework the study uses the qualitative research approach known as phenomenography and, in the context of the guiding legal documents related to education, examines the study's findings as frame factors and as tight and loosely coupled systems. Based on interviews with the study's subjects (five Swedish and five English headteachers), discernible differences were noted between Swedish and English headteachers in their roles as pedagogical leaders. Both groups are responsible for the administration and management of the school but, compared to the Swedish headteachers, their English counterparts have greater personal responsibility for the school's overall performance and are more focused on providing leadership in teaching and learning. In contrast, the Swedish headteachers had a greater separation of the two roles, with the headteacher taking responsibility for administration and leaving responsibility for teaching and learning to the teachers.

This research seeks to look at the effect of the new Swedish training programme for head teachers by comparing it with the previous national training programme and does so primarily through an analysis of documents and texts that served to underpin the two different programmes. To put the Swedish teacher-training programme in an international perspective, the study makes some comparisons to the English teacher-training system. In order to compare and analyse the documents related to the training programmes, frame-factor theoretical perspective is employed. Even though the new training programme is much more intensive and comprehensive than the previous one and even though it focuses on areas with relevance to school equality and assuring students' legal rights, the study's findings show that the new training programme, like the old programme, is still not sufficient to equip all school leaders with the skills they need to fulfil the responsibilities as required in the schools' charter and to assure school equality and the legal rights and guarantees of students.

Headteachers in Swedish comprehensive schools are supposed to guarantee pupils’ legal security, which is expressed in preparatory works, in accordance to the present Education Act. The following question will be under what circumstances the headteacher has to fulfil these demands. Accordingly a central concept of this dissertation is legal security, which will be explained from different aspects.

Furthermore, the fact that the demands on headteachers to be a guarantee for pupils’ legal security increased with the changed organisation of schools during the 80’s and the 90’s. The governing body was earlier centralised with many detailed rules, but became during this time decentralised and more goal oriented. The Education Act became at this time what in Sweden is called a framework law.

What are the opportunities for dissatisfied pupils to appeal headteachers’ decisions? In this thesis it is established that this opportunity is limited. Most of what happens in comprehensive schools is defined as real action and cannot be appealed. Furthermore, it is a fact that most of the decisions made by the Education Ordinance cannot be appealed.

In this dissertation the Head of the Following-up Department, and the Head of the Juridical Department in the National Agency for Education have been interviewed. Both of them are central figures at the National Agency for Education main office in Stockholm. Furthermore, all headteachers in one municipality have answered three questionnaires and some of them have also participated in a continued investigation. Also the National Head Teacher Training Programme has been investigated. As informant in this investigation the author has used a follow up study from the National Agency for Education.

The results from the investigation in one municipality shows: that headteachers should effect the pupils’ rights, that headteachers must be confidential with aims and rules of the school, that headteachers have to be fully aware of her/his school activities, that headteachers have to maintain pupils’ rights and that headteachers must apply administrative routines for documenting and reporting decisions. Questions about pupils’ legal security seem to have great topicality, but they do not seem to belong to either Education or Law. The investigation is too small to allow any possibilities for making generalisations from the results.

To make it possible to look at a specific question from several perspectives a first sketch of a theoretical model has been created in the dissertation. This model shall be looked upon more as a way to think than a complete model.

Med skollag (SFS, 2010:800) följde att utbildningen ska vila på vetenskaplig grund och beprövad erfarenhet. Motsvarande reglering finns inte i tidigare skollagar. I den här rapporten diskuteras vad kravet innebär och dessutom görs en genomgång av hur kopplingen till vetenskap sker i högre utbildning samt mot hälso- och sjukvården. Att utbildningen i skolväsendet ska ta sin utgångspunkt i vad vetenskapen visar är nog en truism för de flesta. Men vad betyder det i skolans praktik? Skolforskningens resultat är inte entydiga och skolan är dessutom utsatt för stort samhälleligt och politiskt intresse med många personliga åsikter. Ibland hänvisas till forskning för att ge dessa åsikter stöd. I rapporten slås fast att skollagens krav på en vetenskapligt baserad utbildning inte följdes av några implementeringsstrategier. Genom den lösa koppling som finns mellan olika nivåer i skolans styrkedja ges därför utrymme för egna tolkningar. Det innebär att ingen egentligen kan avgöra i vilken grad det som beslutats på statlig nivå har blivit verklighet i skolors arbete. Samtidigt är intresset för en vetenskapligt baserad skola stort och statliga myndigheter som Skolverket, Skolforskningsinstitutet och Skolinspektionen arbetar flitigt med frågan. Den är dessutom starkt fokuserad inom lärarutbildningar och fortbildningar av skolans personal. Att stärka den vetenskapliga grunden i skolornas arbete är av nationellt intresse och för att nå framgång i detta har skolans huvudman, skolchefen och skolans övriga ledare en viktig funktion. Det centrala är inte att försöka tolka vad begreppet ”vila på vetenskaplig grund och beprövad erfarenhet” betyder rent lingvistiskt. Än mer viktigt är det att komma fram till hur det ska hanteras i skolans utbildning 5 och det finns förmodligen en skillnad mellan hur det ska tolkas inom hälso  – och sjukvård jämfört med skolan. Det är dags att ta tag i denna skillnad och fastställa vad vetenskaplig grund och beprövad erfarenhet betyder i skolväsendet. Skolan behöver hitta sitt eget sätt att arbeta med vad det innebär att utbildningen ska vila på vetenskaplig grund och beprövad erfarenhet.

The purpose of this article is to increase our knowledge about the role that directors of education play as leaders of educational activities. For its analytical framework, the study uses the qualitative research approach known as phenomenography and examines the study's findings against the rationalist perspective, against systems theory and against tight and loosely-coupled systems. On the issue of accountability, the study shows that while the directors were perceived to be accountable for mismanagement of finances, being accountable for student results was not something that worried the directors participating in this study.

According to the Swedish Education Act, schools should support both students' knowledge development and personal development. Students' levels of knowledge are measured and compared through their examination results and formal grades as well as through international comparative studies and other tools. However, students' personal development is not measured. The purpose of this study is to explore the efforts of local governance chain actors - the Local Educational Authority (LEA), superintendents, principals and teachers - to realise these two normative requirements and to learn more about the tensions and power struggles between these actors. The overarching question is: How do the actors in the governance chain prioritise and act with regard to the requirements for developing students' knowledge and students as individuals? This study is designed as a case study in a compulsory school setting. The empirical data were collected by interviewing LEA chairs, superintendents, principals and teachers in a small town in the south of Sweden. The results show that the LEA and the superintendents focus on students' knowledge development, but principals and teachers resist a too strong focus on knowledge development. The normative requirement - students' personal development - is not explicitly discussed at any level in the governance chain.

Under senare tid har man allt oftare kunnat läsa om att elevernas resultat i skolan inte är tillräckligt bra. Denna handbok tar upp betydelsen av att skolans personal har tillräckliga kunskaper om skolans regelverk och även utbildning och förmåga till ett gott ledarskap för att eleverna ska kunna nå de mål som uppställs i läroplanerna. Tanken är att boken ska kunna användas som ett redskap i den egna skolans utvecklingsarbete.

Boken ger många exempel på rättsliga frågor som kan komma upp i det dagliga arbetet som rektor och lärare. En hel del av dessa frågor besvaras direkt i boken och dessutom ges hänvisningar till var man kan läsa mer. Ett gediget avsnitt om ledarskap i skolan ingår, samt en genomgång av hur lärarnas tid kan disponeras på ett bra sätt enligt kollektivavtalen ÖLA och HÖK.

När det gäller en mer ingående beskrivning av reglerna inom ett visst område hänvisas till Olle Rimstens bok Skoljuridik, som behandlar bl.a. kommunalrätt, arbetsrätt och arbetsmiljö i skolan, sekretess och elevinflytande.

Målgrupp: Skolledare, personal inom barn- och utbildningsförvaltning, lärare.

In Sweden, the local schoolboard has the ultimate responsibility forschool quality and student knowledge development, and is heldresponsible if the expected outcomes are not met. Assisting theboard is the superintendent who is the Chief Executive Officer. Theaim of the study is to investigate the board’s relation to andexpectations of the superintendent, and this article is a result ofa national investigation in which all schoolboard chairs were surveyed.Two main questions were addressed: 1) what expectationsdoes the local schoolboard have of the superintendent, both ingeneral and in relation to student achievements and 2) which tasksare the superintendents expected to prioritise in carrying out theirwork? Data have been collected through a web-based survey usingboth structured and open-ended questions. The results show thatthe schoolboards’ strongest expectations placed on superintendentsare to execute the leadership mission followed by managingthe organisation within allocated budget frames. Responsibilitiesfor academic outcomes have a lower ranking. Superintendentshave many opportunities to influence the schoolboards’ decisionsand thereby affect which goals they should prioritise in the localschool organisation. The superintendent is an invisible ruler who inthe chain of governance occupies the best position to influenceboth the schoolboard’s acting policy and the schools’ acting practice.By being aware of the existing asymmetric distribution ofpower, the schoolboard has the opportunity to exercise controlover its official whose legal responsibility is to assist its membersin their decision makings.

We  examine  how  Swedish  directors  of  education  describe the conditions under which they lead research-based education.  The  empirical  data  was  collected  via  questionnaires  that  were  distributed  via  e-mail  to  all  Swedish  directors  of education in charge of primary and secondary schools. Our results are based on a ‘frame factor’ theoretical perspective.Directors  of  education  judge  themselves  as  being  well-prepared  for  the  task  of  ensuring  that  research-based  education  is provided  to  the  students.  They  envision  their  role as  one  where  they  read  research  reports,  but  they  do  not  disseminate  this scientific  knowledge  throughout  schools.  The  directors  assess  teachers  as  having  the  least  responsibility  for  ensuring  that research-based education in primary- and secondary schools is provided to the students. From a cultural frame perspective, the results of the study reveal that school director considerably overestimate their ability to manage a scientific based education.

In 2010, the Swedish Parliament enacted a new education act that, among other aspects, stipulated education in primary and secondary schools must be based on research and proven experience. Such a legal requirement that would apply to both school levels is quite innovative not only in Sweden but internationally. Over the years principals and teachers have developed new pedagogies designed to improve teaching and learning. Could another means toward such improvements lie in a law stipulating that education in primary and secondary school must be based on research and proven experience? What conditions are required for such a law to affect the work of the school faculty and staff? The analytic methods used in this investigation are Lundgren’s frame factor theory and Goffman’s frame analysis. The focus is on the relationship between parliamentary control via legislation and the possibilities of principals and teachers to fulfil the intentions of the law. Our analysis reveals that the law experienced difficulties due to it not being properly implemented and not providing clear instructions on how it should be used in teaching practice.

Förskola och skola är författningsreglerade verksamheter och personalen förutsätts uppfylla de juridiska krav som ställs. Samtidigt upplever personal att bl.a. dokumentationskraven är höga och man känner emellanåt osäkerhet på hur dessa ska hanteras och hur handläggningen i övrigt formellt ska gå till.

Den här boken är tänkt att utgöra ett stöd för alla som arbetar med dokumentation i förskola och skola. Boken utgår från en tidigare publikation - Dokumentationsboken (Norstedts Juridik, 3 uppl. 2013) men är starkt omarbetad. Den innehåller inte bara blankettmallar utan också förslag till handläggningsrutiner för barn- och elevärenden allt kopplat till aktuella lagar och förordningar. Stor vikt har lagts vid att såväl handläggningen som dokumentationen med stöd av bokens material ska bli så rättsäker och juridiskt korrekt som möjligt. I detta syfte innehåller mallarna för olika beslut, t.ex. beslut om disciplinära åtgärder eller om sekretess, ledtexter som ska bidra till att beslutet blir juridiskt välgrundat och välmotiverat.

Boken vänder sig främst till dem som arbetar i förskola och skola som önskar ett konkret stöd i sitt myndighetsutövande arbete. Den kan också användas i högre utbildning för lärare och skolledare eftersom den tar upp centrala författningar i skolförfattningarna och visar hur dessa kan tillämpas i skolans inre arbete.

Du kan även på www.nj.se köpa mallarna som finns i boken i PDF-format. Mallarna ligger indelade efter respektiva kapitel i boken och med sidhänvisning. Du kan fylla i dena egna uppgifter, spara ned och skriva ut.

Allt fler stämmor höjs mot det som man upplever som en juridifiering av skolväsendet och kritik riktas mot att skolans personal inte har tid med pedagogiska frågor då de måste hålla koll på juridiken. Samtidigt finns andra röster som säger att i en verksamhet med myndighetsutövande inslag måste arbetet styras av en juridisk reglering. I den här rapporten gör vi inledningsvis en historisk tillbakablick i syfte att bättre försöka förstå bakgrunden till skolans förändrade juridiska styrning. Härigenom kan vi också kasta ljus över varför juridiken alltmer kommit att fokuseras i skolan under senare tid. Vi kommer vidare att på ett konkret plan redovisa delar av den juridiska regleringen av skolans verksamhet och diskutera det som idag allt mer kommit att benämnas som en juridifiering av skolväsendet.

Vad handlar då denna juridifiering om? Det som ofta diskuteras är en starkare central styrning men detta räcker inte för att förstå de pågående förändringarna. Ett ökat fokus på den enskilde elevens rättigheter är ett kännetecken för den pågående juridifieringen. Det handlar om rättigheter till korrekt behandling, stöd och möjligheter att överklaga beslut. Ett förtydligande av individens rättigheter bör ses som en positiv utveckling av verksamheten även om det innebärett mer omfattande regelverk. En annan förändring, och kanske bidragande orsak till att regelverket förstärks, är möjligheten för privata aktörer att inordna sig i ett förvaltningsrättsligt regelsystem somtidigare i stort sett varit förbehållet den offentliga sektorn. Detta ökar samtidigt kraven på rättssäkerhetsregler för att skapa ett gemensamt ramverk inom vilket skolverksamheten ska ske.

Mot bakgrund av den ökade juridifieringen blir det intressant att diskutera skolchefens roll och möjligheter att påverka. Skolchefsuppdraget är till skillnad mot rektorsuppdraget inte reglerat i lag men samtidigt har skolchefen en central position som huvudmannens företrädare. Och det är i huvudmannens intresse att värna om elevernas rättigheter. I detta arbete utgör juridifieringen ett viktigt skyddsnät men de huvudsakliga frågorna bör handla om att stärka pedagogik, lärande och ett gott ledarskap i skolan.

In Sweden, as in many other countries all over the world, the question of equality is one of the most critical concerns. In the international policy discourse, there is a dissatisfaction with unequal educational opportunities for students. As a global trend, educational policies aiming to address the inequality in education emphasise global competiveness with a focus on comparative studies, such as OECD’s Programme for International Student Assessment, and greater accountability (Schultz, 2019).

All students must have access to education to achieve the best results possible. In the Swedish Education Act, education must be equivalent regardless of where in the country it is organised (SFS 2010:800). In an equivalent education, students are compensated according to their background and conditions, which means that each student receives the support required to achieve the school’s goals. The equivalence mission rests on every stalkeholder who is responsible for education.

Monitoring results is an important task for educational managers at the local school level. Portrayed as loosely coupled (Weick, 1976) and multi-leveled (Uljens, 2015), the school organisation is supposed to be rationally managed to effectively operate, holding every level accountable for students’ learning outcomes. The various levels in the school system can be illustrated as ‘webs of contracts’ (Wohlstetter et al., 2008), where local school agents, for example teachers, undertake actions on behalf of a principal (Gailmard, 2014). According to Ferris (1992), “the principal ‘contracts’ with the agents to act on the principal’s behalf” (p. 333). The contract further involves the delegation of discretion and decision-making authority to the agents (Soudry, 2007). In turn, the principal may make decisions that affect the actions agents take.

Drawing on the principal-agent theoretical framework, the aim of this study is to empirically examine the functionality of the local school system, particularly with respect to the contract of equal opportunities for all students to improve school results. The following research question has guided the study: How does the local school system function to uphold the contract of giving all students equal conditions for increased merit values?

The study is part of a research project in a Swedish municipality. Previous results from the project (Rapp, 2021; Ståhlkrantz & Rapp, 2022) show that the superintendent, as principal, prioritises the continuous improvement of academic outcomes. The superintendent emphasises that the main priority is for students to achieve high merit values. However, this priority is not supported by all agents in the school organisation. For example, one teacher considers that the students are too young to have to worry about their grades (Rapp, 2021). There are also school principals who prioritise students’ well-being over their academic outcomes (Ståhlkrantz & Rapp, 2022). These are examples of different beliefs and values (Robinson, 2017) that can exist on various levels in the school organisation.

As a multi-leveled governed system, there is a distribution of power among different system levels but also a dynamic relationship and interaction among various actors and their interdependency in the school organisation (Wilkoszewski & Sundby, 2016). To handle expectations and requirements from the principal, local school agents use adaptive strategies, such as bridging and buffering (DiPaola & Tschannen-Moran, 2005) and acting as gatekeepers (Ståhlkrantz & Rapp, 2022). When this occurs, the contract between principal and agents is broken, which makes it difficult or even impossible to realise the principal’s intentions. With the problems ecountered in a multi-leveled school organisation, the hypothesis of this study is that the picture of an ideal, well-functioning school organisation as a “governing chain” with “webs of contract” that aim to give students equal educational opportunities for optimal goalfullfilment may be better illustrated as a diversified, semi-functional school system.MethodDespite being a small Swedish case study (Yin, 2009), this study is of international interest because it provides in-depth insights into how global education policies are translated to a local context. Empirical data were collected using a questionnaire and focus interviews (Cohen et al., 2018), with respondents consisting of local school administrators and primary school teachers. The school has a principal, three assistant principals, about 80 teachers, and more than 850 students (aged 6–16). All teachers were invited to answer a digital questionnaire with a total of 47 questions. The questions were, among other areas, about the school’s governance, cooperation and trust in the governing chain, knowledge results, and the demand for higher merit values. The response rate was 49%. The municipality’s digital survey system was used to administer the survey. Before sending out the questionnaire, all respondents were informed of the purpose of the study. When the survey was distributed, they were informed that participation was voluntary and that answers would be kept anonymous (Vetenskapsrådet, 2017). To deepen the understanding of the survey responses, three focus interviews were conducted with randomly selected teachers. A focus interview with the school’s principal and assistant principals was also conducted. The content of the focus group questions was based on the answers given in the questionnaires. Each interview took 60-90 minutes and was recorded. Before the focus interviews, the interviewees were informed that participation was voluntary and that the recorded interviews will be kept anonymous (Vetenskapsrådet, 2017). In the analysis of the empirical materials, it was integral to identify the framework behind the functionality of the school organisation in upholding the contract of equal opportunities for all students to improve their learning outcomes. Since the principal-agent theory emphasises the responsiveness of the agent’s decisions to the principal’s goals, how this responsiveness is mediated by available actions, and institutional contextual factors, this framework is suitable for studying accountability in public education (Ferris, 1992; Gailmard, 2014). Within the principal-agent relationship, Wohlstetter et al. (2008) identified five key problems: (1) limited decision rights, (2) information asymmetry, (3) divergent objectives, (4) weak incentives, and (5) adverse selection. As a final step, these key problems were utilised as analytical tools to analyse empirical data.Expected OutcomesThe school is governed by national constitutions, which together with local educational priorities, form the contracts that agents are supposed to fulfill. This can be achieved in a diversified and multi-level system, where each level is responsible for its work. Following previous research on principal agency (Ståhlkrantz, 2022) and teacher agency (Bergh & Wahlström, 2018; Priestly et al., 2012), it is argued that school principals and teachers apply high levels of agency and discretion in their daily work. The principal-agent theory reveals that teachers, as agents, are in the best position to make decisions about education. Through incentives and regulations, the principal can ensure that agents responsibly fulfill their delegated role. However, if agents do not share the same beliefs and values as the principal, the former will not execute the activities requested. A functional, tightly coupled system presupposes that local school agents undertake actions on behalf of the principal and that every level in the governing chain is acoountable for the students’ learning outcomes. Preliminary results of this study indicate various problems in the principal-agent relationship in the local school organisation. In the ideal governing system, if the result is not good enough, accountability can be demanded. However, this ideal image is not consistent with the reality in education. At the local school level, no one in the governing chain is held accountable for improving students’ learning outcomes. Thus, the students themselves become responsible for their own merit values. Teachers decide the learning content and manner of teaching. In other words, if teachers do not prioritise increased merit values, the principal has very limited options to manage the school organisation according to contracted objectives and values. As such, it might be more accurate to illustrate the school organisation as a semi-functional organisational system rather than a functional governing chain.References 

Bergh, A., & Wahlström, N. (2018). Conflicting goals of educational action: A study of teacher agency from a transactional realism perspective. The Curriculum Journal, 29(1), 134-149. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research Methods in Education (8th ed.). Routledge. DiPaola, M. F., & Tschannen-Moran, M. (2005). Bridging or buffering? The impact of schools’ adaptive strategies on student achievement. Journal of Educational Administration, 43(1), 60–71. Ferris, J. M. (1992). School-based decision making: A principal-agent perspective. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 14(4), 333-346. Gailmard, S. (2014). Accountability and principal–agent theory. In M. Bovens, R. Goodin, & T. Schillemans, T. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of public accountability (pp. 90–105). Oxford University Press. Priestly, M., Edwards, R., & Priestly, A. (2012). Teacher Agency in Curriculum Making: Agents of Change and Spaces for Manoeuvre. Curriculum Inquiry, 42(2), 191-214. Rapp, S. (2021). Att leda elevers kunskapsutveckling. Styrkedjan och det pedagogiska ledarskapet [To lead students' knowledge development. The chain of command and educational leadership]. Gleerups. Robinson, V. (2017). Reduce change to increase improvement. Corwin. Schultz, K. (2019). Distrust and Educational Change: Overcoming Barriers to Just and Lasting Reform. Harvard Education Press. SFS (2010:800). Skollagen. [Education Act]. Soudry, O. (2007). A principal-agent analysis of accountability in public procurement. Advancing public procurement: Practices, innovation and knowledge-sharing, 432-451. Ståhlkrantz, K. (2022). Principal agency: Educational leadership at the intersection between past experiences and present environments. In N. Wahlström (Ed.). Equity, Teaching Practice and the Curriculum: Exploring Differences in Access to Knowledge (pp. 90–104). Routledge. Ståhlkrantz, K. & Rapp, S. (2022). Leading for higher grades—balancing school leadership on the fine line between accountability and professional autonomy, International Journal of Leadership in Education, 1-21. Uljens, M. (2015). Curriculum work as educational leadership–Paradoxes and theoretical foundations. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 2015(1), 27010. Vetenskapsrådet (2017). God forskningssed [Good research practice]. https://www.vr.se/download/18.2412c5311624176023d25b05/1529480532631/God-forskningssed_VR_2017.pdf. Weick, K. E. (1976). Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21, 1-19. Wilkoszewski, H., & Sundby, E. (2016). From Hard to Soft Governance in Multi‐level Education Systems. European Journal of Education, 51(4), 447-462. Wohlstetter, P., Datnow, A., & Park, V. (2008). Creating a system for data-driven decision-making: Applying the principal-agent framework. School effectiveness and school improvement, 19(3), 239-259. Yin, R. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE.

Caught in the crossfire of expectations of improving students’ learning outcomes while simultaneously safeguarding students’ well-being, school principals must balance accountability and professional autonomy. This article presents findings from a small case study that examined the relationship between the supervisor and four school principals in a Swedish municipality. Drawing on an institutional perspective, the purpose of the study was to examine how the superintendent manages the principals through the quality assessment system through regulative, normative, and cognitive elements and how the principals relate to these institutional aspects. The empirical data was collected by interviews. Scott’s pillars of institutional order were applied to analyze what regulations, normative expectations, and cognitive elements that could be identified in the empirical material. Bridging and buffering were used as analytical tools to analyze the strategies used by the principals to relate to these institutional aspects. The findings indicate clear and well-implemented regulative routines, but also monitoring and a range of sanctions where the principals do not meet expectations. There are examples of normative elements emphasized by the superintendent, as well as cognitive elements, which provide the infrastructure of the organization. To handle these institutional aspects, school principals use adaptive strategies, such as bridging and buffering.

Superintendents, functioning as the local school boards’ chief executive officers, play a fundamental role in improving schools. While teachers and principals have been given a prominence in students´ learning outcomes, the perspective of superintendents as instructional leaders is often forgotten. Based on a nationwide survey of Swedish school boards the study investigates the boards’ expectations of their superintendents to influence student learning outcomes. The basic research question is: How may superintendents as boundary spanners facilitate school improvement? Boundary spanning is used as a theoretical and methodological framework to explore how superintendents may facilitate the local school system to become a more tightly-coupled system and strengthen the organization´s capacity of school improvement. The study’s findings indicate that superintendents have significant opportunities to influence political decisions and school improvement. Superintendents may exert an indirect instructional leadership and thereby tighten the couplings between different hierarchical levels in the school system. In their boundary-spanning roles, superintendents are expected to prioritize managerial assignments, which is a time-consuming task. Because the superintendent is not likely to be criticized or dismissed because of poor student results, windows of opportunities opens up in their entrepreneurial role, and thus a higher likelihood of working more effectively as instructional leaders.

The rationale for this study stems from the Swedish educational context, where teacher practice is subject to policies stating that education must be built on research foundation and proven experience. In a previous article (Åman & Kroksmark, 2018), we demonstrated that the research foundation is operating in concurrence of teachers’ practices and experiences. This study in turn aims to explore how teachers understand proven experience and practices of proving professional experiences. The data was collected in 2014 in the project Modellskolan [The Model School], financed by the Swedish Research Council, through a stimulated recall method. We filmed 14 interviews with teachers focusing on group discussions about teachers’ practical dilemmas. The interviews were analyzed with a phenomenographic method, and the result revealed five categories with which the teachers evaluated collegial and individual experiences. The categories were analysed through praxis theory and linked to the phenomenological concepts of time and space to elucidate how fluid situated and unspoken professional experiences become systematic, general and partly transferable through proving practices. The results shed light on how teachers’ experiences and everyday practices challenge and encourage revisions of the definitions of research foundation and proven experiencea in Swedish national policies.