Policy makers increasingly acknowledge that problems and challenges arising at the school level should be resolved on site. At the same time, the political expectation to delegate more responsibility to the individual school is rather heavily contrasted with the weak knowledge about how this new public management approach can be translated into successful leadership practices. Thus, considering that there is a close relationship between context and leadership, principal preparation programmes should be guided by a deeper examination of contextual factors. Against this background, we aim to critically examine existing views of practitioners and researchers on the challenge of establishing more context-sensitive school leadership preparation programmes in an era of New Public Management in Education. In doing so, we introduce the Swedish Model of principal preparation as an example for a more context-sensitive leadership preparation program. To that end, we argue that a differentiated perspective about contextual conditions and their role as facilitators or obstacles to effective leadership must be further explored. Moreover, school leaders should be encouraged to consider the relevance of such approaches to their own needs.

Purpose – The main task of every school is to contribute to student learning and achievement. In the twenty-first century, national and international evaluations and comparisons have focussed on measurable student and school results. Not only teachers but also principals are held accountable for school results, which increase expectations of principals to work to enhance student learning and improve outcomes. In Sweden, a principal's work with a given school's core mission is labeled as pedagogical leadership, a concept that includes diverse activities related to national goals and school results. Aspects of pedagogical leadership include principals’ classroom observations and communication about teaching and learning issues. The purpose of this paper is to describe a model of pedagogical leadership as a base for principals’ experience with the aim to develop their understanding of pedagogical leadership. Design/methodology/approach – The paper builds on data from three groups of principals who participated in a course to learn more about pedagogical leadership. Findings – The participating principals performed their pedagogical leadership in different manners and with varying quality. During the course, there was a shift in what activities and duties the principals prioritized. The findings highlight the importance of democratic leadership and the improvement of teacher capacity and student outcomes. Practical implications – The paper gives practical examples on how principals can improve their understanding of pedagogical leadership. Originality/value – There are few articles on how pedagogical leadership is understood and practiced. The paper provides a model for pedagogical leadership and empirical data that shows that the concept deserves to be viewed as a qualitative concept that need interpretation.

No abstract

The common view of a successful school includes a visible principal who communicates frequently about the school's pedagogical tasks, teaching and learning. In this article, a study about principals' communication with their teachers is presented. Twenty-four Swedish secondary schools are divided into four groups depending on how they meet academic and social objectives. Questionnaires about teachers' and principals' views on the structural aspects of the communication process and regarding teaching and learning issues were analysed. Principals in the successful schools used communication in a more multidimensional way and communicated more often about issues related to pedagogical tasks. However, principals in all schools conducted few classroom visits and rarely gave teachers feedback. Even though all principals attended many meetings, the organizational structures did not support communication about teaching and learning issues and student outcomes, which indicates a widespread weakness in pedagogical leadership.

No abstract