Conference Agenda

The professionalization of school leaders is frequently developed and debated all over the world. In recent decades, almost all OECD countries and EU member states have invested massively in school leader professional development and training, and this tendency can be seen worldwide (Huber, 2010). One important reason for these investments is the growing recognition of school leaders as important for the core practices of teaching and learning in schools (Bøje & Frederiksen 2019). School leaders are increasingly perceived as key agents for the quality of teaching and learning, teacher professional development but also for improvement and capacity building in schools (Rönnström, 2021).

Although the meaning of ‘professional’ and ‘professionalization’ vary between a plurality of contexts and school leadership connoisseurs, there are some converging trends in recent developments and debates. Some use the term ‘professional’ mainly as an indicator of being successful or good at one’s job. This way of using the term is reflected in research explicating the meaning of successful or effective school leadership (See Drysdale & Gurr, 2017; Hallinger, 2011; Leithwood, 2021; Leithwood et al, 2004; Robinson et al, 2009). Others use the term to indicate membership a of group of educational practitioners or a learning community, or as being a co-creator of communities of practitioners within or linked to schools (See Zachrisson and Johansson, 2010; Chirichello, 2010). There are also researchers who use the term in order to signify membership in qualified and socially closed communities drawn from conditions developed in the sociology of professions. The latter researchers commonly argue that school leaders run the risk of de-professionalization despite massive investments in professional development and training (Bøje & Frederiksen 2019).

The urgency of present time school leader professional development investments is not primarily linked to professionalization in the common or traditional senses; rather, it´s linked to the increasing globalization, economization, rationalization and re-organization of the public sector in general and the education sector in particular (Pashiardis and Brauckman, 2019; Ringarp and Rönnström, 2021; Hood, 1995). In our hyper modern world, changing landscapes of professionalization and professions are emerging and they are growing in importance, and they are important to questions of who educators are and who they are becoming. We can no longer fully grasp recent and ongoing professionalization movements by focusing on skills, capabilities, professional membership or criteria drawn from standard textbooks in the sociology of the professions. There is a need for new frameworks and alternative ways of conceptualizing the professionalization of school leaders in order to understand the scope, character and urgency of school leader professional development and training in present time.

In this paper, we will discuss and analyze the professionalization of school leaders as taking place within a changing landscape of professionalization due to recent globalization, economization, rationalization and organization in the education sector. We will illuminate an ongoing global movement and converging strategies among many European nations with regard to the professionalization of school leaders, and we will discuss their scope, character and urgency. We will in depth discuss recent school leader professional development and training in Sweden as an example of the changing landscape of professionalization. Finally, we will argue that the school leader profession is growing into an organizational profession in Sweden and elsewhere (Evetts, 2011; Ringarp and Rönnström, 2021). This is rarely recognized in recent debates and research on school leader professional development. Organizational professionalization differs from occupational professionalization (as the latter is explicated within the sociology of the professions), and this development has consequences for the knowledge-base, training and autonomy of school leaders and how they are expected to relate to other professionals in schools.

It is acknowledged that school leaders, in this case principals, deputy principals and head of departments have an influence on quality education. The challenge is to determine the development opportunities for school leaders for the complex and diverse contexts in which these leaders must function (Daniëls, Hondeghem and Dochy 2019). School leader’s professional development is an international phenomenon as indicated by Brauckmann, Pashiardis and Ärlestig (2023). Braukmann et al, supported Hallinger (2018) who emphasised that the context for leadership, which will provide the lens for the paper – must be considered for professional development for principals.

Leadership development as international phenomenon is situated in context of the diversity of schools; from urban inner-city schools to suburban school in diverse socio economic as well as mono and multi-cultural communities to rural schools. The cultural, language and socioeconomic diversity in South Africa is similar to what is experienced in Europe (Derring, Brundrett, Slavikova, Karabec, Murden and Nicolaidou 2005; Madalinska-Michalak, 2022) with challenges with regards to immigration and a movement towards a more (political?) preferred homogeneous (or less diverse) society which needs to be managed in society, which includes schools (Bush and Jackson 2002). The diversity context resonates strongly with social identity (in and out groups, us and them) which will also be part of the presentation (Heystek and Lumby 2011; Lumby and English 2009). The perspective from South Africa may contribute to the understanding of leadership development as indicated by Thody, Papanaoum, Johansson and Pashiardis (2007) and Karstanje and Webber (2008). Leadership development are therefore challenged to be at least aware of different forms of diversity and to take it into consideration.

Although there are no official requirements for any management or leadership development or qualification before promotion to any of the above-mentioned leadership positions in South African schools, there are different formats of professional development available for example university qualifications, development provided by unions, NGOs, departments of education as well in-school development opportunity (Bryan 2011; Kirori and Dickinson 2020). This paper based on a specific university-based qualification with the goal of the programme must be that the program must lead to improvement of quality of education at schools. The research question addressed in the paper is therefore: Are there any indications that students are able to improve their schools from what they learned in the two-year academic program in their divers’ contexts?

This is a key issue for any development programme since development cannot be a goal on its own; it must be contextual, and it can be expected that there must be some change and improvement from the development opportunity. School leaders, and specifically school principals, are expected to provide leadership for quality education and school performance (Day, Fleenor, Atwater, Sturm, and McKee 2014) which must be linked to professional development of school leaders (Brauckmann, Pashiardis and Ärlestig 2023).

Except for the format of the program (university qualification in this case) other contextual factors has been explored in the research which may have an influence on the expected positive outcome of development (change and improvement): the funding of the programme (self or outside - sponsor), the selection for participation in the programme which may have an influence on the determination and motivation of participants in a programme, as well the question “what is in it for me?”. These factors may have different implications in different divers’ societies on the potential to change and improve schools. In the South African context, it becomes crucial questions (Moorosi and Grant 2018; Naicker and Mestry 2016).

School leadership and management are key to teachers' professional learning, especially if the leader incorporates teachers' individual characteristics into organizational development activities, thus making teachers open and engaged in professional learning activities (Robinson, Lloyd & Rowe, 2008; Sagnak et al, 2015), while low engagement and motivation can be observed when individual characteristics are not taken into account (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Furthermore, leaders can support teachers' professional learning by providing an appropriate learning environment, both structurally (e.g. time) and through the shaping of the organisational culture (e.g. The complexity of the leadership role and the differentiation of its perception through leadership theory research has been explored in detail in the theoretical research of Krüger and Scheerens (2012). In our analysis, we have mainly drawn on two models, instructional leadership and transformational leadership approaches. The former captures the image of a distinctive professional leader who is knowledgeable in his or her field (Robinson, Lloyd and Rowe, 2008), while the latter sees the leader's task as initiating changes that move the organisational culture towards the values of collegiality, planning and development along common goals (Marzano et al., 2004; Krüger and Scheerens, 2012).

By creating formal learning situations, building trust within the organisation and creating opportunities for peer learning school leaders can have a strong influence on what and how teachers learn in schools (Leithwood et al, 2010, Haiyan et al. 2016). Middle managers can play a key role in supporting teachers' continuous professional development. The creation and generation of knowledge are based on the interaction of organisational members, which requires a high level of commitment. The key to this can be a middle-up-down approach (Nonaka & Toyama, 2005), where middle leadership translate the organisational vision into concrete concepts and create the conditions for knowledge creation. Middle leadership may be able to serve as experts and help teachers to link new theoretical knowledge with local practices. Furthermore, they can lead teachers' research-oriented professional learning (Soekijad et al. 2011, Stoll et al. 2015), and they can cross knowledge boundaries horizontally and vertically (e.g. between managerial and professional knowledge, partnerships with networks outside the institution) and provide innovative learning environments for their colleagues (Hargreaves and Fullan 2012).

It is evident that the middle leadership has a unique position in the school organization. Our research focuses on exploring this unique perspective in terms of individual professional development and organizational learning aspects. To realize the goals of the research we have conducted an online survey on a representative stratified random sample of Hungarian teachers. The details of our research methodology and preliminary results will be detailed in the next parts of the abstract.

Project no. 128738 has been implemented with the support provided from the National Research, Development and Innovation Fund of Hungary, financed under the OTKA-K_18 funding scheme.