Search results

The purpose of this paper is to explore whether and how success has been sustained over time in schools which were identified as being successful five years ago.

Three schools were selected for a revisit, and the sample included two combined schools (grade 1‐10) and one upper secondary school (grade 11‐13). In two schools the same principals were still in post, and in the third school there had recently been a change in principalship. Interviews with the principal and a group of teachers at each school were the major source of new data. Questions that guided the study: What structural and cultural changes can be identified within the schools compared with five years ago? What factors might help sustain success over time?

The learning‐centred approach identified earlier had been sustained in the schools during the five years. All principals focused on multiple ways of influencing staff motivation, commitment and working conditions, teamwork was a vital characteristic, and they also reported on their struggle to sustain and promote equity and social justice. For the two schools with principals still in post one could hardly detect any change in preferred strategies, but for the third school with the new principal there was a significant change. Although his ethos was closely connected to that which existed at the school five years ago, his leadership approach and the agenda for school improvement were different. As such, the study provides an example of how principals have the power to set the tone and the agenda for school development even though leadership practice is an interactive process involving many people.

The paper provides knowledge about sustainable leadership in a context where new expectations are raised towards schools, and principals are in particular challenged to respond to new and sometimes contradicting expectations.

This paper aims to identify what counts as successful school leadership within a Norwegian context.

The paper uses multi‐site case study methods as a methodological approach. In selecting cases the first strategy included schools appointed as “good practice schools” by the Ministry of Education and Research. The second strategy was to obtain a desired variation based on different factors like school size and structure, rural/urban representation and principals' gender.

Leadership in the case schools are almost entirely practiced through collaboration and team efforts, and a learning‐centered approach is the focal point for the schools' philosophy as well as for its practice. Respect of the individual student and colleague in the building of professional communities of practice seems to be a guiding norm of conduct. In addition, school leaders that are successful in fulfilling a moral enterprise based on democratic principles and values, manage to deal with the types of dilemmas that are at the core of working with people in a school.

The study shows how successful leadership is an interactive process involving many people and players.