Our study focused on the leadership strategies of Estonian and Finnish principals aimed at encouraging teachers to participate in school development. We also looked at context-bound factors that form the framework within which principals discuss their work regarding (1) creating a shared vision, (2) implementing shared leadership practices, (3) fostering a collaborative school culture, and (4) supporting teachers’ development and recognizing teachers’ work. We interviewed five principals from each country and used directed content analysis to examine the data. According to the findings, most of the principals had experienced challenges when involving teachers in school development. This seems to be connected to the high levels of professional autonomy prevalent in both countries that is built on a long tradition of understanding autonomy as an individual property of a teacher rather than seeing it in relation to the autonomy provided to an organization. Regarding the aims set for education, Finnish principals emphasized the implementation of the national curriculum and local coherence, whereas principals in Estonia were keener to respond to the expectations set for schools to stand out based on their educational innovations, and this implies a higher level of competitiveness among the schools in Estonia.

This study looks at the views of Finnish comprehensive school principals on distributed leadership and presents discussion on the leadership training required by principals and looks at it in relation to the views of principals. In Finland the qualification requirements for principals are based on their experience as teachers, and studies in educational administration. In general, studies in leadership are not mandatory. In terms of distributed leadership, one relevant question is the way distribution happens. Is it based on delegation of tasks or does it happen in interaction between teachers and principal? The data were principals’ responses to an electronic survey (n=71). The respondents represented 71 schools around Finland. The results showed that principals viewed distributed leadership differently depending on the type of question. In the Likert-scale questions they (n=71) emphasised distributed leadership as an interaction between principal and teachers and their situations, whereas in open-ended answers (n=44) the delegation had a bigger role. In terms of training background, the results indicate that principals (n=13) having university studies in educational leadership and administration emphasised more distributed leadership as an interaction than principals having other types of training. This paper poses questions concerning the content and structure of educational leadership training. Further, this study implies that there is a growing need to examine educational leadership in terms of training, and views concerning leadership structures and practices in schools. Key words: Distributed leadership, educational leadership, leadership training, principal.

We examined practices and experiences of leadership during the COVID-19 school closures in 2020 by analyzing Estonian ( N = 219) and Finnish ( N = 775) school leaders’ responses to open-ended questions in an electronic survey. In the analysis we used five categories drawn from the data: Making decisions, Re-organizing schoolwork, Communication, Giving support, and Self. The findings show leaders stressing especially the themes of within school communication and giving support both at emotional-level and in the use of technology in teaching. The findings signal a leadership approach composed of care and empathy. Moreover, within the category Self, the leader’s ability to lead themselves and manage stress were extensively brought out. We provide four messages reflecting leadership during times of both turbulence and tranquility. For example, a leader’s knowledge about pedagogy prepares the ground for meaningful reorganization of teaching and learning. Also, attention should be paid to locally established structures for collaboration across schools as they support leaders’ work.

Finnish early childhood education and care (ECEC) experienced system-wide changes in legislation, curriculum, and teachers’ and centre leaders’ qualification requirements between 2013 and 2018. Through these changes, the Finnish ECEC follows the global trends shifting the focus of ECEC from care towards education. The data are leaders’ (N = 41) written responses to three open-ended questions in a survey completed in 2018. The analytical framework draws on the models of educational change and human capital of pedagogical leadership. The framework directs focus on leaders’ understanding about and realisation of these new policies in their ECEC centres. Results indicate that leaders have the capacity to interpret and lead the curriculum process. However, to secure the coherence in and quality of ECEC, guidance that is more systematic and instruments (e.g. for development of pedagogy) that support the implementation of the curriculum and its assessment are needed.

In recent decades, an essential global aim of the reforms of special education has been the promotion of inclusive education. This article discusses the implementation of reforms with a focus on tiered support systems in the context of Finnish comprehensive school education. Based on earlier literature, legislation, and administrative documents, we provide a background for Finnish education policy and special education reforms. The focus of this article is on the description of parallel reforms targeting the re-structuring of the systems around support for students and funding of education in the 2010s. We discuss the processes leading to these reforms and the reforms themselves. In addition, we discuss their implications for the organization of the tiered support system. Finally, we highlight some challenges of reform implementation and the current education policy’s movements towards inclusive education.