Description: Since the beginning of the 1990s we see an intensifying discussion about 'modernizing school systems' (Brüsemeister/Eubel 2003) in German speaking countries. In its core this debate may be interpreted as a search for opportunities and means for changing the governance of schooling in order to improve its economy and performance. The purpose of the paper is to examine and develop conceptual tools for the analysis and evaluation of innovation in school governance. These tools are to be tested on pieces of data on attempts at school innovation in Austria.Thus, in its first section the paper discusses various proposals for the conceptualisation of system governance, e.g. by policy studies (e.g. Benz 2004), by administrative studies (e.g. Naschold/Bogumil 1998), by educational research (e.g. Arnott/Raab 2000), and in higher education studies (e.g. Lange/Schimank 2004), and comes up with a set of categories for analysing governance changes in schools systems (Altrichter/Bruesemeister/Heinrich 2005). Methodology: Methodologically, the paper is in its first section a conceptual discussion of means and strategies for the analysis of governance changes in schools systems. In its second and third section, these conceptual tools are used for re-analysing data from qualitative studies about recent Austrian initiatives on school innovation, such as implementing quality management in schools (Altrichter 2000), school-based management plans (Altrichter et al. forthcoming), and ICT (Altrichter et al. 2005). Conclusions: In its second section the paper uses these conceptual tools for an analysis of shifting political priorities in the governance of the Austrian school system. Three distinct phases are identified: Initially, the 'modernization debate' was characterized by an innovation strategy of 'widening the room for manoeuvre of individual schools' in order to make them more responsive towards the potentials and needs of their constituencies. At the end of the 1990s issues of school management and leadership became more prominent. In the wake of TIMSS- and PISA-results (Baumert 1998; OECD 2001) more powerful systemic instruments of governance and reinforced images of external governance of schools (e.g. educational standards) are increasingly seen as the 'via regia' of classroom and school development.In the third section it is asked in what respect these changes affect the role and relative status of main actors in the control of the education system: the state, the profession, and the clients (see Kogan 1996). An analysis of recent studies on school innovation in Austria indicates that not all the hopes of the advocates of 'new education governance' seem to come true: e.g. in many cases the relative status of parents is not improved in the course of gonernance reforms.