Globally, many nation states are experiencing significant governance changes from a social welfare state to new public management, neoliberal policies, increasing plurality and globalization (Uljens, 2007; Uljens & Ylimaki, 2015; Uljens & Ylimaki, in press). More specifically, many nations have experienced ongoing governance changes, including shifts from a social welfare state to new public management/governance (Uljens, Möller, Ärlestig & Fredriksen, 2013; Ylimaki et al., 2016). At the same time, many countries are experiencing internal cosmopolitanism and changing demographics as well as increases in immigration and refugee populations, all of which are related to aims and values. Most recently, the world has been forced to witness populist resistance to neoliberal policies and movements, including particularly Brexit, US election of Donald Trump. These policy and societal trends are both organizational and ideological (e.g. neoliberal, neoconservative, authoritarian populist, new middle class, and neo-nationalist), simultaneously concerning governance and curriculum in ways that demand theoretical and practical coherence that does not exist in the traditionally disparate fields of curriculum/Didaktik and educational leadership studies.

In order to keep national cultures and identities together amidst these ongoing changes, many nation states have (re)centralized curriculum documents or lehrplans and legislated externalized evaluation policies. We can observe curriculum centralization even in countries like UK and the USA with traditions of education in a thin state along with increased curriculum harmonization between nation states now subject to externalized evaluation policies and increased international comparisons (e.g. PISA). At the same time, externalized evaluation policies and comparisons are becoming incresingly international (e.g. PISA), creating the demand for transnational organizations like OECD that directly and indirectly affect curriculum work in schools. In other words, these changes have made it clear that the question of school leadership cannot be solely understood as internal to schools, districts or even states (Uljens & Ylimaki, 2015; in press).

To date, educational leadership studies and curriculum theorizing have not only developed in sepearate fields but also have followed very different theoretical traditions and areas of focus. More specifically, we consider two three dilemmas or questions as central to any theory of education that explains curriculum, teaching, or educational leadership.

1)    How is the relation between education and society defined?

2)    How does an educational theory or theorizing process explain the relation between individuals in terms of pedagogical interaction and influence?

3)    How does a theory explain cosmopolitanism and education?

This symposium features a dialogue about a new co-edited volume Bridging Educational Leadership, Curriculum Studies and Didaktik. Grounding Comparative Research and Dialogue in Non-Affirmative Theory of Education (Uljens & Ylimaki, in press, Springer). Specifically, the session will be designed as an interactive conversation among the contributors and with the audience, to share perspectives on curriculum theorizing/Didaktik and educational leadership studies. Through critical dialogue, we hope to build more coherent understandings of the relationships between curriculum theorizing and educational leadership studies amidst a contemporary era of globalization and cosmopolitanism. Specifically, this session will begin with the co-editors will present the framing for the volume and the larger project bridging curriculum theory/Didaktik and educational leadership studies with education theory, featuring the first part of the volume as well as an overview of each part that follows. Representative contributors/partiicpants from each volume part will then each share highlights from their chapter as it relates to the book purpose/aim. The panelists as a group will then address some of the following questions and broaden the discussion to include both participants and audience members, with a goal of building a strong network of scholars interested in contributing to a movement aimed at bridging curriculum theorizing and policy studies.

References: Uljens, M. & Ylimaki, R. (in press). Bridging Educational Leadership, Curriculum Studies and Didaktik. Non-Affirmative Theory of Education Framing a Comparative and International Dialogue. Dordrecht: Springer. Uljens, M., Möller, J. Ärlestig, H. & Fredriksen, L. F. (2013). The Professionalization of Nordic School Leadership. In: L. Moos (ed.), Transnational Influences on Values and Practices in Nordic Educational Leadership: Is there a Nordic Model? (pp. 133-157) Dordrecht: Springer. Uljens, M. (2007). Education and societal change in the global age. In: R. Jakku-Sihvonen & H. Niemi (Eds.), Education as a societal contributor (pp. 23-51). New York: Peter Lang. Uljens, M. & Ylimaki, R. (2015a). Towards a discursive and non-affirmative framework for curriculum studies, Didaktik and educational leadership. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy 1(3). http://nordstep.net/index.php/nstep/article/view/30177 Ylimaki, R., Fetman, L., Matyjasik, E., Brunderman, L. & Uljens, M. (2016). Beyond Normativity in Sociocultural Reproduction and Sociocultural Transformation: Curriculum Work– Leadership Within an Evolving Context. Educational Administration Quarterly 53(1), 70-106.