The UNESCO Incheon declaration “Education 2030” (UNESCO, 2018) provides for commitment of all the countries to quality education and improvement of learning outcomes. The declaration acknowledges the decisive role of principal to strengthening inputs, processes and evaluation of outcomes and mechanisms to measure progress (UNESCO, 2016 p. 8). Deciding on the school culture and activity organisation, leaders of educational institutions influence the quality of education and, thus, have an indirect but highly important influence on pupils’ learning (OECD, 2016; UNESCO, 2018; World Bank, 2018). Considering the expression of school management some countries empowered self-government authorities and heads of educational institutions (Garcia Moreno, Gertler, Patrinos, 2019). Under the conditions of decentralisation, the fields and functions of activities of educational institution management have been increasing significantly. The principal’s competences are supplemented by new activities such as to manage human, material and financial school resources, to project and manage the plan for school improvement as well as to mobilise the school community and to develop partnership (Vaillant, 2015). Management of an educational institution is acknowledged as a special and exceptional activity.

The individuals with an impeccable reputation are appointed the heads of educational institutions by public competition after their competences are evaluated and meet the relevant requirements established by the Minister of Education, Science and Sport (Švietimo įstatymas, 2020). The heads of educational institutions in Lithuania are required to have higher or equivalent education, pedagogical education, experience in teacher’s work and management. The national education systems in other EU countries, such as Ireland, Denmark, Portugal, Finland, set out adequate requirements for heads of educational institutions (Pont, Nusche, Moorman, 2008). Next to the aforesaid requirements, the national education systems introduce such additional requirements as studies in education management programmes or examinations for heads of educational institutions.

The analysis of the research on school efficiency, institutional improvement and education leadership (Arlestig, Day, Johansson, 2016; Day, Sammons, 2013, Mercer, Barker, Bird, 2010) highlighted the pivotal role of school principal in the school activities. The competences of heads of educational institutions were determined following the correlations between the efficiency of principal’s activity and pedagogical staff activity, their professional development, pupils’ achievements and progress, which were identified during the conducted research. Competence evaluation is perceived as support to principals to work more efficiently, as motivation to improve efficiency of institutions, as strengthening of productive and supportive environment, improvement of leadership and staff management, establishment of principles and practice that determine progress as well as an increase of competitive advantage (Nieto, 2014). The following abilities are referred to as priority functions: work planning and performance evaluation; manpower selection, recruitment and promotion; socialisation; teaching and professional development; performance management; establishment of working conditions; maintenance of employee relations; remuneration and benefits; retirement and redundancy (Ogunyomi, Shadare & Chidi, 2011; Youssef, 2012; Dessler, 2011).

However, the data on the management and leadership of educational institutions have been insufficient. The analysis of expression of competences of school principals and applicants for this post and their change have not been sufficient. There is still a lack of integrated and comparative research on leadership policy efficiency in educational institutions and efficient practices globally (Spillane, Paquin Morel and Al-Fadala, 2019; UNESCO, 2018). This is particularly true in low- and middle-income countries because many researchers unanimously have focused on efficiency of systems in high-income countries (Day and Sammons, 2014/2016; Jensen, Downing, Clark, 2017; OECD, 2016, 2020). Therefore, this research aims to partially respond to the need and to analyse the expression of competences among applicants for the post of school principal.

The research methodology is grounded on organisational models (Hoy & Miskel, 2013) and theories on leadership competences that ensure the education quality (Robinson, 2008). Following the practices of evaluating school principals in various European regions and the holistic principle, the possible perspectives of school principal’s successful activities were distinguished. The qualification requirements for principals in Lithuania provide for two groups of competences attributed to general and managerial spheres. The group of general competences consists of sub-competences: personal effectiveness, strategic thinking and change management, learning to learn, management of people, communication and information. The sub-competences of managerial areas include: strategic management of educational institution, management of education and learning, management of teachers’ professional development, management of structure, processes, resources of educational institution, partnership and communication of educational institution. Thus, a harmonious set consisting of ten sub-competences from the two competence groups combining knowledge and abilities was compiled for successful professional activity of principal. Following the established qualification requirements, a differentiated five-level scale expressed in points was designed. The lowest level of competence refers to weak expression of competences. The applicants evaluated highest are recognised as the most gifted ones. The five-level scale of principals’ competences confirms not only their preparation for the position but also points to (general and managerial) competences needed for managing an educational institution. Not lower than the satisfactory level (3 points) of such competences as personal effectiveness, strategic thinking and change management, learning to learn, management of people, management of education and learning are required from the applicants for the job as principal. The conception of combining the analysis of document content and departmental data was chosen. The document analysis aimed to substantiate the model of principals’ competences and disclose the evaluation system. The secondary analysis of departmental data was employed to identify the trends in expression of competences possessed by applicants for the post of principal. It focused on the representative quantitative evaluation data on applicants’ competences collected by the Lithuanian National Agency for Education. The secondary analysis (Ch.Frankfort-Nachmias, D.Nachmias 1996, p. 292) was based on the longitudinal research, the comparative analysis. The values of data received during evaluation of applicants’ approach competences were analysed. The general sample consisted of 1738 applicants for the post of principal in Lithuania, who participated in the competence evaluation from 2015 to 2019. The generalised tendencies in expression of competences of four years are presented.

The research results showed that school authorities have the second largest influence on the pupils’ learning outcomes, behind only classroom teaching (UNESCO, 2018; VVOB, 2018). Applying their managerial potential, the principals are able to create safe, violence-free, inclusive and equitable learning environments. Moreover, introducing a clear vision and encouraging a positive culture, they can eliminate gender disparities and provide equal opportunities to learn for all as well as encourage their schools to attain well-targeted and quality education for all. The retrospective analysis of primary data starting with 2015 allowed identifying that the mean values of three sub-competences Strategic thinking and change management, Managing people and Managing education and learning barely reached the sufficient level. Over the last four years the competences of only one third of applicants (30.6 %) for school principal’s posit have met the established requirements. A thorough analysis of sub-competences only confirms that both the principals and the teachers raise too low expectations about the pupils’ teaching and learning. On this basis, prerequisites for promoting curiosity, cognitive challenges and pursuit of higher achievements are not created.

Arlestig, H., Day, C. & Johansson, O. (2016) (Eds.) A Decade of Research on School Principals: Case Studies from 24 Countries. London: Springer. Day, C. & Sammons, P. (2013). Successful Leadership: A review of the international literature. CfBT Education Trust. https://www.educationdevelopmenttrust.com/ Day, C., Gu, Q. & Sammons, P. (2016). The impact of leadership on student outcomes: how successful scholl leaders use transformational and instructional strategies to make a difference. Educational Administration Quarterly, 52(2), 221-258. Day, C.; Sammons, P. (2014/2016). Successful school leadership. Reading: Education Development Trust. Reprint of 2014 Report. Dessler, G. (2011). Human resource management. Boston, Mass.: Pearson. Frankfort-Nachmias, C. and Nachmias, D. (1996) Research Methods in the Social Sciences. St. Martin’s Press, New York. Garcia Moreno,V. A. & Gertler,P. J. & Patrinos, H. A. (2019). "School-Based Management and Learning Outcomes : Experimental Evidence from Colima, Mexico," Policy Research Working Paper Series 8874, The World Bank. Hoy, W. K. & Miskel, C. G. (2013). Educational Administration: Theory, Research, and Practice. London: McGraw-Hill. Youssef, C. M. (2012). Human resource management. San Diego, CA : Bridgepoint Education. Lietuvos Respublikos Švietimo įstatymas (2011). Vilnius: Švietimo ir mokslo ministerija Švietimo aprūpinimo centras. Mercer, J, Barker, B., Bird, R. (2010) Human Resource Management in Education [electronic resource] Contexts, Themes and Impact, Hoboken: Taylor and Francis Nieto, M. L. (2014). Human resource management. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Ogunyomi, O.P. & Shadare, A.O. & Chidi, O.C.(2011). Current trends and future directions of human resource management practices: European Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Sciences. 19-25. Pont, B. Nusche D., Moorman H.. (2008). Improving school leadership. Vol. 1: Policy and practice, OECD. ES Mokymosi visą gyvenimą programos EURYDICE oficialus interneto puslapis. ES šalių nacionalinės švietimo sistemos. Spillane, J. P.; Paquin Morel, R.; Al-Fadala, A. (2019). Educational leadership: A multilevel distributed perspective. Qatar: WISE. UNESCO (2018). Activating policy levers for Education 2030: The untapped potential of governance, school leadership, and monitoring and evaluation policies Paris: UNESCO. UNESCO. (2016). Incheon declaration and framework for action for the implementation for sustainable development goal 4: Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning. Paris: UNESCO. Vaillant, D. (2015). School leadership, trends in policies and practices, and improvement in the quality of education. Paris: UNESCO. VVOB. (2018). Putting SDG4 into practice: School leadership. Technical brief no. 1. Brussels: VVOB. World Bank. (2018). World development report 2018: Learning to realize education’s promise. Washington, DC: World Bank Group.