Transformation of policy is a way of studying changes in values that emerge in the school's governance. Transformation takes place in the transformation arena and is the “gap” that can be described as a transformed relationship between the formulation arena and the realization arena (Lindensjö & Lundgren, 1986; 2014). The period in focus for the study is the first half of the 2010s. It is a period of changes in governance through the School Act (2010: 800) and the introduction of the new Swedish curriculum Lgr11 (Skolverket, 2011). During this period, evaluation was given a more prominent place compared with earlier period in the school (see Skolverket, 2004; Statsliggaren, 2008). Evaluation always has a governing effect by marking for the organisation what is important knowledge (Dahlberg et al., 1995). A survey is an example of how an evaluation can highlight what is important to inspect and what is not necessary to inspect. The Schools Inspectorate constructed the first teachers’ survey in 2010 for schoolteachers in compulsory school. Quantitative data were relatively new in connection with inspections in the early 2000’s (Baxter, Grek & Segerholm, 2015). A survey with quantified measurement results claims science objectivity (Clarke, 2015). At the same time, the results may not always be fair representations of the situation at the school, as inspections presented may disregard underlying processes and context. The teachers’ survey is in a transformation of policy where certain values ​​are marked as important in the school.

The school's mission includes giving students equal opportunities to achieve their goals in school, regardless of their place where you live. By the decentralization of the school in the 1990’s, the municipalities and independent superintendents give an increased responsibility to guarantee the quality of the school (Baxter et al., 2015). Decentralization brought about changes for the superintendents, from having been a state-regulated and employed civil servant, to becoming one among other municipal civil servants in a municipality (Nihlfors, 2003).

In rural areas, the school has special challenges to deal with. Teaching is both situational and culturally determined as well as influenced by its conditions in the local environment. The interests affect school values that a person or group want to promote (Jackson, 1992). The superintendents’ position is a municipal official who balances between an assignment from a state regulatory framework and a municipal employer that consists of a politically elected education board (Holmgren et al., 2013; Nihlfors, 2003). In this role, the superintendents’ balances between different groups in that municipality and different levels can influence the values that emerge when transforming policy. There is relatively little research on the transformation arena, which motivates this study's focus on describing and analysing which values are expressed a) in a government tool designed by the authority School Inspectorate and b) in Superintendents' perceptions of values ​​in rural areas.

The purpose of the study is to describe and analyse the values that emerge when transforming policy. The two transformation arenas that are studied are at a national authority level based on the Schools Inspectorate, and at a local administrative level consisting of superintendents in rural areas.

• What values emerge in the transformation of policy at an authority level in the form of the Schools Inspectorates teachers’ survey?

• What values emerge when transforming policy at a municipal administrative level in the form of superintendents’ statements in rural areas?

• What implications do the study's values provide for students as future citizens?

The design of the study is described as the superintendents meets the School Inspectorate's teachers’ survey in an otherwise broken chain of command. When the School Inspectorate examines the school's activities, they go in their inspections past the superintendents in the municipalities and go directly to the teachers at the school. This phenomenon is called that the Schools Inspectorate bypassing (Nihlfors, 2003). In the design of this study, the ques-tionnaire was applied as an interview material as a base for the interviews with the super-intendents in rural areas. This is particularly important to study as the Swedish school sys-tem in the 2000’s has undergone a form of re-centralization with the introduction of the Schools Inspectorate. At the local level, the superintendent’s has a number of different as-signments to handle and at different levels. This means that the structure of the superin-tendent’s decision-making may be unclear and may rather be influenced by a) the superin-tendents’ previous experiences and pragmatic necessities (Cohen, March & Olsen, 1979), b) mutual relations between different actors who interpret what policy may be ( Ball, Maguire & Braun, 2012; Pressman & Wildavsky, 1984), c) problems when different condi-tions and conditions occur at the state level compared to the local reality where the goals are to be realized in a local environment (Lundgren, 1990) and d) the size of the munici-palities, the school's organizational culture, the surrounding environment and its geo-graphical location (Bredeson, Klar, & Johansson, 2011). The study builds on the School Inspectorate teachers’ questionnaires (2010-2015) with ad-ditional interviews with 18 superintendents in rural areas. The selection of the municipali-ties builds on statistics from the school year 2013/14. The sample in the study with the su-perintendents are the following: a municipality in rural and countryside areas, with one (6) 7-9 grade school, one lower secondary school and without any private school providers. Methodological principles according to values are based on Rokeach's (1973) view of val-ues. In the analysis, values are referred to as value which are influenced by personal be-liefs regarding a) desirable behavior related to personal or interpersonal goals and b) desir-able goals, with a personal or an interpersonal social orientation. Values based on Rokeach's definitions are analyzed on a personal and a social orientation, where individu-al interests and local context also can be taken into account.

The results of the study show the transformed values is about to strive to increase students' knowledge results and in less degree educate students to the goal of democratic citizen-ship. This transformation of policy has a focus on the student's personal development and to a lesser extent a social education of democratic citizens. The Schools Inspectorate's control contributes to maintaining a minimum level in the su-perintendents rural schools, yet the superintendents highlight both a lack of desirable be-haviors such as teacher competence, motivated boys and high-performing girls in good health in the task of increasing students' knowledge development. The study shows that schools in rural areas are not perceived as easy to steer to become part of the national and now international competition where everything is measured and valued. The Schools Inspectorate's survey checks to a lesser extent the goal of educating pupils to be democratic citizens and the superintendents statements in sparsely populated and rural areas de-scribe, not always, but a democratic deficit in terms of respect for differences and a demo-cratic dialogue at school and in the surrounding environment. The transformation of values in this study points to a civic education where students in rural areas are not included in the knowledge society's competition to perform and to an even lesser extent to see a democratic approach as a matter of course. In schools in rural areas, a citizen appears who is less individualistic and at the same time a citizen who finds other paths in a democratic society so far. The study has studied two different arenas of transformation, where a central level of au-thority and a local level of administration have expressed values. It would be interesting in a further research to study the teachers' values and their attitudes to the values of this study’s findings.

Ball, S. J., Maguire, M., & Braun, A. (2012). How schools do policy: policy enactments in sec-ondary schools. London: Routledge. Baxter, J., Greek, Sotiria, Segerholm, Christina. (2015). Regulatory framworks: shifting framworks, shifting criteria. In S. Grek & J. Lindgren (Eds.), Governing by inspection (pp. 74-95). Oxon: Routledge. Bredeson, P. V., Klar, H. W., & Johansson, O. (2011). Context-Responsive Leadership: Ex-amining Superintendent Leadership in Context. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 19(18). Retrieved from https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ955996&site=ehost-live Clarke, J. (2015). Inspctions: governing at a distance. In S. Grek & J. Lindgren (Eds.), Gov-erning by inspection. Oxon: Routledge. Cohen, M. D. M., James, G. Olsen, Johan P. (1979). People, Problems, Solutions and Ambi-guity of Relevance. In J. G. March & J. P. Olsen (Eds.), Ambiguity and choice in or-ganizations. Bergen: Univ.-forlaget. Dahlberg, G., Lundgren, U. P., & Åsén, G. (1995). Att utvärdera barnomsorg: om decentrali-sering, målstyrning och utvärdering av barnomsorgen och dess pedagogiska verksamhet. Stockholm: HSL i samarbete med Socialdepartementet. Holmgren, M. J., Olof and Nihlfors, Elisabet. (2013). Sweden: Centralisation and Decen-tralisation as Implementation Strategies. In L. Moos (Ed.), Transnational influences on values and practices in Nordic educational leadership: is there a Nordic model? (pp. 73-85). Dordrecht: Springer. Jackson, P. W. (1992). Conceptions of curriculum and curriculum specilists. In P. W. Jack-son (Ed.), Handbook of research on curriculum: a project of the American Educational Re-search Association (pp. 3-40). New York: Macmillan Pub. Co. Lindensjö, B., & Lundgren, U. P. (2014). Utbildningsreformer och politisk styrning. Stock-holm: Liber. Lundgren, U. P. (1990). Educational policymaking, decentralisation and evaluation. In M. Kogan, M. Granheim, & U. P. Lundgren (Eds.), Evaluation as policymaking: introduc-ing evaluation into a national decentralised educational system (pp. 23-41). London: Jes-sica Kingsley. Nihlfors, E. (2003). Skolchefen i skolans styrning och ledning. Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis. Pressman, J. L., & Wildavsky, A. B. (1984). Implementation: how great expectations in Wash-ington are dashed in Oakland: or, why it is amazing that federal programs work at all, this being a saga of the Economic Development Administration as told by two sympathet-ic observers who seek to build morals on a foundation of ruined hopes. Berkeley: Univer-sity of California Press. Rokeach, M. (1973). The Nature of Human Values and Values Systems. In M. Rokeach (Ed.), The Nature of Human Values. New York: Free Press. SFS 2010:800. Skollag Svensk författningssamling. Stockholm: Utbildningsdepartementet Skolverket. (2011). Läroplan för grundskolan, förskoleklassen och fritidshemmet 2011. Stock-holm: Skolverket. Statsliggaren. (2008-2015). Regleringsbrev Skolinspektionen. 190528, från Ekonomistyr-ningsverket, https://www.esv.se/statsliggaren/regleringsbrev/