School leaders stand in a field of tension between vertical and horizontal expectations. This situation implies that a school leader must consider education policy guidelines and requirements for student results and at the same time meet the needs of students, parents and staff. This requires a "Janus perspective" which on the one hand involves keeping a vigilant eye on the current societal challenges, and on the other hand put the spotlight on which needs should be taken care of in one's own school linked to the local context that frames the institution. 

In this field of tension, school leaders must lead their own staff in the work of interpreting and operationalizing the school's curriculum, which can be challenging. Not least, it requires that the leader himself sets aside sufficient time to update himself on what new reforms and guidelines entail, and in this case the Norwegian curriculum LK20.

The objective of this study is to “open a window” into school leaders’ experienced challenges concerning leading the work of interpreting and operationalizing the school's curriculum in a Norwegian context. For this purpose, we have formulated the following research question:

What challenges do school leaders point out, related to leading the curriculum work at their own school?

In this context, it is relevant to see the school as a learning organization (Senge 1991; Roald 2010). In terms of building capacity for further development of the school, the term "learning organisation" now seems to be replaced by the term "professional learning communities" (Aas & Vennebo, 2021, p. 13). Hence, In the presentation, we will elaborate theoretically on the concept of "professional learning communities". Furthermore, we will include the new curriculum’s description of the professional community and the principal's management of this. We draw on Goodlad's (1979) curriculum model since this model is a relevant analytical tool when it comes to the relationship between the "different faces" of the curriculum.

We will also draw on Ertesvåg's (2012) description of the three phases in development work: initiation, implementation and institutionalisation, which opens up the possibility of being able to analyze whether the school leaders' challenges in leading the curriculum work can be specifically linked to one or more of these phases. We will also take a closer look at ledarship literature, for example Irgens (2021), Klev & Levin (2021), as well as Brunstad (2009) and his book on wise leadership.

To gain insight into school leaders challenges, we have started to analyse 45 written exam texts delivered by school leaders in a 15 Ects school leadership module from 2019 to 2022. All the participants of this module had already finished a 30 Ects general school leadership module, and this following add-on-module (15 Ects) focuses on leading the implementation of the curriculum. The module consists of four two-day physical sessions over the course of one year, work requirements and a development text in the form of an exam text that is handed in at the end of the year. The development text is based on the school leaders' experienced challenges related to the leadership of curriculum implementation. In this article, we want to explore which issues school leaders highlight in their exam texts. We will analyze exam texts that has been delivered the last 5 years, representing cohorts 2018/19, 2019/20, 2020/21, 2021/22, 2022/23. We will limit the selection to students in the module for which our own institutions (HVL and NLA) have been responsible, which includes approx. 45 texts. We will use thematic analysis (Thagaard 2019, pp. 171-180), combined with "cross-section analysis" (Mason, 2018, pp. 194-205). This approach means that we go "across" the data (the different exam texts) , compare the texts and go in depth on the topics that appear.

The analytic processes have just started, and it is difficult to see a clear pattern yet. However, preliminary results reveal some of the main problems that the school leaders point at. One problem that emerges from the data is the issue that it is difficult to lead a teacher group -with different attitudes -towards a common understanding of the curriculum. Further, without a common understanding it is difficult to change practice, in line with the new curriculum. Another critical factor is time. The school leaders report that they are surprised that so much time is necessary for discussions regarding the implementation of the curriculum.

Goodlad, J. I. (1979). Curriculum Inquiry. The Study of Curriculum Practice. McGraw-Hill Book Company. Irgens, E.J. (2021). Profesjon og organisasjon. En bok for profesjonsutøvere og de som skal lede dem. (3. utg.) Fagbokforlaget. Mason, J. (2018). Qualitative Researching. 3.utgave. Sage. Senge, P. (1991). The fifth dicipline.