In a neoliberal society, individualistic and technical logics reduces professionals to consumers of development courses (Hardy, 2012). Principals’ professional learning has come to be about carrying through standardized methods on the initiation of school authorities (Aas & Blom, 2017). Such arrangements usually not lead to changes, due to difficulties of transferring content from one practice to another (Forssten Seiser & Söderström, 2022).

The aim of this study is to contribute with an empirical example of principals’ professional learning from a practice perspective, conceptualizing learning as the process of changing practices (Kemmis, 2021).

 The theoretical framework used is the Theory of practice architectures (TPA) (Kemmis & Grootenboer, 2008) and Ecologies of practices (Kemmis et al., 2012). According to TPA a practice are made up of sayings, doings and relatings. Related to these, the practice architectures consist of three kinds of arrangements prefiguring the practice; Cultural-discursive arrangements - the sayings of a practice, mediated through language and discourses; Material-economic arrangements - resources as the physical environment, human and non-human entities, schedules, money and time ; Social-political arrangements- shaping how people relate to other people and to non-human objects, mediated in the social space as rules, hierarchies, solidarities and other relationships. Ecologies of practices takes a wider perspective to focus on how the practices are related to each other in the complex of educational practices.

The study is based on a critical action research (Kemmis et al., 2014) in which 14 preschool principals, working in a midsized municipality in Sweden, collaborated with a researcher to critically examine and change their ways of leading digitalization in preschool education. The action research followed a cyclic process of trying out actions of leading at the local preschools and reflecting on the experiences in group conversations. The group conversations were audio recorded and analyzed with the theory of practice architectures to identify changes in sayings, doings, and relatings of leading. Ecologies of practices was then used to identify how the practice of professional learning (AR) and leading practices became interdependent during the process, and what practice architectures that enabled the identified changes.

The study is expected to contribute with an empirical grounded example and some indicators of how professional learning can be arranged to generate transformations of practice. The result of the study is relevant to those engaged in organizing for, leading, and participating in, practices for professional learning, such as authorities, local management, school leaders and educators in general.

Aas, M., & Blom, T. (2017). Benchlearning as professional development of school leaders in Norway and Sweden. Professional Development in Education, 44(1), 62–75. Forssten Seiser, A., & Söderström, Å. (2022). The impact of the Swedish national principal training programme on school leaders’ actions: Four case studies. Research in Educational Administration and Leadership, 7(4), 826–859. https://doi.org/10.30828/real.1120909 Kemmis, S. (2021). A practice theory perspective on learning: Beyond a ‘standard’ view. Studies in Continuing Education, 43(3), 280–295. Kemmis, S., & Grootenboer, P. (2008). Situating praxis in practice: Practice architectures and the cultural, social and material conditions for practice. In S. Kemmis & T. J. Smith (Eds.), Enabling praxis: Challenges for education (pp. 37–62). Sense. Kemmis, S., McTaggart, R., & Nixon. R. (2014). The action research planner: Doing critical participatory action research. Springer. Kemmis, S., Edwards-Groves, C., Wilkinson, J., & Hardy, I. (2012). Ecologies of practices. In P. Hager, A. Lee, & A. Reich (Eds.), Practice, learning and change. Professional and practice-based learning (Vol. 8). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4774-6_3