In European and International research regarding school-improvement, different issues concerning implementation, responsibility and participation in educational change are studied and discussed (Hirsch & Killion, 2009) (Huberman & Miles, 1984) Some researchers point out the necessity of supportive and distributed leadership in working with school-improvement (Harris, 2010) others the importance of teachers’ participation and possibility to be the owner of content and performance of changes in curricula or classroom practice (Carr & Kemmis, 1986) (Thornton, 2010). School-culture (Berg, 2003) and organisation structure (Bernstein, 2000) influence choice of subjects and direction of school-improvement, and at what level decisions is taken, as well as how power, influence and responsibility are distributed in different ways and to different levels. How these aspects affect results of intentional improvement is discussed in Swedish studies (Edström, 2010) (Gillberg, 2009).

This paper aims to analyse gender pedagogues´ views on power and responsibility in working with school-improvement. Gender pedagogues are pedagogues who have undergone a training-program focused on gender theory and process-oriented work. It was a training program initiated by the former Social democratic government, the intention was to work towards more equal conditions and possibilities in school and preschool for boys and girls (Wahlgren, 2009). Of interest in this paper is how gender pedagogues consider their own power and influence when it comes to choice of direction and performance of school-improvement. What is possible for gender pedagogues to do when they are involved in school-improvement? How is power and influence expressed in relation to different femininities and masculinities?

Theoretical framework

The theoretical framework draws on Bernstein’s concepts `classification´ and `framing´ (Bernstein, 2000) in this paper especially with focus on relations between femininities and masculinities.

This paper draws on data from interviews with gender pedagogues who work in different municipalities and in different positions in the middle of Sweden. Some of them are engaged in a position as gender pedagogue and others are hired as gender pedagogues on occasional basis.

Bernstein’s concepts `classification´ and `framing´ was the starting point in forming research questions and interview-guide (Bernstein, 2000).

Berg, G. (2003). Att förstå skolan : en teori om skolan som institution och skolor som organisationer. Lund: Studentlitteratur. Bernstein, B. (2000). Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity : theory, research, critique (Rev. ed ed.). Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming critical : education knowledge and action research. London: Falmer Press. Edström, C. (2010). Samma, lika, alla är unika [Elektronisk resurs] : en analys av jämställdhet i förskolepolitik och praktik. Umeå: Institutionen för naturvetenskapernas och matematikens didaktik, Umeå universitet. Gillberg, C. (2009). Transformativa kunskapsprocesser för verksamhetsutveckling : en feministisk aktionsforskningsstudie i förskolan. Växjö: Växjö University Press. Harris, A. (2010). Leading System Transformation. School Leadership & Management, 30(3), 197 - 207. Hirsch, S., & Killion, J. (2009). When Educators Learn, Students Learn. Phi Delta Kappan, 90(7), 464 - 469. Huberman, A. M., & Miles, M. B. (1984). Innovation up close : how school improvement works. New York: Plenum. Thornton, H. J. (2010). Excellent Teachers Leading the Way: How to Cultivate Teacher Leadership. Middle School Journal, 41(4), 36 -43. Wahlgren, V. C. (2009). Den långa vägen till en jämställd gymnasieskola : en studie om genuspedagogers förståelse av gymnasieskolans jämställdhetsarbete. Jönköping: Högskolan för lärande och kommunikation.