The extended legal freedom of schools goes hand in hand with a greater accentuation and professionalization of the role of school leadership. Different styles of leadership are discussed in the school context, e.g. instructional leadership or distributed leadership. Thus Leithwood et al. (2006) conclude: “Indeed leadership by adjective is a growth industry“ (p. 7). In the last 20 years, two styles of leadership dominated the international research in the area of school leadership: instructional leadership and transformational leadership (cf. de Maeyer, Rymenans, van Petegem, van den Bergh & Rijlaarsdam, 2007; Hallinger & Heck, 1998; Robinson, Lloyd & Rowe, 2008).

Particularly the transformational style of leadership (cf. Bass & Avolio, 1994) is related to implement changes (cf. Avolio, 1994; Conger & Kanungo, 1992) with school leaders as change agents (cf. Bass, 1998). Transformational leadership has also proved to be a predictor for various indicators of successful personnel management (e.g. satisfaction, commitment) and therefore it is of great importance in the school context.

The extended autonomy of schools manifests itself particularly in the legal authority. Besides increasing responsibility for school development and improvement, one of the principal’s executive functions is health promotion. How schools can be both - good and healthy - is more and more at issue. In this context teachers’ health promotion is of special concern as they need to keep fit for their job on a long-term basis. Due to the complex requirement structure, teachers have a very stressful and demanding job.

Therefore, this paper investigates in how far school leadership is connected to health of teachers. In this context school leadership is defined as a direct facet of leadership by a person as well as indirectly as leadership by structural organization.

The paper is based on the following global question: what effects does school leadership in form of direct transformational leadership and creation of organizational conditions have on alterable personal characteristics of teachers and their health?

Because of their susceptibility to interventions, for example of health promotion, only alterable personal characteristics were chosen.

The analyses are based on Leithwood’s et al. (2001) model explaining teacher-burnout, which is replicated for the German-speaking world.

Avolio, B. J. (1994). Total Quality and Leadership. In B. M. Bass & B. J. Avolio (ed.), Improving Organizational Effectiveness Through Transformational Leadership (pp. 121-145). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Bass, B. M. & Avolio, B. J. (1994). Improving Organizational Effectiveness Through Transformational Leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Bass, B. M. (1998). Transformational Leadership: Industry, Military, and Educational Impact. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Conger, J. A. & Kanungo, R. N. (1992). Perceived Behavioural Attributes of Charismatic Leadership. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 24 (1), 86-102. de Maeyer, S., Rymenans, R., van Petegem, P., van den Bergh, H. & Rijlaarsdam, G. (2007). Educational Leadership and Pupil Achievement: The Choice of a Valid Conceptual Model to Test Effects in School Effectiveness Research. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 18 (2), 125-145. Hallinger, P. & Heck, R. H. (1998). Exploring the Principal’s Contribution to School Effectiveness: 1980-1995. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 9 (2), 157-191. Leithwood, K., Day, C., Sammons, P., Harris, A. & Hopkins, D. (2006). Successful School Leadership. What it is and how it Influences Pupil Learning. Nottingham: National College for School Leadership. Leithwood, K., Jantzi, D. & Steinbach, R. (2001). Maintaining Emotional Balance. Educational Horizons, 79 (2), 73-82. Robinson, V. M. J., Lloyd, C. A. & Rowe, K. J. (2008). The Impact of Leadership on Students Outcomes: an Analysis of the Differential Effects of Leadership Types. Education Administration Quarterly, 44, 635-674.