1. 2013-2015

2. What is FSL? FSL stands for Future School Leaders. What are the aims of the project?  Establish a long term partnership between Jarfalla and Southwark schools.  Raise profile of school leadership  Share good practice for development of FSL.  Take part in an action research project.

3. Who is involved in the project? What are the requirements from the school?  Commitment to project for 2 years.  8,000 word assignment (with possibility of editing for purpose of publishing) SwedenUK University of StockholmInstitute of Education JarfallaSouthwark 4 Schools in the LA

4.  Greater understanding of the process of developing future school leaders from educational research, local comparisons, and international comparisons.  Improving the systems and support currently in place for school leaders.  Develop long standing international relationship with partner school.

5.  Visit to Sweden, hosted by University of Stockholm. Introduction to project, and to our international partner school – Alfred Salter and Olovslundskolon  Visit to England, hosted by the Institute of Education. Submit initial research proposal and plan data collection.  Several web seminars/skype conversations about the project.  Second visit to Sweden, host by Jarfalla. Updates on individual projects and reflections about collaborations with partner schools.

6. Title: The effectiveness of the school’s approach to the identification and development of future school leaders.approach Aims:  To evaluate the school’s current approach to the identification and development of future school leaders. (staff and school perspective).  To understand the school’s current approach better in terms of the skills / attitudes we look for in FSLs.  To evaluate the need for a more systematic approach to leadership development using leadership standards as a basis for assessment and identification of CPD.  If necessary to modify the school’s approach to ensure it meets the needs of the school and its staff.  To learn from colleagues in our partner school in Sweden.

7. Who did we involve? Teachers Leadership team School managers (non-teaching) Partner school staff What were our methods/ activities? Pilot questionnaires Final questionnaires Case studies Leadership team discussions Partner school visits Did we face any difficulties? Time constraints amid major shifts in National Education Policy

8. Actions: (to date) Created and piloted a questionnaire to collect staff perspectives on the current approach to developing leaders. Questionnaire was refined after feedback. Presentation to staff about the project and what we are trying to learn. All teaching staff given a questionnaire. Results analysed. Additional visit to our partner school to learn more about leadership structure & development and staff voice.

9. Outcomes: (to date) Better understanding of the school’s perceived culture and preferred culture for developing school leaders. Better understanding of the timescales for developing leaders at our school. Developed tools and approaches to support leadership development across the teaching staff. Better understanding of leadership development in our partner school in Sweden.

10.  The two approaches  Our own perception was not the same as staff  Staff want a mixture of both (slightly towards ‘everyone shines’)  How can we support our FSL through these approaches? CPD ownership?  Monitor use of CPD tools  Evaluate their usefulness to staff  Research / develop leadership standards for FSLs  Further collaboration and peer learning with partner school

11.  If you would like to know more about FSL or any of the school’s who are involved projects please go to:  http://fsl-regio.com/ http://fsl-regio.com/