The professionalization of the teaching profession does not make the supervisory functions disappear, in particular that of the headteacher. On the other hand, they must evolve to take into account greater autonomy and therefore greater responsibility on the part of both establishments and teachers.

Taking the Diploma of IT professionals seriously does not lead to saying “All equal, no need for a leader”. Playing the role of a leader, in this context, should however consist of exercising professional leadership rather than bureaucratic authority.

No educational system can do without a hierarchical structure. Someone must represent the school on the outside (upper level of the system, other schools, parents, local authorities, unions) and be responsible for the functioning of the whole on the inside, with the right to decide the last instance. One may wish that this aspect of the function be the corollary rather than the opposite of professional leadership.

What is meant by “professional leadership”? It is by no means a question of having in all fields expertise superior to that of the professors. Conversely, there is no leadership if the role of the school head is limited to the administration of the most managerial aspects: the composition of classes, the allocation of services, the timetable, equipment, budget, premises, security, etc.

These functions are necessary, but we can expect the headteacher to be first and foremost one of the designers-animators of the school Diploma of IT and, even more fundamentally, the one who facilitates cooperative functioning, the division of work, decision-making, identification and treatment of problems, including and first of all pedagogical problems, such as the consistency of practices and requirements, the development of differentiated pedagogy systems, the use technologies, curricular orientations, etc. The school head should be at the heart of educational change processes. So as not to be absorbed by the management,

We measure the complexity of such a role, at the crossroads of multiple institutional constraints and contradictory expectations. From this point of view, the development of professional training for headteachers and other supervisory staff is essential. It is still necessary to train them in the sense of pedagogical and transformational leadership.

However, the tendencies of the new public management can influence the role and the training of the heads of establishments in the opposite direction. If we think of the autonomy of the establishment in the sense of self-financing – this trend is strong in higher education – and of a skillful positioning in the market of consumers of education, then the improvement of teaching quality is not necessarily the most tempting strategy.

It is more expeditious to astutely target an audience, to respond to solvent social demand, and to leave students in difficulty or destitute in second-class establishments unless their parents are wealthy enough to pay for intensive preparation for diplomas and exams. the most valued.

We must defend professional leadership and fight purely entrepreneurial leadership, which would lead establishment managers to worry above all about winning and keeping customers, by playing on quality standards, marketing, advertising, adaptation constantly to fluctuations in social demand, and why not a stock market listing.

The trend towards the privatization of education and the strength of the management culture may give rise to fears that legal authority will be replaced by commercial management. Simply talking about leadership is not enough, we must specify its nature and sources of legitimacy and qualify it as professional leadership.

From this perspective, accession to such positions should proceed from an election by the professors at least as much as from a designation from above. It is at this price that the role will (re)find, in the eyes of the teachers, a legitimacy that it lacks when the administration parachutes managers into the establishments.

The quality of the education system depends on the quality of the supervision. It would be disastrous for him to be the weak link in the chain.