Atkinson, B. (2014). Teachers’ practices: Responding to governmentality in accountability testing policy. International Journal of Leadership in Education: Theory and Practice, 18(1), 34-60.

Ball, S.J. (2003). The teacher's soul and the terrors of performativity, Journal of Education Policy, 18(2), 215-228.

Courtney, S. J., & Gunter, H. M. (2015). Get off my bus! School leaders, vision work and the elimination of teachers. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 18(4), 395-417.

Niesche, R. (2010). Discipline through documentation: A form of governmentality for school principals. International Journal of Leadership in Education: Theory and Practice, 13(3), 249-263.

Swaffield, S. (2016). Multilevel leadership for assessment for learning, and the potential of critical friendship. In G. Johnson, & N. Dempster (Eds.), Leadership in diverse learning contexts. Studies in Educational Leadership, 22. (pp. 93-108). Springer, Cham. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-28302-9_5

Swaffield, S. (2016). Multilevel leadership for Assessment for Learning, and the potential of critical friendship. In G. Johnson, N Dempster (eds.)., Leadership in Diverse Learning Contexts, Studies in Educational Leadership 22, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-28302-95

Assessment for Learning (AfL) is distinguished through definitions, practices, principles, and associated characteristics. AfL is claimed to have the potential to improve student achievement, both in terms of attainment as measured by tests and in the skills and dispositions of learning how to learn, but it has proved difficult to establish and embed in practice. Leadership at all levels – state, school, and classroom – is required. The five principles of Leadership for Learning (LfL), which can be summarised as a focus on learning, conditions for learning, dialogue, shared leadership, and a shared sense of accountability, provide a framework for considering the implementation of AfL at different levels across the education system. The four countries of the United Kingdom illustrate different approaches to national leadership of AfL. Critical friendship has been applied in many contexts and its similarity with the principles and practices of both AfL and LfL suggest it is appropriate for supporting the distributed leadership of assessment for learning. A key feature of critical friendship is questioning, and a set of questions related to each of the five LfL principles is offered in relation to leading AfL at the classroom, school, and country levels.