Numerous studies have underscored the complexity of the role of school principals (Hitt & Tucker, 2016). The school principal's function has been analyzed in the context of diverse organizational, educational, and cultural domains, and their impact on multiple variables concerning students, teachers, and school effectiveness has been explored (Nettles & Herrington, 2007). However, very few studies have examined the unique characteristics of vocational school management (Foley, 2011; Gessler & Ashmawy, 2016; Park, 2012). Even fewer studies have examined how vocational school principals view their role (see, for example, Foley, 2011).

This research lacuna should disturb us in light of the unique characteristics of vocational schools in different countries (Ozer & Perc, 2020). Vocational schools are viewed as an alternative for students with low academic abilities or “at-risk youth” (Down et al., 2019). It was also found that these schools primarily serve working-class students (Nylund et al., 2017), and they suffer from negative stigma and poor image (Vlaardingerbroek & Hachem El-Masri, 2008). In this context, this study examines three key questions: How do vocational school principals portray their role and work environment? How do vocational school principals portray the pedagogy of vocational education? Do these definitions and descriptions imply educational stratification and social inequality in vocational schools, and if so, how are they manifested?

Vocational School Management

Several studies have argued the critical role of the school's socio-cultural context in influencing the school principal's leadership style (Belchetz & Leithwood, 2007; Hallinger & Bryant, 2013). They noted that effective school leadership could be perceived differently in diverse cultures (Tan, 2018). Bennett and colleagues (2003) asserted, for example, that the effectiveness of a distributed leadership style is subject to the school culture: In one school, it will promote trust and partnership, whereas, in another, it may provoke opposition and mistrust.

The assertion that school leadership is context-dependent is the basis for the present investigation. Boateng (2012) argued that management in vocational education institutions differs from management in general education and should be addressed accordingly. Boateng (2012) asserted that vocational education provides students with practical knowledge, and society counts on these schools to prevent unemployment. Therefore, vocational school principals face multiple governmental demands and expectations on the one hand and labor market demands on the other.

Other studies have highlighted the singularity and importance of the vocational school principal because this educational stream is continually subject to changes and effects of the labor market and economy. Thus, the effective management style for this educational stream should be adaptive and responsive and create an educational environment that can adjust to government changes and reforms. It should also provide graduates capable of responding to the same changing job market (Wonacott, 1998).

However, only few studies have directly addressed the unique aspects of management and educational leadership in vocational schools. Several studies have examined how vocational school principals cope with policy reforms or demands to produce change and academic innovation. Foley (2011), for example, investigated how neoliberal reform has affected Australian principals' vocational identity and found them to have multiple identities that they constantly "juggle" when required to implement change in the field.

Notably, however, the research literature barely addresses the question of whether vocational school principals are characterized by a unique leadership style or by management considerations common to all school principals. A comparative study (de Jong et al., 2020) conducted in the Netherlands revealed that vocational school principals were inclined toward a leadership style that the authors termed Thire (theirs). These vocational school principals functioned more as facilitators than primary school principals or academic high schools.

This study is based on a qualitative methodology, with data collected from 22 in-depth interviews with vocational school principals in Israel. we used the snowball sampling method. We located suitable interviewees through personal connections (four participants were interviewed in this way). In addition, an invitation to participate was posted on social networks (14 interviewees), and others were located through mutual acquaintances (four interviewees) who helped us connect with additional interviewees. Of the 22 participants, seven were women, and 15 were men. The seniority of the interviewed principals ranged from 3–18 years. Six interviewees held a teaching certificate, six principals had worked in academic schools, and 10 were retired army officers. Career army officers retire from the military in Israel at a relatively early age––in their 40s and 50s. In light of the symbolic capital associated with being an army officer in Israel, a society in which security and the military play a central role, this transition of military officers to education is relatively common. The participants' schools are located in various cities throughout Israel. The study was approved by the ethics committee of the Faculty of Education at the university with which we are affiliated. The research tool in this study was a semi-structured in-depth interview that aimed to examine the principals' perception of their professional role. The semi-structured hour-long interviews comprised several sections: The principals' career path; perception of the principal's role; daily administrative routine; student population; relationship with parents; social criticism concerning vocational education: The research epistemology guiding us in this study was derived from the thematic analysis approach (Braun & Clarke, 2006). The data were analyzed in six steps. Step 1 included reading the raw data and taking notes about the descriptive and linguistic aspects of the content, as well as preliminary interpretive notes. Step 2 called for an initial conceptualization of the central themes that each author identified. Stage 3 included reading the interview transcripts following the initially extracted themes. Step 4 included a free reading to identify themes not identified in the previous step. Stage 5 included a focused reading of the interviews according to the themes suggested by the authors. Step 6 involved a final reading of the interviews to extract themes not identified by the authors in the previous stages. For each stage, the authors discussed the themes and their classification.

The primary findings of the current study revealed that principals describe their role as managing under social exclusion. This type of management was described through several key features, such as the school's stigmas, low social value, and the nature of the students. The principals described the students as “at-risk youth” who suffer from cognitive, emotional, and behavioral problems. They described their management job as unique, partly because it primarily involves working closely with the youth, typically in the absence of parental involvement (termed a "school without parents"). Principals described their work as managers lacking a routine or having a routine comprised of ongoing crises. They further lamented a sense of uncertainty due to the constant fear of insufficient student enrollment, leading to ongoing closure threats. Against this background, one of the primary roles of vocational school principals is to engage heavily in marketing. In addition, the interviewed principals cited several consequences associated with managing educational spaces of exclusion (called by one of the participants "the backyard of the educational system"): The principals are negatively tagged (considered "second-rate principals"); they are refused entry from hegemonic and prestigious training courses; they see themselves managing students who deride attending a vocational school; and teachers who feel like “second-rate” teachers. It is noteworthy that the principals' experience of marginalization and exclusion resonates with research findings regarding the students' and teachers' experience in vocational schools (Ben Peretz et al., 2003; Van Houtte, 2004). The article discusses the meaning of principals' description of their role in in the context of the "coalition of despair," (Sharlin and Shamai, 1999) especially how education and welfare professionals' experiences parallel those of the marginalized populations they serve. Also discussed was how the principals' role perception impacts educational stratification and social inequality.

Belchetz, D., & Leithwood, K. (2007). Successful leadership: Does context matter and if so, how? In C. Day & K. Leithwood (Eds.), Successful principal leadership in times of change (pp. 117–138). Springer.‏ Ben-Peretz, M., Mendelson, N., & Kron, F. W. (2003). How teachers in different educational contexts view their roles. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19(2), 277–290.‏ Boateng, C. (2012). Restructuring vocational and technical education in Ghana: The role of leadership development. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 2(4), 108 – 114. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. de Jong, W. A., Lockhorst, D., de Kleijn, R. A. M., Noordegraaf, M., & van Tartwijk, J. W. F. (2020). Leadership practices in collaborative innovation: A study among Dutch school principals. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, Down, B., Smyth, J., & Robinson, J. (2019). Problematising vocational education and training in schools: Using student narratives to interrupt neoliberal ideology. Critical Studies in Education, 60(4), 443–461.‏ Foley, A. (2011). Vocational education and training manager discursive practices at the frontline: Alternative possibilities in a Victorian setting. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 39(1), 105–121. Gessler, M., & Ashmawy, I. K. (2016). The effect of political decentralization on school leadership in German vocational schools. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 44(2), 184–204. Hallinger, P., & Bryant, D. A. (2013). Synthesis of findings from 15 years of educational reform in Thailand: Lessons on leading educational change in East Asia. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 16(4), 399–418.‏ Nylund, M., Rosvall, P. Å., & Ledman, K. (2017). The vocational–academic divide in neoliberal upper secondary curricula: The Swedish case. Journal of Education Policy, 32(6), 788–808. Ozer, M., & Perc, M. (2020). Dreams and realities of school tracking and vocational education. Palgrave Communications, 6(1), 1–7.‏ Park, J. H. (2012). The effects of principal’s leadership style on support for innovation: Evidence from Korean vocational high school change. Asia Pacific Education Review, 13(1), 89—102. Sharlin, S. A., & Shamai, M. (1999). Therapeutic intervention with poor, unorganized families: From distress to hope. Routledge. Tan, C. Y. (2018). Examining school leadership effects on student achievement: The role of contextual challenges and constraints. Cambridge Journal of Education, 48(1), 21–45.‏ Wonacott, M. E. (1998) Leadership development in career and technical education. ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education.