The Effect of Education Decentralization on the Role of School-Leadership in Vocational Schools In Germany and Egypt

Author(s):

Iman Ashmawy(presenting / submitting)

Conference:

ECER 2011

Network:

2. Vocational Education and Training (VETNET)

Format:

Paper

Session Information

02 SES 10 B, Impact of VET-Reforms: Examples from Different Countries

Paper Session

Time:

2011-09-15

15:00-16:30

Room:

K 23/27,1 FL., 33

Chair:

Christof Nägele

Contribution

This study aims at addressing a major question of how education decentralization in vocational schools affects the role of school leadership.

Hence, while reviewing literature, many studies on education decentralization were found. Some of these studies demonstrate the types of education decentralization (political, administrative, and fiscal) (Chikoko 2009, Abd El Wahab 2008, El Baradei 2005, Bellenberg 2001), while others elaborate the advantages and disadvantages of decentralization (Khaleghian, 2003,).

Furthermore, many studies discuss the levels of government and stakeholders that are involved in education whether in Germany or Egypt, and how decentralization may impose new changes on their roles, especially the school leadership. For instance, a study illustrates how the different layers in Germany (the federal level, the Länder level, the local educational units, the parents, local community…etc) influence the educational system, especially the schools, and how the relationships between these layers and actors are dynamic and range from antagonism to cooperation(Kussau& Brüsemeister, 2007, Bellenberg et al., 2001). In addition, another study has shown that the reforms of 2006 have increased the role of the schools and their autonomy (Rürup, 2007). While in Egypt, a study shows how the different stakeholders (ministry of education, educational directorates and administrates, school leadership, teachers, parents, community members, political parties, private enterprises) may respond and encourage differently the initiatives of education decentralization (El Baradei 2005).

As for the school leadership, research shows that the school directors in Germany are responsible for administering and supervising the school, developing the budget, preparing school statistics, observing and evaluating the teachers, as well as implementing the rules and policies coming from the Land’s ministry of education (Ashwill, 1999). However, many school directors lack the necessary competencies especially the financial competencies to effectively run the school (Wirris, 2002).

On the other hand, a study demonstrates how the ministry of education in Egypt controls the educational system and sets the policies, rules and regulations, as well as controls human and financial resources, making the education system thereby very centralized. Moreover, this centralistic feature is also dominant at the meso- level (school-level), where in many cases the organizational culture of the school is marked by a strong tendency towards vesting power in the hands of the school director/principal (Ashmawy, 2006).

Method

In this qualitative study, structured interviews are conducted with a sample of school directors/principals (around 30 school directors in Bremen, Lower Saxony, Cairo, Giza and 6 October City to achieve triangulation of data as advocated by Flick (Flick et al, 2004)). These interviews cover open-ended questions related to: the initiatives of school autonomy and education decentralization, the divergent financial, administrative roles performed by the school leadership, the decisions they take whether individually or in association of other actors, and whether or not they demand further empowerment and changes towards more autonomy. The responses are subject to the (formal) structuring content analysis as discussed by Mayring (Mayring, 1993), where they are coded into main categories using the thematic criterion in this coding. The MAXQDA computer software is used in this procedure.

Expected Outcomes

Concerning political decentralization, the German school leaders play an influential role while allowing the teachers to participate in the decision-making process. In Egypt, the school leaders play the key role while the teachers may merely present their opinions. Surprisingly, in both countries the parents and students are passive in the decision-making process, while the private enterprises in the German vocational schools organize the practical exams. Regarding administrative decentralization, the German school leaders play a very apparent role, especially in terms of hiring the teachers and organizing the administrative operation of the everyday life. In addition, most of the organizational work is divided among teams. In Egypt, the school leaders assign most of the administrative work to the teachers, who are autonomous merely in their own class. The idea of teams is not existent and it is the school leaders who perform internal evaluation. In fiscal decentralization, Germany is far advanced than Egypt. The German school leaders have their autonomy in fundraising and in spending their two budgets; for personnel and for learning and teaching materials; while in Egypt the schools receive their budget from the ministry of education and have to spend it as determined by the authorities.

References

- Abd El Wahab, Samir (2008). Decentralization in Egypt: Towards Activating the Institutional and Legal Framework. In: Conference on Decentralization in Egypt: Opportunities and Challenges. Cairo: June 25th-26th. (in Arabic). - Ashmawy, Iman K. (2006). The Effect of Organizational Culture on the Performance of Educational Institutions: An Applied Study on Some Public Schools. Master Thesis in Public Administration. Cairo University: Faculty of Economics and Political Science. (in Arabic). - Ashwill, Mark A. (1999). The Development and Implementation of Education Standards in Germany. The Educational System in Germany: Case Study Findings. USA: Office of Educational Research and Improvement. www.ed.gov/pubs/GermanCaseStudy/chapter2.html. 14/11/2008. - Bellenberg, Gabriele Wolfgang Böttcher& Klaus Klemm (2001). Stärkung der Einzelschule: Neue Ansätze der Ressourcen Geld, Zeit und Personal. Neuwied; Kriftel: Luchterhand. - Chikoko, Vitallis (2009). Educational Decentralisation in Zimbabwe and Malawi: A Study of Decisional Location and Process. International Journal of Educational Development 29, pp. 201–211. - El Baradei, Laila (2005). Decentralization of Pre-University Education in Egypt. Samir Abd El Wahab (editor). In: Program of Decentralization and Local Government Issues. Public Administration Research and Consultation Center. February 2005. pp. 13-44. (in Arabic). - Fend, Helmut (2008). Schule Gestalten: Systemsteuerung, Schulentwicklung und Unterrichtqualität. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaft. - Flick, Uwe, Ernst von Kardorff& Ines Steinke (2004). A Companion to Qualitative Research. London: Sage Publications. - Khaleghian, Peyvand (2003). “Decentralization and Public Services: The Case of Immunization", In: World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, No. 2989. pp. 1-37. - Kussau, Jürgen& Thomas Brüsemeister (2007). Governance, Schule und Politik: Zwischen Antagonismus und Kooperation. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. - Mayring, Philipp (1993). Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse: Grundlagen und Techniken. (4.Auflage). Weinheim: Deutscher Studien Verlag. - Rürup, Matthias (2007). Innovationswege im deutschen Bildungsystem: Die Verbreitung der Idee “Schulautonomie” im Ländervergleich. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.

Author Information

Iman Ashmawy (presenting / submitting)

Institut Technik und Bildung

Lernen und Organisation

Bremen

Search the ECER Programme

Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
Search for authors and in the respective field.
For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.