This study aims at addressing a major question of how decentralization of decision making, administrative and fiscal authorities affect the role of school leadership in the vocational schools.

While reviewing literature, 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 thereof (Khaleghian, 2003,).

Furthermore, various studies discuss the levels of government and stakeholders that are involved in education and how decentralization may impose changes on their roles, especially the school leadership. For instance, the studies of Kussau& Brüsemeister (2007) and Bellenberg et al. (2001) illustrate how the different layers in Germany (the federal and Länder levels, 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. In addition, the study of Rürup (2007) claims that the reforms of 2006 have increased the school autonomy. In Egypt, the study of El Baradei (2005) demonstrates 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.

Regarding the school leadership, Ashwill (1999) mentions that the school principals 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. However, Wirris (2002) claims that many principals lack the necessary competencies, especially the financial competencies, to effectively run the school.

On the other hand, Ashmawy (2006) 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. This centralistic feature has been also dominant at the school-level, where in many cases the organizational culture of the school is marked by a tendency towards vesting power in the hands of the school principal.  

Thus the main research objectives of this study are:

-          demonstrating how decentralization of decision making in education can affect the role of the school leadership in vocational schools. Therefore, it studies how the school leadership may influence the decision making procedure, whether stakeholders are involved, and whether the higher educational authorities treat the schools as equal partners or as subordinates,

-          investigating how administrative decentralization in education can affect the role of the school leadership in vocational schools, especially in teacher selection and recruitment, performance evaluation, development …etc.

-          studying how fiscal decentralization in education can affect the role of the school leadership in vocational schools, especially in terms of budget setting and execution, fundraising…etc.

- 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.