While the above are said to be typical of all the EU countries, they are definitely valid for Greece, as relevant studies have shown. In the following paragraphs, we hope to demonstrate that the profession of education evidences clearly the validity of the above argument. What is noteworthy is that the domain of education is not male dominated in Greece, as it is shown in the following paragraphs.

Women in Education

It has been suggested by numerous researchers and by statistical data, that in most developed countries women are over-represented in pre-primary and primary education as well as in general secondary education as opposed to technical and vocational secondary education. (Wilson, 1997). In Greece, the same pattern is evidenced as shown in Table 1.

Numerous research projects and authors have tried to explain the phenomenon of high representation of women in the teaching profession (both in primary and secondary education), not only in Greece but in Western societies in general (Vassilou – Papageorgiou, 1992, Bucher & Saran, 1995, Cowan & Koutouzis, 1997, Dimitropoulos, 1997, Neave, 1998). We shall not repeat the arguments here. Briefly however, teaching (especially in primary and lower secondary education) has been considered to be the continuation of childcare and child-rearing, which in turn has been associated with women in the above societies. Given these facts, however, one would expect a strong representation of women in managerial positions in the Greek educational system.

Women in Managerial Positions—The Case of Greece

For all schools, the center has: defined the content of the national curriculum; recommended appropriate teaching methods; published textbooks; allocated funding; legislated for participation by various stakeholders in schooling; determined student examinations and has taken full responsibility for the organization of schools, including all aspects of staffing (OECD, 2001 p. 79).

Traditionally, within the highly centralized and bureaucratized Greek educational system, Heads of Schools have been administrators expected to follow and implement decisions made at the central level, i.e., the Ministry of Education. The same could be argued for the Heads of Regional Education Offices (HREOs). They are the "link" between central government and local schools, and they coordinate the schools in their area of responsibility. They are responsible for allocating staff to the schools of the region for which they are responsible. However, the Ministry of Education allocates the staff to the region. In essence they do not decide the number of teachers; they merely administer the decision made at the central level.

School Advisors (SA) have a slightly different role. They are experienced subject specialists, often holding post-graduate degrees, and they assist teachers by offering advice and disseminating good practices. The area of responsibility of each School Advisor depends on the number of teachers teaching the specific subject in each region. For instance there is only one Advisor for Art Education for the whole of the country, but several for Mathematics (34) and Language & Literature (98). Their role is also centrally determined.

Despite the limitations posed by the educational system, all three positions enjoy a certain degree of prestige and status in Greek society, with the HREO and the SAs placed higher in the "ranking." This can be explained by the crucial role of the schools in the early stages of the formation of Greek society, and also by the participation of HREO and SA in various Assessment and Selection Committees. As discussed below, these positions, irrespective of their status in the society, are key to the successful operation of the system and thus, important for the Ministry (and the Minister) of Education.

Perhaps the most prestigious, but definitely the most attractive and well-paid positions, are the Heads of Greek Educational Offices Abroad (HGEOA). Their role is advisory, managerial, andcontrolling. In essence, they represent the Greek Ministry of Education in their area of responsibility. Occasionally, HGEOA have to negotiate with authorities of the host country on issues of organization and administration of the Greek schools, while they also play an important role in the social life of the Greek Diaspora. We could argue, therefore, that their role is also political. There are 26 such positions around the world: 13 in Western Europe and 13 in other continents (USA, Canada, Argentina, Egypt, South Africa, Ukraine, Turkey and 6 in Australia). HGEOA enjoy greater autonomy than their counterparts in Greece, as it is difficult for the Ministry to interfere in everyday aspects of Greek education in these areas. Their selection, however, is centrally administered by the Ministry of Education.

According to Table 2, 41% of Primary Heads are women, although almost 56% of primary teachers are women.

What is interesting in the above table is that Greece stands among the countries with the highest representation of women in School Management positions, indicating that the reasons for the observed under-representation are not country-specific. Rather they come as a result of the reasons stated above by the Eurobarometer study.

The relatively high percentage of women appointed as Heads of schools in Greece does not in any case mean that equality has been achieved, or that women have equal access to such positions. It just shows that the phenomenon of under-representation of women in managerial positions is not unique to Greece.

If we now turn to the more prestigious and, arguably, more influential positions of Heads of Regional Education Offices and School Counselors, the phenomenon of inequality and under-representation is clearly demonstrated. According to Tables 3 and 4, during the last selection process in 1998, only 11 women primary teachers out of 443 candidates expressed an interest in becoming Heads of Regional Office. In secondary education, the numbers were 13 out of 466.

What is interesting to note is that all 13 women selected in secondary education were Greek language and literature teachers.

Moving to the School Advisors (Table 5), we notice that in Primary Education there were only 72 out of 512 women candidates, and in Secondary Education 148 out of 625.

Finally, during the last selection process, for the position of Head of Greek Educational Offices Abroad, there were 199 candidates, 140 men and 59 women as we see in Table 6. Only 5 women were selected.

If we now compare the above figures with the percentage of women teachers in Greece, we can easily reach the conclusion that female participation in managerial or other "crucial" positions in the Greek educational system is not as high as expected and does not reflect the composition of the teaching profession in the country. We see four interrelated reasons for this under-representation. There are three levels of overt or covert discrimination that result in the unequal representation of women in such high-status and highly responsible positions. Below we attempt to identify these levels of discrimination and the main reasons for them.

Reasons for the low participation of women in managerial positions

Personal—psychological barriers

In the Greek context, part of the responsibilities of some School Advisors is to travel and advise teachers from different areas, even prefectures. If a woman takes on such a responsibility, given the family structures in Greece, she is definitely aware that such a decision would probably cause "disorder" within her family. Thus, she is intrinsically demotivated, and prefers to continue her career as an ordinary teacher. Research has shown that women feel more satisfied in the teaching profession than men do, as they feel that there is no incompatibility between their personal and working life (Dimitropoulos, 1997).

Psychological barriers are not expressed only in a lack of interest for managerial positions. It has also been argued that women feel they should also adopt "male behavior" in order to become accepted and appreciated in such positions (Shakeshaft, 1987). Such an argument, however, is not valid, as it has been heavily disputed by research evidence. According to Shakeshaft, (1987) and Robetrson, (1996), in schools headed by women academic achievement and morale is higher, there is less violence, and generally fewer discipline problems. Also, De Lyon and Migniuolo (1989), confirming the above argument, suggest that it is women’s rather different approach to educational management that succeeds. Moreover, current discussions about management and leadership in schools bring to the surface the effectiveness of more democratic, flexible and participatory models of leadership (Koutouzis, 1999). Such models do not require the dominance of a male Headmaster but rather the skill to bring together views and opinions. "The very nature of management, dealing as it does with areas of uncertainty, negotiation and policy making, draws on feminine qualities of intuition, aesthetic considerations, dependence on colleagues and so on" (Singleton, 1993, p.175). This is not to say that all women in relevant positions adopt such a leadership style. It indicates, however that the male stereotype is not the only way to efficiency and effectiveness.

Institutional barriers

Following the above argument it is safe to assert that such manipulation can be associated with gender issues. Let us be more specific. The selection criteria for all three key positions under discussion can be divided into two main categories: a) objective criteria, and b) subjective criteria.

In the first category, all academic or other qualifications, which can be proved by relevant degrees, certificates and the like are included. Professional and other managerial experience is also included in it. In the second category, personal skills and qualities are included. Ability to lead and manage, general social activity, participation in local clubs… are among the expected qualities, assessed by the –centrally appointed – Selection Committee. The assessment of the Committee is of utmost importance in cases where the qualifications presented are about equal.

The composition of the Committee has always been male dominated. Given the persisting stereotypes in Greek society (see below), we would expect that in cases of equal qualifications, male candidates are preferred.

Social—cultural barriers

It would be safe to argue, therefore, that the process of reaching gender equality in Greece started less than twenty years ago. The results of the process and, more importantly, subsequent changes of attitudes and cultural norms, are not immediate; and evidence of inequality - hidden rather than overt – can be observed in many aspects of Greek social life even today. We observe in Greece, the phenomenon described elsewhere: substantial equality can not be achieved as long as "hidden" discrimination and preferences are reproduced. It is not enough to declared equality if you "do not feel very comfortable facing a woman in a authority position" (Al Khalifa, 1992).

In the area of educational management attitudes and perceptions, follow the patterns described above. "Somehow people assume that men possess the necessary qualities to do the job and this only changes when they demonstrate otherwise, but with women, we have to prove over and over again that we can do the job before our abilities are recognized" (Singleton, 1993, p.171) . Quite simply, educational management is considered a "male" job, not only by society in general but also by teachers and even pupils. Research evidence confirms that pupils hold a preconception that effectiveness of the school is increased by having a male as Headteacher, who tolerates less "mucking about" (Stanworth, 1984).

Conclusion and Implications

In an era that calls for greater participation of all parts of society in social and political developments, in an era that has demonstrated that observed democratic deficits create tensions, the covert exclusion of majorities from decision-making mechanisms and positions is clearly not acceptable. While other authors propose the use of quotas to improve the situation, we strongly advocate respect for fundamental democratic principles.