School Board Governance Research Articles

Radical pragmatism in school board governance

ABSTRACT Educational outcomes for Black & brown students are the result of well-functioning school systems overwrought with top-down bureaucracy that stifle school-based leaders from generating school-based solutions. The dominant explanation is the growing power and influence of politically-driven school board members cut off from local, national, and international best practices. Previous research has centered on the power of school boards and what can be done by school board officials with more power. The article explores the impact of school boards ceding power and giving more autonomy to school based leaders through three case studies. Findings indicate that the school districts making the greatest gains for Black & brown students are those that introduce innovation schools or schools that provide more autonomy in return for more accountability.

Replace or repair: Exploring possible methods for improving school governance

ABSTRACT The performance of school boards as a governmental body has been a source of often well-deserved critique in both policy and academic outlets. In this article, we explore approaches to school board governance to conceptualize possible approaches to increasing effective governance in service of students—namely effective governance, district operations, and student learning. We explore both alternative structures to replace traditional school boards and the ways in which relationships between actors in the system might offer routes for more effective governance within traditional school boards.

Mayoral Control and School Superintendents: Lessons from Japan

Background/Context: Since the early 1990s, the United States has been witnessing reforms in large, high-visibility cities, with mayors granted the power to appoint school boards, superintendents, or both. This shift away from elected school board governance has been characterized as marginalizing traditional educators and ushering in reforms that traditional educators oppose. On the other hand, Japan’s experience with mayoral control of schools is nationwide and longer-lived. In 1956, mayors were given authority to appoint members of the school board, and in 2015 they were given further authority to appoint school superintendents. Purpose/Objective/Research Question/Focus of Study: This study analyzes whether Japanese mayors appoint superintendents whose backgrounds make them likely to challenge the education establishment and introduce dramatic educational reforms. We provide some early evidence on how mayors have been using their new powers and how they interact with the superintendents they select. Research Design: We used data from nationwide surveys conducted by the Japanese government to map the broad pattern of superintendent characteristics over time as well as for a sampling framework to identify and select a smaller number of superintendents to be interviewed for obtaining in-depth information. Semistructured interviews of six superintendents were conducted to delve more deeply into the relationship between mayors and superintendents, and the communication between the superintendents and the school board members in Japan. To triangulate the interview data, transcripts of school board meetings, city council meetings, election bulletins (official campaign manifestos), demographic data, and national test scores of students were collected from 2015 to 2019. Conclusions/Recommendations: We identified important differences between the United States and Japan. Rather than aligning with the reform-oriented mayors against school boards and education bureaucracies, the Japanese mayor-appointed superintendents act as mediators between the mayors and the school boards. The difference may be that, in the United States, only mayors who sought mayoral control had the right to appoint school superintendents, whereas in Japan the national government gave all mayors the right to appoint superintendents, regardless of the political context.

Should School Boards Be in Charge? The Effects of Exposure to Participatory and Deliberative School Board Meetings

ABSTRACT Should school boards be in charge of schools? School boards serve as sites for local democracy, but their power has been under siege for over half a century. This study provides results from an original survey in order to assess who Americans want in charge of their schools. Given that the strength of school boards is supposed to be their ability to facilitate local democracy, this study also includes a survey experiment in which participants are randomly assigned short clips of different types of school board meetings to view. The meetings differ in style – one with no stakeholder participation, one with stakeholder participation but no response from the board, and one with participation and board response or what I consider to be public deliberation. The results suggest that school boards are the preferred option, and preferences for school board governance grows stronger once participants are exposed to school board meetings where there is public deliberation. This effect is equally as strong amongst people of color and individuals from low-income households. This study supports the notion that school boards are a crucial part of local democracy in the US.

Mejora escolar, liderazgo y reforma sistémica: una retrospectiva (School improvement, leadership and systemic reform: a retrospective)

Mejora escolar, liderazgo y reforma sistémica: una retrospectiva (School improvement, leadership and systemic reform: a retrospective)

The Hard and Critical Work of School Board Governance

Cindy Elsbernd is the vice chair of the Des Moines Public Schools board of directors in Des Moines, Iowa; a member of the second cohort of the IPGA Policy Governance Proficiency Program; founder and director of Iowa Kidstrong Inc.; the program manager for the United Way of Central Iowa's Well Kids Coalition; and an independent contractor with the Iowa Association of School Boards' Board Development Cadre. In this article, she discusses the application of Policy Governance principles in a school board setting.

School Board Governance in Changing Times: A School's Transition to Policy Governance

The expansion of the school choice movement and greater flexibility allowed by Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) means that education governance is emerging as an important issue for school effectiveness. This longitudinal case study sought to gain an understanding of the implementation of a new governance structure, Policy Governance, in a private, independent school with deeply entrenched culture and patterns of behavior. Findings suggest an immediate positive influence on leadership and culture in the district, including a “trickle down” effect on shared leadership. However, challenges to sustainability indicate that even strict adherence to the model, unanimous support among board members, and strong board and administrator leadership may not be enough to support sustainability.

Linking the distribution of board-executive governance responsibilities to charter school performance

PurposeThis study aims to use the original data collected from school board members representing nonprofit charter schools in the state of Minnesota to examine the relationship between the distribution of board-executive governance responsibilities and the performance of organizations operating as part of a New Public Management style macro-governance reform.Design/methodology/approachA combination of survey data collected from Minnesota charter school board members and hard performance data were utilized in two OLS regression models to predict the link between organizational governance and school performance.FindingsThe authors find that boards can improve hard measures of organizational performance by shifting responsibility of day-to-day operations closer to the executive, and public advocacy duties closer to the board. The results build on the existing literatures on school board governance and board-executive relations. Overall, the findings suggest the existence of an ideal balance between board-executive governance responsibilities in key functional areas on charter school boards.Originality/valueThough a healthy literature exists regarding the value of charter schools, very few studies have actually explored the way in which these organizations are governed. This study is the first to link charter board governance responsibilities to performance.

Exempt Social Welfare Organization Converts to Quasi‐governmental Entity

An organization functions to promote public education and improve public school board governance in a state. Its membership consists of states, political subdivisions of states, and entities the income of which is otherwise excludable from gross income (IRC § 115). This entity is a tax‐exempt social welfare (IRC § 501(c)(4)) entity.

Governing for Results on a Postcollective Bargaining Wisconsin School Board

The popular narrative of Wisconsin’s collective bargaining battle started out being about money. Should public employees pay more toward their healthcare? Can school districts offset state aid cuts using the additional revenue from employee healthcare contributions? Does collective bargaining have a cost? This article gives an overview of Wisconsin school boards, explains exactly how Act 10 increased their power, demonstrates why and how improved school board governance can have an impact on student achievement, reviews the changes Wisconsin school boards are making because of Act 10, and provides policy recommendations to improve both board governance behaviors, and the quality of policies enacted by school boards in the postcollective bargaining era.

Do School Board Governance Best Practices Improve District Performance? Testing the Key Work of School Boards in Wisconsin

ABSTRACTThe most prominent set of school board governance best practices used in the United States is the National School Boards Association’s (NSBA’s) Key Work of School Boards. In this article, we operationalize adherence to the Key Work of School Boards with multiple survey items answered by Wisconsin school board members. Using multivariate regression models, we find that adherence to the best practices results in improved achievement in districts represented by board members who have served for five or more years. The findings support the idea that school board governance behaviors are linked to district-level academic outcomes.

A Comparison of Public and Charter School Board Governance in Three States

In this article we compare the governance behaviors and preferences of nonprofit charter school board members with traditional elected public school board members in Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin. Using originally collected survey data, we find that nonprofit charter school board members are less likely to place emphasis on relations with the public, engage in conflict, be ideologically diverse, and perceive the executive as responsible for key governance tasks than traditionally elected public school board members. The findings provide new information for policymakers weighing the potential benefits of education privatization through the use of nonprofit charter schools against the potential loss of democratic board accountability.

Changing school board governance in primary education through school inspections

This paper addresses if, and to what extent, the current working methods of the Dutch Inspectorate of Education affect the governance of school boards in schools for primary education. A key facet of the working method is the inspection meeting with the school board. Drawing upon a large quantitative study ( n = 244) we are able to identify some changes in school board governance due to these inspection meetings. School boards that had an inspection meeting indicate changes in their governance of quality assurance and data use, and in the amount of data that they collect on the functioning of their schools. School boards indicate very small amounts of activities with regard to the curriculum and instruction in their schools.

School Board Governance

Do school boards have a role in student achievement? Recent research suggests that they do. This case study identifies 12 board of education governance practices associated with higher levels of student achievement. The relationship between these board governance practices and the role of the board in district leadership is examined in the context of Superintendent Smith’s change initiative.

Gendered Behavior Patterns in School Board Governance

Background/ContextEducational leadership literature lacks research focused on how gender influences decision making, in particular at the highest level of school governance, the school board table. Consequently, whether gender makes a difference during decision making at the school board table has yet to be determined.Purpose/Objective/Research Question/Focus of StudyThis article examines the influence of gender during decision making at the school board table as related to board members’ perceived vocal space/influence and perceptions from others (board colleagues and superintendents) about board members’ vocal space/influence. Findings from one of the few studies of women school board members and some of the published literature on women superintendents are used to support discussions and to increase insight into how gender dynamics may play out at the school board table.Research DesignThis qualitative study is a secondary analysis of a larger study (Mountford, 2001) that investigated many factors related to board member decision-making styles, such as motivation for board service and conceptions of power.Conclusions/RecommendationsThe article concludes with a discussion of how decisions are impacted by gender dynamics prior to and during decision making and further suggests ideas for school board training and educational leadership programs of ways in which programs can be improved to address gender issues impacting decision making at the board table.

Board governance of independent schools

PurposeThis paper develops a theoretical framework to guide future inquiry into board governance of independent schools.Design/methodology/approachThe authors' approach is to integrate literatures related to corporate and educational boards, motivation, leadership and group processes that are appropriate for conceptualizing independent school board governance processes.FindingsShows that the institutional role of an independent school board is likely to be quite different, and considerably more significant than the role of a board of a systemic school.Originality/valueThis paper develops an original theoretical framework that will provide a sound basis for investigation of an important but neglected aspect of educational administration in Australia.

Leadership: A Message for State Legislatures

IN THIS knee bone's connected to the thigh bone system of U.S. education, in which each part relates to and relies on other parts, one could speculate that leadership provides the backbone. It is essential, but not sufficient; it is supporting, but needs support; it provides direction, stability, and protection, but is vulnerable. And when it's less than perfect, it is costly to the entire system. Many studies touting the essential qualities of strong school leaders have been written over the past two decades. I will not attempt to summarize those studies here, but - in response to several recent studies - it seems important to reflect on how state policies might address the new information presented. One recent study of leadership was led by Thomas Glass, a professor at the University of Memphis. Titled Leaders Look at the Superintendency, School Boards, and Reform, it surveyed 175 superintendents judged by their peers to be outstanding. Fifty of the 59 survey items had already appeared on the 2000 American Association of School Administrators' 10-year study, The Study of the American School Superintendency 2000: A Look at the Superintendent in the New Millennium. Some responses from this broader national survey are mentioned below, although the focus of the new study was outstanding superintendents. Survey findings included the following: * Seventy-seven percent of these leaders are optimistic about the future of public education; however, 71% agree that the superintendency is in a state of crisis. The leading reasons offered for the crisis are: 1) school board relations, 2) long work hours, and 3) stressful working conditions that discourage principals and central office administrators from seeking superintendencies. * Only 30% of superintendent leaders believe the model for school board governance should continue in its current form. Instead, 52% responded that the governance system needs to be seriously restructured, and 16% responded that it needs to be completely replaced. * Inadequate financing is less a problem for superintendent leaders (25.6%) than for superintendents from the national group (44.2%). Yet, when asked about the most important change needed to improve their districts, superintendent leaders overwhelmingly indicated that funding was the most important problem to address, followed by the need to attract better, more qualified teachers. * A large number (37%) of both superintendent leaders and superintendents from the national group report that having too many insignificant, yet time-consuming demands is limiting their effectiveness as superintendents. * Fifty-five percent of superintendent leaders believe that state accountability and testing have a positive effect in their districts. Glass draws policy implications from the survey's findings. State policy could target more effective boards, especially for districts beset by poverty, low achievement, and community instability. Suggestions for Current Leaders In Trying to Stay Ahead of the Game: Superintendents and Principals Talk About School Leadership, Public Agenda surveyed 853 randomly selected superintendents and 909 principals during the summer of 2001. Nine in 10 superintendents said that giving administrators far more to run the schools while holding them accountable for getting results would be a effective (45%) or somewhat effective (47%) means of improving schools. Public Agenda's survey also indicated that 73% of superintendents and 69% of principals think that the ability to remove ineffective staff members (even those with tenure) would be very effective. Twenty- eight percent of superintendents say they have enough freedom and autonomy to do so now. Thirty-two percent of principals say they do. A Model Worthy of Study While not directly aimed at leadership, a third recent study provides other significant insights into potential recommendations for states to consider. …

Women as Leaders in Public Education

Previous articleNext article No AccessWomen as Leaders in Public EducationSuzanne E. EstlerSuzanne E. Estler Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Signs Volume 1, Number 2Winter, 1975 Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/493227 Views: 53Total views on this site Citations: 25Citations are reported from Crossref Copyright 1975 The University of ChicagoPDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Miryam Martínez Martínez, Manuel M Molina-López, Ruth Mateos de Cabo Explaining the gender gap in school principalship: A tale of two sides, Educational Management Administration & Leadership 49, no.66 (Apr 2020): 863–882.https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143220918258Lucy E. Bailey, Karen Graves Gender and Education , Review of Research in Education 40, no.11 (Dec 2016): 682–722.https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X16680193Michael Parr, Douglas Gosse The Perils of Being a Male Primary/Junior Teacher: Vulnerability and accusations of inappropriate contact with students, McGill Journal of Education 46, no.33 (May 2012): 379–393.https://doi.org/10.7202/1009172arMeredith Mountford, C. Cryss Brunner Gendered Behavior Patterns in School Board Governance, Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education 112, no.88 (Aug 2010): 2067–2117.https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811011200804Rose Mary Newton Does Recruitment Message Content Normalize the Superintendency as Male?, Educational Administration Quarterly 42, no.44 (Oct 2006): 551–577.https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X06291413Marilyn Tallerico, Jackie M. Blount Women and the Superintendency: Insights From Theory and History, Educational Administration Quarterly 40, no.55 (Dec 2004): 633–662.https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X04268837Kaetlyn Lad Two Women High School Principals: The Influence of Gender on Entry into Education and their Professional Lives, Journal of School Leadership 12, no.66 (Jan 2019): 663–689.https://doi.org/10.1177/105268460201200603Michelle D. Young, Scott McLeod Flukes, Opportunities, and Planned Interventions: Factors Affecting Women’s Decisions to become School Administrators, Educational Administration Quarterly 37, no.44 (Oct 2001): 462–502.https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X01374003Linda Skrla, Pedro Reyes, James Joseph Scheurich Sexism, Silence, and Solutions: Women Superintendents Speak Up and Speak Out, Educational Administration Quarterly 36, no.11 (Feb 2000): 44–75.https://doi.org/10.1177/00131610021968895Lois Joy Why are women underrepresented in public school administration? An empirical test of promotion discrimination, Economics of Education Review 17, no.22 (Apr 1998): 193–204.https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-7757(97)00021-6Carolyn Riehl, Mark A. Byrd Gender Differences Among New Recruits to School Administration: Cautionary Footnotes to an Optimistic Tale, Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 19, no.11 (Nov 2016): 45–64.https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737019001045Marilyn Tallerico, Joan N. Burstyn Retaining Women in the Superintendency: The Location Matters, Educational Administration Quarterly 32, no.1_suppl1_suppl (Nov 2016): 642–664.https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X960321004Patricia A. Schmuck Women’s Place in Educational Administration: Past, Present, and Future, (Jan 1996): 337–367.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-1573-2_12Sari Knopp Biklen Feminism, methodology and point of view in the study of women who teach, Melbourne Studies in Education 34, no.11 (Jan 1993): 10–21.https://doi.org/10.1080/17508489309556255Ann Tickamyer, Susan Scollay, Janet Bokemeier, Teresa Wood Administrators’ Perceptions of Affirmative Action in Higher Education, (Jan 1989): 125–138.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-9639-0_10Colleen S. Bell Organizational influences on women's experience in the superintendency, Peabody Journal of Education 65, no.44 (Jun 1988): 31–59.https://doi.org/10.1080/01619568809538620Shirley N. Sampson Equal Opportunity, Alone, is Not Enough or Why There are More Male Principals in Schools these Days, Australian Journal of Education 31, no.11 (Apr 1987): 27–42.https://doi.org/10.1177/000494418703100102Joan Poliner Shapiro Women in Education: At Risk or Prepared?, The Educational Forum 51, no.22 (Mar 1987): 167–183.https://doi.org/10.1080/00131728709339279Barbara K. Dopp, Charles A. Sloan Career Development and Succession of Women to the Superintendency, The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas 60, no.33 (Jul 2010): 120–126.https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.1986.9959302Ann R. Tickamyer, Janet L. Bokemeier Career mobility and satisfaction of women administrators in postsecondary education: A review and research agenda, Sociological Spectrum 4, no.2-32-3 (Jul 2010): 335–360.https://doi.org/10.1080/02732173.1984.9981725James M. Frasher, Ramona S. Frasher, Fountain B. Wims Sex-role stereotyping in school superintendents' personnel decisions, Sex Roles 8, no.33 (Feb 1982): 261–268.https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00287310Judith A. Adkison Women in School Administration: A Review of the Research, Review of Educational Research 51, no.33 (Jun 2016): 311–343.https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543051003311JAMES M. FRASHER, RAMONA S. FRASHER SEX BIAS IN THE EVALUATION OF ADMINISTRATORS, Journal of Educational Administration 18, no.22 (Feb 1980): 245–253.https://doi.org/10.1108/eb009830Burke D. Grandjean, Helen Hazunda Bernal Sex and Centralization in a Semiprofession, Sociology of Work and Occupations 6, no.11 (Aug 2016): 84–102.https://doi.org/10.1177/009392857961004 James G. March American Public School Administration: A Short Analysis, The School Review 86, no.22 (Oct 2015): 217–250.https://doi.org/10.1086/443406