from
TQ TECHNOS Quarterly
Volume 11 Number 4
Winter 2002
Journal of the Agency for Instructional
Technology
Commentary
Boards of Education: The Need for Effective
Leadership
by
William Bainbridge
and
M.
Donald Thomas
No topic seems to gain more attention in
local newspapers and in the electronic media than continuing friction
among board of education members and between boards and administrators.
This increasingly negative spotlight in many school systems makes it more
difficult to recruit good superintendents and tougher to interest
community leaders in serving on boards of education.
Nearly two
decades ago the American School Board Journal featured John
Crawford as an exemplary school board member. The article characterized
Crawford, a Past Chair and Member of the Salt Lake City, UT, Board of
Education, as an effective board member because:
- He was results oriented;
- He knew how to conduct a board meeting;
- He appreciated school system employees and was fair with them;
- He communicated forcefully, clearly and directly with the
superintendent;
- He expected high quality work from administrators;
- He understood the meaning of "public trust" and conducted board
business in public view; and
- He was a public servant in the truest sense.
Salt Lake's
Board of Education, under the presidency of John Crawford, "set the
direction, made tough decisions, showed courage and held the schools
accountable." The Board did not interfere with the superintendent's
obligation to manage the school system and conduct the day-to-day
affairs.
Unfortunately, today the John Crawfords serving as members
of Boards of Education are few and far between . Few individuals possess
the courage and determined principles to improve our schools. As pointed
out by an Iowa study published by the Educational Research Service (ERS
Spectrum, Winter 2001,Vol.19, No.1), extensive on-site interviews
revealed that " the understandings and beliefs of school boards in high
achieving districts differed 'markedly' from those in low achieving
districts." Effective school districts, the study " School Boards and
Student Achievement: A Comparison of Governance in High- and Low-Achieving
Districts" concluded, create seven conditions:
1. Shared leadership;
2. Continuous improvement;
3.
Sustained initiatives;
4. Supportive workplace for staff;
5.
Utilization of data;
6. Staff development; and
7. Community
involvement.
Regrettably, in 2003 many boards of education are
ineffective and create conditions which impair the ABILITY of schools to
provide quality education for their students. Many boards demonstrate the
following:fractured relationships among board members; focus on partisan
political interests;micromanagement of school affairs; concentration of
personal interest items; ambivalence as to what is and is not important;
frequent buy-out of the superintendent;capitulation to special interest
groups; and the inability to negotiate with strong teacher unions. As a
result, schools are generally operated for the benefit of adults, and
children's welfare becomes secondary. Throughout our nation, education is
being weakened by poor board of education leadership practices. It is
enough to say: "John Crawford, where are you when our schools need
you?"
Ineffective boards of education are identified by their
school system results:
- Large numbers of students failing basic skills tests;
- High absenteeism of students and staff;
- Extremely high failure rates, particularly at grade nine;
- A revolving door for school administration; and
- Few students participating in rigorous high level instructional
programs.
School boards need to focus more on setting policy and
less on micro-managing superintendents and school systems, according to a
New England School Development Council (NESDC) report. . The 36 leaders
who contributed to the report, Thinking Differently: Recommendations
for 21st Century School Board/Superintendent Leadership, Governance, and
Teamwork for High Student Achievement, made several recommendations
for building school board-superintendent leadership team relationships
including the need to: clearly define roles of board members and
superintendents, provide boards and superintendents more training in
working together, develop better college training programs for
superintendents , adopt national certification requirements for
superintendents, create a national center for school board-superintendent
leadership . revise state laws to enable boards and superintendents to
meet privately to periodically evaluate their work. The council advises
boards and superintendents to work more as teams and less as adversaries.
Are there other policy solutions for these conditions other than
the cloning of John Crawford? We believe the following considerations are
in order:
1. Board members should be elected to serve a six year term without
being able to run for re-election until an additional six years have
expired;
2. Before being seated at the board, members shall
participate in 30 hours of training and receive a passing grade on a
rigorous examination;
3. All board members shall abide by a Code of
Ethics and be removed from the board by majority vote of the board when
they have failed to abide by the Code..
4. Employee and community
concerns shall be presented to the board in writing and signed by the
complainant;
5. No action shall be taken based on anonymous
information;
6. The board of education shall not involve itself in
four management areas:
- Personnel matters;
- Curriculum and teaching methods;
-
Personnel evaluation, except the superintendent of schools or others
directly
responsible to the board by state statute .
- The
organization of schools and the use of time.
7. Former
employees of the school system shall be prohibited by law from serving
on a school board which has in any way contributed to their retirement
system or plan. School governance requires strong leadership that
establishes accountability for school personnel, but does not interfere
with day-to-day decisions made by employees. Such leadership requires men
and women who, like John Crawford, understand the role of board members to
set direction, make tough decisions, show courage and hold the schools
accountable. Only then will our schools truly operate for the benefit of
all children. Then also will school systems have the positive media
coverage they deserve.
---------------------------------------------
William L. Bainbridge
a former Superintendent in three systems is President of SchoolMatch and
Distinguished Research Professor at the University of Dayton.Former Salt
Lake City School Superintendent and former deputy superintendent for
public accountability for the State of South Carolina M. Donald Thomas is
Chairman of the SchoolMatch Advisory Board and National Lecturer for Nova
Southeastern University.
|
