(49 Questions to Ask Your Board)
[Board meetings]…were less orderly; had less time spent on student achievement; lacked respectful and attentive engagement across speakers; had board members who seemed to advance their own agenda; had less effective working relationships among the governance team; had fewer board members who relied on the superintendent for advice and input; had one member, other than the board president, stand out for taking excessive time during meetings; and did not focus on policy items.
– David Lee and Daniel Eadens1
The above is a description of board meetings in low-performing districts, according to research by Lee and Eadens. Studying board meeting behavior in high and low-achieving districts, such research supports the board’s dedication of time to provide and periodically review boardsmanship guidance. In similar research that studied board self-assessment using state-level school board standards, Lorentzen found significant correlation between a board’s use of written protocols for its interactions and student achievement.2
The board’s authority over individual board members is limited and informal, particularly in the case of elected board members who are chosen by and answer to voters. But the board can and should define its expectations of its members. It should provide an orientation for new members, a written protocol of its expectations, and professional development to shape and guide the behavior of board members, which in turn impacts board effectiveness. The board in Berlin, Connecticut developed a board handbook for this purpose:
At an NSBA conference a session was presented by Gary Brochu and Robert Rader, a board president and state association executive director. They offered a simple but elegant proposition: Why not give the board’s members, especially new board members, and others who are interested, such as candidates for office, a “handbook” describing how the board intends to operate, with the goal of carrying out its business in a professional manner?3
Along with the many board policies that guide staff and students we can usually find a set of board operating policies that describe requirements for eligibility, board organization, how it elects its officers, appointment of members to fill a vacancy, and conduct of meetings. These policies typically include board member protocols and expectations that effective board members follow. Such policies are essential not only for use in induction of the board’s newest members but also for reminding more experienced members of factors that contribute to overall board effectiveness. These policies can be informed by research and reinforced by board practices such as a review of board protocols at the beginning or end of each meeting, structured orientation and board handbooks given to new members, and periodic (quarterly or annual) review of policies whose purpose (self-assessment) is similar to that for superintendent evaluation. Such measures go a long way toward reinforcing individual members’ contribution to governance.
The importance of this task. Boards sometimes act as if they are too busy to get organized, too preoccupied with supervising the work of the staff to pay attention to the more fundamental business of the board itself. We shouldn’t allow ourselves to fall for this too busy excuse. Guiding its members with evidence-based and thoughtfully written board policy, operating protocol, standing operating procedures, and/or a handbook is an important responsibility that should not be ignored. In the absence of written expectations that represent the intent of the board majority, each new member will likely define for himself what the board member’s role is and what the “rules of the road” are for boardsmanship. Individual board member behavior impacts the work of other board members and ultimately the district’s bottom line. (Mis-)behavior in the boardroom that is tolerated tends to set a new norm, lowering the standard for all.
The effective board clarifies the individual role of its board members. It provides clear expectations for their boardsmanship behaviors and intervenes when necessary to facilitate more effective behaviors so that they contribute to overall board effectiveness.
Boardsmanship Guidance consists of 3 elements: Defining the Board Member Role; Setting Boardsmanship Expectations; and Facilitating Boardsmanship.
NOTE: Please feel free to comment. The opinions expressed in these blog entries are informed by references cited herein, and the experiences of the author. Your comments are welcome additions to the conversation.
ALSO: Please feel free to register in order to receive future posts like this one as soon as they are published.
Excerpt from:
- A Framework for School Governance (2017), Rick Maloney
Additional References:
- 1“The Problem: Low-Achieving Districts and Low-Performing Boards” International Journal of Education Policy and Leadership (2014) David Lee and Daniel Eadens
- 2“The Relationship Between School Board Governance Behaviors and Student Achievement” (2013) Graduate Student Dissertation, Ivan Lorentzen, retrieved May 2024
- 3“A Guide to Good Board Behavior” | (2014) Connecticut School Law, retrieved May 2024
Next: Question #25 – Does Your Board Define the Board Member Role?