(49 Questions to Ask Your Board)
…when district leaders are carrying out their leadership responsibilities effectively, student achievement across the district is positively affected.
– Tim Waters and Robert Marzano1
In a landmark study of district leadership, Marzano and Waters reported a significant relationship between student achievement and certain district leadership factors, such as the goal-setting for achievement and instruction, the length of superintendent tenure, and delegation of authority in a manner that they call defined autonomy. Their lessons for boards include the benefit of longer superintendent tenure and these recommendations for district leaders:
- Collaboratively set goals (including non-negotiable goals) for achievement and instruction,
- Allocate resources to support those achievement and instruction goals,
- Monitor achievement and instruction goals.
Giving direction to management is an area of concern for board leadership. Some boards give too much direction and fail to delegate, approving no action that was not submitted to the board for its approval. Others delegate authority, then undermine that authority by directing superintendent and staff on the details of how to get things done in that area. Still others delegate authority over an area and abandon oversight or accountability because it “is no longer our area.” These practices reflect everything from a desire to control staff work to the fear of losing such control. For most it is “the way things have always been done.”
There can be considerable overlap between the board’s leadership role and that of the superintendent, so care must be taken in the guidance boards give to management. Lack of alignment between written management guidance and board behavior can harm superintendent effectiveness and in the worst cases lead to superintendent turnover, negatively affecting the bottom line. Goodman, Fulbright and Zimmerman, in their comprehensive study of school districts, described a negative relationship between frequent superintendent turnover (often due to dysfunctional school board behavior) and overall district success. In one community this was painfully described by a staff member:
Our board members believe their job is the day-to-day running of the schools…and [as a result] over the past 23 years, we’ve had 11 superintendents and acting superintendents.
– Richard Goodman, et al2
No matter what its intent, the way a board of directors “directs” (or fails to direct) can in the worst-case stifle staff initiative and creativity and greatly hinder the superintendent’s ability to respond to district needs in a timely and prudent way.
Scenario: During the early years of their board-superintendent relationship the district had rocky moments with sporadic instances of board intrusion into areas that had been considered superintendent business, but which had never been put in writing. Then the board adopted a governing approach that provides written guidance, expressing expectations written as principles rather than more detailed but unfocused rules and procedures. It drew a line between board business and staff business, then declared a “hands off” policy with respect to what we had decided were superintendent decisions. One day board members were engaged in a deep discussion concerning guidance they should give in an operational area that had already been delegated to the superintendent. During a lull in the discussion, when the speaker was taking a breath, the superintendent blurted out “What am I, a potted plant?” The audience chuckled, and the board decided to cut short its discussion, acknowledging it had crossed the line and had entered superintendent territory. The board had defined the superintendent area and assigned it to her, so was bound by that prior decision to honor it.
In the scenario described above, even after supposedly delegating authority, the board had forgotten the meaning of such delegation, reverting to its former practice (involvement in everything, even where there is no reason to think a board could make better decisions.) The superintendent’s outburst was needed to remind the board of its previously declared commitments.
Not all boards recognize instances of a disconnect between previous decisions (in the above case, delegation of authority to the superintendent) and their actual behavior in meetings. Certainly, intrusive board meddling is an ever-present concern when guiding operational matters, because of the likelihood that unrestricted board micromanagement leads to poor results for students.
The importance of this task. Clear understanding of board and superintendent roles is an essential first step for a board giving guidance and direction to the superintendent. Lack of role clarity is a major contributor to dysfunction in the boardroom, and ultimately harms the district through superintendent turnover.
Many governance authors and most traditional board training programs separate board work from staff work by advising the board to decide what is to be done while the superintendent decides how it will be done. From this it would seem that boards should say very little about operational matters. We need to be both purposeful and prudent about how we provide such guidance, becoming neither micromanager nor rubber-stamp. Still, the board is responsible for all district activity, including daily work performed by the staff, so policy guidance is essential.
Most board policies as we know them guide the operational details of district work. For such policies board guidance to the superintendent is given in terms of broad principles applying community values in situations where operational decisions must be made.
Metaphorically speaking, someone can avoid the pitfalls of micromanagement when guiding the operation of a motor vehicle by hiring someone else to do its driving. But that does not mean a board should ignore operations entirely. As the community’s representative, the board can and should provide guidance for district operations to ensure that unacceptable situations are avoided.
The effective board carefully defines the superintendent’s role, distinguishing it from the board’s own role. It is at all times prepared to hire its next superintendent. It maintains balance, on the one hand recognizing that it is fully responsible for all district activity and therefore should provide guidance that reflects community values and priorities, and on the other hand optimizing organizational effectiveness by appropriately delegating authority, empowering the superintendent with freedom to act, unconstrained by meddling or second-guessing. Balance is not easy to attain, but is necessary to success.
Superintendent Guidance consists of 4 elements: Defining the Superintendent Role; Superintendent Hiring; Setting Management Policy; and Delegating and Providing Support to the Superintendent.
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
References:
- 1District Leadership That Works (2009) Tim Waters and Robert Marzano
- 2Getting There From Here (1997) Richard Goodman et al
Next: Question #33 Does Your Board Define the Superintendent Role?
I just enrolled my stepdaughter in Joliet School District in Illinois. I looked up the academic performance of students in Joliet School District and found that only Bout 12% are proficient in English and only 8% were proficient in Math!
I had the opportunity to speak with the superintendent and asked her where she published her student academiic achievement data because I saw no evidence for it in her strategic plan. She told me that parents can go online to find student academic achievement data.
I recommended that it would be better to produce 5 years of student academic achievement broken down by key subgroups and heat mapped! These posters should be prominently displayed in the district office, individual schools and at all School Board Meetings. Parents should not have to rummage around online to find it.
Of course the superintendent was not at all interested in my recommendation as she said the pandemic was responsible for low student academic achievement.
I think that the School Board should mandate the ubiquitous display of achievementndata in easily understandable ways for parents and community.
Of course our school board will never do this as they adhere to self over service and loyalty over competence cultural values!
That is the reality in most American School Districts. What you can’t see can’t hurt you!!