ERIC ED354609: Building Better Board-Administrator Relations. An AASA Critical Issues Report.

130 Pages·1992·3.7 MB·English

by  ERIC

DOCUMENT RESUME
EA 024 668
ED 354 609
McCurdy, Jack; Byrnes, Donald L., Ed.
AUTHOR
Building Better Board-Administrator Relations. An
TITLE
AASA Critical Issues Report.
American Association of School Administrators,
INSTITUTION
Arlington, V.
REPORT NO
ISBN-0-87652-180-4
PUB DATE
92
NOTE
130p.
American Association of School Administrators, 1801
AVAILABLE FROM
North Moore Street, Arlington, VA 22209-9988.
Non-Classroom Use (055)
PUB TYPE
Guides
MF01/PC06 Plus Postage.
EDRS PRICE
Administrator Role; *Board Administrator
DESCRIPTORS
Relationship; *Boards of Education; Cooperation;
Elementary Secondary Education; *Interprofessional
Relationship; Organizational Communication;
*Participative Decision Making; Politics of
Education; Role Conflict; *Superintendents
ABSTRACT
Practices to maintain and enhance board-member
relationships are described in this handbook. Following the preface,
chapter 1 presents a historical overview to describe the problems
involved in defining the proper roles for school boards and
superintendents. Chapter 2 identifies current board/administrator
roles and what they should be for the 1990s and beyond. The third
chapter examines factors contributing to the declining tenure of
superintendents. Factors of the rising tensions between boards and
administrators in the areas of communication, turf, personnel
decisions, and lack of training are examined in the fourth chapter.
Chapter 5 looks at the external pressures that enhance those
tensions. Chapters 6 and 7 provide strategies for selecting
superintendents and for conducting superintendent evaluation and
board self-evaluation. The eighth chapter describes how to create a
relationship based on trust, with a focus on the importance of
communication and the power of information. The final chapter
examines some of the ways in which successful boards and
administrators have created and maintained thriving relationships
through developing shared decision making, dealing with conflict,
participating in inservice training, changing the superintendent's
role, and sharing responsibilities. An example of a school-based
management program in the Cherry Creek Schools of Englewood,
Colorado, and a list of related American Association of School
(LMI)
Administrators (AASA) publications are included.
***********************************************************************
Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made
from the original document.
***********************************************************************
BUILMNG
J3ET7ERBOARD--1-
ADMINISTRATOR
RELATIONS
U S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
"PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS
Ott ce of Educational Research end tmprovernent
MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY
EDLyCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION
CENTER (ERIC)
This document has been reproduced as
received from the person or organization
Originating it
C Minor changes have Dien Made to improve
reproduction quality
a critical review
Points 01 view or opinions stated in this docu
TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES
o
represent official
meet do not necessao
INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)"
OERI oosition or policy
evaluating the
significance of local
school leadership
and the board
superintendent
4ValsigiatA
relationship
as
the
driving force
fC
1 ,
._.....,,,
7,...-----....-
..,,,
.'
A.
,v
behind it
i 1,4
f..)1f
-,,,,,4
4
, fl
At,: :, ''';''l
,....,
sA
-
,,,,
American
--;
Association of School
1S
Administrators
4\)
2
BUILDING
BE7TE1?BOARD
ADIVIEVISIRATOR
RELATIONS
a critical review
evaluating the
significance of local
school leadership
and the hoard
superintendent
''5111111
relationship as the
driving force
behind it
Amen=
As,ocoloon of S,hool
Adnonotrazon
By Jack McCurdy
Edited by
Donald L. Hymes
3
Series
The AASA Critical issues
of its
provides depends in large measure on the quality
The quality of education a school district
superintendent and the school board is a key factor in
leadership. The relationship between the
the leadership equation.
in the 1990s. due primarily to shrinking
Local school systems are facing unprecedented pressures
expectations. and changing student populations. And
finances, greater public and governmental
superintendents remain solid in a majority of cases,
while the relationships between boards and
tensions that could cripple a school district
there is evidence that these pressures are creating new
if allowed to grow.
least redirected toward improving the educational
How can these tensions be diminished, or at
roles of the board and the superintendent he
system? How can the delicate balance between the
those questions by reviewing the
maintained? This Critic,...! Issues Report attempts to answer
of ensuring strong relationships through
problems and proposed solutions, including ways
effective selection and evaluation procedures.
free lance education writer living in Morro Bay.
This report was written by Jack McCurdy. a
editor/manager of the Critical Issues Series. Special
California. and edited by Donald L. Hymes,
the AASA staff for their editing assistance.
thanks go to Leslie Eckard and Katie Ross of
and school board presidents who responded
Special appreciation also goes to the administrators
superintendents, board
for this report, and to the dozens of
to the AASA survey conducted
generously donated their time to be inter-
members, college professors. and consultants who
of this bock.
viewed, and whose contributions comprise the bulk
GARY MARX
RICHARD D. MILLER
Senior Associate Executive Director
Executive Director
AASA
AASA
School Administrators
Copyright © 1992, American Association of
Library of Congress Card NIVIlher: 92-074903
ISBN: 0-87652-180-4
AASA Stock No.: 21-00220
Design and Graphics: Anita F. Winfield
County.
Photography courtesy of William Mills. Montgomery
Maryland. Public Schools
approved for publication.
This report was reviewed by AASA and
reflect the views or policies of AASA.
Approval does not signify that the contents
1703)528-0748.
Moore St.. Arlington, l'.-1 22209-9988:
To order. contact AASA, 1801 North
AASA is an equal opportunity employer.
Critical Issues Report No. 26
CONTENTS
Preface
Board-Superintendent Relations: A Key to School
Success
3
Chapter 1
The 'Proper' Roles of School Boards and Superintendents:
Searching the Past for Clues
6
Chapter 2
Roles for the 1990s and Beyond: What Are They and What
Should They Be?
13
Chapter 3
a ammulio trilitat
am
NM III UM OM all 110111
The Tenure of Superintendents: Is It Dropping
I III III MIMI' MI MI
I MI NMI
and Whv'?
23
Chapter 4
Tensions Between Boards and Superintendents:
Are They Rising'?
30
Chapter 5
Board-Superintendent Tensions: Pressures from the Outside
45
Chapter 6
Selecting the Superintendent: Where a Good Relationship Can Beginor End
60
Chapter 7
The Evaluation Process: Helping To Build Stronger Relationships
77
A0100*
O .40\
Chapter 8
JO,
The Secret of Success: Laying the Foundation of Trust
0 On Chapter 9
Making the Relationship Thrive: It's Everybody's Responsibility
110
-- aISIII
1111111111.111 awe
MI_ 11111111111II____
1111111111111111
_
3
PREFACE
oard-r
perinte
ns:
Re
School Success
A Key to
leadership in creating
he importance of local scnool
overstated. As long ago
successful schools cannot be
for more
political scientist Neal Gross called
as 1958,
and superintendents
research into the roles of boards
"is at the heart of any
because their relationship
educational problem and its solution."
school &ovemance
years. one observer remarked.
edu-
Over the past several decades. however,
has gone from being a non-issue to a top item on
school
cational research has focused more on the
the national reform agenda.
curriculum, the classroom, students. teachers,
In some quarters, there is a sense of rediscov-
of
social influences on achievement, and a host
local school leadership
ery of the significance of
schoo'
other topics to explore ways of improving
and the board-superintendent relationship as the
effectiveness. School boards and superinten-
driving force behind it. In its 1986 report. "School
dents were, for the most part, forgotten.
Boards: Strengthening Grass -Roots Leadership."
major
Now, as pressures mount to accomplish
(IEL)
the Institute for Educational Leadership
school reform and restructuring, policy makers
declared that "the quality of this relationship
the
and researchers are once again examining
affects the overall effectiveness of a district's
key
joint role of boards and superintendents as a
schools.-
In just a few
to reenergizing public education,
4
Linkages crucial
edly shuffled, the teachers, principals, parents,
and even students go into a holding patten,
The vast majority of hoards and superinten-
waiting for signs of permanency. "They won't
dents enjoy healthy, cooperative relationships,
actthey just wait." she said, and "you often
according to the IEL report and other studies, but
hear, 'This too shall pass.
in many cases those linkages must be strength-
Professor Robert Crowson of the University
ened because they are so crucial. "Unsatisfac-
of Illinois at Chicago said in districts with a high
tory relationships, either between a board and its
turnover in superintendents "there is a real ten-
superintendent or among board members them-
dency to batten down the hatches and to protect
selves, destroy a sense of mission forthe schools."
the organization from the new superintendent
the IEL report said. Dissonance "affects the
because of the feeling that he will only be there a
morale and professionalism of those who staff
short time." In such district, he added, people
the schools and causes lack of confidence in
frequently say, "I've seen them come, I've seen
educational leadership in the community," and
them go, and I'm still doing the same thing."
ultimately "it limits the education of children."
In part, the renewed focus on the dynamics of
Children suffer
local school leadership was prompted by the
high-profile departures of some big -city superin-
"Who suffers'?" asked a superintendent at a
tendents in recent years. Their short tenures,
1991 conference of urban superintendents held
while not representative of the national trend, did
by the U. S. Office of Educational Research and
raise questions about the overall state of board-
Improvement. "The kids, because they don't
superintendent relationships and how they could
have continuity. They don't have stability in
be fortified where necessary. There is wide-
terms of leadership, and programs keep chang-
spread concern in public education that a high
ing. It's a revolving door not only with people but
turnover rate of superintendents and/or board
with programs. Strategic plans get into practice
members causes instability that can, and often
and then they get changed."
does, impede the progress of a district's schools
Milt Goldberg, director of the Office of Re-
and its students.
search in the U.S. Department of Education. said
stability in the superintendency is crucial be-
The importance of stability
cause "the way the superintendent expresses his
As in most large enterprises, fundamental
vision of the system and the way he works to
change in education requires careful planning,
share that vision with the community, students.
long-term commitment, and time, Superinten-
and parents is as important as any factor in the
dent Thomas Payzant of the San Diego City
success of schools." And, he emphasized. "it
Schools noted. "My sense is that if there is
takes time to do that.
This is why strong, collaborative relation-
stability and continuity, you have a better chance
ships between school hoards and superinten-
to institutionalize change." he said.
dents are so vital, and why this Critical Issues
Consultant Jim Huge agrees. He believes that
turnover in school district leadership "causes
Report is so timely. There are inherent tensions
between boards and superintendents. as this
people not to take risks" at a time when risk-
taking may be essential to structural improve-
report will show, but there are also many sound
and effective practices employed by thousands
ment. Some educators, for example. tend to take
safe actions out of "fear that I can't accomplish
of successful boards and superintendents to main-
anything" in a climate of instability.
tain and enhance their relationships.
is impossible to have long-range goals,
This report will delve into those productive
It
planning, and "visionary leadership" in such a
practices in the hope that they will help school
leaders build stronger relationships for the ulti-
climate, said Lee Etta Powell. professor of edu-
cational leadership at George Washington Uni-
mate benefit of the students and the communities
versity. When superintendents are being repeat-
they serve.
5
CHAPTER ONE
The 'Proper'
Roles
Boards and
of School
Superintendents:
Clues
Searching the Past for
were excellent. 29 percent said they
efore getting into the prob-
were good, 7 percent said fair and
2
lems that some school boards
percent said poor. Among hoard presi-
and superintendents encoun-
dents, 61 percent rated their relation-
build stron-
ter and exploring ways to
ships as excellent. 28 percent said good,
decide
ger relationships, we should
9 percent said fair and 2 percent said
what their proper roles should be in
poor. On this point, superintendents
achieving the most effective operation
and boards see eye to eye. according to
of school districts. Why? Because con-
the survey results.
fusion over those roles seems to be at
the core of most conflicts that arise
Shared concerns
between boards and superintendents.
Superintendents and board mem-
Questioned about their level of con-
bers surveyed for this Critical Issues
meIIMVA,4411,a-
cern over their relationships, I8 per-
Report agreed overwhelmingly that
cent of the superintendents character-
their relationships were in very good
ized the concern as major. 35 percent
shape. But a lack of clarity in roles
said it was modest and 47 percent said they had little or no
demands constant attention
poses potential problems and
board presidents was: 23
concern. The breakdown for
to avoid misunderstandings and conflict.
and 47 percent
percent major concern, 30 percent modest
said
For example, 92 percent of the superintendents
their
little or none. In expressing little or no concern about
from
conflicts between superintendents and boards arise
relationships as they stand, however, they clearly were not
confusion over proper roles. and only 8 percent disagreed
suggesting that they attached little or no importance to
the
with that statement. Board members were not asked
good
them. Instead, a large majority said they consider a
in a variety
exact survey question but indicated agreement
relationship so important that they spend a great deal of
of other ways.
time making sure it doesn't become a matter of concern.
of
Describing their relationships with hoards. 62 percent
Overall. 92 pm cent of the superintendents and 65 per-
said they
the superintendents participating in the survey
11
111111111111111
MIMS
MINIM
MN
MUM
MUM
111111
1111111111111MI
__R
_--
MINIM
1111111111111111111111111111111
11111111111111
111111111111111M
_$
111111111111111
1111111-11
111111111111111111111I11111111111111111111
ISMS
MIMI MI
1111111111R
11111111111111
1111111111111111
MIMI
11111
111111111111111111111111111111
MINIM
1111111111111111
111111211111111111111111111
MENEM
I
111111111111111
1111111R11111
111111111111111111111t
cent of the board presidents said they found it necessary to
problems caused by confusions over roles, because there is
work continually at building or maintaining good relation-
no pat answer.
ships. They realizeand often said sothat constant
nurturing of a healthy relationship is an imperative, per-
haps the most important single thing they do to ensure good
management and good schools. Why they feel that way and
The historical evolution
what they do to nurture it will be discussed in greater detail
in later chapters.
of roles
Many pressures
Coincidentally, this report is being prepared on the
Many superintendents who rated their relationships
100th anniversary of the first struggle between hoards and
with hoards as excellent also indicated on a follow-up
superintendents over "who should govern" local schools.
question that they felt significant pressures from their
As we shall see. that initial clash in the 1890s grew out of
hoards. The most recurrent sources of these pressures were
the rise of the superintendency and claimed a number of
personalities of hoard members, outside pressures on
fired chief executives as casualties.
hoards, board frustration over financial matters, changed
That 19th Century fight marked a watershed in the
or increased demands of boards. lack of hoard members'
evolution of the way schools are governed in the United
leadership skills, board members with single constituen-
States. an evolution that began in 1647 when the Massa-
cies, excessive involvement in administration, and fre-
chusetts Bay Colony passed a law requiring all towns of a
quent turnover of hoard members.
certain size to establish and maintain schools.
In their comments. superintendents see the need to work
The year I 789 is also famous for another event besides
constantly to maintain good relationships with their boards.
the birth of this nation. It was the vear that the Massachu-
For example, Arnold Prince of the Gibbon. Minnesota,
setts legislature passed the first state school law and
Public Schools said. "This public relationship is a balance
authorized towns to employ special committees elected by
at best and most any wind can tip the scales." And Robert
the people to oversee schools.
C. Hill of Springfield, Illinois, School District 186 noted.
This hit of history is important to the question of hoard
"Such a relationship is no accident. It is continuously in
superintendent roles because it underscores the tradition of
peril due to the complexity of issues and demands."
citizen control of schools in America. Clearly, elected
Board presidents voiced similar comments. David
hoards came first in the evolution of school governance and
Hausman of the West Monona Public Schools. Onawa.
continue to he predominant for the stewardship of public
Iowa. summed it up this way: "When you fail to work at it.
education in this country.
it soon deteriorates."
But the growth and complexity of American society and
The results from the survey and accompanying com-
its schools brought a new recognition that public education
ments underscored the fact that many superintendents and
required more than lay leadership. In the most significant
hoard members recognize that potential problems between
development since the founding of local schools in I647.
them can lurk just beneath the surface. A fiscal crisis,
school governance in the
I 840s and 1850s was changed
outside pressures, a new hoard memberthese are but a
from a one-headed to a two-headed system of leadership
few of the things that can quickly disrupt smooth sailing.
with the introduction of the superintendency. It was, most
While one of the greatest potential dangers facing
certainly, the beginning of' the challenge to define gover-
hoards and superintendents involves their understanding
nance roles.
of their respective roles, the average citizen might consider
that question ridiculously simple: the board sets the poli-
Enter the superintendent
cies and the superintendent carries them out. But anyone
familiar with education would have to respond that this
While superintendents were not bestowed with authority
equal to that of school boards, their very existence. how-
definition is hopelessly simplistic: unfortunately, it doesn't
always work that way.
ever vaguely defined, served to cloud the board's authority.
As education historian Raymond E. Callahan, professor
It never has and probably never will, and a quick glance
emeritus at Washington University, tells the story, it began
at the origins of' school hoards and school superintendents
with an effort in the 1840s to create the new position of
will reveal why. It may also help both hoards and superin-
tendents understand that neither side is at fault for the
superintendent of schools in Boston. The reason for that
9
7
in school management by school hoards, accusing many
It was not that school board
still pertinent,
move is
hoard members of using schools for their own selfish or
schools.
members lacked the time or expertise to run the
political gain. He urged voters everywhere to elect hoards
although these may have been secondary factors. It was
of
that would give the superintendent "a sufficient amount
the
primarily because group action has its limitations. As
independent power to enable him to improve the schools in
composed
Boston School Committee put it. the body was
fit."
any manner that may to him seem
which thus
of 24 members who shared "a responsibility.
Superintendents took up the call. Callahan says. and the
broken into fragments. presses on no one."
battle was joined. Operation of schools by lay boards was
he held
Then, like today, they needed an individual to
likened to "semi-barbarism" by some superintendents,
accountable for getting things done. But the changeover
School hoards formed their own national organization to
resistance. and it was
was not accomplished without stiff
of
help coordinate the fight and accused superintendents
the first
1851 before the Boston school hoard appointed
being power-hungry and undemocratic. The battle was
full-time superintendent.
waged fcr years. but after 1895, Callahan said, superinten-
Cities across the nation followed Boston's example over
school
dents gradually gained more direct authority over
became
the next several decades and the superintendency
nation.
programs in districts across the
board in most areas. But
a fixture in tandem with the school
This shift was caused in part by schools being largely
widely, and
the authority granted to superintendents varied
removed from ward politics during the municipal reform
Boards.
it was sometimes minimal in those early days.
20th Century
movement. Another major factor was the
in the
usually elected from wards, continued to he active
of an industrial
movement to design schools along the lines
all
operational sphere, "visiting schools, overseeing almost
called
model using scientific management principles, which
administrative detail, and making most fiscal decisions."
for an expert administrator to he given wider authority over
historian David Tyack of Stanford University said.
operations. But superintendents never gained the full de-
had sought in the 19th
gree of independence that many
Corruption key factor
Century.
adminis-
The movement toward a professional school
picked up
Muddying ti e waters
tration headed by an appointed superintendent
in the cities.
steam partly because of political comiption
The question of how much power each should exercise
Ward bosses did help millions of immigrants find their way
Bruce, a
in running schools was never resolved. William
in the new land, Tyack pointed out, but the "graft, patron-
the
leading spokesman for school hoards who created
schools. The cry went
age and favoritism" were costly to
in 1891, agreed that the superinten-
School Board Journal
share of the
out for superintendents to assume a greater
but he
dent should he recognized as the educational expert
of party politics.
power from hoards to lift schools out
that the board's function was
was not willing to concede
The idea was given a big boost in a series of magazine
simply to legislate: it was also to "administer."
reformer
articles published in 1892-93 by noted education
According to Callahan, Bruce "succeeded in muddying
Americin
Joseph Rice. who deplored the condition of
been trying to
the waters, and school administrators have
interference
schools. He placed a large part of the blame on
between the
clear them up ever since." The distinction
"legislative" function and the "executive" function was
despite
blurred. Callahan concluded, "and apparently,
remains
decades of effort by school administrators, it
he distinction between
blurred."
the 'legislative'
function and the
Inherent in the system?
`executive' function
rela-
This look at the origins of board-superintendent
in the
was blurred and
tionships shows clearly that the confusion is rooted
Callahan to
institution of school governance itself, leading
apparently, despite
of the
remark that "certain problems. principally that
decades of effort by
functions between lay school
proper division of power and
in the
hoards and professional school people, are inherent
school administrators,
beyond
system." Some contend that the problem goes even
it remains blurred.
schools and that "representation and administration are
1 0
8