INFORMATION TO USERS

This was produced from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming. While the
m ost advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this docum ent
have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material
submitted.
The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand
markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction.
1. The sign or “ target” for pages apparently lacking from the document
photographed is “Missing Page(s)” . If it was possible to obtain the missing
page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages.
This may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating
adjacent pages to assure you of complete continuity.
2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark it is an
indication that the film inspector noticed either blurred copy because of
movement during exposure, or duplicate copy. Unless we m eant to delete
copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed, you will find a
good image of the page in the adjacent frame.
3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part of the material being photo­
graphed the photographer has followed a definite m ethod in “sectioning”
the material. It is customary to begin filming at the upper left hand com er
of a large sheet and to continue from left to right in equal sections with
small overlaps. If necessary, sectioning is continued again—beginning
below the first row and continuing on until complete.
4. For any illustrations that cannot be reproduced satisfactorily by
xerography, photographic prints can be purchased a t additional cost and
tipped into your xerographic copy. Requests can be made to our
Dissertations Customer Services Department.
5. Some pages in any docum ent may have indistinct print. In all cases we
have filmed the best available copy.

University

Micrdhlms

International

3 0 0 N. Z E E B R O A D , A N N A R B O R , Ml 4 8 1 0 6
18 B E D F O R D ROW, L O N D O N W C 1 R 4 E J , E N G L A N D

8106439

S c h u s t e r , Jo n N e il

AN ASSESSMENT OF PERCEIVED NEEDS AND PARTICIPATION OF
SOUTHWESTERN MICHIGAN PUBLIC SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS IN
LOCAL, REGIONAL, AND STATEWIDE PROGRAMS OF INSERVICE
EDUCATION

PH.D.

Michigan State University

University
Microfilms
International

300 N. Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48106

1980

PLEASE NOTE:
In a l l c a s e s t h i s m a t e r i a l has been f i l m e d 1n t h e b e s t p o s s i b l e
way from t h e a v a i l a b l e copy* Problems e n c o u n t e r e d w i t h t h i s
document ha ve been I d e n t i f i e d h e r e w i t h a c h ec k mark
.
1.

G l o s s y p h o t o g r a p h s __________

2.

Colored I l l u s t r a t i o n s _ _ _ _ _

3.

P h o t o g r a p h s w i t h d a r k b a c k g r o u n d __________

4.

I l l u s t r a t i o n s a r e p o o r copy __________

5.

° r 1 n t shows t h r o u g h a s t h e r e 1s t e x t

6.

I n d i s t i n c t , broken o r s m a ll p r i n t ons e v e r a l

7.

T i g h t l y bound copy w i t h p r i n t l o s t i n s p i n e _________

8.

Computer p r i n t o u t p a g e s w i t h i n d i s t i n c t p r i n t _ _ _ _ _

9.

P a g e ( s ) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ l a c k i n g when m a t e r i a l r e c e i v e d , and n o t a v a i l a b l e
from sc h o o l o r a u t h o r

on b o t h

s i d e s o f page ________
pages

i/^

10.

P a g e ( s ) __________ seem t o be m i s s i n g in numbering o n l y a s t e x t
follow s

11.

Poor c a r b o n copy __________

12.

Not o r i g i n a l c o p y , s e v e r a l pa g es w i t h b l u r r e d t y p e __________

13.

Appendix p a g es a r e p o o r copy __________

14.

O r i g i n a l copy w i t h l i g h t t y p e _ _ _ _ _

15.

C u r l i n g and w r i n k l e d p a g e s __________

16.

O t h e r _____________________________________________________________________

University
M icraiim s

international

AN ASSESSMENT OF PERCEIVED NEEDS AND PARTICIPATION OF
SOUTHWESTERN MICHIGAN PUBLIC SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS
IN LOCAL, REGIONAL, AND STATEWIDE PROGRAMS
OF INSERVICE EDUCATION

By
Jon N. S c h u s t e r

A DISSERTATION

S ubm itte d t o
Michigan S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y
in p a r t i a l f u l f i l l m e n t o f th e requirements
f o r t h e d e g re e o f
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Department o f A d m i n i s t r a t i o n and Higher Education
1980

ABSTRACT
AN ASSESSMENT OF PERCEIVED NEEDS AND PARTICIPATION OF
SOUTHWESTERN MICHIGAN PUBLIC SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS
IN LOCAL, REGIONAL, AND STATEWIDE PROGRAMS
OF INSERVICE EDUCATION
By
Jon N. S c h uste r

Statement o f t h e Problem
The general purpose o f t h e study was to c o n t r i b u t e toward
the improvement o f local board o f e d u ca tio n d e c i s i o n making through
an i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f in d iv i d u a l member pe rc eiv e d need f o r , and a c t u a l
p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n , programs o f i n s e r v i c e e d u c a ti o n .
Pop u latio n
The p op u latio n s e l e c t e d f o r study comprised a u n i v e r s e o f the
322 e l e c t e d and appointed members s e r v i n g on t h e boards o f e d uca tio n
o f the f o r t y - s i x l o c a l p u b l i c school d i s t r i c t s w i t h i n Southwestern
Michigan.
Procedures
To a s s e s s t h e p e rc eiv e d needs and p a s t p a r t i c i p a t i o n o f l o c a l
board members, a t h r e e - p a g e survey q u e s t i o n n a i r e was d esigned f o r the
s tud y .

The included ite m s, with one e x c e p t i o n , s o l i c i t e d an " a g r e e /

d i s a g r e e , " "yes/no" res ponse o r n e c e s s i t a t e d t h e s e l e c t i o n o f a
response on a f i v e - p o i n t , f o r c e d - c h o i c e s c a l e .

Jon N. S c h u s t e r

The m a ilin g o f an i n t r o d u c t o r y l e t t e r preceded t h e i n i t i a l
d i s t r i b u t i o n o f i n s t r u m e n t s , and t h e i r accompanying l e t t e r s , by one
week.

Three weeks a f t e r t h e i n i t i a l m a i l i n g , a second i n s t r u m e n t

was mailed t o each nonr es ponden t.

Four weeks a f t e r t h e i n i t i a l m a i l ­

ing o f survey i n s t r u m e n t s , a t e l e p h o n e c a l l was made t o a l l non­
r e s p o n d e n ts.
Following t h e conduct o f t h e s u r v e y , an i n t e r v i e w was held
w ith t e n o f t h e i nclu ded f o r t y - s i x board o f e d u c a t i o n p r e s i d e n t s .
Major F ind ing s
The f i n d i n g s o f t h e s t u d y were o b t a i n e d through an a n a l y s i s
o f the o b t a i n e d d a t a r e p o r t e d by t h e 277 board members (86.02 p e r c e n t )
who responded to t h e survey q u e s t i o n n a i r e .

They were a l s o based on

i n t e r v i e w s conducted w i t h t h e t e n board o f e d u c a t i o n p r e s i d e n t s .
1.

The av erag e member had s e r v e d on t h e board f o r f o u r

y e a r s and two months.

More than 60 p e r c e n t o f t h e board members had

served f o r l e s s than one e l e c t e d term o f f o u r y e a r s .
2.

More th an 80 p e r c e n t o f t h e members a g re ed t h a t c o ntin u ou s

i n s e r v i c e e d u c a ti o n i s v i t a l l y im p o r t a n t t o a l l who d e s i r e t o perform
t h e i r d u t i e s in a competent manner.
3.

Nearly t w o - t h i r d s o f t h e members d i s a g r e e d w ith a proposa l

c a l l i n g f o r t h e c om p letio n o f a r e q u i r e d o r i e n t a t i o n program, by school
board c a n d i d a t e s , p r i o r t o t h e i r run n in g f o r o f f i c e .
4.

More than t w o - t h i r d s o f t h e members agreed t h a t newly

e l e c t e d o r a p p o in t e d members should be r e q u i r e d to complete a l o c a l l y
determined i n s e r v i c e program d u r in g t h e i r f i r s t y e a r o f s e r v i c e .

Jon N. S c h u s t e r

5.

Nearly t w o - t h ir d s o f t h e members had a ttend ed one o r more

i n s e r v i c e programs conducted a t the local l e v e l .
6.

Only o n e - h a l f o f t h e members had a tte n d e d one o r more o f

t h e regional i n s e r v i c e programs.
7.

Fewer than o n e - t h i r d o f the board members had a ttend e d any

i n s e r v i c e program conducted on a s ta te w id e b a s i s .
8.

Board p r e s i d e n t s b eliev ed t h a t f u t u r e i n s e r v i c e programs

should be s p e c i f i c a l l y designed f o r e i t h e r experienced o r i n e x p e r i ­
enced members and should be conducted on e i t h e r a local or regiona l
basis.
9.

Board p r e s i d e n t s suggested t h a t l o c a l member i n s e r v i c e

attendance would be enhanced i f (1) board o f f i c e r s and c e n t r a l o f f i c e
a d m i n i s t r a t o r s would assume g r e a t e r r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r ensu ring the
att en dance o f in d iv id u a l members; (2) each board would e s t a b l i s h
in s e r v i c e g o a l s , based upon local needs; and (3) boards would be
w i l l i n g to d e fr a y th o se c o s t s in cu r r e d as a r e s u l t o f member p a r ­
ticipation.
Conclusions
1.

The spon sorship o f i n s e r v i c e programs w ill continue as a

primary method employed in the e f f o r t t o enhance th e c a p a b i l i t i e s o f
indiv idual board members and u l t i m a t e l y t h e competence demonstrated
by local boards o f education themselves.
2.

Newly e l e c t e d o r appointed board members should be

req u ired to complete a l o c a l l y determined, planned program o f i n s e r ­
v ice education during t h e i r f i r s t y e a r o f s e r v i c e .

Jon N. S c h u s t e r

3.

Time and c o s t a r e t h e two most s i g n i f i c a n t f a c t o r s i n f l u ­

encing t h e d e c i s i o n made by i n d iv i d u a l board members to a t t e n d i n s e r ­
vice events.
4.

Board members a r e most i n t e r e s t e d i n th o se i n s e r v i c e

t o p i c s r e l a t e d t o c l i e n t p r o d u c t i v i t y and community involvement w i t h
th e sch o ols and l e a s t i n t e r e s t e d in t h o s e t o p i c s concerned with the
t e c h n i c a l a s p e c t s o f t h e f u n c t i o n i n g o f school d i s t r i c t s .

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The completion o f a d o c t o r a l program, w h ile s i m u l t a n e o u s l y
s e r v i n g as a s u p e r i n t e n d e n t o f s c h o o l s , o f t e n became an i n o r d i n a t e l y
d i f f i c u l t task--one

t h a t t e s t e d t h e m e t t l e o f th e c a n d i d a t e and

n e c e s s i t a t e d t h e encouragement, u n d e r s t a n d i n g , and s u p p o r t o f numerous
other individuals.

For such a s s i s t a n c e , t h e w r i t e r i s deeply g r a t e ­

f u l and ex te n d s h i s h e a r t f e l t a p p r e c i a t i o n , in p a r t i c u l a r :
F i r s t and foremost t o h i s w i f e , J a n e , and c h i l d r e n , Jenny
and Chip, f o r t h e i r unwavering f a i t h , l o v e , and s a c r i f i c e s to o numerous
to mention.
To an e x c e p t i o n a l guidance committee:

Dr. Richard F e a t h e r -

s t o n e , Chairman, whose o u t s t a n d i n g l e a d e r s h i p , s i n c e r i t y , and i n s i g h t ­
f u l n e s s were i n v a l u a b l e ; Dr. Samuel Moore I I , whose s c h o l a r l y manner
and wise counsel were e s p e c i a l l y i m p o r t a n t ; Dr. Louis Romano, whose
*• *

warmth and depth o f a d m i n i s t r a t i v e e x p e r i e n c e were p a r t i c u l a r l y n o t e ­
worthy; and Dr. C h arle s Blackman, whose encouragement f o r t h e p r o j e c t ,
as a d i r e c t r e s u l t o f h i s e x p e r i e n c e s on a l o c a l board o f e d u c a t i o n ,
was s i n c e r e l y a p p r e c i a t e d .
To t h e members o f t h e B e r ri e n Springs Board o f E d u c a ti o n ,
i n d i v i d u a l l y and c o l l e c t i v e l y , f o r t h e i r p a t i e n c e and f i n a n c i a l
assistance.

To h i s s e c r e t a r y , Mrs. Dorothy Kesterke, f o r her many hours
of e x t r a e f f o r t in a tt e n d i n g t o the myriad o f ted io u s d e t a i l s a s s o ­
c i a t e d with the p r o j e c t .
To A s s i s t a n t Superinte ndent Stanley Mack!in, who w i l l i n g l y
c a r r i e d more than h i s share o f the c e n t r a l o f f i c e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y
throughout the p r o j e c t .
To P r e s i d e n t Joseph G. Smoot, o f Andrews U n i v e r s i t y , and to
P rofessors Robert Cruise and Lyndon F u r s t , f o r t h e i r e n t h u s i a s t i c
s u p p o r t , personal a s s i s t a n c e , and permission t o use U n i v e rs i ty f a c i l i ­
ties.
To the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e team o f the Berrien Springs Public
Schools, whose personal and p r o f e s s i o n a l e x ce llen c e c o n t r i b u t e d s i g ­
n i f i c a n t l y in enabling the time r e q u i s i t e t o complete the d i s s e r t a t i o n .
To numerous f r i e n d s and c o l l e a g u e s , whose encouragement and
a s s i s t a n c e along the way meant a g r e a t d e al.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

LIST OF T A B L E S ....................................................................................................

vii

LIST OF FIGURES.....................................................................................................

ix

LIST OF APPENDICES............................................................................................

x

Chapter
I.

II.

III.

INTRODUCTION

........................................................................................

1

Statem ent o f t h e Problem ........................................................
Purposes o f t h e S t u d y .................................................................
D e f i n i t i o n o f Major Terms ........................................................
D e s i g n ................................................................................................
L i m i ta t io n s and D e l i m i t a t i o n s ................................................
L i m i t a t i o n s ..................................................................................
D e l i m i t a t i o n s ..............................................................................
O rg a n iz ation o f t h e Study and Overview o f
Subsequent Chapters .................................................................

9
11
12
13
16
16
16

REVIEW OF PERTINENT LITERATURE

17

.................................................

18

I n t r o d u c t i o n ...................................................................................
The Functions o f School Boards ............................................
The Contemporary Environment in Local School
G o v e r n a n c e ..................................................................................
Can Local Lay -Controlled School Boards Survive? . . .
The E s c a l a t i n g Im pera tiv es o f Boardsmanship ..................
A P r o f i l e o f American Pu b lic School Board Members . .
The S o c i a l i z a t i o n o f New School Board Members . . . .
The Value o f Sy stem atic and Continuous Programs of
I n s e r v i c e Education .................................................................
I n s e r v i c e Programs Sponsored by t h e Michigan
A s s o c ia t io n o f School Boards ............................................
S t u d ie s R e la ti n g t o I n s e r v i c e Education f o r School
Board Members ..............................................................................
Summary...............................................................................................

18
19
25
30
37
42
44
47
60
63
79

DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY..................................................................

81

I n t r o d u c t i o n ..................................................................................
Design o f t h e Survey Instrum en t ...........................................

81
81

iv

C h a p te r

IV.

Page

D e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e P o p u l a t i o n ................................................
Plannin g and Conducting t h e Survey ...................................
I n t e r v i e w s With Board P r e s i d e n t s ........................................
S t a t i s t i c a l Treatment o f t h e Data ........................................

84
88
92
93

F I N D I N G S ................................................................................................

94

I n t r o d u c t i o n ...................................................................................
The Importance o f I n s e r v i c e Education t o Board
M e m b e r s ............................................................................................
Length o f S e r v i c e on th e School B o a r d ...............................
A d d i t io n a l Community R e l a t i o n s Topics Submitted by
R e s p o n d e n t s ...................................................................................
The Need f o r F u tu re I n s e r v i c e on A d m i n i s t r a t i o n
T o p i c s ............................................................................................
A d d i t io n a l A d m i n i s t r a t i o n Topics Submitted by
R e s p o n d e n t s ...................................................................................
The Need f o r F u t u r e I n s e r v i c e on Business & Finance
T o p i c s ............................................................................................
A d d i t io n a l Busine ss & Finance Topics Submitted by
R e s p o n d e n t s ...................................................................................
The Need f o r Futu re I n s e r v i c e on Teacher Personnel
T o p i c s ............................................................................................
A d d i t io n a l Teacher Personnel Topics Submitted by
R e s p o n d e n t s ...................................................................................
The Need f o r F u t u r e I n s e r v i c e on Stu d e n t A f f a i r s
T o p i c s ..................................................................................
A d d i t io n a l S t u d e n t A f f a i r s Topics Submitted by
R e s p o n d e n t s ..........................................................................
The Need f o r F u t u r e I n s e r v i c e on General Topics . . .
A d d i t io n a l General Topics Submitted by Respondents .
Ranking o f All I n s e r v i c e Program Topics by Mean
S c o r e s ................................................................................... .... .
Ranking o f All I n s e r v i c e Program Topics by Median
S c o r e s ..................................................................................
Ranking o f I n s e r v i c e C a t e g o r i e s o f Topics by Mean
S c o r e s ...................................................................................
Ranking o f I n s e r v i c e C a t e g o r i e s o f Topics by Median
S c o r e s ..................................................................................
P a r t i c i p a t i o n o f Board Members in Local I n s e r v i c e
P r o g r a m s ..............................................................................
P a r t i c i p a t i o n o f Board Members in Regional
I n s e r v i c e Programs ..................................................................
P a r t i c i p a t i o n o f Board Members in Sta te w id e
I n s e r v i c e Programs ..................................................................
I n t e r v i e w s With Board P r e s i d e n t s ........................................
What I s Your Overall Opinion o f t h e
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ? ......................................................................

94

v

94
95
99
99
101
103
103
105
107
107
108
110
Ill
Ill
114
115
115
118
118
119
120
121

C hapter

Page

What Is Your Opinion Regarding the General
Resu lts (Responses From Local School Board
M em bers)?................................................................................
What Can Be Done, in the Fu tu re , t o Increase
Local Board Member P a r t i c i p a t i o n in I n s e r v ic e
Education A c t i v i t i e s a t the Local, Regional,
and S t a te L e v e l s ? .....................................................................
Summary...................................................................................................
V.

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER
RESEARCH, AND RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................

121

123
125
128

I n t r o d u c t io n ......................................................................................
Summary.............................................................................................
Purpose o f th e Study .................................................................
Review o f P e r t i n e n t L i t e r a t u r e ............................................
Design and Methodology
...........................................................
F i n d i n g s ...........................................................................................
C o n c l u s i o n s ...........................................................................................
Im plica tion s f o r F urther Research ..............................................
Recommendations f o r Future Board Member I nse rv ic e
Programming......................................................................................

128
128
128
129
130
132
135
138

APPENDICES................................................................................................................

148

BIBLIOGRAPHY

171

...........................................................................................................

vi

141

LIST OF TABLES

T a b le

3-1.

4-1.

4-2.

Page

A lph a betic al L i s t i n g o f K-12 Local School D i s t r i c t s ,
Comnunities in Which Post O f f i c e s Are Located,
1979 Student E nro llm ents, and O f f i c i a l
C l a s s i f i c a t i o n ..................................................................................

85

Respondent Opinions on School Board Candidate and
Board Member P a r t i c i p a t i o n in I n s e r v i c e
Education Programs ..........................................................................

96

Length o f Service o f Southwestern Michigan Board
Members (in Y e a r s ) ..........................................................................

97

4 -3 .

Board Members' Rating o f Perceived Needs f o r Future
I n s e r v i c e Programs
on
Community R e l a t i o n s Topics . . . 100

4-4.

Board Members' Rating o f Pe rceived Needs f o r Future
I n s e r v i c e Programs
on
A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Topics

4 -5 .

....

Board Members' Rating o f Perceived Needs f o r Future
I n s e r v i c e Programs
on
Business & Finance Topics . . .

102
104

4 -6 .

Board Members' Rating o f Perceived Needs f o r Future
I n s e r v i c e Programs
on
Teacher Personnel Topics . . . . 106

4-7.

Board Members' Rating o f Perceived Needs f o r Future
I n s e r v i c e Programs
on
S tu d e n t A f f a i r s Topics ....

109

Board Members' Rating o f Perceived Needs f o r Future
I n s e r v i c e Programs
on
General Topics ......................

112

4 -8 .
4-9.

Ranking o f All I n s e r v i c e Program Topics (by Mean
S c ore ) ......................................................................................

113

4-10. Ranking o f All I n s e r v i c e Program Topics (by Median
S c o r e s ) ..................................................................................

116

4-11. Ranking o f I n s e r v i c e C a te g o r ie s o f Topics (by Mean
S c o r e s ) ..................................................................................

117

4-12. Ranking o f I n s e r v i c e C a t e g o r i e s o f Topics (by Median
Sco res )
.............................................................................................
v ii

117

T a b le

4 -13 .
4-14.
4-15.

P age

P a r t i c i p a t i o n o f Board Members i n Local I n s e r v i c e
P r o g r a m s ..............................................................................................

118

P a r t i c i p a t i o n o f Board Members in Regional I n s e r v i c e
P r o g r a m s ..............................................................................................

119

P a r t i c i p a t i o n o f Board Members in S t a t e w i d e I n s e r v i c e
P r o g r a m s ..............................................................................................

120

LIST OF FIGURES

F ig u r e

3-1.
3-2.

4-1.

Page

The Geographical Area, Termed Southwestern Michigan,
Which Included the Population o f t h e Study .
......................

87

D i s t r i b u t i o n o f the Forty -Six Southwestern Michigan
K-12 School D i s t r i c t s by Student Enrollment and
O f f i c i a l C l a s s i f i c a t i o n ................................................................

89

Graphic I l l u s t r a t i o n o f the D i s t r i b u t i o n o f South­
western Michigan Board Members {byYears o f Service) . .

98

ix

LIST OF APPENDICES

A pp en d ix

A.

Page

MICHIGAN ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL BOARDS SPECIAL TOPIC
SEMINAR PRESENTATIONS ..................................................................

149

B.

THE SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE...............................................................

151

C.

INITIAL LETTER TO LOCAL SUPERINTENDENTS REQUESTING
THEIR ASSISTANCE...........................................................................

156

D.

SECOND LETTER TO LOCAL SUPERINTENDENTS

158

E.

INITIAL LETTER TO LOCAL BOARD OF EDUCATION MEMBERS

F.

SECOND LETTER TO LOCAL BOARD OF EDUCATION MEMBERS . . .

162

G.

FOLLOW-UP LETTER TO NONRESPONDENTS

.........................................

164

H.

LETTER TO LOCAL SUPERINTENDENTS REQUESTING THEIR
INTERVENTION AND ASSISTANCE .....................................................

166

LETTER TO BOARD OF EDUCATION PRESIDENTS AND
INTERVIEW GUIDE ...............................................................................

168

I.

x

................................
. .

160

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Locally e l e c t e d or appointed school board s, comprised o f lay
c i t i z e n s , have h i s t o r i c a l l y played a key r o l e in the governance of
American elementary and secondary p u blic e d uca tio n .

Raymond Callahan,

Paul Jacobson, and Harold Webb d e scrib e d American school boards as a
"unique i n v e n t i o n , " as one of democracy's " t a p r o o t i n s t i t u t i o n s , " and
as a r e s u l t a n t consequence o f our d e c e n t r a l i z e d system o f p u blic edu­
cation J

No o t h e r n a ti o n has so u n i v e r s a l l y i n s t i t u t e d "the p a t t e r n

o f having p ub lic schools d i r e c t e d and c o n t r o l l e d by e l e c t e d lay o f f i 2
c i a l s a t the local d i s t r i c t l e v e l . "
As Jacobson wrote, "The school
board i s p r a c t i c a l l y unknown o v e r s e a s , and where i t does e x i s t , i t
does not have the p o l i c y f u n c t i o n s which c h a r a c t e r i z e i t in the
United S t a t e s . "

3

In c o n t r a s t with those p r a c t i c e s e s t a b l i s h e d in

most n a t i o n s , the American p u b l ic system o f education has a long
t r a d i t i o n of local c o n t r o l , a t r a d i t i o n in c o n c e rt with " th e democratic
*See Raymond E. C allahan, "The American Board o f Education,
1789-1960," in Understanding School Boards, ed. P e t e r J . Cistone
(Lexington, MassTTi D. C. Heath & Co., 1975), p. 19; Paul B. Jacobson,
Foreword to The School Board, by Keith Goldhammer (New York: Center
f o r Applied Research in Education, 1964), p. v; Harold V. Webb,
Preface to New Dimensions in School Board L ea d er sh ip , by William E.
Dickinson (Evanston, i l l . : NSBA, 1969), p. i l l .
2

Callaha n, p. 19.

^Jacobson, p. v.

2
p r i n c i p l e t h a t t h e people [sh o u ld ] have t h e o p t io n of d e c id in g the
kind and l e v e l o f e d u c a ti o n a l program they want."
The governance o f p u b l i c e d u c a t i o n , when pe rc eiv e d w i t h i n a
l e g a l c o n t e x t , i s t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f the v a ri o u s s t a t e s .

Local

school boards enjoy on ly t h o s e e x pre ss ed and l i m i t e d powers o f e i t h e r
a mandatory o r d i s c r e t i o n a r y n a t u r e g r a n te d t o them by the s t a t e in
which they a r e l o c a t e d .

5

They a r e , as Goldhammer d e s c r i b e d them,

t h a t agency of government c r e a t e d by the s t a t e l e g i s l a t u r e and
given t h e legal power t o govern t h e a f f a i r s o f t h e l o c a l school
d i s t r i c t . . . . The key agency in t h e management o f the school
d i s t r i c t [having] power t o a c t in accordance with t h e mandates
and a u t h o r i t y g r a n te d by t h e s t a t e l e g i s l a t u r e . ®
Although p u b l ic e d u c a tio n i s l e g a l l y a r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f the
s t a t e , h i s t o r i c a l l y most o f t h i s r e s p o n s i b i l i t y has been d e le g a t e d
to local school b o a rd s .^

L a u t e n s c h l a t e r wrote:

"Boards o f Education

in t h e American e d u ca tio n al system occupy a u nique, and s i g n i f i c a n t
p o s i t i o n , w ie ld in g tremendous i n f l u e n c e in dete rm ining t h e kind and
O

q u a l i t y o f our e d u c a ti o n a l programs."
The q u a n t i t a t i v e magnitude o f t h e American elementary and
secondary p u b l i c e d u ca tio n e n t e r p r i s e c o n t r i b u t e s d i r e c t l y t o th e
4

Encyclopedia o f E d u c a ti o n , 1971 e d . , s . v . "School Boards:
Operation s" by Ja y D. S c r i b n e r .
5
Kern Alexander, Ray Corns, and Walter McCann, P u blic School
Law: Cases and M a t e r i a l s ( S t . P a u l , Minn.: West P u b l i s h i n g Co.,
1969), pp. 1-6.
C

Keith Goldhammer, The School Board (New York:
Applied Research in E d u c a ti o n , 1964), p. 2.

Center f o r

^Jacobson, p. v.
Q

Harley M. L a u t e n s c h l a g e r , "A Study of School Board I n s e r v i c e
T rainin g Techniques" (Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , Indiana U n i v e r s i t y , 1956), p . 1.

3
i n f l u e n c e a t t r i b u t e d t o school b o a r d s .

More t h a n 96,000 i n d i v i d u a l

members comprise t h e g ov e rn in g bo ard s o f 15,834 p u b l i c school systems
c o n d u c t in g programs from k i n d e r g a r t e n th rou g h t h e t w e l f t h g r a d e ,
having an e s t i m a t e d e n r o l l m e n t o f 4 3 , 7 5 8 ,5 5 6 p u p i l s .

At t h e c o n c l u ­

s i o n o f t h e 1976-77 school y e a r , a p p r o x i m a t e l y $ 6 6 .9 b i l l i o n ( e x c l u d ­
ing c a p i t a l o u t l a y and i n t e r e s t payments on d e b t ) had been expended
in o p e r a t i n g t h e day programs o f t h e s e p u b l i c school s y s te m s , an
g
amount e q u a l l i n g 4 . 8 7 p e r c e n t o f t h e n a t i o n ' s p e r s o n a l income.
The e x t e r n a l environm ent o f t h e school board has undergone a
profound and r a p i d t r a n s f o r m a t i o n w i t h i n t h e p a s t two d e c a d e s.

A

l o n g - e s t a b l i s h e d t r a d i t i o n o f d e c i s i o n making c h a r a c t e r i z e d by c o n d i ­
t i o n s o f s t a b i l i t y , c o n g e n i a l i t y , and a c l o s e d p o l i t i c a l atm osphere
has l a r g e l y d i s a p p e a r e d under t h e powerful im pact o f r e c e n t s o c i a l ,
economic, j u d i c i a l , p o l i t i c a l , and c u l t u r a l p r e s s u r e s .

C i s t o n e and

F o s t e r p o i n t e d o u t t h a t t o d a y ' s school board s must c o n te n d w ith
s w i f t l y moving t i d e s o f change and t h a t t h e i r d e c i s i o n s a r e t y p i c a l l y
made i n a t u r b u l e n t and p r o b l e m a t i c e n v ir o n m e n t , a c i r c u m s t a n c e
c r e a t i n g p r e s s u r e s t h a t impinge upon school b o a rd s as well as con­
s t r a i n and shape t h e i r b e h a v i o r . U s d a n c o n c u r r e d and r e p o r t e d :
®See W. G r a n t Vance, " P u b l i c School E x p e n d i t u r e s a s a P e r c e n t ­
age o f P e r s o n a l Income," American E d u c a t i o n , December 1978, p. 50; ERS
Re se arch D i g e s t , "Number o f P u b l i c School D i s t r i c t s w i t h 300 o r More
P u p i l s and Number o f P u p i l s E n r o l l e d in These D i s t r i c t s by S t a t e and by
E n rollm ent S i z e o f D i s t r i c t " ( A r l i n g t o n , Va.: E d u c a ti o n a l Research
S e r v i c e , March 19 7 9); Harold V. Webb, "A New G a llu p S tud y ; What t h e
P u b l i c R e a l l y Thinks o f I t s School B o a r d s," ASBJ 162 ( A p r il 1975): 36-40.
l^ S ee P e t e r J . C i s t o n e , U n d erstan d in g School Boards ( L e x i n g to n ,
Ma ss.: D. C. Heath & C o ., 1975), pp. x i i i - x i v ; Badi G. F o s t e r , O r i e n ­
t a t i o n and T r a i n i n g o f School Board Members ( A r l i n g t o n , Va.: ERIC
Document R e p r o d u c tio n S e r v i c e , ED 114 930, 1 9 7 5 ) , pp. 8 -1 0 .

4
Local e ducational d e cisio n making u n t i l r e c e n t l y was made
through somewhat s t a b l e processes and occurred in a r e l a t i v e l y
closed p o l i t i c a l environment t h a t was dominated by a small
group o f i n f l u e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s , p a r t i c u l a r l y the s u p e r i n ­
t e n d e n t, and board members. This consensual and c lo sed s t y l e
of e du cational p o l i t i c s , with p r o f e s sio n a l e d u c a to r s playing
major r o l e s , has undergone dramatic t r a n s f o r m a t i o n . Within a
b r i e f period o f time . . . major i s su e s such as r a c e , t e a c h e r
m i l i t a n c y , community c o n t r o l , stu d en t a c t i v i s m , i n f l a t i o n and
concomitant concerns about e s c a l a t i n g school c o s t s , and demands
f o r a c c o u n t a b i l i t y have cascaded upon boards o f e d u c a t i o n . *>
Fo ster presen ted two paramount qu e stion s c u r r e n t l y c o n f r o n t ­
ing school boards in asking:
How, in t h e face of c o n sta n t change, a r e school boards t o func­
tio n both d e m o c r atica lly and e f f e c t i v e l y ? . . . How a re they to
absorb the continuous stream of in fo rm a tio n , r e q u e s t s o r demands
for change, and a t the same time keep t h e school system on a
steady course even while innovations a r e being developed and
implemented?^
Today's pu b lic school boards must contend with "a c r i s i s in
a u t h o r i t y a t the local level o f school governance,"

13

a circumstance

c re a te d in p a r t by the d u a l i t y o f in d iv id u al members being o f f i c e r s
of the s t a t e —th ere b y being held accountable f o r t h e d i s c h a r g e of
p r e s c r ib e d legal r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s —while sim ultaneously being
expected to f u l f i l l the demands o f t h e i r local c o n s t i t u e n t s .

14

These r o l e s have become more dichotomous than c o m p atib le, f r e q u e n t l y
Michael E. Usdan, "The Future V i a b i l i t y o f t h e School
Board," in Understanding School Boards, ed. P e t e r J . Cistone
(Lexington, Hass .: D. C. Heath & Co., 1975), pp. 265-66.
12

13

F o s t e r , pp. 10-11.

William Dickinson, New Dimensions in School Board Leader­
ship: A Seminar Report and Workbook (Evanston, 111.: NSBA, 1969),
p. 10.
14
Michigan A s so c ia tio n o f School Boards, Boardsmanship in
B rief: A Handbook f o r Michiqan School Board Members (Lansinq: MASB,
1975), p. 5.

5

r e s u l t i n g in he ig h tene d p u b l i c d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n o ver t h e p e r c e i v e d
i n a b i l i t y o f school boards t o cope w i t h p r e s e n t - d a y e d u c a t i o n a l p r o b ­
lems.

Manning su g gested t h a t " t h e r e was a time when everyone b e l i e v e d

t h e s c h o o l s , l i k e t h e f l a g and motherhood, were s a c r e d .

However,

t h e c u r r e n t p u b l i c view i s d e p i c t e d as having soured and become a
composite o f d i s c o n t e n t , a n g e r , and c y n i c i s m . "

15

A c r e d i b i l i t y gap

between promises made and no t kept i s r e p o r t e d , coming a t a time
when "no governmental body . . . i s as v u l n e r a b l e and exposed t o a
growing c y n ic a l p u b l i c as t h e l o c a l board o f e d u c a ti o n t o which t h e r e
can be such immediate and d i r e c t a c c e s s . "

16

The e x p e r t i s e demons trated by school boards in coping w i t h a
v a s t l y d i f f e r e n t and novel e x t e r n a l environment may well d e te r m in e
the f u t u r e o f l o c a l l a y - c o n t r o l o ver p u b l i c e d u c a t i o n , a s well as
t h e c o n tin u e d e x i s t e n c e o f school boards t h e m s e lv e s .

In r e p o r t i n g

board members as being " r e l a t i v e l y u n s k i l l e d managers o f d i v e r s i t y
and change," Page su g g e ste d t h a t " u n l e s s board members can f u n c t i o n
e f f e c t i v e l y t o b r in g abo ut n e c e s s a r y changes in e d u c a t i o n , e i t h e r
th ey w i l l become merely d i p l o m a - c o n f e r r i n g , c o r n e r s t o n e - l a y i n g d i g ­
n i t a r i e s o r th ey w i l l simply become o b s o l e t e . " ^
The l o n g e v i t y o f individual-m em be r s e r v i c e on school b o a r d s ,
as well

ing

as t h e i r e x p re ss e d views r e g a r d i n g t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f such

^ W i l l i a m R. Manning, "The C r e d i b i l i t y Gap That I s N e u t r a l i z ­
t h e P u b l i c S c h o o l s ," ASBJ 159 (June 1972): 31-32.
16Usdan, p. 271.

^ R u t h H. Page, What Makes an E f f e c t i v e School Board Member?
( D a n v i l l e , 111.: I n t e r s t a t e P r i n t e r s & P u b l i s h e r s , 1975), p. 1.

6

s e r v i c e , has been s i g n i f i c a n t l y i n f l u e n c e d by t h e p r e c e d i n g c o n s i d ­
erations.

A 1971 su r v e y conducted by t h e N a t io n a l School Boards

A s s o c i a t i o n r e v e a l e d t h a t n e a r l y a s many members r e s i g n as r e t i r e .
F u r t h e r , t w o - t h i r d s o f t h o s e q u e r i e d were " p e s s i m i s t i c a b ou t t h e
a b i l i t y o f p u b l i c s c h o o l s t o cope w i t h t h e i r mounting p r o b le m s."

18

In h i s s t u d y o f board-member l o n g e v i t y , Hurwitz r e p o r t e d t h e a v e r a g e
t e n u r e o f New J e r s e y board members a s 3.97 y e a r s , and he noted t h a t
n e a r l y 50 p e r c e n t o f them were i n t h e i r f i r s t t e r m .
have r e v e a l e d :

19

Other s t u d i e s

(1) i n one p a r t i c u l a r y e a r o v e r 50,0 00 new board mem­

b e rs assumed t h e i r p o s i t i o n s , (2) a 25 p e r c e n t t u r n o v e r r a t e in
school board membership i s commonplace, and {3) each y e a r one o u t o f
f o u r members i s new t o t h e p o s i t i o n .

20

A t h o u g h t f u l c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f t h e c u r r e n t demands i m p l i c i t
in school board membership, c ouple d w i t h a r e a l i z a t i o n t h a t c i t i z e n s
s e e k i n g such s e r v i c e t y p i c a l l y a r e n o t r e q u i r e d t o meet any l e g a l
q u a l i f i c a t i o n s in e x c e s s o f t h o s e s p e c i f i e d f o r a l l school e l e c t o r s ,
d i c t a t e s a need f o r s y s t e m a t i c and c o n t i n u i n g probrams o f i n s e r v i c e
education.

S t . John w rote t h a t t o d a y ' s board members have a g r e a t e r

burden th a n a t any tim e i n t h e h i s t o r y o f American p u b l i c e d u c a t i o n ,
a l t h o u g h t h e y o f t e n b egin and c o n t i n u e t h e i r d u t i e s w i t h o u t t h e
^®Pat R u s s e l , "Why Boardmen Q u i t , " ASBJ 159 {November
1971): 26.
19
Mark W. H urw itz, "The P e rson a l C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and A t t i ­
t u d e s o f New J e r s e y School Board Members" (Ed.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , Temple
U n i v e r s i t y , 1 971), p. 90.
20
■See G l o r i a Dapper and B a rbara C a r t e r , A Guide f o r School
Board Members (Chicago: F o l l e t t , 1 9 6 5 ) , p. v i i ; D i c k in s o n , p. 23.

a s s i s t a n c e th ey d e s p e r a t e l y need.

21

N i c o lo f f summarized t h e c u r r e n t

s i t u a t i o n in r e p o r t i n g t h a t new members t y p i c a l l y begin t h e i r terms
o f s e r v i c e w ith v ery l i m i t e d knowledge o f e i t h e r t h e i r d u t i e s or
a u t h o r i t y and t h a t during t h e i r t e n u r e l i t t l e formal t r a i n i n g i s
a v a i l a b l e t o them.

Consequently, a lthough continuous i n s e r v i c e edu­

c a t i o n i s e s s e n t i a l i n o r d e r t h a t members develop adequate knowledge
and a p p r o p r i a t e s k i l l s in coping with t h e i r r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s , they
t y p i c a l l y f a l l back on t h e i r ex perienc es in school as a r e f e r e n t in
d e c i s i o n making.

22

A study conducted by t h e Pennsylvania School

Boards A s s o c ia t io n i n d i c a t e d t h a t a minimum o f two y e a r s o f s e r v i c e
i s r e q u i r e d b e fo r e board members gain th e background and confidence
they need t o perform e f f e c t i v e l y ; f u r t h e r , t h a t a "wide range o f
l o c a l , s t a t e and n a t i o n a l o r i e n t a t i o n programs and continuous i n s e r v i c e t r a i n i n g a r e im pe rativ e i f you a r e going t o keep good, well
informed board members."

23

D e sp ite th e c r i t i c a l need f o r knowledgeable and s k i l l f u l board
members and t h e concomitant n e c e s s i t y to provide co ntin u in g oppor­
t u n i t i e s f o r i n s e r v i c e e d u c a ti o n , a sy s te m a t i c approach to t h i s pr ob­
lem i s n o n e x i s t e n t .

There a r e no s t a t u t o r y mandated programs o f

21

Walter S t . John, G uidelines f o r E f f e c t i v e School Board
O p e r a tio n , S e r v i c e , and Leadership (Tempe, A r i z . : Arizona School
Boards A s s o c i a t i o n , 1969).
22

Lanning G. N i c o l o f f , "Pe rceived I n s e r v i c e Education Needs
o f Members o f Boards o f Education in I l l i n o i s " (Ed.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n ,
Northern I l l i n o i s U n i v e r s i t y , 1977), pp. 4-7.
23

Nick Goble, G e ttin g Good Board Members and Holding Them
{A rlin g to n , Va.: ERIC Document Reproduction S e r v i c e , ED 137 979,
1977), p. 5.

8

o r i e n t a t i o n o r i n s e r v i c e e d u c a ti o n f o r c a n d i d a t e s s e e k i n g , o r i n d i ­
v i d u a l s e l e c t e d t o , membership on p u b l i c school boards o f e d u c a t i o n .
Although each s t a t e has a school boards a s s o c i a t i o n t h a t , as p a r t o f
i t s r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s , p r e s e n t s i n s e r v i c e programs, no s a n c t i o n s a r e
a v a i l a b l e t o a p p ly t o board members who do no t a t t e n d such p r e s e n t a ­
t i o n s ; nor has t h e r e been developed a s y s t e m a t i c way f o r e n s u r i n g
t h a t t h o s e o p p o r t u n i t i e s t h a t have been made a v a i l a b l e a r e , in f a c t ,
a p p r o p r i a t e to t h e p e r c e i v e d needs o f t h e in te n d ed p o p u l a t i o n .

24

As

Snyder, in h i s review o f t h e c u r r e n t s i t u a t i o n , r e p o r t e d :
E f f e c t i v e membership on a b o a rd, c a l l i n g f o r a c e r t a i n amount
o f s o p h i s t i c a t i o n and knowledge, can n ot be l e f t t o chance.
An o r g a n i z e d and formal t r a i n i n g program a p p ea rs t o be t h e most
v i a b l e a l t e r n a t i v e t o i n s u r e more ad equ a te p e r f o r m a n c e . 25
What i s e s s e n t i a l , t h e n , i s o f a tw o - f o l d n a t u r e :

f i r s t , to

d ete rm ine t h e i n s e r v i c e e d u c a ti o n needs o f l o c a l board members, as
p e r c e i v e d by c u r r e n t l y s e r v i n g board members t h e m s e lv e s ; and se co nd,
t o a s c e r t a i n t h e p a s t a t t e n d a n c e o f board members a t t h o s e i n s e r v i c e
e d u c a ti o n o p p o r t u n i t i e s p r e s e n t e d on a l o c a l , r e g i o n a l , and s t a t e ­
wide b a s i s d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d s o f t h e i r s e r v i c e .

I t i s in te n d e d t h a t

t h e use o f t h i s i n f o r m a ti o n by t h o s e who p lan f u t u r e i n s e r v i c e p r e ­
s e n t a t i o n s w i l l r e s u l t in enhanced board member i n t e r e s t and p a r t i c i ­
p a t i o n in such a c t i v i t i e s , w i t h t h e u l t i m a t e o b j e c t i v e being i n c r e a s e d
knowledge and improved s k i l l f u l n e s s i n d e c i s i o n making a t t h e l o c a l
l e v e l o f school governance.
^ I n t e r v i e w w ith James Mecklenburger, National School Boards
A s s o c i a t i o n , Washington, D .C ., 12 September 1978.
^ M i l t o n L. Snyde r, "The New School Board Member" (Ph.D.
d i s s e r t a t i o n , United S t a t e s I n t e r n a t i o n a l U n i v e r s i t y , 1972), pp. 3 -4 .

9

Statement of th e Problem
The governance of American pu b lic schools i s the r e s p o n s i ­
b i l i t y of the various s t a t e s .

With the exception of Hawaii, however,

each o f the s t a t e s sa nctions the e stablis hm ent o f m u ltip le u n i t s of
local school j u r i s d i c t i o n and d e le g a te s s p e c i f i c fu nctio ns to t h e i r
governing boards.

These boards are most commonly r e f e r r e d to as

school boards or as boards of education and are comprised o f a spe­
c i f i c number of lay c i t i z e n s , as i s s t a t u t o r i l y defined.
While local boards of education have t r a d i t i o n a l l y occupied
a p ivo ta l p o s i t io n in the o v e ra ll schema f o r public ed u ca tio n , t h e i r
being popularly viewed as having so le r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r the outcomes
o f schooling i s a res u rg en t phenomenon.

C itiz e n s a r e , in ever-

in cre asin g numbers, concluding t h a t t h e i r local boards and individual
board members a re "in a b e t t e r p o s i t io n than anyone e l s e to have real
impact in helping Americans move toward a b e t t e r l i f e . "

26

This esca­

l a t i n g p e rc ep tio n , superimposed on a v o l a t i l e e xte rnal p o l i t i c a l
environment in which school boards f u n c t i o n , n e c e s s i t a t e s t h a t t o d a y 's
board members demonstrate g r e a t e r knowledge and improved d e c i s i o n ­
making s k i l l s regarding th e educational e n t e r p r i s e s they govern than
was he re to f o re the case.
Providing i n s e r v ic e education o p p o r t u n i t i e s i s a favored
technique employed by school boards a s s o c i a t i o n s in t h e i r e f f o r t s to
enhance the understanding and performance o f indiv idual board members.
Such is the case in Michigan where, since 1970, e xte nsive and
26Page, p. 13.

10
d i v e r s i f i e d I n s e r v i c e e f f o r t s have been a n n u a l ly made by the Michigan
A s s o c ia t io n o f School Boards (MASB).

N e v e r t h e l e s s , a review o f

MASB reco rd s r e v e a l e d t h r e e s e r i o u s d e f i c i e n c i e s in t h e planning f o r
and a c t u a l conduct o f r e g io n a l and s ta te w id e i n s e r v i c e p r e s e n t a t i o n s :
(1) no sy s te m a t i c e f f o r t has been made to s o l i c i t the recommendations
o f lo ca l board members, with r e f e r e n c e to t h e i r perc eived informa­
t i o n a l n eeds, p r i o r t o t h e de te r m in a tio n o f tho se t o p i c s s e l e c t e d
f o r p r e s e n t a t i o n ; (2) no rec o r d has been kept r e l a t i v e to which
board members have a tt e n d e d th e v ario u s p r e s e n t a t i o n s ; and (3) no
record has been kept reg a rd in g t h e i n s e r v i c e a c t i v i t i e s sponsored by
the v a rio u s county c h a p t e r s a f f i l i a t e d with MASB.
Board members cannot be p r o f i c i e n t in unders tanding every
a s p e c t o f e d u c a tio n o r th e o v e r a l l o p e r a t io n o f th e sc h o o ls.

Never­

t h e l e s s , as a r e s u l t o f t h e i r experience t h e r e a r e undoubtedly a re a s
in which they f e e l a need t o improve t h e i r competencies.

They, t h e r e ­

f o r e , should be c o n s i d e r e d a prime source of in fo rm atio n from which
f u t u r e i n s e r v i c e e d u c a ti o n programs might be developed.
The problem address ed in t h i s study i s tw o -fo ld in n a t u r e :
1.

To a s s e s s t h e needs o f an a r e a p o pu latio n o f school board
members f o r f u t u r e i n s e r v i c e e d u ca tio n p r e s e n t a t i o n s , as
p e rc e iv e d by c u r r e n t l y s e r v in g l o c a l board members them­
s e l v e s ; and

2.

To determine t h e p a r t i c i p a t i o n o f an a r e a p o pu latio n o f
c u r r e n t l y s e r v i n g l o c a l school board members in p r e v i o u s ly
conducted l o c a l , r e g i o n a l , and s t a te w i d e i n s e r v i c e educa­
tion presentations.

11
Purposes o f t h e Study
The g e n e r a l purpose o f t h e w r i t e r i s to c o n t r i b u t e toward the
improvement o f lo c a l board o f e d u ca tio n d e c i s i o n making thro ugh an
i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f i n d i v i d u a l member p e rc eiv e d need f o r , and a c t u a l
p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n , programs o f i n s e r v i c e e d u c a tio n - - p r o g r a m s t h a t a re
p r e s e n t e d f o r t h e purpose o f p r o v i d in g them i n f o r m a ti o n v i t a l t o
a r r i v i n g a t knowledgeable d e c i s i o n s .
More s p e c i f i c a l l y , i t i s in te nd ed t h a t t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n
w i l l have d i r e c t i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r :
1.

The enhancement o f f u t u r e emphasis given Southwestern
Michigan board member i n s e r v i c e e d u ca tio n a t t h e l o c a l
school d i s t r i c t l e v e l ;

2.

The encouragement o f improved Southwestern Michigan board
member p a r t i c i p a t i o n in i n s e r v i c e e d u c a ti o n p r e s e n t a t i o n s
a t t h e l o c a l , r e g i o n a l , and s t a t e w i d e l e v e l s ;

3.

The i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f s p e c i f i c t o p i c s o f p e r c e i v e d South­
w estern Michigan board member need f o r use in t h e p la n n in g
o f f u t u r e l o c a l , r e g i o n a l , and s t a t e w i d e i n s e r v i c e educa­
t i o n programs; and

4.

The p r o v i s i o n o f c u r r e n t in f o r m a tio n t o l o c a l , r e g i o n a l ,
and s t a t e w i d e l e v e l p r o f e s s i o n a l s having r e s p o n s i b i l i t y
f o r plan nin g f u t u r e i n s e r v i c e e d u c a tio n programs f o r
school board members.

12

D e f i n i t i o n o f Major Terms
The following major terms a re an i n t e g r a l p a r t o f t h i s study
and, as such, a r e defined t o promote c l a r i t y and c o n t i n u i t y f o r the
read er.
Board of Education—A seven-member board, e l e c t e d in a c c o r ­
dance with the General School Laws o f the s t a t e o f Michigan, sponsor­
ing a k in derg a rte n through t w e lf t h - g r a d e p u b l ic education program
within one s p e c i f i c local school d i s t r i c t .

27

The terms "board" and

"school board" a r e used synonymously with "board o f education" in
t h i s study.
Board Member—A c i t i z e n , duly e l e c t e d o r appointed t o member­
ship on a local school d i s t r i c t board of e d u c a ti o n , whose term of
a c t i v e s e r v i c e i s included during th e period in which t h i s study was
conducted.

The term "member" i s used synonymously with "board member"

in t h i s study.
Southwestern Michigan—That geographic are a r e p r e se n te d by th e
combined s e r v i c e a r e a s of the Berrien County, Lewis Cass, S t . Joseph
County, Kalamazoo V a lle y , and Van Buren County I n term ed iate School
D istricts.

Included t h e r e i n a r e f o r t y - s i x lo c a l t h i r d - or f o u r t h - c l a s s

school d i s t r i c t s sponsoring k in derg a rte n through t w e lf t h - g r a d e programs.

28
I n s e r v ic e Education—All o f th ose a c t i v i t i e s and events con­

ducted s p e c i f i c a l l y f o r board members, s e p a r a t e and a p a r t from t h e i r
27

Michigan, General School Laws and A d m in is tr a tiv e R ules.
School Code of 1976 (1977), p t . 3 and p t . 4, pp. 11-27.
28I b i d . , pp. 11, 20.

The

13
r e g u l a r r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s , which a r e inte nded to enhance a board
member's c a p a b i l i t y and performance as a board member.

The terms

" i n s e r v i c e ' 1 and " i n s e r v i c e t r a i n i n g " a r e used synonymously w ith
" i n s e r v i c e ed u ca tion " in t h i s study.
Local Programs—All o f t h o s e a c t i v i t i e s and events o rg an ized
and sponsored under t h e a u t h o r i t y o f a l o c a l board and conducted
w i t h i n t h e geographic a re a served by t h a t same board.
Regional Programs—All o f th o se a c t i v i t i e s and e v e n t s con­
ducted a t v a r i o u s l o c a l e s throughout Michigan; s i t e s s e l e c t e d on t h e
primary b a s i s o f t h e i r a c c e s s i b i l i t y t o lo c a l board members.

Such

programs a r e sponsored by a c h a p t e r or c h a p t e r s o f th e Michigan Asso­
c i a t i o n o f School Boards or by MASB i t s e l f .

Past e v e n t s , sponsored

by MASB on a r e g io n a l b a s i s , have been termed " s p e c i a l t o p i c s e m in a r s , "
" d r i v e - i n c o n f e r e n c e s , " and "academies o f boardsmanship."
State w ide Programs--In clud e d a r e t h e "Saturday m id -w in ter con­
f e r e n c e s " and " s t a t e conventions" a n n u a l ly sponsored by MASB f o r the
dual purpose o f conducting o r g a n i z a t i o n a l b u sin e ss and p ro vid in g
in serv ice experiences.
Design
To a s s e s s t h e perc eived needs o f lo c a l board members and
t h e i r p a r t i c i p a t i o n in p a s t i n s e r v i c e edu catio n programs, a survey
q u e s t i o n n a i r e was mailed t o t h e st udy p o p u l a t i o n .

The stu dy popula­

t i o n c o n s i s t e d o f a l l c u r r e n t l y se r v in g board o f education members
of t h e f o r t y - s i x l o c a l p u b l i c school d i s t r i c t s sponsoring k i n d e r g a r ­
t e n thro ugh t w e l f t h - g r a d e programs, l o c a t e d in Southwestern Michigan
(N = 322).

14

The survey i n s t r u m e n t , t o g e t h e r w i t h an accompanying l e t t e r
o f i n t r o d u c t i o n , was m a i l e d t o th e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n r e q u e s t i n g p a r ­
t i c i p a t i o n and i n d i c a t i n g t h e im portance o f t h e s t u d y .

The c o n f i d e n ­

t i a l t r e a t m e n t o f r e s p o n s e s was a s s u r e d and was so i n d i c a t e d i n t h e
l e t t e r o f i n t r o d u c t i o n and on t h e s u r v e y i n s t r u m e n t .

Each su r v e y

i n s t r u m e n t m a i l e d t o t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n was n u m e r i c a l l y coded t o
p e r m i t f o l l o w - u p r e q u e s t s o f t h o s e who f a i l e d t o respond w i t h i n two
weeks o f t h e d a t e o f m a i l i n g .

Three weeks a f t e r t h e o r i g i n a l m a i l i n g

o f su r v e y i n s t r u m e n t s , a second w r i t t e n r e q u e s t and a n o t h e r i n s t r u m e n t
were s e n t t o t h o s e who f a i l e d t o r e s p o n d .

A dditionally, a w ritte n

r e q u e s t f o r a s s i s t a n c e was s e n t t o t h e s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s o f t h o s e d i s ­
t r i c t s from which a board member f a i l e d t o r e s p o n d .

Four weeks f o l ­

lowing t h e o r i g i n a l m a i l i n g o f su r v e y i n s t r u m e n t s , a t e l e p h o n e c a l l
was made t o each n o n r e s p o n d e n t p e r s o n a l l y , r e q u e s t i n g com pliance w i t h
t h e su r v e y r e q u e s t .
Because o f t h e n a t u r e o f t h e problem, t h e w r i t e r used a n o r ­
m a t i v e su r v e y method t o g a t h e r d a t a f o r t h i s s t u d y .

T h is method, as

Be st e x p l a i n e d , p e r m i t s t h e r e s e a r c h e r t o g a t h e r d a t a
from a r e l a t i v e l y l a r g e number o f c a s e s a t a p a r t i c u l a r t i m e .
I t i s n o t co n cern ed w i t h c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f i n d i v i d u a l s a s
individuals.
I t i s concern ed w i t h t h e g e n e r a l i z e d s t a t i s t i c s
t h a t r e s u l t when d a t a a r e a b s t r a c t e d from a number o f i n d i ­
vidual case s.
I t i s e s s e n t i a l l y c r o s s - s e c t i o n a l . 29
A second major c o n t r i b u t i o n o f t h e n o r m a t iv e method o f s t u d y
l i e s in i t s enabling th e re s e a rc h e r to c o l l e c t data about th e s u b je c t
a s i t now e x i s t s .
29

N .J.:

As Van Dalen r e p o r t e d :

John W. B e s t , Rese arch in E duca tion (Englewood C l i f f s ,
P r e n t i c e - H a l l , 1 9 5 9 ), p. 107.

15
Before much p ro gress can be made in solving problems, men must
possess a c c u r a t e d e s c r i p t i o n s o f t h e phenomenon with which they
work. Hence, t h e e a r l y developments in educational r e s e a r c h ,
as in o t h e r f i e l d s , have been made in the are a o f d e s c r i p t i o n s .
. . . Determining t h e n a tu r e o f p r e v a i l i n g c o n d i t i o n s , p r a c t i c e s ,
and a t t i t u d e s seeking a c c u ra te d e s c r i p t i o n s o f a c t i v i t i e s ,
o b j e c t s , p rocesses and pers ons—i s t h e i r o b j e c t i v e . They d e p i c t
c u r r e n t s t a t u s and sometimes i d e n t i f y r e l a t i o n s h i p s t h a t e x i s t
among phenomena or tr e n d s t h a t appear t o be d e v e l o p i n g . 3 0
In the dete rmination o f an a c c e p t a b l e response r a t e f o r the
survey in stru m e n t, the r e s e a r c h e r adopted those response r a t e s recommended f o r survey r e s e a r c h by Babbie and o t h e r a u t h o r i t i e s .

31

While

itw asassu m ed t h a t a l l members included in the sample would complete
and r e t u r n t h e i r survey in s t r u m e n t s , a 100 p e rc e n t response r a t e i s
r a r e l y achieved.

T h ere fo re , as Babbie su ggest ed, t h e following

response r a t e s were used as g u i d e l i n e s f o r data c o l l e c t i o n and a n a ly ­
s i s in t h i s study:

F i f t y p ercen t i s deemed adequate f o r a n a l y s i s and

r e p o r t i n g , a response r a t e o f 60 p e r c e n t i s considered good, and a
response r a t e o f 70 p e rc e n t or more i s termed very good.

32

The a n a l y s i s o f survey da ta i s re po rte d in a d e s c r i p t i v e s t a ­
t i s t i c a l form at, which i s accompanied by a n a r r a t i v e f o r th o se s t a t i s ­
t i c a l measures used to examine t h e d a t a .

30

Deobold Van Dalen, Understanding Educational Research: An
In tr o d u c tio n (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1 9 6 0 1 P* 184.
31
See Earl R. Babbie, Survey Research Methods (Belmont, Ca.:
Wadsworth Publishing Co., 1973), pp. 165-69; K. A. Brownlee, "A Note
on t h e E f f e c t s o f Nonresponse on Surveys," Journal o f the American
S t a t i s t i c a l Associa tio n 52 (1957): 29-32; Marjorie N. Donald, 11Implic a t i o n s o f Nonresponse f o r th e I n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f Mail Quest ionnaire
Data," Public Opinion Q u a rte rly 24 (January 1960): 99-114; Gene F.
Summers, e d . , A t t i t u d e Measurement (Chicaqo: Rand McNally & Co.,
1971).
32Babbie, pp. 29-32.

16
L i m i t a t i o n s and D e l i m i t a t i o n s
Lim itations
The s t u d y i s l i m i t e d t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t :
1.

S u b j e c t i v e judgments a r e c a l l e d f o r i n re s p o n s e t o s e v e r a l
q u e s t i o n s i n clud ed in t h e survey i n s t r u m e n t ;

2.

The w r i t e r has i d e n t i f i e d and framed t h e s i g n i f i c a n t
i n s e r v i c e i s s u e s as r a i s e d in t h e l i t e r a t u r e on t h i s
s u b j e c t , which th u s may l i m i t t h e range o f r e s p o n s e ;

3.

The

survey i n s t r u m e n t i s r e l i a b l e ;

4.

The method and e x a c t n e s s a p p l i e d i n t h e coding

o f questions

and q u a n t i f i c a t i o n pr ocedures used f o r d e s c r i p t i v e s t a t i s ­
t i c a l a n a l y s i s i s a p p r o p r i a t e ; and
5.

The geography might impose some c o n d i t i o n s on t h e r e s p o n s e s .

D elim itations
The s tu d y i s d e l i m i t e d t o :
1.

The

r es p o n se s from th ose 322 e l e c t e d o r a p p o in t e d members

c u r r e n t l y s e r v i n g on the boards o f e d u c a t i o n o f t h e f o r t y s i x p u b l i c school d i s t r i c t s sp on so rin g k i n d e r g a r t e n thro ugh
t w e l f t h - g r a d e programs and l o c a t e d w i t h i n t h e Southwestern
g eo gra p hical a r e a o f t h e s t a t e o f Michigan;
2.

The i n s e r v i c e e d u c a ti o n needs o f board members as p e r c e i v e d
by t h e board members th e m se lv e s;

3.

The p a r t i c i p a t i o n o f board members in l o c a l , r e g i o n a l , and
s t a t e w i d e i n s e r v i c e e d u c a ti o n programs a s r e p o r t e d by t h e
board members th em se lv e s; and

17
4.

L i b r a r y r e s e a r c h t o i n c l u d e ERIC, D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s ,
and DATRIX i n f o r m a t i o n s e a r c h e s ; N a t io n a l School Boards
A s s o c i a t i o n and Michigan A s s o c i a t i o n o f School Boards
r e c o r d s and r e p o r t s ; books, p e r i o d i c a l s , and r e p o r t s on
f i l e a t t h e Michigan S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y L i b r a r y , Andrews
U n i v e r s i t y L i b r a r y , and t h e S t a t e o f Michigan L i b r a r y ;
and books and m a t e r i a l s owned o r borrowed by t h e w r i t e r .
O r g a n i z a t i o n o f t h e Study and Overview
o f Subsequent C h a p te r s

The s t u d y i s p r e s e n t e d in f i v e c h a p t e r s .
Ch a pte r I i n c l u d e s t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n ,

the statem ent of the

problem , t h e p urp ose s o f t h e s t u d y , a d e f i n i t i o n o f m ajo r t e r m s , t h e
design,

t h e l i m i t a t i o n s and d e l i m i t a t i o n s o f

t h e s t u d y , and a

state­

ment o f t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n o f t h e s t u d y .
C ha pte r I I c o n t a i n s a rev iew o f t h e l i t e r a t u r e r e l a t i n g t o t h e
s t u d y and i n c l u d e s t h e r e s u l t s o f p r e v i o u s l y completed s t u d i e s .
P r e s e n t e d i n C h a p te r I I I i s t h e d e s i g n o f t h e s t u d y , i n c l u d ­
ing t h e d e s i g n o f t h e su rv e y i n s t r u m e n t , a d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e p o p u l a ­
t i o n being s t u d i e d , t h e p l a n n i n g and c o n d u c t i n g o f t h e s u r v e y , t h e
i n t e r v i e w s w i t h board p r e s i d e n t s , and t h e s t a t i s t i c a l t r e a t m e n t o f
the data.
The f i n d i n g s g e n e r a t e d from t h e o b t a i n e d and a n a l y z e d d a t a
a r e found in C ha pte r IV.
C h a p te r V c o n t a i n s a summary o f t h e e n t i r e s t u d y , fo llo w ed by
c o n c l u s i o n s and i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h , and t h e w r i t e r ' s
recommendations.

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF PERTINENT LITERATURE
Introduction
The l i t e r a t u r e r e l e v a n t t o i n s e r v i c e e d uca tion f o r school
board members i s both l i m i t e d and i n t e r m i t t e n t in n a t u r e .

There i s ,

however, i n c r e a s i n g evidence o f a heightened concern over th e need f o r
more knowledgeable and s k i l l f u l board members and f o r the continued
e x i s t e n c e o f l o c a l , l a y - c o n t r o l in t h e schema of e d u c a tio n a l govern­
ance.

This w r i t e r has examined t h e s e concerns by focusin g on t h e func­

t i o n s o f school b o a rd s, th e s i g n i f i c a n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the
contemporary environment in lo c a l school governance, and t h e s u r v i v a l
p r o b a b i l i t y f o r l o c a l , l a y - c o n t r o l l e d school bo ard s.

The i n c r e a s i n g

demands made o f school board members and a p r o f i l e o f American school
board members a r e a l s o p r e s e n t e d .

In a d d i t i o n , t h e s o c i a l i z a t i o n of

new board members, t h e value o f s y s te m a t i c and continuous programs
f o r lo ca l school board members, and t h o s e p a s t i n s e r v i c e e d uca tio n
programs sponsored by t h e Michigan A s s o c i a t i o n o f School Boards a r e
reported.

F i n a l l y , ten r e s e a r c h s t u d i e s r e l a t i n g to the t o p i c o f

i n s e r v i c e e d u c a ti o n f o r l o c a l board members a r e reviewed and sum­
marized.

18

19
The F u n c tio n s o f School Boards
Numerous e a r l y w r i t e r s a tt e m p t e d t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f l i s t s in
which t h e e x a c t d u t i e s o r r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s common t o a l l l o c a l school
boards would be s p e c i f i e d .

Among t w e n t i e t h c e n t u r y commenters,

however, t h i s endeavor has g e n e r a l l y been abandoned—l a r g e l y due t o a
r e a l i z a t i o n t h a t t h e d e c e n t r a l i z e d system o f e d u c a t i o n a l governance
unique t o t h e United S t a t e s , in combination w ith t h e polic y-making
c a p a b i l i t y p e c u l i a r to our school b o a r d s , p r e c l u d e s a p r e c i s e l i s t i n g
o f t h o s e s p e c i f i c f u n c t i o n s o f common involvement.

Cubberly was among

t h e f i r s t t o a p p r i s e t h i s s i t u a t i o n a nd, as a r e s u l t , e x p re ss e d a
concern w ith t h e g e n e r a l i z e d f u n c t i o n s common t o t h e r o l e o f school
boards.

He wrote:

"The r e a l work o f t h e board i s t o d e te r m in e p o l i ­

c i e s , s e l e c t e x p e r t s , d e c i d e on e x p e n d i t u r e s and t a x l e v i e s , s e l e c t
school s i t e s , and g e n e r a l l y a c t as a board o f school c o n t r o l . "

33

Each l o c a l school board i s an a g e n c y o f t h e s t a t e in which i t
is located.

As suc h , i t becomes p a r t o f t h a t "network o f a d m i n i s t r a ­

t i v e a g en c ie s" s p e c i f i c a l l y c r e a t e d t o implement t h e enactm ents o f
the l e g i s l a t i v e branch o f s t a t e government.

Those powers g r a n t e d by

s t a t e l e g i s l a t u r e s t o t h e i r c o n s t i t u e n t school board s a r e g e n e r a l l y
34
o f an e x e c u t i v e , q u a s i - l e g i s l a t i v e , and q u a s i - j u d i c i a l n a t u r e .
R e g ardles s o f t h e powers e x p r e s s l y g r a n t e d t o them, school boards a r e
not f r e e t o a c t in an in dependent manner.
33

The complex environment in

Ellwood P . C u b b e r l e y , P u b l i c School A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , c i t e d by
Raymond E. C a l l a h a n , Understanding School Boards (L exingto n, Mass.:
D. C. Heath & Co ., 1975), p. 37.
34
A le x an d e r, Corns, & McCann, p. 124.

20

which t h e i r de cisio n making c u r r e n t l y takes place tends to i n h i b i t ,
i f not p rec lu de, independence of a c t i o n .

As Goldhammer emphasized,

t h e r e a r e f i v e l e v e l s o f control over the s p e c i f i c a c tio n s o f any
local school board.

These a re :

(1) the s t a t e c o n s t i t u t i o n ,

(2) l e g i s l a t i v e enactments ( s t a t u t o r y law), (3) the r u l e s and r e g u l a ­
t i o n s o f t h e s t a t e board of ed u catio n, (4) c ou rt d e c i s i o n s , and
(5) s o c i e t a l demands.

35

The general fun ctio n s of school boards and, in p a r t i c u l a r ,
the s p e c i f i e d r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s granted to them in the process o f edu­
c a t i o n a l governance, are not well disc erne d by local c i t i z e n s .

As a

consequence, i n d iv i d u a ls and groups t y p i c a l l y have u n r e a l i s t i c expec­
t a t i o n s f o r , and make demands o f , local school governors t h a t cannot
be s a t i s f i e d ,

Bendinger, in his a n a l y s i s o f the popular view r eg a rd ­

ing the r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of local boards, reported:
Of a l l the agencies devised by Americans f o r th e guiding of
t h e i r pu blic a f f a i r s , few a r e as vague in fu nction as the
school board; fewer s t i l l take o f f i c e in such resounding apathy -and none o t h e r , i r o n i c a l l y , i s capable of s t i r r i n g up t h e pas­
sions of the community to so f i n e a f r o t h . . . . For the school
board i s r e a l l y n e i t h e r l e g i s l a t i v e nor a d m i n i s t r a t iv e in func­
t i o n , and only in a most lim i te d way [ i s i t ] j u d i c i a l . . . i t
i s local p h ilos op h er, i t i s watchdog, and i t i s whipping boy.36
Commonly held community e x p ec ta tio n s of school board members, whether
r e a l i s t i c or n o t , were rep o rted by Goldhammer in h i s e xte nsive research
i n t o the governance o f local schools.

He noted t h a t the public views

i t s local school r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s as being (1) promoters of the public
^Goldhammer, pp. 4-8.
^ R o b e r t Bendinger, The P o l i t i c s o f Schools: A C r i s i s in S e l f Government (New York: Harper & Row, 1969), p. 3.

21

i n t e r e s t in e d u c a t i o n —t h e most commonly held b e l i e f , (2) d e fe n d e r s
and upholders o f t h e most commonly held va lu e s o f th e community,
(3) an a p p e l l a t e body to hear complaints and g r i e v a n c e s , (4) c l o s e
s u p e r v i s o r s over p r o f e s s i o n a l p e r s o n n e l , (5) c o n s e r v a t o r s o f
r e s o u r c e s , (6) promoters o f i n d i v i d u a l r i g h t s and i n t e r e s t s .

37

Such views, t h e n , tend t o form t h e p e ri m e t e r w i t h i n which i t i s popu­
l a r l y assumed school boards w i l l form p o l i c i e s and reach d e c i s i o n s
c o n s i s t e n t with lo c a l d e s i r e .
Within t h e p a s t two d ecades, numerous w r i t e r s have examined
t he c u r r e n t f u n c t i o n s common t o l o c a l school boards.

Their fin d in g s,

alth ou g h r e p o r t e d in d i f f e r i n g ways, evidenced c o n s i d e r a b l e agreement.
Page wrote " t h a t t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f c l e a r l y de fined g o a ls and
o b j e c t i v e s f o r t h e school system i s t h e b o a r d ' s most im p o rtan t f un c ­
tion."

R ossm iller m aintain ed :

"School boards have two major func­

t i o n s —policymaking and e v a l u a t i o n " ; and t h a t " th e b o a r d ' s competence
in performing t h e s e two f u n c t i o n s w i l l in l a r g e measure determine i t s
effectiveness."

Foster reported fiv e c u rren t areas of generalized

board involvement: "(1) making p o l i c y ; (2) develop ing programs;
(3) employing p e r s o n n e l ; (4) p rovidin g e d u c a t i o n a l l y r e l a t e d s e r v i c e s ;
and (5) managing the use o f t h e p h ysic al f a c i l i t i e s o f t h e school d i s ­
tric t."

Goldhammer s i m i l a r l y summarized f i v e primary a r e a s o f school

board r e s p o n s i b i l i t y a s :

(1) " d e t e r m i n a ti o n o f major g o a l s , "

(2) "g eneral f o r m u la ti o n o f o p e r a t i n g p o l i c i e s , " (3) " s e l e c t i o n o f key
p e r s o n n e l , " (4) " r e s o u r c e procurement and a l l o c a t i o n s , " and
37

Goldhammer, pp. 11-14.

22

(5) " e v a l u a t i o n . "

S a v a rd , in p r e s e n t i n g one o f t h e more d e t a i l e d

a c c o u n t s on t h e f u n c t i o n s o f school b o a r d s , l i s t e d t e n s e p a r a t e con­
s i d e r a t i o n s as f o l l o w s :
1.

I n t e r p r e t t h e e d u c a t i o n a l needs o f t h e community;

2.

I n t e r p r e t the requirements of the p ro fessio n al s t a f f ;

3.

Develop and s t a t e p o l i c y in a cc ord a n c e with t h e law and
t h e needs o f t h e p e o p l e ;

4.

S e le c t executive personnel;

5.

Approve p l a n s o r methods by which t h e p r o f e s s i o n a l s t a f f
c a rry out po licy ;

6.
7.

O btain f i n a n c i a l r e s o u r c e s ;
E v a l u a t e t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s and e f f i c i e n c y o f t h e s y s t e m general ly ;

8.

E v a l u a t e t h e perform ance o f t h e s u p e r i n t e n d e n t ;

9.

Inform t h e p u b l i c o f pro g ram s, p roblem s, and proposed
s o l u t i o n s ; and

10.

R eceiv e i n f o r m a t i o n , c o m p l a i n t s , e x p r e s s i o n s , and c o n ce rn s
from t h e community.

38

All s t a t e sc hool b o a rd s a s s o c i a t i o n s , in r e c o g n i t i o n o f t h e
p r e e m in e n t p o s i t i o n o f s t a t e governments in l o c a l e d u c a t i o n a l g o v e rn ­
a n c e , have a d d r e s s e d t h e " f u n c t i o n s o f l o c a l school board s" i s s u e .
38

See F o s t e r , p. 8 ; Goldhammer, pp. 100-103; Page, p. 6;
R ichard A. R o s s m i l l e r , O p p o r t u n i t i e s U n l i m i t e d : A Guide f o r Wisconsin
School Board Members, 5th ed. {Winneconne, W i s . : Wisconsin A s s o c ia t i o n o f School Boards, 1977 ), p. 21; and Enc yclo pedia o f E d u c a t i o n ,
1971 e d . , s . v . "School Boards: R e l a t i o n o f School Boards t o T h e i r
Communities," by William G. Savard .

23

Accordingly, t h e Michigan Associa tio n of School Boards (MASB) has
l i s t e d those fu n ctio n s o f p a r t i c u l a r concern to i t s

a f f i l i a t e s as

follo w s:
1.

To comply with the laws o f the s t a t e and the r e g u l a t i o n s
of the s t a t e education a u t h o r i t y ;

2.

To determine th e goals or o b j e c t i v e s o f public education
in th e school

3.

d istrict;

To choose th e s u p e rin te n d en t o f schools and work harmo­
n i o u sly with him;

4.

To c o n t r i b u t e to the development and improvement of edu­
c a t i o n a l o p p o r t u n i t i e s o f a l l c h ild r e n and youth in the
district.

5.

To develop the p o l i c i e s t h a t w ill a t t r a c t and r e t a i n p e r ­
sonnel needed to r e a l i z e t h e educational o b j e c t i v e s o f
th e d i s t r i c t .

6.

To provide f o r an e d u c a t i o n a l l y e f f i c i e n t p l a n t ;

7.

To help ob tain the f i n a n c i a l resources ne cessary to
achieve th e educational g o a ls ;

8.

To keep th e people of the d i s t r i c t i n t e l l i g e n t l y informed
about the sc h o o ls;

9.

To be s e n s i t i v e t o the educ ational hopes and a s p i r a t i o n s
o f the people of the d i s t r i c t ; and

10.

39

To a p p r a i s e t h e a c t i v i t i e s o f the school d i s t r i c t in l i g h t
39
of the goals or o b j e c t i v e s p rev io u sly e s t a b l i s h e d .
Michigan A sso cia tio n o f School Boards, p. 9.

24

Although t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s o f school boards have t r a d i ­
t i o n a l l y been determined by agencie s and s o c i a l f o r c e s e x te r n a l t o
them, t h e r e i s a growing concern t h a t school b oa rds, th em se lve s, must
begin t o e x e r t s u b s t a n t i a l in f lu e n c e over t h e i r r o l e s .

Page sugge sted

t h a t , in t h e f u t u r e , boards should become e n a b l e r s r a t h e r than r e g u ­
l a t o r s and t h a t each lo ca l board "must become a c a t a l y s t f o r candid
d i s c u s s i o n and p o s i t i v e change r a t h e r than a s e ek e r o f p o l i t i c a l
accommodation," as well as "a planning agency t h a t he lps a community
decide what i t wants i t s sc hools t o b e ."

40

Dickinson was more d e f i n i ­

t i v e in o f f e r i n g t h e follo w in g g eneral mandates f o r c o n s i d e r a t i o n by
th o se boards seeking t o remain v i a b l e in f u t u r e are nas o f e d u c a ti o n a l
governance:
1.

School boards must be p o s i t i v e f o r c e s f o r advancing th e
ideal o f t h e open s o c i e t y ;

2.

School boards must lead th e way in t h e c r e a t i o n o f a more
human e d u ca tion al system;

3.

School boards must become managers o f s o c i a l change and
c o n tr o v e r s y ;

4.

The school board must work c r e a t i v e l y with many o t h e r
agencie s t h a t a r e a l s o in t h e e d u ca tio n b u s i n e s s ;

5.

School boards must use p o l i t i c a l muscle in g e t t i n g t h e
money needed f o r e d u c a ti o n ;

6.

School boards working t o g e t h e r must guide and goad t h e
u n i v e r s i t i e s i n t o producing t h e school e x e c u ti v e t a l e n t
the times demand;

4 ° P a g e , p . 1.

25

7.

8.

School bo ard s must

h e lp r e c r u i t , t r a i n , and f i n d ways t o

r e t a i n t h e kind o f

board members t h e t im e s demand; and

School board s must

hold th em se lv e s c h i e f l y a c c o u n t a b l e f o r
41
the q u a li t y of the public schools.
The Contemporary Environment in
Local School Governance

The environm ent w i t h i n which school b oa rd s o p e r a t e , and t h e
problems t h a t c o n f r o n t them, a r e " c o n s i d e r a b l y more v a r i e d and complex
t o day th an when t h e y were f i r s t e s t a b l i s h e d . "

42

Throughout most o f

o u r n a t i o n ' s h i s t o r y , l o c a l boards h e ld a p r e e m in e n t p o s i t i o n in t h e
p r o c e s s o f e d u c a t i o n a l g ov ern an ce; t h e y c o n ducted school b u s i n e s s and
re a che d d e c i s i o n s w i t h o u t s i g n i f i c a n t i n t e r f e r e n c e from e x t e r n a l
sources.

"Packing a l l o f t h e w allo p o f t h e s t a t e a t t h e i r f i n g e r t i p s ,

l o c a l boards e njo yed . . . what perh aps no o t h e r governmental b o d ie s
e njoy e d b e f o r e o r s i n c e — a s h a r e o f a l l t h r e e b ran c h es o f g o v e r n m e n t's
powers, e x e c u t i v e , l e g i s l a t i v e and j u d i c i a l . "

43

They w e r e , as

Bendinger d e s c r i b e d them, " t h e most common o f a l l American u n i t s o f
44
government—and t h e one l e a s t s u b j e c t e d t o c r i t i c a l e x a m i n a t i o n , "
f u n c t i o n i n g i n a r e l a t i v e l y c l o s e d p o l i t i c a l domain h a llm a r k e d by con­
d i t i o n s o f i n s u l a r i t y and s t a b i l i t y .

41D i c k in s o n , pp. 11-28.
42

F o s t e r , p. 8.

4*3

M. C h e s t e r N o l t e , " I t Keeps G e t t i n g R i s k i e r by t h e Year t o
Be a Boardman," ASBJ 158 ( J u l y 1970): 12-13.
44

B endinger, p.

ix.

26

Within the p a s t twenty y e a r s , t h e e x t e r n a l environment o f
school boards has undergone a r a p i d and profound change.

A cascade

o f p o l i t i c a l , economic, s o c i e t a l , and j u d i c i a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s has
converged on l o c a l bo a rd s, demanding o r compelling changes in t h e i r
t r a d i t i o n a l r o l e s as l o c a l school govern ors.

Webb s t a t e d :

"Never

before have t h e l a y l e a d e r s o f p u b l i c e d u ca tio n faced such a m u l t i tude o f p r e s s u r e s and demands a t a l l l e v e l s o f our s o c i e t y . "

45

Never

befo re have lay l e a d e r s been c o n fr o n te d with such an avalan che of
s o c i e t a l e x p e c t a t i o n s , such an a c c e l e r a t e d r a t e o f change, o r with
demands o f such i n t e n s i t y and magnitude.
From a h i s t o r i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e , ge neral t o p i c s r e l a t i n g t o
" the r o l e o f th e bo ard , t h e o b j e c t i v e s o f p u b l i c e d u c a t i o n , communi­
c a t i o n s , and f i n a n c e " comprised t h e primary m a tr ix o f school board
d e c i s i o n making.

46

The contemporary board , however, i s more l i k e l y

to be involved with s p e c i f i c concerns s i m i l a r t o th e f o llo w in g :
1.

c o n f l i c t i n g and changing c oncepts o f t h e r o l e and f u n c t i o n
of the school;

2.

t h e i n c l u s i o n o f more and v a r i e d groups demanding a s h a r e of
governance and s o c i a l reform s;

3.

d e m o n s tr a ti o n s , p r o t e s t a c t i o n s , and r e c a l l e l e c t i o n s ;

4.

employee m i l i t a n c y and organized e f f o r t s ;

5.

l e g i s l a t i v e en actm en ts;

6.

ju d icial decisions;

7.

i n s u f f i c i e n t f i n a n c i a l s u p p o r t and t h e e f f e c t s o f i n f l a t i o n ;

^Webb, p. i i i .
^ Encyclopedia o f E d u c a ti o n , 1971 e d . , s . v . "School Boards:
Education o f Members," by Maurice E. S t a p le y .

27

8.

t h e expanded demands o f s t a t e boards o f e d u c a ti o n and t h e i r
expanded r o l e s ; and

9.

federal in v o lv em en t.^

One s c h o l a r d e s c r i b e d t h e c u r r e n t m i l i e u in term s o f " th e p l i g h t " o f
school b o a r d s , a s e t t i n g in which budgets a r e r e g u l a r l y d e f e a t e d by
t a x p a y e r s o r g u t t e d by municipal c o u n c i l s in c i t i e s , t e a c h e r s a r e
manning p i c k e t l i n e s and in vadin g s t a t e l e g i s l a t u r e s , and t h e n a t i o n ' s
l a r g e s t m i n o r i t y group i s t o r n between c o n f l i c t i n g d e s i r e s f o r quick
integration.^®

While t h e s o u r c e s o f t h e m u l t i f a r i o u s i s s u e s a r e

numerous and d i v e r s e , t h e y a r e unanimous in demanding t h a t l o c a l
boards no lo n g e r remain i s o l a t e d and a l o o f from t h e problems s o c i e t y
e n c o u n t e r s and t h a t board members become a p a r t y o t t h e s o l u t i o n o f
t h o s e problems.

Bendinger c h a r a c t e r i z e d t h e p o p u l a r p e r c e p t i o n in

emphasizing t h a t school boards a r e "whipping boys f o r whatever goes
wrong in s o c i e t y , " p a r t i c u l a r l y s i n c e i t i s "an o l d American t r a d i t i o n
t h a t when t h e tim e s a r e o u t of j o i n t , t h e t r o u b l e somehow must be
sought in f a u l t y e d u c a t i o n . "

49

The c u r r e n t e x p e c t a t i o n s , demands, and

r e q u i r e m e n ts have combined t o c r e a t e an environment in which t h e " l o c a l
governance o f p u b l i c sch o o ls i s s o r e l y t r o u b l e d , " wherein t h e a c c o u n t a ­
b i l i t y clamored f o r o f t e n "exceeds t h e c a p a c i t y and c a p a b i l i t i e s [ o f
t h e s c h o o l ] in d e a l i n g w i t h complex s o c i a l , p o l i t i c a l , and economic
problems t h a t t r a n s c e n d t h e s c h o o l . "
^ F o s t e r , p. 8.
^®Bendinger, p. x.
4 9I b i d . , p. 4.

Among t h e s e a r e t h e e l i m i n a t i o n

28

o f p o v e rty , crime, drug abuse, s o c i a l i n j u s t i c e , i n e q u i t y o f opport u n i t y , unemployment, and environmental d efilem e n t.

50

Bell and Goldman de p ic te d t h e contemporary environment as
r e f l e c t i n g a popular s t r u g g l e t o se cure t h e o r i g i n a l i n t e n t o f local
c o ntrol o f pu b lic e d uca tio n .

As such, c u r r e n t demands made of local

boards continue
in t h e t r a d i t i o n o f more than 300 y e a r s of searchi ng f o r a v i a b l e
form o f e du cational governance t h a t i s a t once res p o n siv e to
ind iv id u al needs, community customs and v a l u e s , s t a t e and f e d ­
e r a l ambitions and d e s i r e s , and demands f o r s o c i a l change which
sp rin g from a r a p i d l y emerging post i n d u s t r i a l s o c i e t y .
School systems a re described as r e f l e c t i n g t h e t h r e e dominant ch ara c t e r i s t i c s —i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n , u r b a n i z a t i o n , and b u r e a u c r a t i z a t i o n p r e v a i l i n g in contemporary American s o c i e t y , having become l a r g e r in
o r d e r t o provide more s e r v i c e a t reduced c o s t s to a wider v a r i e t y of
people.
The r e s u l t has been th e emergence o f l a r g e , complex o r g a n i z a ­
t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e s c h a r a c t e r i z e d in t h e extreme by boards o f
education i s o l a t e d from p a r e n t s , t e a c h e r s , and s t u d e n t s , p r e ­
s i d i n g over a bureaucracy with complex communications and
r e g u l a t i o n s , d i f f u s e and o f t e n u n i n t e l l i g i b l e aims and g o a l s ,
clouded a c c o u n t a b i l i t y , l a c k o f r e s p o n s i b i l i t y , and an agoniz­
i n g ly slow a b i l i t y t o c h a n g e .51
A r e c u r r i n g and i n t e n s i f i e d concern t h a t school boards n e i t h e r
comprehend the magnitude o f those d i v e r s e changes o c cu rrin g in
50

Richard Wynn, Foreword t o What Makes an E f f e c t i v e School
Board Member? by Ruth H. Page ( D a n v il l e , i l l . : I n t e r s t a t e P r i n t e r s &
P u b l i s h e r s , 1975), p.
51See Daniel B e l l , "Notes on the P o s t - I n d u s t r i a l Society (1 1),"
Public I n t e r e s t 7 (Spring 1967): 102-108; and Encyclopedia o f Educa­
t i o n , 1971 e d . , s . v . "School Board R e la ti o n s : Control of th e Schools,"
by Samuel Goldman.

29

contemporary s o c i e t y , nor a r e they c ap ab le o f contending with a
v a s t l y d i f f e r e n t environment has been e x p re ss ed .

As Bailey suggested:

A p l a u s i b l e case can be made ou t f o r t h e p r o p o s i t i o n t h a t th e
school board i s t o American e d u c a tio n what t h e House o f Lords
i s t o B r i t i s h p o l i t i c s —a l a r g e l y u s e l e s s ceremonial body, a l l
s e t about with pomposity, but i r r e l e v a n t to t h e d e te r m i n a ti o n
o f major i s s u e s . The argument here i s t h a t by t h e time t h e
Federal government, s t a t e e d u ca tio n d ep artm e n ts, lo c a l p r o f e s ­
s i o n a l s t a f f s , m i l i t a n t t e a c h e r o r g a n i z a t i o n s , John Birch s o c i e ­
t i e s , textbook and hardware sa lesmen, black p a r e n t s and P a n t h e r s ,
and t h e l o c a l media have completed t h e i r macabre Whirling-Dervish
dance, lo ca l school boards appear t o be n othin g b u t awkward
w a l l f l o w e r s p e r v e r s e l y held r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the su c ce ss o f th e
p a r t y . 52
I t has a l s o been su g gested " t h a t l o c a l school boards have o u t l i v e d
t h e i r u s e f u l n e s s " and, in the f u t u r e , s o c i e t y w i l l i n c r e a s i n g l y seek
s t a t e and f e d e r a l i n t e r v e n t i o n in r e s o l v i n g t h o s e problems f a c i n g
l o c a l sc h o o l s .

I t i s , t h e r e f o r e , e s s e n t i a l t h a t f u t u r e school boards

b e t t e r comprehend t h e cosmopolitan o r i g i n o f th o se e x p e c t a t i o n s held
f o r them, s i n c e "what happens on o t h e r t u r f s , and in d i s t a n t p l a c e s ,
has an enormous impact upon s c h o o l s , and c onsequently on t h e work of
school b o a r d s . "

B a il e y emphasized:

I t w i l l . . . make a d i f f e r e n c e whether school board members
understan d the world we a r e e n t e r i n g . For t h e i r only chance
o f p laying a meaningful r o l e in t h e f u t u r e o f American educa­
t i o n i s t o develop a c l e a r n otio n o f what t h e new s c r i p t i s a l l
a b o u t, and who th e o t h e r a c t o r s a r e with whom they must coop­
e r a t e . 5^

52

Stephen K. B a i l e y , "New Dimensions in School Board Leader­
s h i p , " in New Dimensions in School Board Leadership: A Seminar Report
and Workbook, ed. William E. Dickinson (Evanston, 111.: Nsba , 1969),
p. 97.
53
See B a il e y , p. 98; and Wynn, p.

30

Can Local L ay -C o n tro lle d School Boards Survive?
A careful consideration of the e sca latin g ex p ectatio n s, p res­
s u r e s , and mandates c o n f r o n t i n g school boards has caused c o n s i d e r a b l e
concern f o r t h e f u t u r e o f t h e s t r o n g l y roo ted t r a d i t i o n o f l o c a l
c o n t r o l , unique t o American e d u c a t i o n a l governance.

Goldman e x p l a i n e d ,

"Local c o n t r o l has meant t h a t t h o s e most d i r e c t l y a f f e c t e d by a school
have both t h e power and t h e means t o i n f l u e n c e i t s philo sophy and
o p e r a t i o n " ; f u r t h e r , t h a t "from t h e v e ry b e g in n i n g , t h e American
c i t i z e n r y has z e a l o u s l y guarded i t s p r e r o g a t i v e t o i n f l u e n c e and
d i r e c t p u b l i c e d u c a ti o n so as t o make i t r e s p o n s i v e t o t h e c o n d i t i o n s
and needs o f t h e l o c a l i t y s e r v e d . "

However, a f t e r c a r e f u l l y rev ie w ­

ing c u r r e n t l o c a l d e cisio n-m a kin g p r a c t i c e s , he a s s e r t e d :

" I ts [local

c o n t r o l ' s ] o r i g i n a l c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n b e a r s o nly moderate resemblance
t o i t s p r e s e n t im plem enta tio n.

At b e s t , l o c a l c o n t r o l seems t o be

l i m i t e d t o c e r t a i n a r e a s o f d e cisio n-m a kin g p r e s c r i b e d by o v e r r i d i n g
s t a t e and f e d e r a l law s, and a t worst i t i s r e l a t i v e l y n o n e x i s t e n t . "

54

Wiles and Conley went even f u r t h e r in s u g g e s t i n g t h a t t h e co n ce p t o f
l o c a l c o n t r o l , a s o r i g i n a l l y i n s t i t u t e d and p r a c t i c e d , i s an an ach ron ­
ism i n c u r r e n t e d u c a t i o n a l governance.

They m a in ta in e d :

The American school board has rea ched t h e p o i n t where what was
mere inadequacy has come c l o s e t o t o t a l h e l p l e s s n e s s , where
d e c l i n e and f a l l a r e no lo n g e r e a s i l y d i s t i n g u i s h e d . Perhaps
the k in d est d e f i n i ti o n o f the local b o ard 's p resen t control r e l a ­
t i o n in e d u c a t i o n a l p o l i c y making today i s a m ed iatio n o f a d j u d i ­
c a t i o n r o l e between c o n te nd in g f a c t i o n s . 55
54
55

Encyclopedia o f E d u c a ti o n , Goldman.

David K. Wiles and Houston Conley, School Boards: T h e i r
Policy-Making Relevance (B eth esda, Md.: ERIC Document Reproduction
S e r v i c e , ED 100 022, 1974), p. 4.

31
Dickinson a p p r o p r i a t e l y summarized t h e p r e v a i l i n g concern regarding
the f u t u r e v i a b i l i t y o f local co ntrol when he asked:

"Is th is present

c h a p t e r —t h e one in which school boards are a c t i n g ou t t h e i r p a r t s
r i g h t now—to be the f i n a l one f o r the c i t i z e n board in pu b lic educa­
t io n ?

Are we w itnessing t h e l a s t hurrah f o r the layman as local school

governor?"56
In a l l l i k e l i h o o d , th e e x i s t e n c e o f a h ig h ly d e c e n t r a l i z e d n e t ­
work o f public schools ensures the f u t u r e presence o f some form of
lo ca l governance.

The r e a l i s s u e , as Jones m aintained, " i s one of

lay c o n t r o l , not l o c a l c o n t r o l .

That i s , s h a l l the e s s e n t i a l d i r e c t i o n

o f American education be decided by the p u b l i c , or s h a l l i t be d e l e gated e n t i r e l y or p r i m a r i l y to the p r o f e s s i o n a l educato r?"

57

Numerous

pro posa ls have been suggested as a l t e r n a t i v e s t o l a y - c o n t r o l l e d local
school boards.
1.

Among the more r e c u r r e n t a re :

A p r o f e s s i o n a l i z e d school board— (a scheme o f augmentation
c a l l i n g f o r t h e a d d i t i o n of members having demonstrated
s k i l l and knowledge, in ed u ca tio n al m a t t e r s , to loca l
school b o a rd s ) ;

2.

A n a ti o n a l board o f e d u c a t i o n - -(one s i n g l e board o f con­
t r o l modeled a f t e r the Federal Reserve Board);

56

National School Boards A s s o c i a t i o n , Meeting t h e Challenges
o f School Board Leadership (Evanston, 111.: NSBA/ 1975), pp. 94-95.
57
P h i l i p G. Jo n e s, "How t o Train a New School Board Member—
and Ways t o Help Seasoned Veterans Brush Up, Too," ASBJ 160 (April
1973): 21-29.

32

3.

The c i t y council ta k e o v e r — (a simple t r a n s f e r o f a u t h o r i t y
t o t h e lo ca l municipal l e g i s l a t i v e body);

4.

The p r o f e s s i o n a l manager s o l u t i o n — (replacement o f the
e l e c t e d o r appoin ted board with a b u s i n e s s e x e c u ti v e o r
e f f i c i e n c y e x p e r t ) ; and

5.

A c i t y commissioner o f e d u c a t i o n — (inte n d ed f o r l a r g e
urban a r e a s ; such a commissioner would be a member o f the
m ayor's o f f i c i a l f a m i l y ) .

Such a l t e r n a t i v e s to e l e c t e d o r appoin ted l o c a l l a y - c o n t r o l l e d school
boards may be extreme o r i m p r a c t i c a l .

However, th e y a re " d e f i n i t e

symptoms o f widespread d i s c o n t e n t about the governance o f America's
p u b l i c sch o o ls and i f n othin g e l s e , they evoke the r e a l i z a t i o n t h a t
the American school board i s a t t h e c r o s s r o a d s . "

58

Two s u r v e y s , conducted in t h e e a r l y 1970s f o r t h e purpose of
a s c e r t a i n i n g p u b l i c a t t i t u d e s r e g a r d in g l o c a l school boards and edu­
c a t i o n a l l e a d e r s , produced s i n g u l a r l y d i s q u i e t i n g r e s u l t s .

A 1972

H a r r i s p o ll r e v e a l e d a s u b s t a n t i a l e r o s i o n in p u b l ic c onfidence in
i t s e d u c a t i o n a l l e a d e r s - - b o t h lay and p r o f e s s i o n a l - - i n comparison
w ith t h o s e r e s u l t s achieved s i x y e a r s e a r l i e r :

61 p e r c e n t express ed

"a g r e a t deal o f s a t i s f a c t i o n in 1966; 33 p e r c e n t in 1972."

S i m i la r

f i n d i n g s were e x p re ss ed by National School Boards A s s o c ia t io n (NSBA)
Executive D i r e c t o r Harold Webb in h i s r e p o r t i n g t h e r e s u l t s o f the
1974 NSBA n a t i o n a l stu dy o f p u b l i c a t t i t u d e s toward l o c a l governance:

5 8 NSBA, p. 9 6 .

33

The p u b l i c ' s n o t i o n o f what school b oa rd s a r e and what th e y do
i s d i s m a l l y d i s t o r t e d , c o n s t i t u t i n g p erh aps even a t h r e a t t o t h e
c o n ce p t o f l o c a l , c i t i z e n c o n t r o l o f s c h o o l s . . . . Those many
school board members who complain t h a t t h e p u b l i c d o e s n ' t u n d e r ­
s t a n d them o r a p p r e c i a t e them have good r e a s o n t o complain. . . .
The p o l l ' s f i n d i n g s show c l e a r l y t h a t most a d u l t s i n t h e U nited
S t a t e s d o n ' t u n d e r s t a n d what t h e i r l o c a l school b o a rd s a r e d o i n g ,
n o r in d ee d what t h e i r l o c a l school bo ard s a r e . Moreover, a
m a j o r i t y o f U.S. a d u l t s does n o t b e l i e v e t h a t school bo ard s
sh o u l d have f i n a l a u t h o r i t y ( o v e r t h e d e c i s i o n s o f t h e i r school
a d m i n i s t r a t o r s ) in s e v e r a l c r u c i a l a r e a s o f e d u c a t i o n a l p o l i c y
making in which school b o a r d s , by law, do have f i n a l l o c a l a u t h o r ­
i t y . At l e a s t a s d i s q u i e t i n g as what t h e G allu p p o l l s t e r s di d
h e a r i s what th e y d i d n ' t h e a r . The D o n 't Knows n e a r l y always
comprise d a p l u r a l i t y o f t h e r e s p o n s e s when s p e c i f i c q u e s t i o n s
were a s k e d . . . . 34% have no o p i n i o n a b o u t t h e i r l o c a l school
b o a r d s , 63% c a n ' t name a s i n g l e t h i n g t h e i r l o c a l school boards
have done d u r i n g t h e p a s t y e a r , o n l y 42% b e l i e v e t h e b o a r d , in
a d i s p u t e , works t o f u r t h e r t h e b e s t i n t e r e s t s o f s t u d e n t s , 53%
d o n ' t know how many members a r e on t h e school b o a r d , [a n d ] only
38% b e l i e v e b oard s a c t as r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f t h e p u b l i c . . . .
When p r e s e n t e d w i t h 11 a r e a s in which boa rds a r e by law t h e f i n a l
a u t h o r i t y (school budg et and t a x e s , b u i l d i n g new s c h o o l s , t e a c h e r
s a l a r i e s and c o n t r a c t s , t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , changing a t t e n d a n c e boun­
d a r ie s , h ir in g , su b je cts to tea ch , textbooks, d i s c ip l i n e , teacher
methods t o u s e , and h i r i n g o f p r i n c i p a l s / s u p e r i n t e n d e n t ) o n l y
[ t h e ] h i r i n g o f p r i n c i p a l s and s u p e r i n t e n d e n t [were] pick e d by a
m a j o r i t y o f a d u l t s a s an a c t u a l l e g a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f b o a r d s . 59
More r e c e n t r e s e a r c h , however, s u g g e s t s a p o s i t i v e change in
t h e p u b l i c ' s a t t i t u d e toward i t s e le m e n t a r y and se c o n d a r y s c h o o l s , as
well as toward school b o a rd s .

Gallup su g g e s te d " t h e y e a r 1976 may

well prove t o be t h e t u r n i n g p o i n t i n t h e p u b l i c ' s a t t i t u d e toward
the pu blic schools.

Evidence . . . i n d i c a t e s a l e v e l i n g o f f i n t h e

downward t r e n d o f r e c e n t y e a r s . . . toward t h e p u b l i c s c h o o l s . "
Two y e a r s l a t e r he r e p o r t e d t h a t 61 p e r c e n t o f t h o s e q u e r i e d had
e i t h e r "a g r e a t d e a l " o r " f a i r amount" o f c o n f i d e n c e i n t h e i r l o c a l
board and e l a b o r a t e d :

59

J o n e s , p. 2 1 ; and Webb, p.

36.

34

C i t i z e n s of the nation give t h e i r school boards a vote o f con­
f i d e n c e . School boards g e t t h e i r h i g h e s t vote o f confidence in
the Midwest and South and in sm a ller communities. The lowest
vote i s recorded 1n t h e c i t i e s with one m il l io n population or
more. Northern b l a c k s , o f a l l groups, give t h e i r school boards
the lowest r a t i n g . And . . . they a l s o give t h e i r schools the
lowest r a t i n g . Southern b l a c k s , on the o t h e r hand, give t h e i r
.chool boards a r a t i n g above the n a tio n a l a v e r a g e .60
The r e c e n t changes in th e p u b l i c ' s opinion and i n t e r e s t in i t s schools
have been d i r e c t l y a t t r i b u t e d to the dramatic increase in educational
c o s t s , a circumstance t h a t has converted a s t a t e o f "near t o t a l apathy"
in to one o f " v i t a l concern."

As Webb noted:

"In t h i s e ra o f educa­

t i o n a l consumerism—c a l l i t a c c o u n t a b i l i t y i f you must—the pu b lic i s
coming t o r e a l i z e t h a t 1 t owns i t s p u b lic s c h o o l s . " ^
Educational a d m i n i s t r a t o r s a re by no means unanimous in t h e i r
expressed opinions regarding the f u t u r e v i a b i l i t y of school boards.
Two prominent p r a c t i t i o n e r s , Joseph Cronin, Superintendent o f Public
I n s t r u c t i o n in I l l i n o i s , and Mark Hurwitz, Executive D i r e c t o r of the
New J e r s e y School Boards A s s o c i a t i o n , t y p i f y the div erg e n t views
e x i s t e n t w ith in the p r o f e s s i o n a l community.

Cronin suggested t h a t

l o c a l , l a y - c o n t r o l l e d lay boards cannot survive much longer and
o f f e r e d f o u r primary reasons f o r t h e i r u l t i m a t e demise:

(1) the

c o n s o l i d a t i o n o f school d i s t r i c t s —a con tinuing tren d in which more
than 114,000 independent u n i t s ceased t o e x i s t during the y e ars
See George H. Ga llup, "Eighth Annual Gallup Poll o f the
P u b l i c ' s A t t i t u d e s Toward th e Public Sc hools," Phi Delta Kappan
(October 1976): 188; and idem, "The 10th Annual Gallup Poll o f the
P u b l i c ' s A t t i t u d e s Toward the Public Schools," Phi Delta Kappan
(September 1978): 42.
Winfield Smith, "The F i r s t Hard Look a t School Boards,"
ASBJ 161 (August 1974): 8; and Webb, p. 38.

35

1935-1973, (2) a p l e t h o r a o f s t a t e mandates—which have s t r i p p e d
l o c a l boards o f a u t h o r i t y in ever-ex pand ing a r e a s o f d e c i s i o n
making, (3) an expansion in r e g i o n a l p l a n n i n g , and (4) c o u r t s u i t s
and judgments.

He w rote:

J u s t as t h e j e t plane ove rto ok t h e p a s s e n g e r t r a i n , t h e school
p o l i c i e s o f t h e 1950s may n o t s u r v i v e t h e c o m p e ti t io n from t h e
o u t - o f - s c h o o l e d u c a ti o n i n f l u e n c e s o f t h e l a t e 1970s and 1980s.
School boards may c o n ti n u e t o e x i s t . . . b u t t h e f r u s t r a t i o n
f a c t o r with which t h e y must contend i s bound to i n c r e a s e i f th e
t r e n d s o f t h e l a s t 30 y e a r s c o n t i n u e .
C on ve rsely , Hurwitz m ain tained t h a t l o c a l boards would s u r v i v e s i n c e
"systems o f government o p e r a t e in t h e realm o f p o l i t i c a l r e a l i t y and
n o t academic t h e o r y . "

He a s s e r t e d , a l b e i t somewhat c y n i c a l l y :

Boards o f e d u c a ti o n make p e r f e c t s c a p e g o a t s ( o r b u f f e r s i f you
p r e f e r ) f o r t h e m is ta k e s o f s t a t e government. . . . [They] w i l l
be around f o r a long time because t e a c h e r s f i n d them co n ven ient
t o w r e s t money from, a d m i n i s t r a t o r s need t h e i r s u p p o r t , and t h e
v o t e r s , t a x p a y e r s , p a r e n t s and s t u d e n t s need a vo ice a t t h e
l o c a l l e v e l t h a t can be provided by n e i t h e r s t a t e nor p r o f e s ­
sio n a l.^
P u b lic e d u c a ti o n in t h e United S t a t e s i s l i k e l y t o remain
both t a x - s u p p o r t e d and compulsory, and school boards a r e p o p u l a r l y
viewed a s " th e mechanism whereby sch o o ls can be made more r e s p o n s i v e
CO

to t h e i r c o n stitu e n ts."

NSBA has d e s c r i b e d t h e c o n t i n u i n g need as

f o l lo w s :
The l o c a l school board in America i s needed t o g u a r a n t e e t h e
e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f wise and humane p o l i c i e s . I t i s needed t o
a r t i c u l a t e t h e a s p i r a t i o n s o f t h e conmunity f o r i t s c h i l d r e n .
62

Mark W. Hurwitz and Joseph M. C ron in, "Can Local Lay School
Boards Survive Much Longer With Any Real Power?" ASBJ 161 (Ja nuary
1974): 55, 57-58.
63
L. Harmon Z e i g l e r and M. Kent J e n n i n g s , Governing American
Schools: I n t e r a c t i o n in Local School D i s t r i c t s (North S c i t u a t e , Mass.:
Duxbury P r e s s , 197 4), pp. 253-54.

36
I t i s needed to s e t high goals and reachable o b j e c t i v e s —and
to make sure t h a t th es e o b j e c t i v e s a re met. I t i s needed to
make local scho ols respond f u l l y to the needs of a l l c h i l d r e n .
I t i s needed to make su r e t h a t t h e schools in which our c h i l ­
dren spend t h e i r days a r e not what they are sometimes s a i d to
be—grim and j o y l e s s p la c e s . I t i s needed t o p r o t e c t c h i l d r e n .
The lo ca l school board i s needed t o i n s p i r e , inform, and i l l u ­
m i n a t e . 64
Such views a r e in c o n c e rt with the expressed b e l i e f s o f th e general
p u b lic which, although i t may a t b e st have a nebulous understanding
of t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of school boards, n e v e r t h e l e s s "holds to the
p r i n c i p l e t h a t local school p o l i c i e s should be s e t by l o c a l school
board s."

S tud ies o f public a t t i t u d e s toward local edu cational gov­

ernance have i n v a r i a b l y found t h a t Americans overwhelmingly favor
" t h e f i n a l decision-making a u t h o r i t y " remaining vested in t h e i r local
school boards and t h a t they a re " g r e a t l y opposed t o giving up local
r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r t h e p u b lic sc h o o l s , no m a t t e r what th e encroachments o f th e s t a t e and f e d e r a l governments."

65

The continued lon g ev ity o f l a y - c o n t r o l l e d local school boards
may depend, in l a r g e p a r t , upon th e e f f i c a c y o f t h e p u b l ic schools in
s a t i s f y i n g those s o c i e t a l e x p e c ta ti o n s held f o r them.

It is , there­

f o r e , c r u c i a l t h a t boards recognize "the school system can be no
b e t t e r than th e b o a r d . C o n s e q u e n t l y , the f u t u r e decision-making
s k i l l and knowledgeableness evidenced by lo c a l boards may well e i t h e r

64NSBA, p. 101.
See George H. Gallup, "Ninth Annual Gallup Poll o f the
P u b l i c ' s A t t i t u d e s Toward t h e Public Schools," Phi Delta Kappan
(September 1977): 42; and idem, "Eighth Annual Gallup Poll . . . ,"
p. 195.
66n
Page, „p. 77.

37

enhance t h e i r v i a b i l i t y o r ensu re t h e i r demise.

As Smith

e x p la in ed :
I t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t boards w i l l become merely c e r e m o n ia l, a vest i g a l remnant o f p a s t governance. Such a r e s u l t can --an d should—
be avoided. Boards a r e t h e mechanisms whereby sc hools can be
made more res p o n s i v e t o t h e i r c o n s t i t u e n t s . Whatever t h e p e r i l s
t h a t more res p o n s i v e sc hools may b r i n g , th e c o s t s o f i n s u l a t i o n
from t h e community a r e g r e a t e r .
The E s c a l a t i n g Im peratives o f Boardsmanship
The r e c e n t p r o l i f e r a t i o n in s o c i e t a l e x p e c t a t i o n s held f o r ,
and demands made o f , p u b l i c sc hools has had s i g n i f i c a n t consequences
f o r members o f lo c a l school board s.

H i s t o r i c a l l y , c i t i z e n s (whether

e l e c t e d o r appoin ted to membership) have been "expected to be p r o ­
moters o f p u b l ic i n t e r e s t in ed ucation and . . .

to be defe n d ers and
CQ

upholders o f t h e b a s i c a l l y a ccepted v a lu e s o f t h e community."

In

th e s e c a p a c i t i e s , i t was s u f f i c i e n t t h a t t h e y a c t e d so as t o a ttem p t
t o r e f l e c t th e community w i l l , as an a p p e l l a t e body, and as con­
s e r v a t o r s o f the f i n a n c i a l r e s o u r c e s o f t h e d i s t r i c t .

However, such

a r e s t r i c t e d d e f i n i t i o n o f purpose i s no lo n g e r germane to those
r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s t h r u s t upon board members.

In stu dy ing th e c u r r e n t

s i t u a t i o n , Dickinson r e p o r t e d :
The need f o r i n t e l l i g e n t , r e s p o n s i b l e l e a d e r s h i p . . . has
never been more u r g e n t . School boards a r e on t h e f r o n t l i n e
in a war t h a t ' s g e t t i n g h o t t e r . The n a t i o n ' s grave problems
o f rac e and p o v e r t y , t h e phenomenon o f s t u d e n t u n r e s t , t h e
ta x p a y e r s ' r e v o l t , t e a c h e r m i l i t a n c y —a l l t h e s e f o r c e s a r e
t e s t i n g th e m e t t l e (and t h e s t a y i n g power) o f th e n a t i o n ' s school
board members.
^ S m i t h , p. 8.
®®Jacobson, p. v.

38

Rose c o n c u r r e d and emphasized:
At one time board members were esteemed by t h e community; now,
c a u g h t in t h e middle in n e g o t i a t i o n s o r r a c i a l p rob lem s, they
a r e f r e q u e n t l y c r i t i c i z e d , v i l i f i e d , and p e r s o n a l l y h a ra s s e d
. . . and even t h o s e s t u r d y enough t o s t a n d t h e h e a t , t h e g r e a t
demands on t h e i r time make school board membership an e x pensiv e
p u b l i c s e r v i c e . 69
Svenson and Bryson c a l l e d a t t e n t i o n t o t h e i n c r e a s i n g burdens i n h e r e n t
i n board membership as f o l lo w s :
The board member o f t h e l a s t t h i r d o f t h i s c e n t u r y has become
no t o nly a f u n c t i o n a l manager o f p u b l i c e d u c a t i o n ; he i s ,
wh eth er he l i k e s i t o r n o t , a d e c i s i o n maker w ith c o n s i d e r a b l e
c u l t u r a l impact. The school board member now e s t a b l i s h e s s t a n ­
d a r d s o f b e h a v i o r , p a t t e r n s o f r e l a t i o n s h i p s , and measurements
o f t h e q u a l i t y and q u a n t i t y o f t h e t e a c h i n g / l e a r n i n g p r o c e s s .
I t i s t h e boardman who e s t a b l i s h e s t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e
school and t h e community.' 0
In h i s s tu d y o f new school board members, Snyder found t h a t
r o l e e x p e c t a t i o n s f o r a l l boardsmen had d r a s t i c a l l y changed d u rin g
the p r ec ed in g d ecade.

He concluded t h a t t h e c o n s o l i d a t i o n o f d i s ­

t r i c t s , d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n e f f o r t s i n urban d i s t r i c t s , and g r e a t e r c i t i ­
zen involvement were primary p r e c i p i t a t i n g f a c t o r s o f t h i s change
and a s s e r t e d t h a t f u t u r e board members would need t o accommodate a l l
o f t h e f o l lo w in g in o r d e r to f u l f i l l t h e i r d u t i e s a d e q u a t e l y :
(1) d e m o n s tr a te g r e a t e r e x p e r t i s e in f a c i l i t a t i n g t h e t e c h n i c a l and
l e g a l problems encompassing e d u c a t i o n ; (2) ev id e n ce g r e a t e r u n de r­
s t a n d i n g o f t h e a c c o u n t a b i l i t y movement; (3) e x h i b i t r e f i n e d t e c h n iq u e s

®^See D ic k in s o n , p. 9; and Lowell C. Rose, "Can Local School
Boards S u rviv e?" Education D i g e s t 36 (November 1970): 20.
^ A r t h u r L. Svenson and Joseph E. Bryson, "Good-bye F o r e v e r ,
Old Rubberstamp School Board Members," ASBJ 157 (June 1970): 27.

39

in p o l ic y making; (4) m anifest g r e a t e r understanding o f the complex,
i n n e r workings o f t h e school d i s t r i c t ; (5) demonstrate more knowl­
edge o f t h e d i s t r i c t ' s f i n a n c i a l s t r u c t u r e ; and (6) possess improved
i n d iv id u a l and problem problem-solving tec h n iq u e s.

71

As p re v io u s ly mentioned in t h i s s t u d y , the e v e r - e s c a l a t i n g
demands made o f board members have r e s u l t e d in a s e r i o u s n a tio n al
problem—t u r n o v e r .

For a m u l t i p l i c i t y o f r e a s o n s , among which the

most f r e q u e n t l y c i t e d i s "being a board member takes too much tim e ,"
an expanding number o f experienced members have re fused f u r t h e r s e r ­
v ic e .

In r e p o r t i n g those causes c i t e d by former members, Downey

explained:
The complaints about time were not unexpected. More t r o u b l i n g
by f a r was the p e rva sive sense o f f r u s t r a t i o n , powerless nes s,
even b i t t e r n e s s t h a t a l l but a handful o f ex-board members
expressed. Regulatory i n t e r f e r e n c e , inadequate school revenues,
i n t r a n s i g e n t t e a c h e r union demands, d i s c o r d a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p s
between governance and management, b ick e rin g among board members,
and a chronic c o n d it i o n of h o s t i l i t y and s u s p ic io n among t a x ­
payers were d i s q u i e t i n g f a c t o r s c i t e d time and again by people
who had served on school boards in systems of a l l s i z e s , in a l l
types o f communities a c r o s s th e United S t a t e s . 72
In a d d i t i o n t o tho se members who v o l u n t a r i l y r e t i r e from
a c t i v e s e r v i c e , an i n c r e a s in g number o f incumbents a r e being voted
out of o ffice .

"In our p r e s e n t time o f complicated fin an ce and s o p h i s ­

t i c a t e d machinery and high powered employer/employee r e l a t i o n s , board
members who do no t have the time or who a r e not s u f f i c i e n t l y informed
t o perform t h e i r jo b s as policy-makers with e f f i c i e n c y , a r e being
Milton L. Snyder, "The New School Board Member" (Ed.D. d i s ­
s e r t a t i o n , United S t a t e s I n t e r n a t i o n a l U n i v e r s i t y , 1973), pp. 49-50.
72
Gregg W. Downey, "Why School Board Members Q u it—and Why
T hey 're Sometimes Glad They Did," ASBJ 165 (February 1978): 26.

40

re p l a c e d r a p i d l y . "

73

Dyer m ain tain ed t h a t t h i s s i t u a t i o n i s a l o g i ­

c a l consequence o f t h e e s c a l a t i n g e x p e c t a t i o n s p u b l i c l y held f o r
school systems and c oncom itant s t a n d a r d s o f performance demanded o f
l o c a l school g o v e rn o r s .

She emphasized t h a t , in t h e f u t u r e ,

board members would view th em se lv es as p o l i t i c i a n s [an d] should
u nd e rstan d t h a t t h e i r d e s t i n i e s a r e shaped in t h e shadow o f t h e
b a l l o t box. They must be a c c o u n t a b l e t o t h e i r c o n s t i t u e n t s , a
f e a t t h a t o f t e n r e q u i r e s toughness and independence t h a t school
board members have n e i t h e r known o r c a r e d t o m u ster in e a r l i e r
e r a s . 74
I t i s i r o n i c t h a t , a t a time when " l e a d e r s o f s o p h i s t i c a t i o n
and i n t e l l i g e n c e a r e needed on l o c a l school boards as ne ver b e f o r e , "
board members " i n most s t a t e s need l i t t l e more t h a n a warm body and
s u f f i c i e n t v o t e s t o be e l e c t e d . "

75

Margaret B uvinger, p r e s i d e n t o f

NSBA, emphasized t h e need f o r members p o s s e s s i n g s u p e r i o r q u a l i f i c a ­
t i o n s , in o r d e r t o meet t h e c h a l l e n g e s c o n f r o n t i n g school b o a rd s , as
f o l lo w s :
What c o u n t s , a t a tim e when school board members a r e i n c r e a s i n g l y
r e q u i r e d t o make major d e c i s i o n s on complex m a t t e r s , a r e q u a l i ­
f i c a t i o n s t h a t d e fy l e g a l d e f i n i t i o n . The day o f on e-h our board
m eetings in which b u s i n e s s m a t t e r s a r e d e a l t w ith t i d i l y i s long
gone, and most boards f i n d t h a t t h e c om p lex ity o f c u r r e n t p ro b ­
lems r e q u i r e s an e v e r i n c r e a s i n g commitment o f t im e . Lacking
t h i s commitment . . . t h e s t r o n g e s t b e l i e f i n p u b l i c e d u c a t i o n , _
and in t h e l a y d i r e c t i o n o f t h i s e d u c a t i o n . . . i s o f no a v a i l . 76
73

Louise Dyer, "The American School Board Member and H is—and
Her— Era o f F i e r c e New Indep enden ce," ASBJ 160 ( J u l y 1973): 20.
74I b i d . , p. 17.
75See NSBA, p. 97; and Bob F. S t e e r e , "Should t h e S t a t e T rain
Board C andid ate s 1f Only t o S h i e l d t h e P u b l i c From Bunglers?" ASBJ 160
(April 1973): 29.
7®Margaret J . Buvinger, "Board Members: Are You Q u a l i f i e d ? "
ASBJ (April 1979): 66.

41

C o n s i d e r a b l e e f f o r t has been expended, o v e r t h e y e a r s , in
c a t a l o g i n g t h o s e a t t r i b u t e s r e q u i s i t e o f l o c a l school board members.
A s p e c i f i c l i s t i n g o f t h e q u a l i f i c a t i o n s deemed e s s e n t i a l f o r " e f f e c ­
t i v e " members i s i n c l u d e d i n "e v e r y school bo ard s a s s o c i a t i o n hand­
bo o k ."^

In commenting on t h o s e q u a l i f i c a t i o n s c r u c i a l t o e f f e c t i v e

boardsm anship a t t h e p r e s e n t t i m e , Buvinger s p e c i f i e d t h e f o l l o w i n g :
(1) a love f o r and b e l i e f i n p e o p le ( t h e most i m p o r t a n t ) ; (2) an open
mind and a w i l l i n g n e s s t o l e a r n ; (3) a w i l l i n g n e s s t o d e v o te s u f f i ­
c i e n t tim e and a t t e n t i o n t o t h e p a r t i c u l a r c o n c e rn s o f a l o c a l sy ste m ;
(4) an u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e fu n d am e n ta ls o f bu d ge ting and a c c o u n t i n g ,
t h e p r i n c i p l e s o f labor-management r e l a t i o n s , t h e p r o c e s s o f good
p u b l i c r e l a t i o n s , and t h e t e c h n i q u e s o f l o n g - r a n g e p l a n n i n g ; and
(5) a b e l i e f in l a y - d i r e c t i o n o f p u b l i c e d u c a t i o n .

78

An i n t e r e s t i n g

c o n t r a s t , however, was n o ted i n t h e f i n d i n g s o f a su r v e y j o i n t l y con­
d u c te d by C a r o l i n e M u l l in s and The American School Board J o u r n a l - re s e a rc h intended to determine th o se q u a l i f i c a t i o n s or c o n d itio n s
a d m i n i s t r a t o r s d e s i r e d i n board members.

The r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e d t h a t

c e n tr a l o f f i c e a d m in is tr a to r s believed "the q u a l i f i c a t i o n s . . . neces­
s a r y t o good boardsmanship a r e . . . more l i k e l y t o be found in p r o ­
f e s s i o n a l and u p p e r - l e v e l management p e o p l e . "

Three s p e c i f i c a l l y

d e s i r e d q u a l i f i c a t i o n s were r e p o r t e d as f o l l o w s :

(1) a c o l l e g e de g re e

i n a p r o f e s s i o n —p r e f e r a b l y m ed icin e o r d e n t i s t r y , (2) a p e rs o n a l
c on ce rn w i t h t h e l o c a l syste m p r e d i c a t e d upon having c h i l d r e n in
^ D i c k i n s o n , p. 23.
78

Buvinger,

p.

66.

42

a t t e n d a n c e , and (3) an i d e n t i f i c a t i o n with a p a r t i c u l a r segment of
t he lo c a l community—p a r t i c u l a r l y a m in o rity group.

Additionally,

the respondents were n e a r l y unanimous in t h e i r disapproval o f board
members who had earned p r o f e s s i o n a l degrees in education and with
those having degrees in classroom t e a c h i n g , in p a r t i c u l a r . ^
I t has been asked whether any mere human, r e g a r d l e s s o f qu ali
f i c a t i o n or m o ti v a ti o n , would be capable o f s a t i s f a c t o r i l y r e s o lv in g
t he d i v e r s e problems c u r r e n t l y c o nfronting lo ca l boards.
as Dickinson responded, i s :

The answer,

"Society w i l l . . . have t o be s a t i s f i e d

with a big self-improvement p r o j e c t in the Board member l i n e r a t h e r
than with the invention o f new model human b e ing s."

80

A P r o f i l e of American Public School Board Members
An unde rstanding o f t h e demographics of the more than 96,000
men and women who comprise the membership o f American lo c a l school
boards i s of c o n sid e r a b le importance.

N e v e r th e le ss, a se v e r e l y

l im i t e d e f f o r t has been made t o e s t a b l i s h a p r o f i l e of th e governors
o f local sc h o o ls; f u r t h e r , l o n g it u d i n a l r e s e a r c h h a s, thus f a r , been
r e s t r i c t e d t o one study.
In 1974, Z e i g l e r and Jennings rep orte d t h e r e s u l t s o f a s i x y e a r r e s e a r c h p r o j e c t involving e i g h t y - s i x local school d i s t r i c t s and
541 board members.

Their p r o f i l e of t h e " t y p ic a l board o f education

member" was as follo w s:

(1) Caucasian, (2) male, (3) f o r t y to

79

"What Makes a Good Board Member? Superintendents Answer,"
Education Summary 27 (October 15, 1974): 3.
®^Dickinson, p. 23.

43

f i f t y - n i n e y e a r s o f a g e , (4) e arn s in excess o f $20,000 a n n u a l l y ,
(5) has l i v e d in t h e community f o r t h i r t y - s i x or more y e a r s , (6) has
completed one to fo u r y e a r s o f c o l l e g e , (7) i s p r o f e s s i o n a l l y o r t e c h ­
n i c a l l y employed, (8) owns h i s own house, {9) i s a P r o t e s t a n t and
a t t e n d s church weekly, (10) i s a Re publican, (11) was e l e c t e d r a t h e r
than a p p o in te d , and (12) has se rved t h e school system o r th e commun i t y " i n a l e s s e r c a p a c i t y " p r i o r t o being f i r s t e l e c t e d .

81

Hurwitz,

in h i s study of t h e personal c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and a t t i t u d e s o f New
J e r s e y board members, r e p o r t e d s i m i l a r f i n d i n g s .

He wrote t h a t New

J e r s e y board members (1) " a r e predominately m a r r i e d , male Caucasians
in t h e i r middle f o r t i e s who p r e f e r t h e Republican p a r t y and the P r o t e s ­
t a n t r e l i g i o n " ; (2) " a r e predom inately c o l l e g e g r a d u a t e s with a
media[n] income o f $19,000 who a re engaged in white c o l l a r and p r o f e s ­
s io n a l o c c u p a ti o n s " ; and (3) "devote 17.45 hours per month to t h e i r
school board d u t i e s , have se rved an average o f 3.97 y e a r s on t h e i r
bo ard , and c o n s i d e r themselves n e u t r a l on a l i b e r a l - c o n s e r v a t i v e
scale.
The most r e c e n t endeavor to e s t a b l i s h a p r o f i l e o f school
board members, on a nationwide b a s i s , was j o i n t l y conducted by the
American A sso c ia tio n o f School A d m i n is tr a t o r s (AASA), V i r g i n i a Poly­
t e c h n i c I n s t i t u t e , and t h e S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y o f V i r g i n i a .

81
op

Although

Z e i g l e r and J e n n i n g s , pp. 22-37.

Mark W. Hurwitz, "The Personal C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and A t t i t u d e s
o f New J e r s e y School Board Members," D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r ­
n a t i o n a l 32/4-A (October 1971): 1786-87.

44
t h e complete r e s u l t s o f t h e 1,268 board member s t u d y have n o t been
f i n a l i z e d , Underwood e t a l . have r e p o r t e d t h e f o l l o w i n g :
American school board members a r e t y p i c a l l y su b u r b a n , w h i t e ,
m id d le o r u p p e r- m i d d le c l a s s , and m idd le a ged. The number o f
fem ale members has i n c r e a s e d from . . . 1 1 . 9 p e r c e n t t o 26 p e r ­
c e n t . Female members a r e most common i n t h e c e n t r a l p a r t o f
t h e n a t i o n . . . . A l l [members] a r e r e l a t i v e l y a f f l u e n t and
have a c h i e v e d a h ig h l e v e l o f e d u c a t i o n . . . . The v a s t m a j o r i t y
o f r e s p o n d e n t s have s e r v e d from one t o t e n y e a r s ; 37 p e r c e n t a r e
i n t h e i r f i r s t t erm — 61p e r c e n t have been e l e c t e d o r a p p o i n t e d
t o more t h a n one term . . .. The t o p i s s u e s o f c on ce rn a r e —
For Male Members
For Female Members
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

C o lle c tiv e bargaining
Declining e n ro llm e n ts
D iscipline
Curriculum reform
C u t t i n g programs &
p u b lic apathy

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

C o lle ctiv e bargaining
Declining enrollm ents
C u rriculum r eform
C u t t i n g programs
A ccountability^

The S o c i a l i z a t i o n o f New School Board Members
The p r o c e s s by which new members s e l e c t i v e l y a c q u i r e t h e
v a l u e s , a t t i t u d e s , i n t e r e s t s , s k i l l s , and knowledge c u r r e n t w i t h i n
t h e board on which t h e y have become members has been e x p l a i n e d in
marke dly d i s s i m i l a r ways.

There i s , however, agreem ent t h a t school

board s "must t r a n s m i t t h e i r norms t o t h e i r n o v i c e members i f t h e y a r e
t o e n s u r e t h e c o n t i n u e d o p e r a t i o n o f t h e syste m ; a n d , n o v ic e members
must l e a r n [ t h e s e ] norms i f t h e y a r e t o be f u l l y f u n c t i o n i n g , e f f e c t i v e , and i n t e g r a t e d members o f t h e s y s t e m . "

84

An a p p r e c i a t i o n f o r

t h e s o c i a l i z a t i o n p r o c e s s has become i n c r e a s i n g l y i m p o r t a n t a s a
83

Kenneth E. Underwood, Lawrence McCluskey, and George
Umberqer, "A P r o f i l e o f t h e School Board Member," ASBJ 165 (O cto ber
1978): 25-26.
84
P e t e r J . C i s t o n e , "The S o c i a l i z a t i o n o f School Board Members,"
E d u c a ti o n a l A d m i n i s t r a t i o n Q u a r t e r l y 13 ( S p r in g 1977): 20.

45
d i r e c t r e s u l t of the previously reported e v er-es ca latin g turnover
r a t e among board members, one o u t o f f o u r being new t o t h e p o s i t i o n
in any given y e a r .

Jones e xp la in e d t h a t t h e new member " i s l i k e l y

t o begin h i s t e n u r e with only a l i m i t e d unders tanding o f h i s d u t i e s
as a board member, t h e r o l e o f a board o f e du ca tio n t o d a y , and—
perhaps most i m p o r t a n t l y —o f t h e consequences h is a c t i o n s on th e
board may hold f o r th e f u t u r e o f l a y c o n tr o l o f e d u c a t i o n . "
concurred and emphasized:

Sta p le y

"The t y p i c a l new school board member has

devoted h i s e n e r g i e s to a b u s i n e s s , p r o f e s s i o n , o r t r a d e and has had
only i n c i d e n t a l c o n t a c t with the o p e r a t i o n s o f t h e s c h o o l s . "

85

In an e a r l y study o f t h e s o c i a l i z a t i o n p r o c e s s , Kerr r e p o r t e d
new members a s being both u n s k i l l e d and u n f a m i l i a r with th e i n t r i ­
c a c i e s o f school governance.

He found t h a t novices a r e , as a conse­

quence, s o c i a l i z e d toward t h e " l e g i t i m a t i n g [ o f ] t h e p o l i c i e s o f the
school system t o t h e community, r a t h e r than r e p r e s e n t i n g t h e v ario u s
segments o f t h e community t o th e school a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . "

He ex p la in ed

t h a t both a d m i n i s t r a t o r s and e xperienced members p a r t i c i p a t e in the
i n d u c t i o n p r o c e ss and t h a t t h e fo llo w in g t h r e e major f o r c e s q u i c k l y
converge t o shape t h e a t t i t u d e s and performance o f new members:
(1)

school board p o l i t i c s , (2) p r e s s u r e f o r confo rmity throughout

t h e s o c i a l i z a t i o n p r o c e s s , and (3) community p r e s s u r e s .

Kerr con­

cluded t h a t , as a r e s u l t o f t h e i r i n t r o d u c t o r y e x p e r i e n c e s , new
members a r e e f f e c t i v e l y absorbed i n t o t h e e x i s t e n t governance modus

QC

See J o n e s , p. 23; and Encyclopedia o f E d u c a tio n , 1971 e d . ,
s . v . "School Boards: Education o f Members," by Maurice E. S ta p le y .

46
operandi and r a p i d l y , r e g a r d l e s s o f p r e - e l e c t i o n promises o r p e rs o n a l
background, a c t t o p e r p e t u a t e t h e s t a t u s quo.

86

Ronald Gray, D i r e c t o r o f P u b lic R e l a t i o n s f o r t h e B r i t i s h
Columbia School T r u s t e e s A s s o c i a t i o n , co n cu rred w i t h K e r r ' s a n a l y s i s
and summarized t h e new board member s o c i a l i z a t i o n p r o c e s s a s f o l l o w s :
O s t e n s i b l y , t h e t r u s t e e r e p r e s e n t s t h e p e o p l e , as t a x p a y e r s ,
c t i z i e n s and p a r e n t s ; a r o l e which by i t s v e ry n a t u r e r e q u i r e s
no s p e c i a l i s t t r a i n i n g . To perform e f f e c t i v e l y t h e t r u s t e e
needs an a t t i t u d e o f concern and an e f f e c t i v e means o f communi­
c a t i n g w ith t h e p u b l i c he r e p r e s e n t s . In e f f e c t , however, what
happens i s t h a t t h e t r u s t e e s i t s down a t t h e f i r s t meeting o f
t h e board with very l i t t l e knowledge o f what i s e x p e c te d o f him,
what h i s d u t i e s a r e t o be and, more i m p o r t a n t l y , no c o n ce p t o f
h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h t h e n o n - e l e c t e d p eople f a c i n g him a c r o s s
t h e t a b l e . The new t r u s t e e i s t h e r e f o r e p e r f e c t l y s e t up t o be
absorbed w i t h a minimum o f f u s s and d i s t u r b a n c e i n t o t h e ed uca­
t i o n a l e s t a b l i s h m e n t in t h e school d i s t r i c t and t o be manipu­
l a t e d w ith v a ry in g degree o f s u b t l e t y by t h e p r o f e s s i o n a l
s t a f f . 87
L a t e r r e s e a r c h , however, d i s p u t e d K e r r ' s f i n d i n g s .

Cistone,

in r e p o r t i n g th e r e s u l t s o f h i s 1976 s tu d y o f O n t a r i o ' s novice board
members, s t a t e d :

"The r e s e a r c h shows t h a t t h e s k i l l s , a t t i t u d e s , and

b eh av io r n e c e s s a r y f o r f u n c t i o n i n g a s a board member a l r e a d y have been
a c q u i r e d as a consequence o f r e c r u i t m e n t , preincumbent e x p e r i e n c e ,
and a n t i c i p a t o r y s o c i a l i z a t i o n , " b e f o r e t h e i r e l e c t i o n o r a p poin tm ent.
He e x p l a i n e d :
Board members d o n ' t run f o r o f f i c e on a whim; th ey have worked
in o t h e r a c t i v i t i e s t h a t le a d i n t o s e r v i c e on a school bo ard .
. . . I n s t e a d o f r e l y i n g on t h e c o l l e c t i v e wisdom o f e x p e r i e n c e d
school board members, o r t h e i n f l u e n c e o f a school s u p e r i n t e n d e n t ,
new . . . members make d e c i s i o n s on what t h e y have l e a r n e d p r i o r
86

Norman K e r r , "The School Board a s an Agency o f L e g i t i m i z a ­
t i o n , " Sociolo gy o f E ducation 38 ( F a l l 1964): 45-55.
87
Ron Gray, " I n - s e r v i c e T r a i n in g f o r School T r u s t e e s , "
Education Canada 11 (June 1971): 24.

47

t o t h e i r e l e c t i o n or appointment . . . and most . . . members
come from s u r p r i s i n g l y s i m i l a r backgrounds. The d i f f e r e n c e in
a t t i t u d e s between new and v ete ran . . . members i s indeed sm all.
School board members seem t o be, in f a c t , almost a s e l f p e rp e tu a tin g s p e c i e s .
Cistone maintained t h a t a new board member, u n lik e "a c o n scr ip ted
s o l d i e r [who] has t o undergo a compulsory s o c i a l i z a t i o n —boot c a m p before he begins to i d e n t i f y h im self with the army," comes t o his
p o s i t i o n "with a s e t o f n otion s t h a t change l i t t l e during [ h i s term]
of o f f i c e . "

On t h e b a s i s o f h i s f i n d i n g s , he a s s e r t e d t h a t o v e r t

s o c i a l i z a t i o n endeavors a r e o f r e l a t i v e l y minor s i g n i f i c a n c e , and
those t h a t do occur tend t o lead the novice in th e d i r e c t i o n of those
p o s i t i o n s advocated by t h e s u p e r i n t e n d e n t —d e s p i t e the c o u n te r p o s i t i o n between boards o f education and t h e i r c h i e f e x e c u tiv e o f f i c e r s .
The Value o f Systematic and Continuous Programs
o f I n s e r v i c e Education
The e x p e r t i s e evidenced by boards o f education in meeting
those p r e s e n t and f u t u r e c h a lle n g e s c o n fr o n tin g them w i l l l i k e l y
determine whether or not l o c a l , l a y - l e a d e r s continue to enjoy a sub­
s t a n t i v e r o l e in e du ca tio nal governance.

Since l o c a l boards can be

no more e f f e c t i v e than t h e composite wisdom evidenced through the
knowledge and s k i l l demonstrated by t h e i r i n d iv id u a l members, "the
education o f board members becomes . . . i n c r e a s i n g l y im p ortan t."

89

The imperatives of th e c y b e r n e t i c age, as well as c on tinuing so c i a l
DO

See C i s t o n e , pp. 19-32; and idem, "School Board Members
Learn T h eir S k i l l s Before They Become Board Members," ASBJ 165
(January 1978): 32-33.
89
Encyclopedia o f E ducation, S tap le y.

88

48

and e d u c a ti o n a l r e f o r m s, n e c e s s i t a t e th e s e r v i c e s o f h ig h ly s k i l l e d ,
knowledgeable lo c a l members, perhaps more so than a t any o t h e r time
in our n a t i o n ' s h i s t o r y .

C i t i z e n s must, t h e r e f o r e , understand t h a t

t h e most d i r e c t way th ey "can i n f l u e n c e t h e i r sch o o ls i s through the
type o f school board members th ey e l e c t , " and b o a rd s , them se lv es,
"must be c e r t a i n t h a t t h e i r communities a re served by informed and
capable . . . members."

90

Thompson r e p o r t e d t h e c u r r e n t need as f o l ­

lows:
The changing focus o f e d u c a t i o n a l needs i s having a v i s i b l e
impact on th e r o l e o f t h e members o f lo c a l school boards. Board
members must be much more knowledgeable t o f u n c t i o n e f f e c t i v e l y .
They must understand t h e i s s u e s in p u b l ic elementary and secon­
dary e d u ca tio n as well as t h e tec h n iq u e s o f p o l i c y development
and d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g . 91
The e d uca tio n o f t o d a y ' s board members cannot be l e f t to
chance.

Since " th e f i r s t requirem ent f o r an e f f e c t i v e school board

member i s t h a t he have t h e in f o r m a tio n and knowledge on which t o base
his d e cisio n s,"

92

i t i s im p e r a t i v e t h a t p u r p o siv e , s y s t e m a t i c , and

continuous programs o f i n s e r v i c e e d uca tio n be developed and imple­
mented and t h a t board members a v a i l themselves o f such programs.

The

c ontinued r e l i a n c e upon l o n g e v i t y o f s e r v i c e as t h e c h i e f v e h i c l e f o r
t h e enhancement o f perso nal and c o r p o r a t e performance would l i k e l y
prove c a l a m i to u s .

Although "some improvement u s u a l l y r e s u l t s from

90

See Neal Gro ss, Mho Runs Our Schools? (New York: John
Wiley & Sons, 1958), p. 126; and Rose, p. 21.
91
Barbara Thompson, Foreword t o O p p o r t u n i t i e s Unlimited: A
Guide f o r Wisconsin School Board Members, by Richard A.R ossm il ler
(Winneconne, Wis.: WASB, 1977), p. i i i .
92
G r o s s , p. 94.

49

e x p e r i e n c e on t h e j o b , most s u b s t a n t i a l p r o g r e s s i s n o t l i k e l y t o
o c c u r u n l e s s p u r p o s e f u l and i n t e n s i v e e f f o r t s a r e made by v a r i o u s
means t o improve t h e competence o f l o c a l school board members."

93

Weitman summarized t h e u r g e n t need t o enhance school board perform an ce
as f o l l o w s :
I t i s e v i d e n t from t h e l e g a l s t a t u s and from t h e l a r g e amounts
o f f i n a n c i a l w e a l t h under t h e c o n t r o l o f school b o a rd s t h a t t h e y
a r e in a v e ry i m p o r t a n t p o s i t i o n so f a r as p u b l i c s c h o o l s a r e
co n ce rn e d . The im p o rtan c e o f t h i s p o s i t i o n does n o t l e n d i t s e l f
t o t h e a d m i n i s t e r i n g by p e r s o n s who have l i t t l e knowledge and
s k i l l in such management, and who, in many i n s t a n c e s a r e n o t
p r o v i d e d t h e o p p o r t u n i t y t o l e a r n t h e i r p r o p e r f u n c t i o n s . The
board s a r e r e q u i r e d by law t o make f a r - r e a c h i n g d e c i s i o n s .
It
seems e n t i r e l y w ise t h a t t h e y a t l e a s t sh ou ld be given t h e o p p o r­
t u n i t y t o l e a r n more a b o u t t h e i r f u n c t i o n s so a s t o make such
d e c i s i o n s w i t h knowledge and u n d e r s t a n d i n g . 94
The c o s t s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h i n s e r v i c e programs f o r board mem­
b e r s have f r e q u e n t l y been a s u b j e c t o f c i t i z e n c o n ce rn and c r i t i c i s m .
In d e fe n d i n g such e x p e n d i t u r e s , Weinheimer compared school sys tems t o
c o r p o r a t i o n s and e x p l a i n e d :
C o r p o r a t e o f f i c e r s o f e v e r y l a r g e c o r p o r a t i o n in t h e community,
who have t h e f i s c a l and l e g a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s comparable t o
t h a t o f t h e l o c a l board o f e d u c a t i o n , must spend tim e and money
f o r t r a i n i n g and i n - s e r v i c e o f i t s o f f i c e r s and key s t a f f in
o r d e r t o keep a b r e a s t o f t h e t i m e s . Without t h a t t r a i n i n g , t h e
c o r p o r a t i o n would soon c l o s e i t s d o o r s .
I t w o u l d n ' t make any
d i f f e r e n c e how o l d t h e c o r p o r a t i o n was o r how e x p e r i e n c e d t h e
o f f i c e r s o r s t a f f p r e v i o u s l y w e r e . 95

QO

W. E. B e cke r, "How t o Make B e t t e r B o a r d s," ASBJ 155 (Octobe r
1967): 25.
94

Ronald E. Weitman, "An A n a l y t i c a l Study o f t h e I n - s e r v i c e
E d u c a tio n a l Needs o f Chairmen o f Boards o f E d ucation i n Georgia"
(Ed.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f G e o r g ia , 1960), p. 17.
Norman P. Weinheimer, " T e l l I t R ig h t Up F r o n t , " MSBJ 26
(O c to b e r 1979): 5.

50

A r e c e n t Pennsylvania School Boards A s s o c ia tio n Commission
concurred with Weinheimer and r ep o r te d i t s recommendations r e l a t i v e to
board member i n s e r v i c e , and t h e c o s t s a s s o c i a t e d t h e r e w i t h , as f o l ­
lows:
School b u s i n e s s , l i k e many o t h e r a s p e c t s o f modern l i v i n g ,
r e q u ir e s a broader p e r s p e c t i v e o f a l l the i n f lu e n c e s a f f e c t i n g
s o c i e t y and p u b lic e d u c a tio n . School d i r e c t o r s , who do not tak e
t h e i r r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s s e r i o u s l y and do not engage in personal
i n s e r v i c e e d u c a ti o n , a r e doing a d i s s e r v i c e t o th e board and the
community-at-large. School d i r e c t o r s , who seek personal i n s e r ­
vice o p p o r t u n i t i e s and t h e broader p e r s p e c t i v e o f group i n s e r v i c e ,
w ill unquestiona bly have improved t h e i r c a p a b i l i t i e s t o perform
on b e h alf of t h e p u b l ic i n t e r e s t . . . . Being r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the
o pe ra tio n o f a p u b l ic school system . . . i s a c h alle n g in g ta s k
and r e q u i r e s a broad base o f knowledge and information in o rd er
to make i n t e l l i g e n t d e c i s i o n s . . . . I n s e r v i c e education and
t r a i n i n g can provide the unde rstanding needed t o ensure proper
management and c o n tr o l o f t h e edu ca tion al system and the p u b l i c ' s
tax d o l l a r s . Boards not a p p r o p r i a t i n g funds f o r proper i n s e r v i c e
t r a i n i n g a r e sh ort-ch a n g in g t h e i r community in terms of under­
standing t h e n a t u r e and needs o f e f f e c t i v e school o p e r a t i o n s . " 6
The Commission advocated " t h a t adequate f i n a n c i a l reso urces
must be a l l o c a t e d a t t h e lo ca l level . . .
member] i n s e r v i c e goals and o b j e c t i v e s . "

t o achieve s t a t e d [board
I t recommended:

(1) "boards

should adopt a p p r o p r i a t e p o l i c i e s which encourage p a r t i c i p a t i o n in
p r e s e r v i c e , new o r i e n t a t i o n programs, and on going i n s e r v i c e a c t i v i ­
t i e s " ; (2) "school d i s t r i c t s should provide adequate funds annually
f o r school board . . . i n s e r v i c e t r a i n i n g " ; and (3) "boards . . .
should be encouraged t o a t t e n d i n s e r v i c e programs a t the l o c a l , s t a t e
and national l e v e l [ s ] . 1,97
96

Pennsylvania School Boards A s s o c i a t i o n , PSBA Commission to
Strengthen th e Working R e l a ti o n s h ip s o f School Boards and Sup erinte n ­
dents (H arris burg , Pa .:
Pennsylvania School Boards A s s o c ia t io n ,
w r y , pp. 14-15.
9 7 I b i d . , p. 2 2 .

51
D e s p i t e t h e a p p a r e n t need and j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r board member
i n s e r v i c e e d u c a t i o n , s y s t e m a t i c approaches t o t h e development o f
s e q u e n t i a l programs have been v i r t u a l l y i g n o r e d , and t h o s e e f f o r t s
t h a t have been made have n o t g e n e r a l l y been taken s e r i o u s l y .
S t . John w r o t e :

"The a r e a o f . . . i n s e r v i c e t r a i n i n g f o r board mem­

b e r s i s shunted around o r laughed a t o r simply ignored so f r e q u e n t l y
th a t i t hurts.

. . . "

98

F r a n c o i s found t h a t " t h e a verage boardman's

o r i e n t a t i o n and t r a i n i n g c o n s i s t s o f l i t t l e more th an being given
re a d in g m a t e r i a l s , having a p r i v a t e c o nfe renc e w i t h t h e s u p e r i n t e n d e n t , and t o u r i n g a few s c h o o l s . "

99

In a m a j o r i t y o f s t a t e s , 75 p e r ­

c e n t o f t h e newly e l e c t e d members r e c e i v e no formal t r a i n i n g from
t h e i r school b oard s a s s o c i a t i o n , and in t h o s e s t a t e s where t h e a s s o ­
c i a t i o n s do o f f e r new member t r a i n i n g workshops, as many as 90 p e r c e n t
o f t h e in te n d e d p o p u l a t i o n do n o t a t t e n d . ^

T h is c o n t i n u i n g circum ­

s t a n c e caused t h e e d i t o r s o f The American School Board Jo u rna l t o
comment:
New members a r e welcomed aboard as i f t h e y a r e dewy-eyed c o l l e g e
freshmen p l e d g i n g T r i - D e l t or Sigma-Chi. Then, a f t e r t h e h e a r t y
rounds o f p o s t - e l e c t i o n g l a d - h a n d i n g , t h e y ' r e a d v is ed t o s i t
t i g h t , s h u t up, and l e a v e t h e f i r s t y e a r ' s d e c i s i o n making to
t h e v e t s a n d , o f c o u r s e , t h e p r o s . 1O'
98

W alte r D. S t . Jo h n, "Why Boardmen Need B e t t e r T r a i n i n g —and
What They Need t o Know," ASBJ 158 (February 1971): 27.
99

John F r a n c o i s , " B e t t e r —Lots B e t t e r —T r a i n i n g Is Needed f o r
New Board Members," ASBJ 158 ( J u l y 1970): 9-10.
^ J o n e s , p. 22.
^ " A f t e r You Shake T h e i r Hands, Try This New Way t o Train
New Board Members Quickly and P r o f i t a b l y , " ASBJ 161 (May 1974): 33.

52

Although t h e v a l u e o f s y s t e m a t i c and c o n t i n u o u s i n s e r v i c e
programs f o r a l l board members has been w i d e ly a c c l a i m e d , few examples
o f p l a n s f o r p o s s i b l e i m p l e m e n ta t io n have been d e v e l o p e d .

T h at a t t e n ­

t i o n p a id t o t h i s s u b j e c t h a s , i n t h e main, i n v o lv e d s u g g e s t e d o r i e n t a t i o n a c t i v i t i e s f o r new members.

102

S t . John was among t h e e a r l y

c ontempo ra ry w r i t e r s t o s t r e s s t h e d e s i r a b i l i t y o f c o n t i n u i n g " r e l e ­
v a n t and e f f e c t i v e " i n s e r v i c e t r a i n i n g t h r o u g h o u t a member's p e r i o d
o f service.

He s u g g e s t e d t h a t in o r d e r " t o p u t t h e wheels i n m o tio n ,"

e d u c a t i o n a l l e a d e r s sho u ld a c t i v e l y s o l i c i t (1) t h e a d o p t i o n o f r u l e s
and r e g u l a t i o n s , r e g a r d i n g o r i e n t a t i o n and i n s e r v i c e program s, by
s t a t e s ' board s o f e d u c a t i o n and d e p a r t m e n t s o f e d u c a t i o n , (2) t h e
a d o p ti o n o f " a p p r o p r i a t e r e s o l u t i o n s " by t h e n a t i o n a l and s t a t e s '
school boards a s s o c i a t i o n s ; and (3) t h e a d o p ti o n o f " p o l i c i e s s p e ­
c i f i c a l l y r e l a t i n g t o improved programs f o r members" by l o c a l boards
of education.

He recommended i n c l u d i n g t h e f o l l o w i n g s p e c i f i c t o p i c s

in l o c a l i n s e r v i c e programs:
1.

Board o p e r a t i o n and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s ;

2.

Needs o f i n d i v i d u a l members;

3.

Problems, p r e s s u r e s , and f r u s t r a t i o n s o f bo ard members;

4.

Legal and f i s c a l m a t t e r s ;

5.

R e l a t i o n s w i t h news media r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s ;

6.

R e l a t i o n s w i t h community power s t r u c t u r e s and s p e c i a l
i n t e r e s t g r o u p s;

102

See E ncyclo pedia o f E d u c a t i o n , S t a p l e y ; and Edward M.
T u t t l e , School Board L e a d e r s h i p in America ( D a n v i l l e , 11 1 .:
Interstate
P r e s s , 1 9 5 8), p. 127.

53

7.

Basic information about e d u c a tio n ;

8.

Management s k i l l s and tec h niqu e s;

9.

S t a f f member r e l a t i o n s ;

10.

Community r e l a t i o n s ; and

11.

Needs and tre n d s in s o c i e t y and t h e i r i m p lic a tio n s f o r
educational s e r v i c e s . ^

The t r a i n i n g of newly e l e c t e d o r appointed board members has
been a t o p i c of continuing i n t e r e s t .

Although t h e r e was general

agreement t h a t the s i n g l e b e s t way t o design i n s e r v i c e se ss io n s f o r
novices has been " to expose them t o r e a l l i f e problems,"

104

a c o n sid ­

e r a b l e d i f f e r e n c e o f opinion regarding th e len g th o f time req u ired
f o r them t o become f u l l y f u n c t i o n i n g , e f f e c t i v e board members was
reported.

Snyder concluded t h a t from s i x months to one y e ar of

" o n - t h e - p a r t - t i m e - j o b - t r a i n i n g was n e c e s s a r y ; White rep o rted t h a t the
" l a r g e s t number o f new board members i n d i c a t e t h e i r a p p re n tic e s h ip
. . . took a f u l l y e a r " ; and

Goble wrote t h a t " a t l e a s t two y e a r s o f

. . . s e r v i c e [were r e q u i r e d ] befo re board members gain t h e background and confidence t o perform e f f e c t i v e l y and c o n f i d e n t l y . "

105

There was r e p o r t e d , however, unanimity in t h e perceived value of
103

S t . John, Boardmen, pp. 27-28.

^ J o n e s , p. 26.
^ ^ S e e ERS Information A ia , " C i ti z e n Boards a t Work: New
Challenges t o E f f e c t i v e Action" ( A r l i n g to n , Va.: Educational Research
S e r v i c e , 1975); Goble, p. 6; NSBA Research Report 1973-2, "Training
New School Board Members: A Survey" (Evanston, 111.: National School
Boards A s s o c i a t i o n , 1973); and Eilene White, "How t o Show New Board
Members t h e Ropes—Without Being S t r a n g l e d , " Executive Educator 1
(November 1979): 21.

54

i n s e r v i c e programs, e s p e c i a l l y f o r new members, and in t h e b e l i e f t h a t
t h e in c lu d e d e x p e r i e n c e s would " s h o r t e n t h e time needed by t h e new
board member t o become a f u n c t i o n i n g member o f t h e school board
t e a m . " 106
The f e a s i b i l i t y o f mandating, by s t a t e s t a t u t e , new member
p a r t i c i p a t i o n in p r e s c r i b e d i n s e r v i c e programs has been a r e c u r r e n t
issue.

Although no s t a t e has e s t a b l i s h e d such a r e q u i r e m e n t , " r e c e n t

s u rv e y s o f new and old board members, s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s and e x e c u t i v e
d i r e c t o r s o f s t a t e school boards a s s o c i a t i o n s i n d i c a t e t h a t more and
b e t t e r — perhaps f o r m a l iz e d and mandatory—t r a i n i n g f o r new school
board members i s both n e c e s s a r y and f o r e s e e a b l e . " 10^

In h i s s t u d y ,

Snyder found t h a t 67 p e r c e n t o f t h e new board members and 57 p e r c e n t
o f t h e s u p e r i n t e n d e n t r e s p o n d e n ts b e l i e v e d new members should be
108
r e q u i r e d t o p a r t i c i p a t e in t r a i n i n g programs.
S t e e r e went one
s t e p f u r t h e r in a dv o ca ting a plan f o r t h e t r a i n i n g o f p r o s p e c t i v e
school board c a n d i d a t e s .

He su ggested t h a t a l l c a n d i d a t e s be i n v i t e d

and u r g e d , a l t h o u g h not r e q u i r e d , t o p a r t i c i p a t e in a program d esigned
by t h e s t a t e department o f e d u c a t i o n ; f u r t h e r , t h a t t h o s e who corn109
p l e t e d such t r a i n i n g be s p e c i a l l y i n d i c a t e d on t h e b a l l o t .
S t a p l e y has su g gested t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o f an i n t e g r a t e d f o u r phased approach in the t r a i n i n g o f new board members, as f o l l o w s :
106R o s s m i l l e r , p. 18.
10^ J o n e s , p. 22.
100NSBA Research Report 1973-2, p. 2.
1 0 ^ S t e e r e , p. 2 9 .

55

(1) o r i e n t a t i o n - -comprised of general a c t i v i t i e s designed to in troduce
the member to the o v e r a l l o p e ra tio n o f th e system, and h is r e s p o n s i ­
b i l i t i e s as a board member, and occurring p r i o r t o taking o f f i c e
(when th e i n t e r v a l between e le ct i o n /a p p o in t m e n t and s l a t i n g i s s u f ­
f i c i e n t ) or w ith in th e f i r s t t h r e e months a f t e r taking o f f i c e ;
(2) lo ca l i n s e r v i c e education programs—a c t i v i t i e s designed to probe,
in depth , various t o p i c s o f immediate r e le v an c e; (3) p a r t i c i p a t i o n in
s t a t e and n a tio n a l m ee tin g s; and (4) s e l e c t e d r ea d ing s.

He emphasized

t h a t the lo c a l board and i t s s u p e r i n t e n d e n t , as well as the s t a t e and
na ti o nal school boards a s s o c i a t i o n s , a re e q u a lly important "sources
of data" t o be e x p l o i t e d in th e d ete rm in atio n o f local programs approp­
r i a t e to t h e needs of new m e m b e r s . ^

The New York School Boards

Association recommended t h a t a seminar approach be used by i t s con­
s t i t u e n t lo c a l boards in t h e i r t r a i n i n g of new board members; i t
developed a p ro to ty p e model and l i s t e d th e following s k i l l s t h a t p a r ­
t i c i p a n t s , as a r e s u l t o f t h e i r involvement, should be able to demon­
strate:
1.

Analyze t h e j o b o f the school board member,

2.

Recognize important edu cational problems,

3.

Make e f f e c t i v e d e c i s i o n s ,

4.

Improve th e b o a rd 's channel o f communications t o and from
t h e board, and

5.

Determine good school board p o l i c i e s .

111

^ E n c y c l o p e d i a o f E ducation, S taple y .
^ N e w York School Boards A s s o c ia t io n , A Seminar f o r New
School Board Members (Albany: New York School Boards A s s o c ia t io n ,
1972), p. 1.

56

In P o r t l a n d , Oregon, a weekend r e t r e a t f o r new members i s a n n u a l ly
conducted.

All board members and key c e n t r a l o f f i c e a d m i n i s t r a t o r s

p r e s e n t a s e r i e s of t o p i c a l s e s s i o n s , in an informal atmosph ere,
"aimed a t d e f i n i n g r o l e s ; [ t h e ] p o l i c y f u n c t i o n ; p o l ic y v s. adminis112
t r a t i o n [ c o n s i d e r a t i o n s ] ; e v a l u a t i o n ; and ’how the system w o r k s . " 1
Whatever desi gn c o n f i g u r a t i o n i s u l t i m a t e l y s e l e c t e d f o r
i n s e r v i c e p r e s e n t a t i o n s a t th e l o c a l l e v e l , i t should en ab le t h e new
member " t o i d e n t i f y his r o l e and . . . provide him with s u f f i c i e n t
b a s i c info rm a ti o n . . .

t o make a rea so na ble assessment o f p r o p o sa ls

put forward by t h e b o a r d ' s p r o f e s s i o n a l a d v i s o r s " ; i t s u l t i m a t e o b j e c ­
t i v e should not be " t o teach new board members a l l the a n sw e rs, but
113
t o t r a i n them t o ask the r i g h t kinds o f q u e s t i o n s . . . . "
The o r i e n t a t i o n and i n s e r v i c e edu catio n o f new board members,
while c r u c i a l l y importan t to the su c c e ss f u l performance o f lo c a l
school bo a rd s, would be inadequate in s a t i s f y i n g t h e t o t a l r e q u i r e ­
ment.

What i s needed i s a c o n tin u o u s, s e q u e n t i a l program o f i n s e r ­

v i c e a c t i v i t i e s f o r a l l board members.

As Goldhammer e x p l a i n e d :

Board members should c o n s t a n t l y seek to improve t h e i r a b i l i t y
t o perform t h e i r d u t i e s . . . . Board members should a v a i l them­
s e l v e s o f o p p o r t u n i t i e s t o p a r t i c i p a t e in school board a s s o ­
c i a t i o n m e e tin g s, i n - s e r v i c e t r a i n i n g programs, c l i n i c s , and
school board co n fe ren c es . . . . I t i s n e ce ssa r y c o n s t a n t l y t o
upgrade and improve t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n s which each school board
member makes t o h i s community and to t h e f u r t h e r a n c e o f t h e edu­
c a t i o n a l program o f t h e p u b l i c s c h o o l s . ' 14

112White, pp. 20-21.
113

See Gray, p. 25; and J o n e s , p. 25.

^^Goldhammer, p. 107.

57

Nick Goble, Pu b lic R e l a t i o n s O f f i c e r o f t h e Pennsylvania School Boards
A s s o c i a t i o n , e x p re ss ed t h e f o l lo w in g maxims f o r c o n s i d e r a t i o n by l o c a l
boards se ek in g t o develop s y s t e m a t i c i n s e r v i c e programs:
1.

The p r e - s e r v i c e tim e p e r i o d and t h e f i r s t few y e a r s o f
board s e r v i c e a r e most i m p o r t a n t in d e v e lo p in g board
leadership;

2.

S t a t e - l e v e l r e s o u r c e s should complement and s u p p o r t l o c a l
d i s t r i c t a c t i v i t i e s and e d u c a t i o n a l programs;

3.

Local boards should s e t a s i d e ad eq u a te funds in th e budget
t o s u p p o r t l o c a l , s t a t e , and n a t i o n a l t r a i n i n g programs
f o r board members; and

4.

Su c c ess fu l o r i e n t a t i o n and school board t r a i n i n g programs
need t h e same c a r e f u l a t t e n t i o n , p l a n n i n g , and commitment
as o t h e r school d i s t r i c t c o n c e rn s .

115

Wiles and Conley r e p o r t e d t h a t " t h e id e a o f e x p e c t i n g o n l y
th e p r o f e s s i o n a l person nel t o be t r a i n e d i s f o c u s i n g t r a i n i n g to o
narrowly" and emphasized t h a t t h e c u r r e n t environment " n e c e s s i t a t e s
a p p l i c a t i o n o f a l i f e l o n g l e a r n i n g plan f o r school board members as
well as o t h e r members in t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n . "

They su g g e ste d a con­

t i n u i n g i n s e r v i c e program s p e c i f i c a l l y d e sig n e d t o a s s i s t board mem­
b e rs in de velopin g s k i l l s i n t h e f o l lo w in g t o p i c a l a r e a s :
1.

Organizational S k i l l s
a.

Methods and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s o f school board members

b.

Improving o r g a n i z a t i o n a l communication

115Goble, pp. 5 -6 .

58

2.

3.

c.

Motivational f a c t o r s

d.

Methods o f team b u i ld i n g in work groups

e.

Planning and s e t t i n g p r i o r i t i e s

f.

Diagnostic procedures

g.

Change s t r a t e g i e s

Management Concepts and Methods
a.

Personnel management

b.

Program e v a lu a tio n

P o licy Problems and Governmental R ela tio n s h ip s
a.

Intergovernmental r e l a t i o n s

b.

Energy use and c o n servatio n

c.

Environmental concerns in p u b l ic management

d.

Occupational s a f e t y and h e alth

116

An o v e r a l l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r developing board member i n s e r ­
vice education programs has never been e s t a b l i s h e d .

I t had been

g e n e r a l l y assumed t h a t the lo ca l su p e r i n te n d e n t was accountable f o r
e s t a b l i s h i n g t r a i n i n g experiences a p p r o p r i a t e to the needs of h is
board members and t h a t , in educating o f new members, he had a " p r i ­
mary r e s p o n s i b i l i t y " although "the whole board should be involved
in [ t h e ] t r a i n i n g s e s s i o n s . L o c a l

a d m i n i s t r a t o r s , t o be c e r t a i n ,

"must make a conscious and continued e f f o r t t o educate t h e local
board and n o t depend e n t i r e l y upon o u t s i d e o r g a n i z a t i o n s and

116Wiles, pp. 3-5.
117

"How Do You Educate Board Members?
Education USA 17 (March 10, 1975): 161.

Very C a r e f u l ly ! "

59

activ ities."

118

However, many a u t h o r i t i e s maintained t h a t a m u l t i ­

f a c e t e d approach in which "school d i s t r i c t p e r s o n n e l , school board
members, school boards a s s o c i a t i o n s , as well as s t a t e and f e d e r a l
o f f i c e r s s h a r e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y to a s s u r e t h a t competent e d u c a t i o n a l
pol icy- make rs govern America's school systems" was most a p p r o p r i a t e .

119

The i n d iv i d u a l board member, t o o , has a primary duty t o improve h i s
c a p a b i l i t i e s by a v a i l i n g him self o f t h o s e i n s e r v i c e e x p e r i e n c e s p r o ­
vided f o r h i s b e n e f i t .

R e g r e t t a b l y , as Stefonek po in te d o u t :

"As i s

o f t e n t h e case in o t h e r a r e a s , board members who need th e most help in
u nd e rs tan d in g i s s u e s and l e a r n in g how t o f u n c t i o n as e f f e c t i v e members
a r e t h e same people who d o n ' t have t h e i n t e r e s t or make the commitment
t o p a r t i c i p a t e in self-improvement i n s e r v i c e a c t i v i t i e s . "

120

A phenomenal r a t e o f change, which has i n c r e a s i n g l y been
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f lo c a l board members' s e r v i c e , has had a profound
impact on every a s p e c t o f p u b lic e d u c a tio n a l governance, t h e d e v e lo p ­
ment and conduct o f i n s e r v i c e a c t i v i t i e s f o r lo ca l members being no
e x c e p ti o n .

As George T i p l e r , Executive D i r e c t o r o f the Wisconsin

A s s o c i a t i o n o f School Boards, s t a t e d :

"With th e advent o f r a p i d t u r n ­

over o f school board members, an or gan ized approach t o i n s e r v i c e i s
121
somewhat d i f f i c u l t . "
118

Tom S t e f o n e k , Viewpoints o f Local School Board P r e s i d e n t s :
Educational Problems, Achievements, and Challenges ( A r l i n g t o n , Va.:
ERIC Document Reproduction S e r v i c e , ED 151 944, 1978), p. 14.
119
N5BA Research Report 1973-2, p. 1.
^ S t e f o n e k , p. 14.
121

I n ter v iew w ith George T i p l e r , Wisconsin A s s o c i a t i o n o f
School Boards, Winneconne, Wisconsin, 3 October 1978.

60

The development and im p le m e nta tion o f c o n t i n u i n g i n s e r v i c e
programs, a p p r o p r i a t e t o t h e needs o f l o c a l members, has been r e p o r t e d
a s being f o u n d a t i o n a l t o improving o v e r a l l school board perform ance
and t o r e t a i n i n g q u a l i f i e d , e x p e r i e n c e d board members.

122

Sin c e

b e in g an e f f e c t i v e member " w i l l t a x t h e i n t e l l i g e n c e , t h e a s p i r a t i o n s ,
and t h e st am ina o f an i n d i v i d u a l , " t h e r e can be l i t t l e d o ubt t h a t "one
o f t h e keys t o r e t a i n i n g d e d i c a t e d board members i s t o keep them
informed and to p r o v i d e them w i t h t h e n e c e s s a r y t o o l s t o do an e f f e c 123
tiv e job."
As N i c o l o f f e x p l a i n e d :
What i s needed . . . i s improved and i n c r e a s e d i n s e r v i c e ed u ca­
t i o n f o r board members t h r o u g h o u t t h e i r p e r i o d [ s ] o f s e r v i c e .
I f t h e s e i n s e r v i c e o p p o r t u n i t i e s a d d r e s s t h e m s e lv e s t o t h e f e l t
needs o f board members, t h e r e can be l i t t l e d o u b t t h a t t h e y w i l l
be u t i l i z e d and r e s u l t in t h e b e t t e r m e n t o f t h e n a t i o n ' s school
s y s t e m s . '^4
I n s e r v i c e Programs Sponsored by t h e Michigan
A s s o c i a t i o n o f School Boards
The Michigan A s s o c i a t i o n o f School Boards (MASB) has p r o v i d e d
t h e prim a ry impetus f o r board member i n s e r v i c e e d u c a t i o n i n t h i s
state.

A s y s t e m a t i c and e x t e n s i v e e f f o r t , i n t e n d e d t o enhance t h e

knowledgeablenes s and d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g s k i l l s o f t h o s e s e r v i n g as l o c a l
e d u c a t i o n a l g o v e r n o r s , was i n i t i a t e d i n 1979.

Since th e n , n in e ty -

f i v e s e p a r a t e i n s e r v i c e o p p o r t u n i t i e s have been sp o n s o r e d by MASB
122
123

PSBA Commission, p. 15.

See Lloyd W. Ashby, The E f f e c t i v e School Board Member
( D a n v i l l e , 111.: I n t e r s t a t e P r i n t e r s & P u b l i s h e r s , 1 9 6 8), 111; and
Goble, p. 6.
124
Lanning G. N i c o l o f f , " P e r c e i v e d I n s e r v i c e E d u ca tion Needs
o f Members o f Boards o f Edu cation in I l l i n o i s " (Ed.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n ,
N orthern I l l i n o i s U n i v e r s i t y , 1 9 7 7), p. 7.

61

a t the regional and st a te w ide l e v e l s .

These events have been c a t e ­

gorized as follows:
1.

Statewide Conferences
Ten annual confe re nces, o f a 2- 1/2 to t h r e e - d a y d u r a t i o n ,
have been he ld . A m aj o r it y o f t h e s e events have been con­
ducted in e i t h e r D e t r o i t or Grand Rapids. Members have
been encouraged to p a r t i c i p a t e in th e conduct of Associa­
t i o n b u s i n e s s , as well as in a v a r i e t y o f i n s e r v i c e p r e ­
sentations.

2.

Mid-winter Conferences
Ten annual e v e n t s , each held on a Saturday, have been
conducted in Lansing. While Asso cia tio n business has
been conducted during these mee tings, the overwhelming
m a j o r it y o f time has been devoted to the p r e s e n t a t i o n of
timely t o p i c s of "presumed board member i n t e r e s t . "

3.

New Member O r i e n t a ti o n Workshops
T h i r t y - f o u r regional e v e n t s , of 1-1/2 days d u r a t i o n ,
s t r a t e g i c a l l y held throughout Michigan have been conducted.
Eight o f t h e s e have included a c t i v i t i e s s p e c i f i c a l l y
intended f o r newly e l e c t e d board o f f i c e r s - - p r i m a r i l y
p r e s i d e n t s and t r e a s u r e r s .

4.

Special Topic Seminars
These t r a i n i n g s e s s i o n s , i n c r e a s i n g l y termed "Academies
o f Boardsmanship," were i n i t i a t e d in 1973 and have t y p i c ­
a l l y been of 1-1/2 days d u r a t i o n . They a r e provided on a
r egional b a s i s throughout Michigan, and the m a j o r it y have
been conducted on Friday a fte r n o o n s and S a t u r d a y s . 125

5.

D r iv e - in Conferences
Beginning in 1978, thes e one-day ( u su a lly Frida y) regional
e v en ts have been conducted f o r the b e n e f i t of both admin­
i s t r a t o r s and board members. To d a t e , the following p r e ­
s e n t a t i o n s have been made: "The Michigan C ivil Rights
Act" ( t h r e e c o n fe r e n c e s ) , "Handicapped Laws" (one c o n f e r ­
e n c e ) , "U nsettle d Teacher Contracts " (one c o n fe r e n c e ) ,
" C o l le c t i v e Bargaining C o ntract Adminis tratio n" (two con­
f e r e n c e s ) , and "Implementing t h e Open Meetings Act" ( t h r e e
c o n fe r e n c e s ) .

125

The Special Topic Seminars a r e l i s t e d in Appendix A.

62
In a d d i t i o n t o th o se e f f o r t s made d i r e c t l y by MASB in s u p p o r t
o f i n s e r v i c e e d u c a ti o n f o r board members, t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n o f l o c a l
" c h a p t e r s " has a l s o been provided f o r in A r t i c l e VIII o f MASB's
By-Laws.

Membership in a c h a p t e r i s u s u a l l y comprised o f a l l l o c a l

d i s t r i c t s w i t h i n a one- o r two-county a r e a , o r w i t h i n t h e g eo g raph ic
a r e a in c l u d e d in an i n t e r m e d i a t e school d i s t r i c t .

Within Southwestern

Michigan, f o u r c h a p t e r s o f MASB have been formed, as fo llo w s:
The
The
The
The

Be rri e n -C ass Counties Chapter o f MASB
Kalamazoo V alle y Chapter o f MASB
Van Buren County Chapter o f MASB
S t . Joseph County Chapter o f MASB

The fundamental goal o f l o c a l c h a p t e r s has been t o enhance board mem­
b e r c a p a b i l i t y through t h e i r p a r t i c i p a t i o n

in

inservice a c t i v i t i e s

s p e c i f i c a l l y t a i l o r e d t o th o se needs and i n t e r e s t s e x i s t e n t in a
l i m i t e d g e o g ra p h ic a l a r e a .

Upon t h e f o r m atio n o f a c h a p t e r , MASB

r e b a t e s 3 p e r c e n t o f a l l s t a t e a s s o c i a t i o n dues c o l l e c t e d from t h o s e
d i s t r i c t s w i t h i n t h e i nclud ed t e r r i t o r y , as an i n c e n t i v e t o conduct
i n s e r v i c e e d u c a ti o n and t o d e f r a y t h e expenses a s s o c i a t e d t h e r e w i t h .
Chapter o f f i c e r s a r e r e q u i r e d t o submit an annual r e p o r t t o MASB
d e t a i l i n g t h e i r bu dget, o p e r a t i n g p r o c e d u r e s , and i n s e r v i c e p r e s e n t a ­
tions.

However,

o u t comment."

MASB "merely a c c e p t s and f i l e s " t h e s e r e p o r t s " w i t h ­

There a r e , a t p r e s e n t , twe nty-one c h a p t e r s l o c a t e d

th r o u g h o u t Michigan, encompassing app ro x im ate ly 50 p e r c e n t o f t h e 526
l o c a l K-12 school d i s t r i c t boards o f e d u c a ti o n in t h i s s t a t e .
The l a c k o f a formal r e s e a r c h b a s e , r e l a t i v e t o p a s t i n s e r v i c e
p r e s e n t a t i o n s and l o c a l member p a r t i c i p a t i o n , has been termed a
" s e r i o u s i n h i b i t o r " t o p r e s e n t MASB e f f o r t s in t h i s are na o f a c t i v i t y .

63
The o rg anization has not maintained s t a t i s t i c a l records on i n s e r v ic e
p a r t i c i p a t i o n , nor has "any e f f o r t been made to achieve s t a t i s t i c a l l y
s i g n i f i c a n t data regarding the perceived i n s e r v ic e needs o f local
board members."

The "sum t o t a l o f [ i n s e r v i c e ] survey work to date"

has been reported in "A Survey of Michigan School Board Association
Members," conducted in 1976 f o r the purpose of determining local
member p a r t i c i p a t i o n in MASB-sponsored workshops.

Of a randomly

s e l e c te d sample o f 350 local board members, 133 responded; 59 percent
(78) affirmed t h e i r "past involvement" in "workshops" events.
The MASB Board o f D i r e c t o r s , "in recognition of the v i t a l
importance of i n s e r v ic e education f o r local board members," appointed
i t s f i r s t Directo r f o r In se r v ic e Education and Community Rela tions on
November 10, 1978.126
Studies Relating t o Inse rvic e Education f o r
School Board Members
Ten d i s s e r t a t i o n s , d e scribin g various asp ects of i n s e r v i c e
education f o r board members, have been w r i t t e n within the p a st
twenty-three y e a r s.
In 1956, Harley Lautenschlager u t i l i z e d a d e t a i l e d , s t r u c t u r e d
inte rvie w method to determine those "techniques" board members p e r ­
ceived themselves to have used in understanding "the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s
of a modern school program and i t s o p e r a t io n . "

His sample con sisted

of f o r t y - f i v e c u r r e n t l y se rving board members from Indiana, I l l i n o i s ,
and Michigan—i n d iv i d u a ls se l e c te d by the executive s e c r e t a r i e s o f
126

Interview with Mary Kay Ashmore, Michigan Association of
School Boards, Lansing, Michigan, 14 November 1978 and 7 June 1979.

64

s t a t e and reg io na l school boards a s s o c i a t i o n s .

L auten s chlag e r found

t h a t board members overwhelmingly viewed t h e s u p e r i n t e n d e n t as "the
key person" in pro vid in g them in fo rm a tio n r e l a t i v e t o the program and
o p e r a t i o n o f t h e school system.

Conversely, n a t i o n a l and s t a t e

school boards a s s o c i a t i o n s were not co n sid ered an "im po rtan t [source
of] help."

In s m a l l e r d i s t r i c t s , "personal c o n t a c t s " were r e p o r t e d

a s an impo rtan t way t o "keep in touch" with c i t i z e n s ; in l a r g e r d i s ­
t r i c t s , members i n d i c a t e d a g r e a t e r r e l i a n c e on formal r e p o r t s f o r
"community i n p u t . "

The m a j o r i t y i n d i c a t e d t h a t they r e l i e d he av ily

on th o se r e p o r t s subm itted by t h e s u p e r i n t e n d e n t and o t h e r s t a f f
members in e v a l u a t i n g t h e performance o f t h e i r s c h o o l s , whereas some
a s s e r t e d s u c c e s s f u l r e s u l t s in using l a y - a d v i s o r y groups.

Published

read in g m a t e r i a l s were n o t d e s c r i b e d as an "im p ortan t source o f
a s s i s t a n c e , " t h e m a j o r i t y having r e p o r t e d read ing few m a t e r i a l s
r e l a t e d d i r e c t l y t o e d u c a t i o n , u n l e s s s p e c i f i c items were r e f e r r e d to
them by the s u p e r i n t e n d e n t as being o f "immediate concern" t o t o p i c s
o f i n t e r e s t in t h e i r school systems.

127

In h i s 1960 s t u d y , Ronald Meitman conducted an assessment and
a n a l y s i s o f the i n s e r v i c e e d u ca tio n needs o f t h e chairmen o f boards o f
e d u ca tio n in Georgia.

He developed a d e t a i l e d , f o r c e d - c h o i c e ques­

t i o n n a i r e , in which "broad a r e a s o f school board f u n c t i o n s " were
c a t e g o r i z e d , and s e n t a copy t o a l l p u b l ic school board chairmen and
to t h e i r superintendents.

The p a r t i c i p a n t s were asked t o i n d i c a t e

t h e i r res ponse s on a f o u r - p o i n t continuum ranging from "no f e l t need"
127

L a u t e n s c h l a g e r , passim , Chapter 4.

65

to "great f e l t need."

He found t h a t t h e needs e x p re s s e d by board

chairmen* as well as t h o s e needs p e r c e i v e d by s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s as
being a p p l i c a b l e t o board ch airm en , ha d, in a l l i n s t a n c e s , s i g n i f i ­
cant c o rre la tio n c o e f f ic ie n ts .

However, s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s r a t e d the

needs f o r board chairmen s i g n i f i c a n t l y l e s s than d i d th e chairmen
t hem se lv e s.

While chairmen e x p r e s s e d "some f e l t need" f o r f u r t h e r

knowledge in a l l c a t e g o r i e s i n c l u d e d in t h e survey i n s t r u m e n t , " g r e a t
f e l t need" was r e p o r t e d in t h e a r e a s o f "The School Board and t h e Edu­
c a t i o n a l Program" and "The School Board and Broad I s s u e s . "

No s i g n i f i ­

c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p was found between t h o s e needs e x p re ss ed and t h e
f o l lo w in g v a r i a b l e s :

(1) l e n g t h o f s e r v i c e on t h e b oa rd , (2) t h e

e d u c a t i o n a l l e v e l ach iev e d by t h e chairman, (3) t h e method o f becoming
a board member {appointment o r e l e c t i o n ) , and (4) a g e - - e x c e p t i n g t h a t
t h o s e r e s p o n d e n t s o v e r s e v e n t y r e p o r t e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y l e s s need f o r
128
additional in serv ice a ssista n ce .
In 1968, Benjamin Kammer sought t o d ete rm in e whe ther o r not
a v a i l a b l e i n s e r v i c e a c t i v i t i e s were meeting t h e needs o f Colorado
l o c a l school board members a nd, more s p e c i f i c a l l y , t o answer th e ques­
tion:

Does board member " e f f e c t i v e n e s s " c o r r e l a t e p o s i t i v e l y with

t h e i r level o f in se rv ic e p a r t i c i p a ti o n ?

His s t u d y inclu d ed a random

s e l e c t i o n o f 177 Colorado s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s and two members, chosen a t
random, from each o f t h e i r boards o f e d u c a t i o n .

A q u e s t i o n n a i r e was

s e n t t o th e s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s i n d i c a t i n g t h i r t y - t w o " c r i t e r i a " t o be
c o n s i d e r e d in d e te r m i n i n g t h e " e f f e c t i v e n e s s " o f school board member
128

Weitman, passim , C h a p te rs 4 and 5.

66

“be h av io r."

A s e p a r a t e q u e s t i o n n a i r e i n d i c a t i n g ten " t y p i c a l " i n s e r ­

vice a c t i v i t i e s was se n t to the board members in an e f f o r t to a s c e r ­
tain t h e i r levels of inservice p a rtic ip a tio n .

Indice s o f “perceived

average e f f e c t i v e n e s s " were then determined f o r both p a r t i c i p a n t s and
n o n p a r t i c i p a n t s in i n s e r v i c e a c t i v i t i e s .

Kammer found a stro n g p o s i ­

t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n between e f f e c t i v e n e s s , as perceived by the s u p e r i n ­
te n d e n t s , and board member involvement in each o f the following
activ ities:

(1) p a r t i c i p a t i o n in r e g i o n a l , s t a t e , and n a ti o n a l school

boards o r a d m i n i s t r a t o r s meetings; (2) p a r t i c i p a t i o n in the develop­
ment of o r i e n t a t i o n a c t i v i t i e s designed to a s s i s t new board members;
(3) the reading o f p r o f e s s i o n a l p u b l i c a t i o n s and m a t e r i a l s ; (4) a t t e n ­
dance a t on-campus c o ll e g e c o nferen ces; and (5) p a r t i c i p a t i o n in the
d i s c u s s i o n o f , and a ctu al involvement i n , the r e v i s i o n o f the b o a rd 's
p o l ic y manual.

S u pe rinte ndents a l s o rep orte d "p ro g res siv e in c r e a s e s "

in perceive d board member e f f e c t i v e n e s s in r e l a t i o n s h i p to t h e amount
of personal education a t t a i n e d ; the s i z e of the school d i s t r i c t —the
l a r g e r t h e d i s t r i c t , th e more e f f e c t i v e the board members were deemed
to be; a g e - - t h e "most e f f e c t i v e " were between f o r t y and f i f t y ; and
o ccu pation —salesmen were perceived "most e f f e c t i v e , " followed (in
descending o rd er) by managers o r p r o p r i e t o r s , p r o f e s s i o n a l s , ranchers
and farm e rs , housewives, s k i l l e d workers, and s e m i - s k i l l e d o r u n s k i l l e d
workers.

He s t a t e d the following c o nclusio ns:

(1) board member

i n s e r v i c e t r a i n i n g , as perc eived by s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s , does improve
e f f e c t i v e n e s s ; (2) expanded and Improved t r a i n i n g i s p a r t i c u l a r l y
necessary in th e a re a s o f understanding and a cceptin g the "purposes
and o b j e c t i v e s o f a modern sc h o o l, suspending judgment on c o n t r o v e r s i a l

67
i s s u e s u n t i l a l l f a c t s p r e s e n t e d , w i l l i n g n e s s t o devote time away from
t h e community in promoting t h e w e l f a r e o f t h e p u b l i c s c h o o l s , a
w i l l i n g n e s s to devote time t o promoting t h e w e l f a r e o f the sc hools
w it h in the community in a d d i t i o n to t h e time s p e n t in board o f educa­
t i o n m eetings, a f e e l i n g o f r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r improving e d uca tio n a t
t h e s t a t e l e v e l , d i s p l a y i n g both t a c t and f i r m n e s s , r i g o r o u s l y se ek­
ing f i n a n c i a l sup p o rt f o r s c h o o l s , [and] e f f e c t i v e l y i n t e r p r e t i n g
school programs t o th e community"; (3) t h e r e i s a need t o i n c r e a s e
board member a tt e n d a n c e a t r e g i o n a l , s t a t e , and n a t i o n a l meetings;
and (4) t h e r e i s a need to c o n tin u e and expand o r i e n t a t i o n programs
f o r new board members.

129

As an i n t e g r a l p a r t o f h i s 1970 d i s s e r t a t i o n , B i l l y Knight
examined th e emphasis N o rth east Texas p u b l i c school boards placed on
e i g h t general a r e a s o f t h e i r r e s p o n s i b i l i t y ( cu rriculu m and i n s t r u c ­
t i o n , s t u d e n t p e r s o n n e l , employed p e r s o n n e l , f i n a n c e and b u s i n e s s ,
t h e school p l a n t , p u b l i c r e l a t i o n s a u x i l i a r y s e r v i c e s , and board
a c t i v i t i e s ) from two p e r s p e c t i v e s :

(1) school d i s t r i c t s i z e and

(2) th e e x t e n t o f board member " p a r t i c i p a t i o n in p r o f e s s i o n a l meetings
such as workshops and c o n v e n t io n s ."

T h i r t y d i s t r i c t s were s e l e c t e d on

a s t r a t i f i e d random b a s i s accord ing t o s i z e , as determined by average
d a i l y a t t e n d a n c e , from among th e 149 K-12 d i s t r i c t s l o c a t e d w ithin
t h e tw e n ty - f i v e county a r e a comprising N o r t h e a s t Texas.

A "predeter­

mined t a b u l a t i o n in stru m en t" was used t o a ch iev e a c o n t e n t a n a l y s i s
129

Benjamin A. Kammer, " E f f e c t i v e School Board Behavior as I t
R e la te s to School Board I n s e r v i c e A c t i v i t i e s in t h e S t a t e o f Colorado,"
D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l 29/04-A (October 1968): 1078.

68

o f t h e o f f i c i a l school board minutes o f each in c lu d e d d i s t r i c t ,
th u s e n a b l in g a c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f board a c t i o n s as being p r i m a r i l y
" p o l i c y , m i n i s t e r i a l , a d m i n i s t r a t i v e , [ o r ] m i s c e l l a n e o u s " in n a t u r e .
C o n c u r r e n t l y , a q u e s t i o n n a i r e was s e n t t o each board member r e q u e s t i n g
i n f o r m a t i o n r e l a t i v e t o h i s a t t e n d a n c e a t workshops and c o n v e n t io n s .
The o b t a i n e d d a t a were c o r r e l a t e d on t h e b a s i s o f t h e t h r e e s i z e
groupings and t h e aforem entio ned a r e a s o f board involv em ent, w i t h an
a d d i t i o n a l comparison being made f o l lo w in g f u r t h e r s u b d i v i s i o n o f
member i n s e r v i c e r e s p o n s e s i n t o "board as a whole" low, medium, and
high a t t e n d a n c e g r o u p i n g s .

C o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s o f .01 "were

a t t a i n e d in a l l i n s t a n c e s . "

Knight found t h a t a l l boards devoted

i n s u f f i c i e n t a t t e n t i o n t o t h e c u rr i c u lu m and i n s t r u c t i o n and p u b l i c
r e l a t i o n s a r e a s o f t h e i r r e s p o n s i b i l i t y and t h a t t h e y tended t o be
o v e r l y in v o lv e d w i t h a d m i n i s t r a t i v e m a t t e r s , w h ile d e v o ti n g t o o l i t *
t i e r e g a r d t o t h e i r l e g i s l a t i v e and e v a l u a t i v e f u n c t i o n s .

He f u r t h e r

r e p o r t e d t h a t "when comparing t h e v a r i o u s groups by p e r c e n t a g e , s i m i ­
l a r i t y o f a c t i o n r a t h e r than d i s p a r i t y tended t o be th e p r e v a l e n t
r e l a t i o n s h i p , " a l t h o u g h t h o s e boards whose members were more a c t i v e
in a t t e n d i n g workshops and c o nv en tio ns had "more e q u i t a b l e d i s t r i b u ,
..
,,130
tions of actio n s.
In 1970, F r e d e r i c k S a l e s s t u d i e d t h o s e new board member o r i e n ­
t a t i o n programs conducted by l o c a l school d i s t r i c t s in t h e suburban
P h i l a d e l p h i a , P e n n s y l v a n ia , a r e a .
130

He sought t o d e te r m in e and e v a l u a t e

B i l l y Rowe Kni ght, "Action Emphases o f N o r t h e a s t Texas
School B o a rd s," D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l 31/09-A (March
1971): 4421A-4422A.

69

the s p e c i f i c a c t i v i t i e s employed in the o r i e n t a t i o n o f new members,
who i s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r th e conduct o f o r i e n t a t i o n programs, the
length o f time re qu ire d f o r new members t o become o r i e n t e d , and the
opinions o f the p a r t i c i p a n t s reg arding techniq ues t h a t could have
been employed to make t h e i r experiences more meaningful.

A detailed

q u e s t i o n n a i r e approach was used in conju nction with a random sampling
o f board members and su p e r i n te n d e n t s from f o r t y - n i n e d i s t r i c t s lo cate d
w it h in the f o u r c o u n ti e s comprising the suburbs a d ja ce n t t o P h i l a ­
delphia.

The r e s u l t s were based on the respo nses of 187 board members

and tw e n ty - s ix s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s .

Sales found t h a t although both groups

agreed new member o r i e n t a t i o n programs a re "very im po rtant," the
express ed enthusiasm f o r "need" was not matched with "deeds in so f a r
[ s i c ] as the q u a l i t y or q u a n t i t y of o r i e n t a t i o n programs provided i s
concerned."

The need f o r o r i e n t a t i o n was a l s o rep o rted as being

"co n tin u o u s," e s p e c i a l l y sin ce as many as o n e - t h i r d o f the board mem­
bers were "new" a t any given p o in t in time.

Board members r ep o r te d

r e c e i v i n g th e g r e a t e s t amount in curriculum and i n s t r u c t i o n .

Although

they expressed having r eceived " l e s s than h a l f o f the s p e c i f i c i n f o r ­
mation" they would have l i k e d , t h e q u a l i t y o f o r i e n t a t i o n programs
was r a t e d as "good" o r " e x c e l l e n t " in a l l a r e a s excepting curriculum
and i n s t r u c t i o n .

Members a l s o f e l t t h a t o r i e n t a t i o n programs should

"begin as soon as a new member i s e l e c t e d o r appointed and continue
through t h e e a r l y months o f o f f i c e . "

They a l s o s t a t e d t h a t t h e i r

employers were " e i t h e r su p p o r tiv e o r perm iss iv e in t h e i r a t t i t u d e s "
r eg a rd ing employees being on a school board; t h e r e f o r e , "some time
away from work f o r o r i e n t a t i o n would appear t o be f e a s i b l e . "

There

70

was no common agreement on th e le n g t h o f time r e q u i r e d t o complete
t h e o r i e n t a t i o n p roce ss:

Board members sugge sted from s i x months to

one y e a r ; s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s m aintained t h a t one y e a r t o e i g h t e e n months
was e s s e n t i a l .

Board members were n o t in agreement r e g a r d i n g who

should be he ld r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e o r i e n t a t i o n o f n o v i c e s , a lthough
a m a j o r i t y o f s u p e r i n te n d e n t s f e l t t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y " r e s t e d with
the s u p e r i n t e n d e n t . "

Among S a l e s ' recommendations were t h e f o llo w in g :

(1) s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s were urged t o provide l e a d e r s h i p in p la n n in g and
pro vid in g o r i e n t a t i o n programs f o r new school board members,
(2) s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s should give new members more than a " b r i e f con­
v e r s a t i o n " s i n c e they want " f a c t s and they want them p r e s e n t e d in an
org anized manner," (3) o r i e n t a t i o n should begin as soon as a new
member i s s e a t e d and c on tin ue th rou g ho u t h i s e a r l y months in o f f i c e ,
and (4) new members "should r e a l i z e o r i e n t a t i o n i s viewed by s u p e r i n ­
te n d e n ts as t a k in g from s i x months to one y e a r lo ng er than members
believe i t d o e s . " ^
In h i s 1971 d i s s e r t a t i o n , James Andrews sought to i d e n t i f y
the kinds o f in fo rm atio n and e x p e r i e n c e s t h a t should be provided in
o r i e n t i n g new school board members t o t h e i r r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s and
a u t h o r i t y as boardsmen.

He conducted a s t r u c t u r e d i n t e r v i e w with ten

Indiana s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s — i n d i v i d u a l s s e l e c t e d by a " j u r y o f p r o f e s ­
so rs " from Indiana U n i v e r s i t y as having done "an o u t s t a n d i n g j o b o f
o r i e n t i n g new school board members."
131

A d d i t i o n a l l y , twenty new board

F r e d e r ic k Carl S a l e s , "A Survey o f t h e O r i e n t a t i o n o f New
Board Members P r a c t i c e d by S e l e c te d Local School D i s t r i c t s " (Ed.D.
d i s s e r t a t i o n , Temple U n i v e r s i t y , 1970).

71

members, s e l e c t e d randomly on t h e s t r a t i f i e d v a r i a b l e o f sc ho ol d i s ­
t r i c t s i z e , were i n t e r v i e w e d .

F i n a l l y , d a t a from s t a t e school

b oa rds a s s o c i a t i o n s , r e l a t i v e t o t h e p r o c e s s o f o r i e n t i n g new members,
were g a t h e r e d and r e v ie w e d .

S a l e s found unanimous agreem ent t h a t t h e

o r i e n t a t i o n p r o c e s s sh o u ld be a s soon a f t e r t h e e l e c t i o n o r a p p o i n t ­
ment o f new members a s p o s s i b l e and t h a t t h e s u p e r i n t e n d e n t and more
e x p e r i e n c e d members were a d j u d e d , by t h e new members, t o have pro v id ed
t h e g r e a t e s t a s s i s t a n c e t o them.

The most common t e c h n i q u e s employed

by s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s in o r i e n t i n g new members were:

(1) s u p e r i n t e n d e n t /

board member c o n f e r e n c e s , (2) a t t e n d a n c e a t board m ee tin g s p r i o r t o
assuming o f f i c e ,

(3) a t t e n d a n c e a t r e g i o n a l and s t a t e - l e v e l m ee tin gs

c on ducted by t h e I n d i a n a School Boards A s s o c i a t i o n , and (4) t o u r s o f
local educational f a c i l i t i e s .

The major problem a r e a s f o r new members

were found t o be in t h e a r e a s o f p u b l i c r e l a t i o n s and f i n a n c e .

On t h e

b a s i s o f h i s f i n d i n g s , Andrews concluded t h a t t h e d e g re e t o which each
i n d i v i d u a l member i s "inform ed o r uninformed" w i l l r e f l e c t in t h e
q u a l i t a t i v e d e c i s i o n s r e a c h e d by t h e board o f e d u c a t i o n ; t h e r e f o r e ,
i t i s i m p e r a t i v e t h a t " a d e q u a te i n f o r m a t i o n and p r o p e r t r a i n i n g " be
made a v a i l a b l e t o new members a t t h e o n s e t o f t h e i r terms o f o f f i c e .
He n o te d t h a t l i t t l e communality e x i s t s i n school board o r i e n t a t i o n
p r o c e d u r e s among t h e v a r i o u s s t a t e school b o a rd s o r g a n i z a t i o n s and
t h a t " e x t e n s i v e r e s e a r c h " in t h e a r e a o f new member o r i e n t a t i o n has
n o t been c o n d u c t e d .

He d e te r m i n e d t h a t s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s were "most

h e l p f u l ” i n a s s i s t i n g new members becoming a c c l i m a t e d t o t h e i r

72

r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s and s t a t e d t h a t novices should be encouraged to
a t t e n d board meetings be fo r e t a k i n g o f f i c e .

132

One o f the more comprehensive s t u d i e s r e l a t i n g t o th e t r a i n i n g
o f new school board members was completed by Milton Snyder in 1972.
Snyder conducted a d e t a i l e d , s t r u c t u r e d i n t e r v i e w with t h i r t y newly
e l e c t e d members, t h e i r board p r e s i d e n t s , and s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s o f
sch o o ls from t h i r t y school d i s t r i c t s in f o u r Southern C a l i f o r n i a
counties.

He found " s t r o n g su p po rt" f o r t h e conduct o f new member

t r a i n i n g programs:

9525 o f t h e board members and 80 p e rc e n t o f the

s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s concurred t h a t i f such programs were a v a i l a b l e , new
members would be i n t e r e s t e d in p a r t i c i p a t i n g in them, whereas 67
p e r c e n t o f t h e members and 57 p e r c e n t o f t h e s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s responded
t h a t " th e t r a i n i n g o f new members should be mandatory."

The m a j o r i t y

{56 p e r c e n t ) o f the t h r e e responden t groups p r e f e r r e d having t r a i n i n g
programs conducted by the C a l i f o r n i a School Boards A s s o c i a t i o n ; they
a l s o "f av o red holding t r a i n i n g programs p r i o r t o [new members] tak in g
o f f i c e o r w it h in t h r e e months a f t e r t a k in g o f f i c e . "

The p r e f e r r e d

t r a i n i n g techn iq u e was r e p o r t e d as being " t h e weekend s h o r t - s e m in a r
i n c o r p o r a t i n g small group o r i e n t a t i o n . "

The respondents suggested

t h a t s i x months t o one y e a r o f involvement was r e q u i r e d " f o r new
school board members t o become co mfo rtab le in t h e i r p o s i t i o n s , "
t h a t t r a i n i n g programs should be " c o n t i n u o u s ," and t h a t such programs
should be expanded " t o i n c o r p o r a t e t r a i n i n g f o r experien ced members."
132

James R. Andrews, "A Study o f t h e Pe r c e p tio n s Held by New
School Board Members Toward T h e ir T r a i n in g f o r Board Membership,"
D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l 32/06-A (December 1971): 2931.

73

All r e s p o n d e n t gro ups ranke d "working r e l a t i o n s w i t h t h e s u p e r i n ­
t e n d e n t " as t h e t o p p r i o r i t y in a t r a i n i n g program, whereas board
p r e s i d e n t s ranked " l e g a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s " second and s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s
viewed " s e l e c t i o n o f t h e s u p e r i n t e n d e n t " a s second in i m p o r t a n c e .
Among t h e l o w e s t s u b j e c t s in p e r c e i v e d im po rtan ce were:

"maintenance,

i n t e r - d i s t r i c t r e l a t i o n s , c a r e e r e d u c a t i o n , and conmunity p o l i c i e s . "
Appr oxim ately 60 p e r c e n t o f a l l r e s p o n d e n t s e x p r e s s e d t h e c o nce rn t h a t
new members were " l e a s t p r e p a r e d " t o c a r r y o u t t h e i r d u t i e s a s commu­
nity rep re se n ta tiv e s.

Snyder n o ted t h a t s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s viewed them­

s e l v e s a s being "most i m p o r t a n t " in t h e t r a i n i n g o f new members and
t h a t n o v i c e s , t h e m s e l v e s , r e p o r t e d t h e " r e a d i n g o f e d u c a t i o n codes and
d i s t r i c t p o l i c i e s " as t h e "most i m p o r t a n t " p r e p a r a t i o n t h e y had e x p e r i ­
enced.
Snyder concluded t h a t t h e a d d i t i o n a l tim e r e q u i r e d f o r t h e
t r a i n i n g o f new members should "be h i g h l y t a s k o r i e n t e d , s c h e d u l e d f o r
s h o r t p e r i o d s . . . and d i r e c t e d by h i g h l y competent i n s t r u c t o r s . "

He

recommended t h a t t r a i n i n g programs " s h o u ld have w r i t t e n o b j e c t i v e s ,
. . . be t a i l o r e d t o s u i t l o c a l d i s t r i c t s ' need s . . . [ a n d ] use t h e
most e f f e c t i v e methods p o s s i b l e . "

F u rth e r, t h a t the follow ing areas

"sh o u ld be b a s i c " t o a l l new member t r a i n i n g programs:

(1) working

r e l a t i o n s w ith th e s u p e r i n t e n d e n t , (2) t h e e v a l u a t i o n o f e d u c a t i o n a l
pro g ram s, (3) t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f broad program g o a l s , (4) community
r e l a t i o n s , and (5) t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e b u d g e t.

133

Sn yder, p a s s i m , C h a p te r 5.

133

74

In 1973, Janies Harper, J r . , completed h i s e x p l o r a t o r y study
designed t o determine whether o r not new board members in the r e c e n t l y
d e c e n t r a l i z e d ( r e g i o n a l i z e d ) D e t r o i t Public Schools were perceived by
themselves and by "major board obse rv ers" as having t r a i n i n g needs in
seven s e l e c t e d f u n c t i o n s o f school o p e r a t io n s :

finance, negotiations,

p o l ic y making, curriculum a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , human r e l a t i o n s and person­
n e l , group dynamics, and general education t o p i c s .

(The term "new

board member," as used in t h i s stu d y , r e f e r s t o i n d i v i d u a l s e l e c t e d
t o membership on th e newly c r e a t e d D e t r o i t regional boards o f e ducation;
such persons may have had previous experience as l o c a l school gover­
nors on o t h e r school b o a r d s .)

A s t r a t i f i e d sampling techn iq u e was

used in g a th e r in g d a ta from a "universe " o f a l l members comprising
t h e e i g h t regional boa rds, plus an a d d it i o n a l 186 "major board
o b s e r v e r s " ; in t o t a l , 242 i n d i v i d u a l s p a r t i c i p a t e d in t h i s study.
S t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t data were achieved through an a n a l y s i s of
the responses i n d i c a t e d on the following "custom designed" i n s t r u ­
ments:

"Se lec te d Functions o f School Operations Survey," "Needs

Analysis Survey," "School Board Rating Survey," "Time Survey I n s t r u ­
ment," and "Major School Board O bserve r's Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ."

Harper

found t h a t new board members having more formal education were p e r ­
ceived by major board o b se rv ers as being "more capable" in a l l seven
s e l e c t e d f u n c t i o n s o f school o p e r a t i o n s .

However, with t h e exception

o f t h e fin a n c e a r e n a , t h e board members' responses r e l a t i v e t o t h e i r
p e rc e p t i o n s o f e f f e c t i v e n e s s di d not c o r r e l a t e s i g n i f i c a n t l y with
achieved formal e d u c a ti o n , t h e ex p en d itu re of time in performance of
d u t i e s , or t h e number o f personal memberships in noneducational

75

organizations.

Both members and o b s e r v e r s perc eived a need f o r a d d i ­

t i o n a l t r a i n i n g , although n e i t h e r group responded t h a t i n s e r v i c e
e x p e r i e n c e s should be mandatory.

An organ ized t r a i n i n g program was

viewed as n e c e ssa r y "because t o d a y ' s j o b [ a s a board member] demands
i t " and should be accomplished by " o u t s i d e o r g a n i z a t i o n s " using a
" v a r i e t y o f methods" a f t e r members a r e e l e c t e d and p r i o r t o t h e i r
taking o f f ic e .

Harper concluded:

"There i s a need t o know more

s p e c i f i c in fo rm atio n about boardmen's p r o f i c i e n c y in each o f the seven
f u n c t i o n s o f school o p e r a t io n s " and to develop a " h i g h ly a c c u r a t e
d i a g n o s t i c inst ru ment" t h a t p r o p e r l y a s s e s s e s t h e need f o r t r a i n i n g
new board members.

Among h i s recommendations were t h e follo w in g:

(1) t r a i n i n g e x p erien c es should be " r e a s s u r i n g and as e g o -b u i l d in g
as p o s s i b l e " ; (2) i n i t i a l t r a i n i n g should se rve t o a c q u a in t members
with t h e s c h o o l s , t h e community, and a l l departments w it h in th e
a d m i n i s t r a t i v e o r g a n i z a t i o n ; (3) r e g i o n a l s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s should
p e r i o d i c a l l y conduct " l o c a l i z e d i n s e r v i c e t r a i n i n g f o r new members;
and (4) " s t a n d a r d s f o r c e r t i f y i n g board members" should be developed
and i n s t i t u t e d . ^
In 1974, Charles Calloway sought t o develop a p r e s e r v i c e
t r a i n i n g program f o r p r o s p e c t i v e school board members, one t h a t would
a l s o be a p p r o p r i a t e to t h e i n s e r v i c e needs o f members a l r e a d y s e r v i n g .
To accomplish t h i s purpose , he e s t a b l i s h e d t h e follo w in g s p e c i f i c
objectives:
134

James Harper, J r . , " D e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n : An E x p lo ra ti o n o f
Boardmanship T r a in in g Needs o f New School Board Members in S e le c te d
Functio ns o f School O p e r a t i o n s ," D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l
33/11-A (May 1973): 6011.

76

(1) t o d e te r m i n e i f Tennessee and T e n n e s s e e ' s b o r d e r i n g s t a t e s
have p r e s e r v i c e o r i n s e r v i c e t r a i n i n g programs f o r school board
members; (2) t o d e te r m i n e t h e q u a l i f i c a t i o n s f o r s e r v i n g a s a
sc hool board member in T ennessee and 1n T e n n e s s e e ' s e i g h t b o r ­
d e r i n g s t a t e s ; (3) t o d e t e r m i n e i f some t y p e o f p r e s e r v i c e t r a i n ­
in g program should be r e q u i r e d o f a l l p r o s p e c t i v e sc ho ol board
members; (4) t o d e t e r m i n e t h e t y p e s o f a c t i v i t i e s a school board
member should be f a m i l i a r w i t h b e f o r e assuming h i s j o b ; (5) t o
d e te r m i n e what a p r e s e r v i c e a n d / o r i n s e r v i c e t r a i n i n g program
f o r school board members should c o n s i s t o f and based on t h e s e
needs t o d e velop such a t r a i n i n g program; and (6) t o f i e l d t e s t
a p r e s e r v i c e a n d / o r i n s e r v i c e t r a i n i n g program, once d e v e l o p e d ,
w i t h a group o f school board members and p r o s p e c t i v e school
board members.
To g a t h e r a p p r o p r i a t e d a t a , Calloway s e n t a l e t t e r r e q u e s t i n g i n f o r ­
mation c o n c e rn in g board member p r e s e r v i c e and i n s e r v i c e t r a i n i n g p r o ­
grams, as well as i n f o r m a t i o n r e l a t i v e t o t h a t which sho u ld be i n c o r ­
p o r a t e d i n t o such programs, t o t h e s t a t e school board s a s s o c i a t i o n s
and d e p a r t m e n t s o f e d u c a t i o n o f T ennessee and T e n n e s s e e ' s e i g h t
bordering s t a t e s .

A d d itio n a lly , a survey q u e s tio n n a ir e designed to

i d e n t i f y c u r r e n t l o c a l school board t r a i n i n g programs was s e n t t o t h e
bo ard c h a i r m a n , s u p e r i n t e n d e n t , and one a d d i t i o n a l board member
(chosen a t random) o f e ac h o f t h e 146 p u b l i c school system s i n Ten­
nessee.

The sample c o n s i s t e d o f 438 p a r t i c i p a n t s .

Calloway found

" p r a c t i c a l l y no r e s e a r c h d e a l i n g d i r e c t l y w i t h p r e s e r v i c e t r a i n i n g "
f o r board members.

He n o te d t h a t t h e r e s p o n d e n t s t a t e s " v a r y w id e ly "

i n t h e i r t r a i n i n g programs f o r bo ard members and t h a t " very l i t t l e
f o r m a l , o r g a n i z e d t r a i n i n g " i s a v a i l a b l e in T e n n e s s e e , a l t h o u g h a l l
T e n n e sse e r e s p o n d e n t s " b e l i e v e d t h e r e sh o u l d be b e t t e r t r a i n i n g
a v a i l a b l e " t o them.

T r a i n i n g programs were r e p o r t e d as an " i n v a l u a b l e

t o o l " i n a s s i s t i n g members and p r o s p e c t i v e members i n becoming " b e t t e r
v e r s e d " and "more l e a r n e d " i n t h o s e " co m p e te n cie s" needed t o become

77

e f f e c t i v e board members.

While both members and s u p e r i n te n d e n t s

"were i n t e r e s t e d " in upgrading " th e q u a l i t y o f school board member­
s h i p , " n e i t h e r group b e liev e d p a r t i c i p a t i o n should be mandated—
e i t h e r befo re o r a f t e r e l e c t i o n o r appointment.

135

In h i s 1977 d i s s e r t a t i o n , Lanning N i c o lo f f sought t o d e t e r ­
mine the most important i n s e r v i c e education needs o f c u r r e n t l y s e r v ­
ing I l l i n o i s pu b lic school board members, as a sse ss ed by board mem­
bers themselves and s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s , and to determine a ranked o rd er
of the i n s e r v i c e needs o f boards o f e d u c a tio n —con sidered as a whole.
He s e l e c t e d a s t r a t i f i e d random sample comprised o f e i g h t y elementary
(K-8), e ig h t y secondary ( 9 - 1 2 ) , and e i g h t y u n i t (K-12) d i s t r i c t s in
such a manner as t o a s s u r e an e q u i t a b l e d i s t r i b u t i o n from among the
s i x reg io ns w ith in I l l i n o i s and among t h e s i z e of d i s t r i c t s , based
upon e n r o l l m e n t s , w it h in each o f the aforementioned s t r a t a .

From

each included d i s t r i c t , t h e s u p e r i n t e n d e n t , board p r e s i d e n t , one
experienced member (more than one y e a r of s e r v i c e ) , and one new member
( l e s s than one y e a r o f s e r v i c e ) were s e l e c t e d f o r p a r t i c i p a t i o n .

The

"experienced" and "new" members were chosen a t random by the local
s u p e r i n te n d e n t .

Four i d e n t i c a l survey q u e s t i o n n a i r e s , one f o r each

c ateg o ry of resp o n d en ts, comprised of n i n e t y - e i g h t items of " p o s s i b l e
concern" t o board members were c o n s t r u c t e d .

All board member respon­

de nts were asked t o r a t e t h e i r "personal need f o r f u r t h e r i n s e r v i c e
education" on a f i v e - p o i n t f o r c e d - c h o i c e s c a l e from " l i t t l e o r no
135

Charles Calloway, "A P r e s e r v ic e a n d /o r I n s e r v ic e T rainin g
Program f o r Board o f Education Members," D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s tra cts I n t e r ­
n a ti o n a l 3 5/10-A (April 1975): 6356.

78

need" t o " c r i t i c a l n e e d ."

Board p r e s i d e n t s , e x p e r i e n c e d members,

and s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s were asked t o r a t e t h e i n s e r v i c e needs o f the
"board as a whole" on a second s c a l e t h a t was i n clud ed on t h e i r s u r ­
vey q u e s t i o n n a i r e s .

N i c o l o f f found t h a t t h e ten h i g h e s t i n s e r v i c e

n e e d s , as e x p r e s s e d on t h e " p erso n al needs s c a l e , " in o r d e r o f p e r ­
c e iv e d import an ce were:

(1) r e t a i n i n g l o c a l c o n t r o l o f e d u c a t i o n , "

(2) "new i d e a s f o r p r o v i d i n g funds f o r s c h o o l s , " (3) " i n f l u e n c i n g
s t a t e and f e d e r a l l e g i s l a t i o n a f f e c t i n g e d u c a t i o n , " (4) "coping with
in flatio n ,"

(5) " e f f e c t i v e t e a c h e r e v a l u a t i o n t e c h n i q u e s , " (6) " c u t ­

t i n g back school e x p e n d i t u r e s in a f i n a n c i a l c r i s i s , "

(7) " c h a r a c t e r ­

i s t i c s o f a good e d u c a t i o n a l program," (8) " d i s m i s s a l o f t e a c h e r s , "
(9) " n e g o t i a t i o n s , " and (10) "improving t e a c h e r - b o a r d r e l a t i o n s . "
For t h e "board as a whole," t h e ranking was t h e same, e x c e p t "board
o f e d u c a t i o n s e l f - e v a l u a t i o n " was s u b s t i t u t e d f o r "improving t e a c h e r board r e l a t i o n s . "

Although "some v a r i a t i o n " (based on d i s t r i c t l o c a ­

t i o n ) and " s u b s t a n t i a l v a r i a t i o n " (based on d i s t r i c t s i z e ) were found
t o e x i s t in r e l a t i o n s h i p t o t h o s e needs p e r c e i v e d t o be most impor­
t a n t , t h e v a r i o u s c a t e g o r i e s o f board members agreed on t h e most
i m p o r t a n t i n s e r v i c e needs and on t h e need f o r a program o f l o c a l board
member i n s e r v i c e e d u c a t i o n .

Members and s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s a l s o con­

c u r r e d t h a t l o c a l boards p a r t i c u l a r l y need i n s e r v i c e e x p e r i e n c e s in
each o f t h e f o l l o w i n g a r e a s , l i s t e d in de sc ending o r d e r o f importan ce:
(1) " i n c r e a s i n g t h e power and i n f l u e n c e o f l o c a l boards o f e d u c a t i o n , "
(2) "improving t h e f i n a n c i a l o p e r a t i o n s and f i n a n c i a l c o n d i t i o n o f t h e
s c h o o l s , " (3) " d e a l i n g more e f f e c t i v e l y with t e a c h e r p e r s o n n e l , "

79

(4) "providing q u a l i t y ed ucatio n," and (5) "building b e t t e r boards
o f e d u c a ti o n . " ^ ®
Summary
Local boards of education have t r a d i t i o n a l l y played a c ru c ial
r o l e in the schema o f American public educational governance.

The

expressed degree o f popular s a t i s f a c t i o n with, and concomitant support
f o r , public school programs and products has been d i r e c t l y influenced
by the composite a c t io n s taken by school boards a t the local l e v e l .
As a consequence, those c i t i z e n s e le c t e d or appointed to school board
membership share the heavy r e s p o n s i b i l i t y to s a t i s f y the e xp ec ta tion s
of the local c i t i z e n r y and, co n cu rren tly , accommodate the e s c a l a t i n g
requirements of the various branches and agencies of the s t a t e and
federal governments.
Throughout most o f our n a t i o n ' s h i s t o r y , school boards func­
tione d in a r e l a t i v e l y s t a b l e and congenial environment.

Within the

p a st twenty y e a r s , however, they have i n c r e a s in g l y had to cope with
a c c e l e r a te d demands and mandates f o r change, a s i t u a t i o n t h a t has
challenged t h e c a p a c ity o f board members to resolv e numerous problems
t h a t f r e q u e n t ly transcend the schools.

The contemporary environment,

hallmarked by e v e r - e s c a l a t i n g imperatives o f boardsmanship, has
caused many a u t h o r i t i e s to conclude t h a t school boards are a t a
cro s sro a d s—t h a t the co n tin u atio n o f l o c a l , l a y - c o n tr o l over public
schools may c o n s t i t u t e an anachronism in educational governance.

^ N i c o l o f f , pp. 80-165.

80

Various a u t h o r i t i e s concur t h a t t o d a y ' s school board members
must evidence g r e a t e r knowledge and be more s k i l l f u l in t h e a r t o f
d e c i s i o n making i f they a r e t o meet t h o s e c h a l le n g e s c o n f r o n t i n g them.
A primary method f o r f a c i l i t a t i n g t h e e x i s t e n t need i s through the
p r o v i s i o n o f continuo us and s y s te m a t i c programs o f i n s e r v i c e e d u c a t i o n ,
a c t i v i t i e s p r e d i c a t e d upon t h e pe rc eiv e d needs o f c u r r e n t l y se rv in g
board members and designed t o enhance t h e i r c a p a c i t i e s as lo c a l school
governors.
While a l l a u t h o r i t i e s concur t h a t improving t h e c a p a b i l i t i e s
o f school board members i s a key t o enhancing t h e o v e r a l l o p e r a t io n
o f America's p u b l i c s c h o o l s , a l i m i t e d e f f o r t has th us f a r been made
in studying t h e many f a c e t s o f t h e i n s e r v i c e e d u ca tio n f o r board
members i s s u e .

CHAPTER I I I
DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

Introduction
The w r i t e r , in Chapter I I , confirms an i n t e n s i f y i n g concern
r e l a t i v e to t h e c r i t i c a l need f o r more knowledgeable and s k i l l f u l
lo c a l school board members and t h e concomitant n e c e s s i t y t o prov ide
them with s y s t e m a t i c and c on tin uo u s programs o f i n s e r v i c e e d u c a t i o n .
I t a l s o s u b s t a n t i a t e s th e m e r i t o f in v o lv i n g c u r r e n t l y s e r v i n g board
members in the d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f th o se i n s e r v i c e t o p i c s most appro p­
r i a t e t o t h e i r needs.
The de sig n o f th e stud y i s p r e s e n t e d in t h i s c h a p t e r .

Described a r e

th e de sig n o f t h e survey i n s t r u m e n t , t h e p o p u l a t i o n s e l e c t e d f o r
s t u d y , t h e plan n in g and c o nd u ctin g o f t h e su r v e y , t h e i n t e r v i e w s with
board p r e s i d e n t s , and t h e s t a t i s t i c a l t r e a t m e n t o f t h e o b t a i n e d d a t a .
Design o f t h e Survey In stru m ent
A t h r e e - p a g e survey i n s t r u m e n t e n t i t l e d " I n s e r v i c e Education
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e o f Southwestern Michigan Pu blic School Board Members"
was desig n ed f o r t h e s t u d y .

I t was c o n s t r u c t e d by t h e w r i t e r w ith

t h e a s s i s t a n c e o f h i s committee chairman, a p r o f e s s o r o f measurement
and e v a l u a t i o n , a p r o f e s s o r o f r e s e a r c h d e s i g n , and p r o f e s s i o n a l
s t a f f members o f t h e Michigan A s s o c i a t i o n o f School Boards (MASB).

81

82

The instrument con sisted of t h i r t y items and was subdivided i n t o four
p a r t s , as follows:
1.

Part I , "Your Opinion," presented the respondents with

t h ree general statements regarding local board member p a r t i c i p a t i o n in
in se r v ic e a c t i v i t i e s .

Each statement n e c e s s i t a t e d a personal conclu­

sion regarding i t s m erit and s o l i c i t e d an "agree" or "d isagree"
response.
2.

P a r t I I , "Your S e r v ic e ," asked the respondents to i n d i c a t e

numerically how many years and months they had served on the local
school board as o f the date the survey was conducted.
3.

P a r t I I I , "Planning f o r the Future," was f u r t h e r sub­

divided i n to s i x to pic al s e c t i o n s , each composed o f t h r e e or more
r e l a t e d sta te m e n ts, c ategorized as follows:

(1) "Community Rela­

t i o n s , " (2) "Administration," (3) "Business and Finance," (4) "Teacher
Personnel," (5) "Student A f f a i r s , " and (6) "General Topics."

Each of

the twenty included statements was followed by the numerals 1, 2, 3,
4, and 5 in ascending order.

The d i r e c t i o n s to the respondent defined

1 as "unimportant," 2 as "of minor importance," 3 as "somewhat impor­
t a n t , " 4 as "very important," and 5 as "of c r u c i a l importance."
Respondents were i n s t r u c t e d to " c i r c l e the degree o f importance you
a t t a c h to each of th es e t o p ic s f o r f u t u r e board i n s e r v i c e programs."
A d d i t io n a l ly , a blank l i n e was provided following each of the t o p ic al
s e c t i o n s , and respondents were encouraged to "add any t o p ic you b eliev e
to be of s u f f i c i e n t importance to m e r it a f u t u r e board i n s e r v i c e pro­
gram."

83

4.

P a r t IV, "Your Pa st P a r t i c i p a t i o n in Local, Regional, &

State-Wide I n s e r v ic e Education Programs," pr esented the respondents
with s i x s e p a r a t e st a te m e n ts inte nd ed t o determine t h e i r previous p a r­
t i c i p a t i o n in l o c a l , r e g i o n a l , a n d /o r s t a t e - w i d e i n s e r v i c e programs or in
events having been sponsored by e i t h e r the local county (or c o u n ti e s )
c h a p t e r o f MASB o r by MASB i t s e l f .

A "yes "or "no" response to each

item was s o l i c i t e d .
All q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were i d e n t i c a l except f o r t h e i n c l u s i o n of
a s p e c i f i c code number, which was conspicuously handwritten on the
f i r s t page.

The c o n f i d e n t i a l t r e a tm e n t of a l l responses was s t a t e d ,

with the i n d iv id u a l instrum ent number being i n d i c a t e d f o r use "only
to i d e n t i f y tho se who have responded."
Those items included in the survey instrument were developed
follo win g a review o f the r e l a t e d l i t e r a t u r e , p a r t i c u l a r a t t e n t i o n
having been paid t o those lo ca l board member surveys r ep o rte d during
the e i g h t y e a r s immediately preceding th e study.

The two surveys,

independently conducted by N i c o lo f f and Snyder, were of sp e cia l
i n t e r e s t and were, t h e r e f o r e , analyzed with e x t r a o r d i n a r y c a r e .

137

An o r i g i n a l pool o f more than 200 p o t e n t i a l items was reduced by fusing
r e l a t e d t o p i c s and by e l i m i n a t i n g th ose q u e s t io n s i r r e l e v a n t to the
purposes o f t h e study .

The in stru m ent was revamped on f o u r s e p a r a t e

oc casions and, in i t s f i n a l form, r e p r e s e n te d a consensus o f e x p e r t s
and lo c a l board members regarding v a l i d i t y , r e l i a b i l i t y , c l a r i t y ,
l e n g t h , and ease o f a d m i n i s t r a t i o n .
1^7

138

See N i c o l o f f , Appendix A; and NSBA Research Report 7 3 -2 ,

pp. 3 - 6 .
138

A copy o f the survey q u e s t i o n n a i r e i s includ ed as Appendix B.

84
D e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e Po p u la tio n
The p o p u l a t i o n s e l e c t e d f o r s tu d y comprised a u n i v e r s e o f t h e
322 e l e c t e d and a p p o in t e d members s e r v i n g on the seven-member boards
o f e d u c a t i o n o f t h e f o r t y - s i x Southwestern Michigan l o c a l p u b l i c school
d i s t r i c t s s p o n s o r in g k i n d e r g a r t e n through t w e l f t h grade programs (K-12)
a t the time t h e s t u d y was c o n ducted.

C u rren t board membership was t h e

s o l e d e l i m i t i n g c r i t e r i o n used in t h e s e l e c t i o n o f p a r t i c i p a n t s .

It

was b e l i e v e d t h a t t h e r e s p o n s e s r e c e i v e d from a p o p u l a t i o n s e r v i n g
w i t h i n a r e l a t i v e l y s m a l l , homogeneous g e o gra p h ica l a r e a would be b e s t
s u i t e d t o t h e s t a t e d p urp oses o f t h e stu d y .
In Table 3 - 1 , an a l p h a b e t i c a l l i s t i n g o f the in c lu d e d f o r t y s i x K-12 l o c a l school d i s t r i c t s i s p r es en te d ^ a d d i t i o n a l l y , t h e commu­
n i t i e s in which t h e i r p o s t o f f i c e s a r e l o c a t e d , t h e i r 1979 o f f i c i a l
s t u d e n t e n r o l l m e n t s , and t h e o f f i c i a l d i s t r i c t c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f each
are indicated.

139

In F i g u r e 3 - 1 , t h a t p o r t i o n o f t h e s t a t e o f Michigan i n c l u s i v e
o f t h e s t u d i e d p o p u l a t i o n , h e r e i n b e f o r e termed "Southwestern Michigan,"
i s shown.

I t i s predo m inantly a mixed r u r a l , su bu rban, and urban

a r e a , having no m e t r o p o l i s s e r v e d e x c l u s i v e l y by a s i n g l e p u b l i c school
d istrict.

All o f t h e i n c l u d e d l o c a l K-12 school board members s e r v e in

d i s t r i c t s t h a t a r e c a t e g o r i z e d as being o f e i t h e r t h e " t h i r d " o r
" f o u r t h " c l a s s , a d e t e r m i n a t i o n p r e d i c a t e d upon t h e i r s t u d e n t

139
(Lansing:

1980 Michigan Education D i r e c t o r y and Buyer*s Guide
Michigan Education D i r e c t o r y , n . d . ) , pp. 118-218.

Table 3 - 1 .--A lph ab e tic al l i s t i n g o f K-12 local school d i s t r i c t s , communities in which po st o f f i c e s
a re l o c a t e d , 1979 stu dent e n ro llm e n ts, and o f f i c i a l c l a s s i f i c a t i o n .
D istrict
Bangor Public Schools
Benton Harbor Area Schools
Berrien Springs Public Schools
Bloomingdale School D i s t r i c t 16
Brandywine Public Schools
Bridgman Public School D i s t r i c t
Buchanan Comnunity Schools
Burr Oak Comnunity Schools
Cassopolis Public Schools
C e n t r e v i l l e Public Schools
Climax-Scotts Community Schools
Coloma Community Schools
Colon Community Schools
Comstock Public Schools
Constantine Public Schools
Covert Public Schools
Decatur Public Schools
Dowagiac-llnion School D i s t r i c t
Eau C l a i r e Public Schools
Edwardsburg Public Schools
Galesburg-Augusta Community Schools
Galien Township Schools
Gobles Public Schools

Location of
Post Office
Bangor
Benton Harbor
Berrien Springs
Bloomingdale
Niles
Bridgman
Buchanan
Burr Oak
Cassopolis
C entreville
Climax
Coloma
Colon
Comstock
Constantine
Covert
Decatur
Dowagiac
Eau C l a i r e
Edwardsburg
Galesburg
Galien
Gobles

1979
Student Enrollment
1730
9028
2164
1204
2007
881
2200
375
1800
1000
785
2624
1090
2745
1601
732
1362
3506
1031
2079
1487
750
1135

Official
C lassification

Table 3 - 1 .--Continued.
D istrict
Gull Lake Community Schools
Hartford Public Schools
Kalamazoo School D i s t r i c t
Lakeshore Public Schools
Lawrence Public Schools
Lawton Community Schools
Marcell us Community Schools
Mattawan Consolidated Schools
Mendon Community Schools
New Buffalo Area Schools
Niles Comnunity Schools
Parchment Schools
Paw Paw Public Schools
Portage Public Schools
River Valley School D i s t r i c t
S t. Joseph Public Schools
S c ho o lcra ft Community Schools
South Haven School D i s t r i c t
S t u r g i s Public Schools
Three Rivers Community Schools
Vicksburg Comnunity Schools
W atervliet Public Schools
White Pigeon Community Schools

Location of
Post Office

1979
Student Enrollment

Official
C lassification

Richland
Hartford
Kalamazoo
S t e v e n s v il l e
Lawrence
Lawton
Marcel 1us
Mattawan
Mendon
New Buffalo
Niles
Parchment
Paw Paw
Portage
Three Oaks
S t . Joseph
S c ho o lcra ft
South Haven
S tu r g is
Three Rivers
Vicksburg
W atervliet
White Pigeon

2856
1449
14083
3555
830
1000
1045
2189
858
1175
5285
2000
2177
9302
1962
3244
882
3214
3098
3300
2794
1500
1522

3
4
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
4
4
3
4
3
4
3
3
3
3
4
4

87

F i g u r e 3 - 1 . - -T h e g e o g r a p h i c a l a r e a , termed S o uthw estern Michig an,
which i n c l u d e d t h e p o p u l a t i o n o f t h e s t u d y .

88

e n ro llm e n ts, as annually enumerated and r ep o rte d in accordance with
the Michigan General School Laws.

140

In Figure 3 -2 , t h e c u r r e n t d i s t r i b u t i o n o f the f o r t y - s i x
Southwestern Michigan K-12 p u b lic school d i s t r i c t s , by o f f i c i a l c l a s ­
s i f i c a t i o n , i s shown.

Thirty-two d i s t r i c t s , se rving fewer than 2,400

s t u d e n t s , a r e o f t h e "fo u rth " c l a s s ; f o u r tee n d i s t r i c t s , se rv ing
more than 2,400 but fewer than 30,000 s t u d e n t s , a r e o f the " t h i r d "
class.

Within the population s e l e c t e d f o r stu d y , 224 members (69.57

perc ent) serve on t h e boards of " f o u r t h " - c l a s s d i s t r i c t s ; 98 members
(30.43 p e rc en t) serve on the boards of " t h i r d " - c l a s s d i s t r i c t s .
Planning and Conducting the Survey
In o r d e r to obtain an a c c u r a t e l i s t i n g o f th ose c i t i z e n s who
had served as members on t h e included lo c a l school boards s i n c e 1970,
and, more s p e c i f i c a l l y , tho se who c u r r e n t l y held membership, i t was
necessary to secure the a s s i s t a n c e o f each in te r m e d ia te d i s t r i c t and
local d i s t r i c t su p e r i n te n d e n t .

A phone c a l l was made to th e f i v e

in te rm e d iate school d i s t r i c t s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s , e x p la in in g the f o r t h ­
coming survey and i t s intended purposes.

The cooperation o f each was

secured, and l i s t s rev e aling t h a t 716 i n d i v i d u a l s had served during
the period January 1, 1970, through J u l y 15, 1979, were se n t t o th e
writer.

The f i v e l i s t s were then r e c o n s t i t u t e d i n t o a s e p a r a t e l i s t ­

ing f o r each of the f o r t y - s i x local school d i s t r i c t s and were s e n t
to the su p e r in te n d e n ts in the local d i s t r i c t s , t o g e t h e r with an
140
pp.

11, 20.

Michigan, General School Laws and A dm in is tra tiv e R u l e s ,

89

N
U
M
B
E
R
0
F
D
I
S
T
R
I
C
T
S
1201 -

1800

18012400

24013000

Fourth Class

30013600

Third Class

STUDENT ENROLLMENT

Figure 3 - 2 . —D i s t r i b u t i o n o f t h e f o r t y - s i x Southwestern Michigan
K-12 school d i s t r i c t s by s t u d e n t e n r o l l m e n t and
official classification.

90

accompanying l e t t e r e x p l a i n i n g t h e p r o j e c t and r e q u e s t i n g t h e i r
a s s i s t a n c e in v e rify in g the included inform ation.

141

On t h e b a s i s

o f t h e r e t u r n e d d a t a , a r e v i s e d l i s t i n g , i n c l u d i n g t h e names and
a d d r e s s e s o f 679 form er and p r e s e n t board members, was c o n s t r u c t e d .
This l i s t i n g was s u b d i v i d e d i n t o two p a r t s , so a s t o p r e s e n t s e p a r a t e l y
in a l p h a b e t i c a l o r d e r t h e 357 p e r s o n s who, a l t h o u g h havin g p r e v i o u s l y
s e r v e d s i n c e 1970, were no l o n g e r board members, and a s i m i l a r l i s t i n g
o f t h o s e 322 p e rs o n s c u r r e n t l y s e r v i n g on l o c a l school b o a r d s .
A p r e t e s t o f t h e su r v e y i n s t r u m e n t was co n d u cted d u r i n g t h e
month o f A u gu st, 1979.

S e v e n t y - f i v e o f t h e 357 fo rm er members

(21 p e r c e n t ) were randomly s e l e c t e d f o r p a r t i c i p a t i o n .

Responses

were r e c e i v e d from f i f t y - e i g h t ( 7 7 .3 4 p e r c e n t ) fo rm er members.

Their

comments, e s p e c i a l l y t h o s e p e r t a i n i n g t o t h e f o r m a t o f t h e i n s t r u m e n t
and t o t h e i n d i v i d u a l q u e s t i o n s , proved i n v a l u a b l e in r e f i n i n g t h e
q u e s t i o n n a i r e i n t o i t s f i n a l form.
A telephone c a ll

was made to

each l o c a l d i s t r i c t s u p e r i n t e n ­

d e n t in e a r l y Septem ber,

1979, in an

e f f o r t to a s c e r t a i n whether or

n o t t h e r e had been any changes in board membership s i n c e
in g v e r i f i c a t i o n .

the preced­

Three c o r r e c t i o n s t o t h e l i s t i n g were made as a

resu lt of th is e ffo rt.
On September 24, 1979, a copy o f t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e and an
accompanying l e t t e r e x p l a i n i n g t h e p u r p o s e s , s c o p e , and tim e s c e n a r i o
o f t h e su rve y were s e n t t o t h e l o c a l s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s f o r t h e i r review

141
Appendix C.

The l e t t e r t o l o c a l s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s i s i n c l u d e d as

91

and c o n s i d e r a t i o n .

142

One week l a t e r , an i n t r o d u c t o r y l e t t e r signed

by the a u th or and by the Executive D i r e c t o r o f MASB was s e n t to each
local board member.

143

Approximately one week following t h e mailing

of the i n tr o d u c to r y l e t t e r , in which board members were a l e r t e d to
the importance of the p r o j e c t , a copy o f the survey instrum ent and
an accompanying l e t t e r —t o g e t h e r with a stamped, s e l f - a d d r e s s e d
envelope--were mailed to the population o f t h e stud y.

144

Three weeks

a f t e r the i n i t i a l mailing of survey i n s t r u m e n t s , a follow-up proce­
dur e, intended to maximize res p o n se s, was i n s t i t u t e d , as follo w s:
(1) a second survey in str u m e n t, coded th e same as the f i r s t , and an
accompanying l e t t e r —t o g e t h e r with a stamped, s e l f - a d d r e s s e d e n v e l o p e were mailed t o a l l nonrespondents;

145

(2) a t t h e same time, a l e t t e r

was s e n t t o each s u p e r i n t e n d e n t , i n d i c a t i n g th ose o f h i s board members who had not responded, re q u e s tin g h i s personal i n t e r v e n t i o n ;

146

and (3) f o ur weeks a f t e r t h e i n i t i a l m ailing of survey i n s t r u m e n t s , a
personal telep hone c a l l was made to each of the s i x ty - tw o board mem­
bers who had not y e t responded.

142

The second l e t t e r s e n t t o l o c a l su p e r in te n d e n ts i s included
as Appendix D.
143
The i n t r o d u c t o r y l e t t e r s e n t t o school board members i s
included as Appendix E.
144

The l e t t e r , accompanying the survey i n s tr u m e n t, s e n t to
school board members i s included as Appendix F.
145
The second l e t t e r , se n t to nonrespondents, i s included as
Appendix G.
146
The t h i r d l e t t e r , s e n t t o lo ca l su p e r i n te n d e n t s re q u e s tin g
t h e i r a s s i s t a n c e with nonrespondents, i s included as Appendix H.

92

The survey was completed on December 1, 1979, a t which time
277 o f t h e p o p u l a t i o n o f 322 l o c a l board members (86.02 p e r c e n t ) had
responded.

A review o f t h e l i s t o f board members r e v e a l e d t h a t a

100 p e r c e n t re s p o n s e was a c h ie v e d from e i g h t e e n school b o a rd s ,
encompassing 126 members; twenty -seven o t h e r b o a r d s , encompassing 189
members, evidenced a m a j o r i t y ( f o u r o r more o f t h e seven members)
r e s p o n s e ; from only one board d id a m a j o r i t y o f t h e members ( f o u r o f
t h e seven) f a i l t o respond.
I n t e r v i e w s With Board P r e s i d e n t s
As an a d j u n c t t o t h e conduct o f t h e s u r v e y , an i n t e r v i e w was
he ld w ith t e n o f t h e in c l u d e d f o r t y - s i x board p r e s i d e n t s .

The purpose

o f t h e s e i n t e r v i e w s was t o a s c e r t a i n t h e i r o p i n io n s r e g a r d i n g t h e s u r ­
vey i n s t r u m e n t , t h e g e n eral r e s u l t s , and t h o s e a c t i o n s t h a t might be
i n s t i t u t e d t o i n c r e a s e l o c a l board member p a r t i c i p a t i o n in f u t u r e
i n s e r v i c e e d u c a t i o n programs.

I t was f e l t t h a t t h e p r e s i d e n t s , by

v i r t u e o f t h e i r l e a d e r s h i p r o l e , could p r o vid e v a l u a b l e i n s i g h t s
r e g a r d i n g t h e o b t a i n e d d a t a and t h a t th ey would be b e s t a b l e t o recom­
mend a p p r o p r i a t e c o u r s e s f o r f u t u r e i n s e r v i c e i n i t i a t i v e s .

The ten

p r e s i d e n t s , s e l e c t e d a t random, were c o n t a c t e d r e g a r d i n g t h e i r w i l l ­
i n g n e s s t o p a r t i c i p a t e in an i n t e r v i e w ; a l l a gre ed t o do so.

A q u e s­

t i o n n a i r e , on which t h e p e r c e n t a g e o f r e s p o n s e s f o r P a r t s I , I I I , and
IV had been r e c o r d e d , was mailed t o each p a r t i c i p a n t .

An i n t e r v i e w

g uid e s h e e t and an accompanying l e t t e r o f e x p l a n a t i o n were a l s o
147
in c l u d e d in t h e m a i l i n g .
An i n t e r v i e w sc h e d u le was a rra n g ed a t
147

The l e t t e r and i n t e r v i e w guide s e n t t o board p r e s i d e n t s
i s i n c l u d e d as Appendix I .

93

t h e c o n v en ien c e o f each board p r e s i d e n t , and i n t e r v i e w s conmienced one
week f o l l o w i n g t h e m a i l i n g o f t h e a f o r e m e n t io n e d documents.
S t a t i s t i c a l T r e a tm e n t o f t h e Data
The s t a t i s t i c a l t r e a t m e n t o f t h e d a t a was accomplish ed th ro ug h
t h e use o f t h o s e f a c i l i t i e s a t t h e Computer C e n te r o p e r a t e d by Andrews
U n i v e r s i t y a t B e r r i e n S p r i n g s , Michigan.

The d a t a were p r o c e s s e d

through a Xerox Sigma-VI com p u ter, which had been s p e c i f i c a l l y p r o ­
grammed f o r t h e s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s o f e d u c a t i o n a l r e s e a r c h s u r v e y s .
Each q u e s t i o n n a i r e was checked f o r c o m p le te n e s s and s u b m i tt e d t o t h e
C e n te r f o r t r a n s f e r t o p u n c h -c a r d s and v e r i f i c a t i o n .

With t h e e x ce p ­

t i o n o f t h o s e h a n d w r i t t e n r e s p o n s e s i n d i c a t e d on t h e b lank l i n e f o l ­
lowing each o f t h e s i x t o p i c a l s e c t i o n s , c o m p r isin g P a r t I I I o f t h e
q u e s t i o n n a i r e , t h e raw s c o r e method and v a r i a n c e f o r a p o p u l a t i o n f o r ­
mula were used t h r o u g h o u t in computing t h e r e s u l t s .

The o b t a i n e d d a t a

were r e p o r t e d on o r d i n a l a n d / o r i n t e r v a l s c a l e s .
The computer p ro v id ed an i n d i v i d u a l - i t e m summary i n c l u d i n g t h e
f r e q u e n c y , p e r c e n t a g e , mean, m edian, s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n , and semii n t e r q u a r t i l e range f o r each o f t h e i n c l u d e d t w e n t y - t h r e e s t a t e m e n t s
and seven q u e s t i o n s .

In a d d i t i o n , a mean, m edian, s t a n d a r d d e v i a ­

t i o n , and s e m i - i n t e r q u a r t i l e range were c a l c u l a t e d on each o f t h e s i x
t o p i c a l s e c t i o n s co m p risin g P a r t I I I o f t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e , each s e c ­
t i o n b e in g c o n s i d e r e d , f o r t h e p u rp o se s o f t h e s e c a l c u l a t i o n s , as a
whole.
The c o m p u t e r ' s c a l c u l a t i o n s were checked a t random t o v e r i f y
t h e r e s u l t s and a c c u r a c y i n a c c o rd a n c e w i t h program d i r e c t i o n s .

CHAPTER IV
FINDINGS
In t r o d u c t io n
The w r i t e r sought t o a s c e r t a i n the c u r r e n t I n s e r v ic e education
n eeds, and the p a st p a r t i c i p a t i o n In i n s e r v i c e education e v e n t s , o f a
c u r r e n t l y serving po pulation o f loca l school board members.

To t h es e

ends, a survey q u e s t i o n n a i r e was mailed in the f a l l o f 1979 to each o f
the 322 members, e l e c t e d o r appointed to o f f i c e , on the f o r t y - s i x
Southwestern Michigan boards o f education sponsoring k in dergarte n
through t w e l f t h grade programs.
In t h i s c h ap ter the w r i t e r r e p o r t s the fin d in g s o f the study
through an a n a l y s i s o f th e obtained d a t a , as re p o r te d by t h e 277 board
members (86.02 pe rc ent) who responded to the survey q u e s t i o n n a i r e .
Also pres ented i s a n a r r a t i v e r e p o r t o f the summarized opinions o f ten
randomly s e l e c t e d board p r e s i d e n t s r e l a t i v e to the survey i n s tr u m e n t,
the g e n er alize d r e s u l t s o f the sur ve y, and a c t i o n s t h a t could be taken
in an e f f o r t t o i n c r e a s e local board member p a r t i c i p a t i o n in f u t u r e
i n s e r v i c e education e v e n t s .
The Importance o f I n s e r v ic e Education
t o Board Members
In t h e f i r s t t h r e e q u e s t i o n s , board members were asked to
"agree" or "disagree" with state m ents p e r t a i n i n g t o the importance of
school board candidate o r i e n t a t i o n and board member p a r t i c i p a t i o n in
94

95

i n s e r v i c e e d u c a ti o n programs.

Approximately t w o - t h i r d s (63 p e r c e n t )

o f t h e r e s p o n d e n t s d i s a g r e e d w ith a re qu ire m e n t t h a t would mandate
t h e co mpletion o f an o r i e n t a t i o n program, r e l a t i n g t o t h e r e s p o n s i ­
b i l i t i e s o f board members, by school board c a n d i d a t e s p r i o r t o t h e i r
running f o r o f f i c e .

However, when asked whether o r n o t newly e l e c t e d

o r a p p o in t e d members should be r e q u i r e d t o complete an i n s e r v i c e p r o ­
gram, as d e f i n e d by l o c a l board w r i t t e n p o l i c y and d uring t h e i r f i r s t
y e a r o f s e r v i c e , more t h a n 66 p e r c e n t o f t h e r e s p o n d e n ts a g re e d .
A d d i t i o n a l l y , more than 81 p e r c e n t o f t h e r e s p o n d e n t s a l s o agre ed
t h a t c o n t i n u i n g i n s e r v i c e e d u c a t i o n " i s v i t a l l y i m p o r t a n t " t o any
board member who d e s i r e s t o perform h i s o r h e r d u t i e s w e l l .

(See

Table 4 - 1 . )
Length o f S e r v i c e on t h e School Board
As Table 4-2 shows, Southwestern Michigan board members
ranged in l o n g e v i t y o f s e r v i c e from l e s s than one month t o more than
t w e n t y - e i g h t y e a r s and t h r e e months, w i t h a mean l o n g e v i t y o f f o u r
y e a r s - t w o months and a median o f t h r e e y e a r s - t h r e e months.

The d i s ­

t r i b u t i o n o f r e s p o n d e n t s d e m o nstra te d a pronounced n e g a t i v e skew, as
follow s:

168 members (60.65 p e r c e n t ) had se rv ed l e s s than one e l e c t e d

term o f f o u r y e a r s ; a t o t a l o f 234 members (84.48 p e r c e n t ) had se r v e d
f o r l e s s t h a n two e l e c t e d terms o f e i g h t y e a r s ; and only f o r t y - t h r e e
members (15.52 p e r c e n t ) had s e r v e d on t h e l o c a l board f o r more than
eight years.

Table 4-1 . —Respondent opinions on school board candi date and board member p a r t i c i p a t i o n in
i n s e r v i c e education programs.
No
Statement______________________Response________ Agree_________ Disagree
f

%

f

%

f

%

Candidates f o r local boards should
be req uired t o complete an o r i e n ­
t a t i o n program r e l a t i n g to school
board member r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s
before running f o r o f f i c e .........................

1

.36

101

36.46

175

63.18

1.63

1.71

Newly e l e c t e d or appointed members
should be r eq u ir e d to complete an
i n s e r v i c e program, as s p e l le d out
in local board w r i t t e n po licy
durinq t h e i r f i r s t y e a r o f
s e r v i c e ..............................................................

2

.72

185

66.79

90

32.49

1.33

1.24

17.69

1.19

1.11

Continuing i n s e r v i c e education
i s v i t a l l y important to any
board member who wishes t o p e r ­
form h i s / h e r d u t i e s w e l l .....................

3

1.08

225

81.23

49

97

Table 4 - 2 . --Length o f s e r v i c e o f Southwestern Michigan board members
(in y e a rs ).
Years
of
S e r v ic e
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

f

%

47
38
40
43
22
10
22
12
13
8
6
2
2
2
4
1
1

16.97
13.72
14.44
15.52
7.94
3.61
7.94
4.33
4.69
2.90
2.18
.72
.72
.72
1.44
.36
.36

Years
of
S e rv ice

f

2
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
277

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Total
Range
Mean
Mdn.

%

72
36

36
100 "00

1-28.3 y e a r s
4. 2 y e a r s
3. 3 y e a r s

Figure 4-1 g r a p h i c a l l y i l l u s t r a t e s t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f board
members a ccord ing to l e n g th o f s e r v i c e on t h e i r l o c a l school bo ard s.
The Need f o r Future I n s e r v i c e on
Community R e la ti o n s Topics
Each o f t h e t h r e e t o p i c s l i s t e d was r a t e d by a m a j o r i t y o f
respondents as being between "somewhat importan t" and " o f c r u c i a l
im portance," as f o l lo w s :

(1) "Improving Communications With t h e

P u b l i c , " with a mean o f 4 . 3 0 , had th e h i g h e s t average r a t i n g w it h in
t h e "Community R e la ti o n s " c a t e g o r y .

The v a s t m a j o r i t y (87 p e r c e n t )

o f responden ts i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h i s s u b j e c t was e i t h e r "very im po rtant"
o r " o f c r u c i a l im p o rtan c e ," while l e s s than 2 p e r c e n t viewed i t as

o

I

2

3

4

3

6

7

8

9

10 II

12 13 14 i5 H, 17 IS *9 30 2 t 23 23 24 2 3 2 6 27 2&

Years of Service

Figure 4 - 1 . —Graphic i l l u s t r a t i o n o f th e d i s t r i b u t i o n of Southwestern Michigan board members (by
years o f s e r v i c e ) .

99

being "unimportant"; (2) "Building a Permanent Base o f Comnunity
Support" had a mean o f 4.2 3 , with more than 82 p e rc en t o f respondents
viewing t h i s s u b j e c t as being e i t h e r "very important" o r "of c r u c i a l
importance" t o t h e i r i n s e r v i c e needs; and (3) although "The Role and
Function o f Advisory Committees" was viewed as being s u b s t a n t i a l l y
l e s s important than the preceding two t o p i c s , i t had a mean o f 3.30,
with 230 respondents (83 pe rc en t) having r e p o r t e d i t as being "some­
what im portant," "very im p o r ta n t," or "of c r u c i a l importance."

(See

Table 4 - 3 . )
Additional Community R e la ti o n s Topics
Submitted by Respondents
Respondents submitted twelve a d d i t i o n a l t o p i c s , which they
believed to be of s u f f i c i e n t importance t o m e r i t a f u t u r e i n s e r v i c e
program, within the "Comnunity R e la tio n s " c a t e g o r y , as follows:
(1) Desegregation; (2) Why Millage E le c t i o n s Must Be Planned f o r a t
Great Lead Times; (3) P o licy Matters Versus A dm in is tra tiv e Matte rs;
(4) Negotia tions I n s e r v ic e f o r t h e P u b l i c ; (5) Millage Campaign Pro­
grams; (6) How to Encourage Attendance a t Board Meetings; (7) How to
Take Valid Opinion P o l l s ; (8) Ways o f Using t h e Local Media; (9) When
or When Not t o Have Closed Session Meetings; (10) Informing t h e Public
o f Vital I s s u e s ; (11) In cre as in g Public Involvement; and (12) Working
R ela tio n s h ip s With the City Council.
The Need f o r Future I n s e r v ic e on A d m inistra tio n Topics
Each of the t h r e e t o p i c s l i s t e d was r a t e d by a m a j o r it y o f
the respondents as being between "somewhat important" and "of c r u c i a l

Table 4 -3 .—Board members' rating o f perceived needs for future in service programs on Comnunity Relations to p ics.
Rating o f Importance
Topic

No
Response

Unimportant

Of
Minor
Importance

Somewhat
Important

Very
Important

Of
C rucial
Importance

1

2

3

4

5

Mean

Std.
Dev.

Hdn.

Q1

Q2

Q

f

*

f

%

28

10.11

121

43.68

121

43.68

4.30

.75

4.37

3.80

4.93

.57

1.44

36

13.00

116

41.88

113

40.79

4.23

.79

4.31

3.72

4.90

.59

11.91

121

43.68

89

32.13

20

7.22

3.30

.87

3.29

2.73

3.97

.62

%

f

%

f

%

Improving
Communications
With th e
P ublic . . . .

3

1.08

3

1.08

1

.36

B uilding a
Permanent Base
o f Comnunity
Support . . .

6

2.17

2

.72

4

The Role and
Function of
Advisory
Comnittees . .

7 2.53

7 2.53

33

f

100

%

f

101

importance,11 as follows:
mean response o f 3.57.

(1) "Improving Administrator Morale" had a
The l a r g e s t number o f board members (41 p e r­

cent) in d ic a te d t h i s s u b j e c t as being "very important," while l e s s
than 2 percent perceived i t to be "unimportant."

(2) A t o t a l o f 117

respondents (42 percent) viewed "Setting Administrator S a l a r i e s &
Fringe Benefits Programs" as being "somewhat important"; an a d d it i o n a l
141 respondents (50 percent) sa id t h a t i t was e i t h e r "very important"
or "of c r u c i a l importance" to them.

The t o p ic had a mean o f 3.57.

(3) "Developing a Strong Administrative Team" had a mean of 4.15 and
was c l e a r l y perceived as the most important "Administration" to p ic
pres ented.

A t o t a l o f 219 respondents (79 percent) in d ic a te d t h i s

su b j e c t as being e i t h e r "very important" or "of c ru c ial importance"
to them.

(See Table 4-4.)
Additional Administration Topics Submitted
by Respondents
Respondents submitted an a d d it i o n a l t h i r t e e n t o p ic s f o r

c o n sid e r a tio n under the "Administration" category, as follows:
(1) Superintendent Evaluations, (2) Evaluation o f the Adm inis trativ e
Team—C o l l e c t i v e l y and I n d i v id u a ll y , (3) Development of Board and
Adm inistrator R e la tio n s , (4) In se rv ic e Programs f o r A dm in is tra to rs ,
(5) Weeding-out Weak Adm inistrators, (6) Administrator Performance
Reviews, (7) S e tting-up an Evaluation System f o r A dm in istra to rs,
(8) Does Strong Administrative "Team" E f fo r t Limit Creative Problem
Solving?, (10) The R e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s o f A dm inis trators , (11) The Commu­
n i c a t i o n o f Common Goals Between Boards and A dm inis trators , (12) Improv­
ing Communications, and (13) Administrator Unions.

Table 4 -4 .--Board members' rating o f perceived needs for future inservice programs on Administration to p ics.
Rating o f Importance
Topic

No
Response

Unimportant
1
*

Of
Minor
Importance
2

f

*

f

f

Improving
A dm inistrator
Morale . . . .

4

1.44

5

1.81

19

6.86

S ettin g
A dm inistrator
S a la rie s &
Fringe Bene­
f i t s Programs .

3

1.08

3

1.08

13 4.69

Developing a
Strong Admin­
is tra tiv e
T e a m .................

5 1.81

6

2.17

%

9

3.25

Somewhat
Important

Very
Important

Of
Crucial
Importance

3

4

5

Std.
Dev.

Mdn.

Q1

02

Q

%

f

1

99

35.74

114

41.16

36

13.00

3.57

.87

3.62

2.95

4.22

.64

117

42.24

108

38.99

33

11.91

3.57

.80

3.54

2.95

4.17

.61

38

13.72

105

37.91

114

41.16

4.15

.93

4.29

3.64

4.90

.63

f

f

Mean

%

103

The Need f o r Fu tu re I n s e r v i c e on
Business & Finance Topics
Respondents r a t e d each o f t h e t h r e e t o p i c s i n c l u d e d in th e
"Business & Finance" c a t e g o r y as being between "somewhat im p o rtan t"
and " o f c r u c i a l i m p o r t a n c e ," as f o l l o w s :

(1) "Unde rstanding S t a t e

Aid C a l c u l a t i o n s " had a mean o f 3 . 6 9 , with 119 board members (42 p e r ­
c e n t ) viewing t h i s s u b j e c t as "very i m p o r t a n t . "

(2) Somewhat s u r ­

p r i s i n g l y , "Going A f t e r & G e t ti n g Federal D o l l a r s " had t h e lo w e st mean
r a t i n g (3 .4 4 ) w i t h i n t h e c a t e g o r y .

Although t h e l a r g e s t s i n g l e number

o f r e s p o n d e n ts I n d i c a t e d t h e s u b j e c t a s being "very i m p o r t a n t , " t h e
d i s t r i b u t i o n o f r e s p o n s e s was more e v en ly d i v i d e d t h a n was t r u e in
e i t h e r o f t h e o t h e r two c a t e g o r i c a l t o p i c s .

Only 15 p e r c e n t s a i d t h i s

s u b j e c t was " o f c r u c i a l i m p o r t a n c e ," w h ile more th a n 18 p e r c e n t
r e p o r t e d i t as being e i t h e r "u nimportan t" o r " o f minor i m p o r t a n c e ."
(3)

"Coping With I n f l a t i o n " had t h e h i g h e s t mean ( 4 .0 8 ) w i t h i n t h e

category.

More th an 77 p e r c e n t o f t h e res p o n d e n t s r e p o r t e d t h i s s u b ­

j e c t t o be e i t h e r "very im p o rtan t" o r " o f c r u c i a l importance" t o them,
w h i l e l e s s than 7 p e r c e n t r e p o r t e d i t as being e i t h e r "unim portant"
o r " o f minor i m p o r t a n c e ."

(See Table 4 - 5 . )

A d d i t io n a l Business & Finance Topics
Submitted by Respondents
Respondents su b m itte d an a d d i t i o n a l t h i r t e e n t o p i c s f o r
c o n s i d e r a t i o n under t h e "Business & Finance" c a t e g o r y , a s f o l l o w s :
(1) Budget and Accounting P r o c e d u r e s , (2) Understanding Your S c h o o l s '
Budget; (3) School Accounting P r i n c i p l e s , (4) P u t t i n g P r e s s u r e on t h e
S t a t e t o Give More Money Due the S c h o o l s , (5) S e t t i n g P r i o r i t i e s f o r

Table 4 -5 .—Board members' rating o f perceived needs for future in service programs on Business A Finance to p ics.
Rating o f Importance
Topic

No
Response

Unimportant

Of
Minor
Importance

1

Somewhat
Important
3

2

4

f

*

f

2.17

22

7.94

74

26.71

14

5.05

38

13.72

78

8

2.89

9

3.25

43

f

*

f

*

Understanding
S ta te Aid
C alcu latio n s .

4

1.44

6

Going A fte r &
G etting
Federal
D o llars . . .

3

1.08

Coping With
In fla tio n . .

3

1.08

Very
Important

%

f

*

Of
Crucial
Importance
5

Mean

Std.
Dev.

Mdn.

Q1

Q2

Q

f

%

119 42.96

52

18.77

3.69

.94

3.79

3.04

4.36

.66

28.16

102

36.82

42

15.16

3.44

1.07

3.57

2.71

4.24

.76

15.52

108

38.99

106

38.27

4.08

.97

4.21

3.58

4.85

.64

105
Budget Cu ts, (6) Understanding Local Budgets, (7) Understanding Business
P o l i c i e s , (8)Budget A n a l y s i s , (9) G e ttin g t h e Best Business Agent as
A d m i n i s t r a t i v e A s s i s t a n t , (10) The Pros and Cons o f Year-Round
S c ho ols, (11) A d m i n is tr a t o r R e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s in Paring Budgets,
(12) G e ttin g t h e Most With Limited F in a nce s, and (13) The "Price" o f
Federal D o l l a r s .
The Need f o r Future I n s e r v i c e on
Teacher Personnel Topics
As Table 4-6 shows, a l l t h r e e t o p i c s in t h i s c a t e g o r y were
viewed by respondents as being between "somewhat important" and "of
c r u c i a l im po rtance," as f o llo w s:

(1) " S e l e c t i n g and R eta in ing

E x c e l l e n t Teachers" had a mean o f 4 . 2 3 —t h e h i g h e s t o f th e t h r e e items
indicated.

More than 79 p e r c e n t o f t h e re spondents s a i d t h i s s u b j e c t

was e i t h e r "very impo rt an t" o r "of c r u c i a l importance" to them.

Of

t h e 219 board members responding in t h i s manner, 146 (52 p e rc e n t)
i n d i c a t e d t h e s u b j e c t to be " o f c r u c i a l im portance."

(2) "Inexpensive

Techniques f o r S t a f f Improvement" had a mean o f 3 . 8 0 , th e lowest
w i t h i n the c a t e g o r y .

The l a r g e s t number o f responden ts (40 p e rc en t)

r a t e d t h i s s u b j e c t as being "very I m p o r ta n t, " while l e s s than 1 p e r ­
c e n t p e rc eiv e d i t to be "u n im p o rtan t."

(3) The m a j o r i t y o f respondents

(73 p e r c e n t ) r e p o r t e d "Improving Teacher-School Board R e la ti o n s " as
being e i t h e r "very im p o rtan t" o r "o f c r u c i a l im portance."
j e c t had a mean r a t i n g o f 3.99.

(See Table 4 - 6 . )

This sub­

Table 4-6.--Board members' rating o f perceived needs for future inservice programs on Teacher Personnel to p ics.
Ratinq o f Importance
Topic

No
Response

Unimportant

Of
Minor
Importance

Somewhat
Important

Very
Important

Of
C rucial
Importance

1

2

3

4

5

f

f

Std.
Dev.

Mdn.

Q1

02

Q

%

f

%

73

26.35

146

52.71

4.23

1.03

4.57

3.71

5.03

.66

26.71

113

40.79

63

22.74

3.80

.90

3.86

3.13

4.46

.66

19.86

120

43.32

83

29.96

3.99

.88

4.06

3.50

4.68

.59

f

%

f

*

S electin g i
R etaining
E xcellent
Teachers . . .

5

1.81

7

2.53

16

5.78

30

10.83

Inexpensive
Techniques
fo r S ta ff
Improvement . .

6

2.17

2

.72

19

6.86

74

Improving
Teacher-School
Board Rela­
tio n s .................

6

2.17

4

1.44

9

3.25

55

%

Mean

%

f

107

Additional Teacher Personnel Topics
Submitted by Respondents
An a d d it i o n a l twenty-one t o p i c s were su bm itte d, by the respon­
d e n t s , under t h e "Teacher Personnel" c ateg ory .

The t o p i c s , r e p r e ­

se n tin g the l a r g e s t supplement o f items receiv ed under any one o f the
c a t e g o r i c a l headings, were as follows:

(1) T rain in g A dm in is tr a to rs

in Teacher S e l e c ti o n Procedures, (2) Legal Aspects o f Teacher Employ­
ment, (3) Improving Teacher Morale--two submissions, (A) Developing
A l t e r n a t i v e Methods o f Compensation, (5) A Thorough Evaluation o f the
Teaching S t a f f , (6) The Role of the Board in Teacher Evaluation Pro­
cedu res, (7) Understanding R ela tio nship s Within a T e a c h e r s1 Union,
(8) How to Eliminate Poor Teachers, (9) Discharging Tenured Teachers,
(10) Eliminating I n e f f e c t i v e Teachers, (11) Understanding th e Power
o f the Michigan Education A s s o c ia tio n , (12) F i n a l i z i n g Teacher Con­
t r a c t s Before t h e Opening o f School, (13) S e l f - e v a l u a t i o n f o r Teachers,
(14) Developing Gifted & Talented Programs Using Presen t S t a f f and
F a c i l i t i e s , (15) Adm inistrator R e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s in Teacher Ev alu atio n,
(16) Teachers' Morale, (17) How to Maintain a High Level o f S t a f f
Morale, (18) Improving Teacher Morale, (19) Understanding Union Domi­
nation o f the Local Negotia tions Proces s, and (20) Understanding th e
S t a f f Reduction Process.
The Need f o r Future I n s e r v i c e on
Student A f f a i r s Topics
"Improving Student Achievement" received a mean o f 4 .3 6 ,
the h i g h e s t o f the t h r e e t o p ic s l i s t e d in the "Student A f f a i r s " c a t e ­
gory.

More than 50 p e rc e n t o f the respondents i n d i c a t e d t h i s s u b j e c t

108

t o be "of c r u c i a l im po rtance," while l e s s than 3 p e rc e n t p e rc eiv e d
i t to be "unimportant" o r "of minor importance."
" I n c r e a s i n g Student Involvement in School A c t i v i t i e s " had
a mean o f 3 . 5 5 , w i t h t h e l a r g e s t s i n g l e number o f board members i n d i ­
c a t i n g t h e s u b j e c t t o be "somewhat im p o r ta n t."
The most even d i s t r i b u t i o n o f r e s p o n s e s , w i t h in t h e "Student
A f f a i r s " c a t e g o r y , was record ed in response t o th e t o p i c :
l i s h i n g a Minimal Competency Testing Program."

"E stab­

With a mean o f 3 .4 1 ,

t h i s t o p i c was viewed, on t h e whole, as being between "somewhat impor­
t a n t " and "very i m p o r t a n t . "

(See Table 4 - 7 . )

A d ditio n a l Student A f f a i r s Topics
Submitted by Respondents
Respondents subm itted an a d d i t i o n a l f i f t e e n t o p i c s f o r
f u t u r e i n s e r v i c e c o n s i d e r a t i o n in c on ju n c ti o n with the " S t u d e n t A f f a i r s "
c a t e g o r y , as fo llo w s:

(1) Methods o f Building B e t t e r P arent-T eacher-

Student Communications a t t h e High School Level, (2) Health Education
in t h e Schools, (3) Improving Minority Student Achievement,
(4) Improved S tud e n t and A d m in is tr a to r Communications, (5) G e ttin g
Paren ts t o Care, (6) Understanding Standardized T e s t i n g , (7) Keeping
"Dope" Off th e Campus, (8) E s t a b l i s h i n g and Maintaining an E x c e ll e n t
Curriculum, (9) Measuring Success 1n Education, (10) Improving Student
Involvement and School P r i d e , (11) Ways o f Recognizing Good Student
C i t i z e n s h i p , (12) Counseling Students f o r the F u t u r e , (13) M otivat­
ing S t u d e n t s , (14) D i s c i p l i n e , and (15) Understanding Student Values.

Table 4 -7 .—Board members' rating o f perceived needs for future inservice programs on Student A ffairs to p ics.
Rating o f Importance
Topic

No
Response

Unimportant

Of
Minor
Importance

Somewhat
Important

Very
Im portant

Of
C rucial
Importance

1

2

3

4

5

102

36.82

141

50.90

4.36

.81

4.53

3.87

5.01

.57

38.27

95

34.30

45

16.25

3.55

.94

3.53

2.88

4.25

.69

75 27.08

89

32.13

48

17.33

3.41

1.12

3.52

2.63

4.28

.83

23

2.53

21

7.58

106

5.78

42

15.16

3

1.08

4

1.44

Increasing
Student
Involvement
in School
A c tiv itie s . .

3

1.08

7

E stab lish in g
a Minimal
Competency
Program . . . .

7 2.53

16

Q

8.30

1.44

Improving
Student
Achievement . .

f

Q2

X

4

X

Q1

f

X

f

Mdn.

X

f

*

S td.
Dev.

f

X

f

Mean

110
The Need f o r Future I n s e r v i c e on General Topics
Board members were asked to respond to f i v e Items Included
w ith in t h e "General Topics" c atego ry .

In doing so , they r a t e d two

o f the t o p i c s as being between "unimportant" and "somewhat important"
to t h e i r f u t u r e i n s e r v i c e needs.

These two, "Consolidating School

D i s t r i c t s " and " M in o ritie s Awareness T r a i n i n g , " receiv ed the lowest
r a t i n g s o f a l l of t h e t o p i c s included in t h e survey in strument.
The t o p i c , " C o l le c t i v e Bargaining in an Era o f L im i ts ," had
a mean of 3.77 .

More than 40 p e rc en t o f the respondents i n d ic a t e d

t h i s s u b j e c t to be "very important" t o them, while a t o t a l o f 176
board members i n d i c a t e d i t as being "somewhat im p o r ta n t," "very impor­
t a n t , " o r "of c r u c i a l importance."
In r a t i n g "M ino ritie s Awareness T r a i n i n g , " only f i f t y board
members {18 p e r c e n t ) I n d i c a te d t h i s s u b j e c t as being e i t h e r "very
important" or "of c r u c i a l importance."

Conversely, 114 respondents

(41 p e rc e n t) s a i d i t was "unimportant" o r "of minor importance."

The

mean of t h i s t o p i c was 2.70.
With a mean o f 1 .0 9 , "Conso lidating School D i s t r i c t s "
r ec e iv e d t h e lowest r a t i n g in t h e "General Topics" categ o ry and in the
e n t i r e survey.

More than t w o - t h i r d s (67 pe rc ent) o f the respondents

viewed t h i s s u b j e c t as e i t h e r "unimportant" o r "of minor importance."
Only 10 p e rc e n t rep o rte d i t as being "very important" o r "of c r u c i a l
importance."
The t o p i c perceive d t o be o f g r e a t e s t importance within the
c ateg o ry was " I n f lu e n c in g th e S t a t e L e g i s l a t u r e . "

With a mean of

Ill

3 . 8 5 , 182 r e s p o n d e n t s (65 p e r c e n t ) viewed t h e t o p i c as being e i t h e r
" v ery i m p o r t a n t " o r "of c r u c i a l im p o rta n c e ."
The f i n a l t o p i c , " S e l f - e v a l u a t i o n f o r Boards o f E d u c a ti o n ,"
had a mean o f 3.6 4 and was r e p o r t e d by 247 board members a s being
between "somewhat i m p o r ta n t" and " o f c r u c i a l importance" t o them.
(See Table 4 - 8 . )
A d d i t io n a l General Topics Submitted b.y Respondents
Respondents su b m itte d an a d d i t i o n a l t e n t o p i c s , w i t h i n t h e
General Topics c a t e g o r y , as f o l l o w s :

(1) Unbiased F a c t s About School

I n t e g r a t i o n , (2) Programs f o r t h e G i f t e d , (3) S p ecia l Education Man­
d a t e s , (4) V o c a t i o n a l - T e c h n ic a l T r a i n i n g Awareness, (5) The D i f f e r ­
ence s Between S e t t i n g P o l i c y and D i r e c t i n g A c t i o n s , (6) Sp e c ia l
E ducation i n t h e 8 0 s , (7) I n f l u e n c in g Fede ral L e g i s l a t i o n , (8) E s t a b ­
l i s h i n g Goals f o r School Programs, (9) Home and Classroom S tu d en t
D i s c i p l i n e , and (10) Lawsuits & Legal L i a b i l i t i e s .
Ranking o f All I n s e r v i c e Program Topics by Mean Scores
As T able 4 -9 shows, s i x o f t h e twenty t o p i c s (30 p e r c e n t )
i n c l u d e d i n t h e s u r v e y q u e s t i o n n a i r e had mean s c o r e s o f 4 . 0 o r h i g h e r
and were, t h e r e f o r e , viewed by res p o n d e n t s as being between "very
i m p o r t a n t " and " o f c r u c i a l importance" t o t h e i r i n s e r v i c e e d u c a ti o n
n e eds.

An a d d i t i o n a l tw elv e t o p i c s (60 p e r c e n t ) had means between

3 . 0 and 3 .9 9 ("somewhat im p o r t a n t " and "very i m p o r t a n t " ) .

Only two

t o p i c s (10 p e r c e n t ) were r a t e d as being between " o f minor importance"
and "somewhat im p o r ta n t" (means between 2 . 0 and 2 . 9 9 ) .

None o f t h e

Table 4 -8 .—Board members' rating o f perceived needs for future inservice programs on General to p ics.
Rating o f Importance
Topic

No
Response

f

*

Unimportant

Of
Minor
Importance

Somewhat
Important

Very
Important

Of
C rucial
Importance

1

2

3

4

5

f

%

f

16

f

1

f

%

Mean

Std.
Dev.

Mdn.

Q1

Q2

Q

f

%

61

22.02

3.77

.94

3.85

3.12

4.44

.66

C o lle ctiv e
Bargaining
in an Era
o f Lim its . .

5

1.81

6

2.17

16

5.78

74

26.71

M in o rities
Awareness
T raining . .

6

2.17

32

11.55

82

29.60

107

38.63

35

12.64

15

5.42

2.70

1.02

2.70

1.94

3.33

.70

C onsolidating
School
D is tr ic ts . .

10

3.61

101

36.46

85

30.69

51

18.41

21

7.58

9

3.25

2.07

1.09

1.88

1.16

2.78

.81

Influencing
the S ta te
L e g isla tu re .

3

1.08

8

2.89

18

6.50

66

23.83

97

35.02

85

30.69

3.85

1.03

3.96

3.14

4.69

.78

S e lf-e v a l­
uation fo r
Boards of
Education . .

3

1.08

14

5.05

13

4.69

88

31.77

103

37.18

56

20.22

3.64

1.02

3.71

2.97

4.38

.70

115 41.52

113

Table 4 - 9 . —Ranking o f a l l i n s e r v i c e program t o p i c s {by mean s c o r e s ) .
j . j j M 'i ^ a ^ B ^ B a a a a g g a e a '

Rank

r e

a a e i .f ■ - — —- j -

Topic

■ ■i.

Mean

1

Improving Student Achievement

4.3577

2

Improving Communications With th e Pu blic

4.2993

3

Building a Permanent Base o f Community Support

4.2325

4

S e l e c t i n g and R e ta in in g E x c e l l e n t Teachers

4.2316

5

Developing a Strong A d m i n is tr a t iv e Team

4.1471

6

Coping With I n f l a t i o n

4.0766

7

Improving Teacher-School Board R e la ti o n s

3.9926

8

I n f l u e n c i n g the S t a t e L e g i s l a t u r e

3.8504

9

Inexpensive Techniques f o r S t a f f Improvement

3.7970

10

C o l l e c t i v e Bargaining in an Era o f Limits

3.7684

11

Understanding S t a t e Aid C a l c u l a t i o n s

3.6923

12

S e l f - e v a l u a t i o n f o r Boards o f Education

3.6350

13

Improving A d m i n is tr a t o r Morale

3.5751

14

S e t t i n g A d m i n i s t r a t o r S a l a r i e s & Fringe
B e n e f i t s Programs

3.5657

I n c r e a s i n g S tu de nt Involvement in School
A ctivities

3.5474

16

Going A f t e r & G e t ti n g Federal D o lla r s

3.4380

17

E s t a b l i s h i n g a Minimal Competency T e s ti n g
Program

3.4111

18

The Role & Function o f Advisory Committees

3.3037

19

M i n o r i t i e s Awareness T rain in g

2.7011

20

C o n s o lid a tin g School D i s t r i c t s

2.0712

15

i

114
t o p i c s p r e s e n t e d was p e r c e i v e d by r e s p o n d e n t s , on t h e a v e r a g e , as
being l e s s than " o f minor i m p o r ta n c e ."
"Improving S t u d e n t Achievement," w ith a mean o f 4.35 7 7 ,
r e c e i v e d t h e h i g h e s t averag e r a t i n g from r e s p o n d e n t s .

"Consolidat­

ing School D i s t r i c t s , " w i t h a mean o f 2.0712, had t h e lowest mean and
was, t h e r e f o r e , viewed by t h e res p o n d e n t s as t h e l e a s t im p o r ta n t t o p i c
presented.
I n t e r e s t i n g l y , a l l o f t h e f i v e t o p i c s having t h e h i g h e s t
a verage r a t i n g s in importanc e

a r e what might a p p r o p r i a t e l y be termed

"people o r i e n t e d " ; t h e y d i r e c t l y r e l a t e t o groups w i t h which board
members must c o n t i n u o u s l y i n t e r a c t —s t u d e n t s , t h e p u b l i c , t e a c h e r s ,
and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s .

C o n ve rsely, t h o s e f i v e t o p i c s r e c e i v i n g t h e

lo w e st a verage r a t i n g s i n importance a r e more " t e c h n i c a l l y o r i e n t e d " ;
t h e y p r e s e n t s u b j e c t s w ith which board members may n o t have been, o r
may choose n o t t o become, i n v o lv e d .
Ranking o f All I n s e r v i c e Program Topics by Median Scores
Ranking t h e i n s e r v i c e t o p i c s by median s c o r e s r e v e a l s t h a t
t e n o f t h e twenty ite ms (50 p e r c e n t ) remained in t h e same o r d e r as
when th e y were ranked by t h e i r mean s c o r e s .

However, seven t o p i c s

(35 p e r c e n t ) a c h ie v e d median r a n k i n g s o f 4 . 0 o r h i g h e r and were i n d i ­
c a t e d by r e s p o n d e n t s a s being between "very i m p o r ta n t" and " o f c r u c i a l
i m p o r t a n c e ."

An a d d i t i o n a l e le v e n t o p i c s (55 p e r c e n t ) had median

r a t i n g s o f 3 . 0 and 3.9 9 ("somewhat im p o r t a n t " and "very i m p o r t a n t " ) .
F i n a l l y , two t o p i c s (10 p e r c e n t ) had median r a t i n g s between 1 .0 and
2 .9 9 ( " u n im p o r tan t" and " o f minor i m p o r t a n c e " ) .

115

The nin etee n th and tw e n ti eth rankings, as determined by both
mean and median, were accorded the same two t o p i c s :

"Minorities

Awareness Training" and "Consolidating School D i s t r i c t s . "

(See

Table 4-10.)
Ranking of In se rv ic e Categories of Topics
by Mean Scores
The "Teacher Personnel" category of to p ic s received the
hig h est average r a t i n g o f importance and was the s i n g l e category
having a mean (4.0074) between "very important" and "of c ru c i a l
importance."

Each of the o t h e r f i v e c a t e g o r i e s had a mean score

between 3.2113 and 3.9472 ("somewhat important" and "very important").
The "General Topics" category was viewed, on the average, as having
to p ic s of l e a s t importance to the respondents.

(See Table 4-1 1 .)

Ranking of In se rv ic e Categories o f Topics
by Median Scores
As Table 4-12 shows, respondents ranked the "Teacher Per­
sonnel" and "Community Relations" c a t e g o r i e s of t o p ic s as the two
most important to t h e i r i n s e r v ic e program needs.

Each of t h e remain­

ing f o u r c a te g o r ie s of t o p ic s had a median score between 3.29 and
3.89 ("somewhat important" and "very im portant").

The "General

Topics" category was, as in the case o f the mean ranking, viewed as
l e a s t important.
A comparison of the ranks r e v e a l s t h a t four of the s i x c a t e ­
g ories o f t o p ic s remained in the same p o s i t i o n s when ordered by t h e i r
mean and median sc o res.

Only the fo u rth and f i f t h ranks,

116

Table 4 - 1 0 . —Ranking o f a l l I n s e r v i c e program t o p i c s {by median sc o r e s ) .
Rank

Topic

Median

1

S e l e c t i n g & R eta in ing E x c e l l e n t Teachers

4.57

2

Improving Student Achievement

4.53

3

Improving Communications With t h e Pu blic

4.37

4

Build ing a Permanent Base o f Conmunity Support

4.31

5

Developing a Strong A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Team

4.29

6

Coping With I n f l a t i o n

4.21

7

Improving Teacher-School Board R e la ti o n s

4.06

8

I n f l u e n c in g t h e S t a t e L e g i s l a t u r e

3.96

9

Inexpensive Techniques f o r S t a f f Improvement

3.86

10

C o l l e c t i v e Barg aining in an Era o f Limits

3.85

11

Understanding S t a t e Aid C a l c u l a t i o n s

3.79

12

S e l f - e v a l u a t i o n f o r Boards o f Education

3.71

13

Improving A d m i n is tr a t o r Morale

3.62

14

Going A f t e r & G e t ti n g Federal D o l l a r s

3.57

15

S e t t i n g A d m i n i s t r a t o r S a l a r i e s & Fring e
B e n e f i t s Programs

3.54

I n c r e a s i n g Stud en t Involvement in School
A ctivities

3.53

E s t a b l i s h i n g a Minimal Competency T e s tin g
Program

3.52

18

The Role & Function o f Advisory Committees

3.29

19

M i n o r i t i e s Awareness T r a in in g

2.70

20

C o n s o lid a tin g School D i s t r i c t s

1.81

16
17

117
" A d m i n is tr a t io n " and "Business & F i n a n c e ," were r e v e r s e d , in o r d e r
o f p e r c e i v e d im p o rtan ce, when t h e dual comparison was made.

Table 4 - 1 1 .- - R an k in g o f i n s e r v i c e c a t e g o r i e s o f t o p i c s (by mean s c o r e s ) .
Rank

Category

Mean

1

Teacher Personnel

4.0074

2

Community R e l a t i o n s

3.9472

3

Stu dent A f f a i r s

3.7738

4

A d m i n is tr a t io n

3.7619

5

Business & Finance

3.7357

6

General Topics

3.2113

Table 4 -1 2 .--R an k in c 1 o f i n s e r v i c e c a t e g o r i e s o f t o p i c s (by median
scores)
Rank

Category

Median

1

Teacher Personnel

4.12

2

Community R e l a t i o n s

4 .0 3

3

Student A ffa irs

3.89

4

Business & Finance

3.86

5

Adm inistration

3.81

6

General Topics

3.29

118

P a r t i c i p a t i o n o f Board Members in
Local I n s e r v ic e Programs
When asked i f they had p a r t i c i p a t e d in local i n s e r v i c e pro­
grams sponsored by t h e county o r c o u n ti e s school boards a s s o c i a t i o n ,
180 o f the respondents (64 pe rc en t) answered a f f i r m a t i v e l y ; 94
(33 pe rc ent) i n d ic a t e d t h a t they had not atten ded such f u n c t i o n s .
(See Table 4 -1 3 .)

Table 4 - 1 3 . —P a r t i c i p a t i o n o f board members in loca l i n s e r v i c e
programs.
No
Response

Activity

Local programs sponsored
by the county (o r coun­
t i e s ) school board asso ­
c i a t i o n ..................................

f

%

3

1.08

Yes
f

No
%

180 64.98

f

Mean

Mdn.

1.34

1.26

%

94 33.94

P a r t i c i p a t i o n o f Board Members in
Regional I n s e r v ic e Programs
As Table 4-14 shows, t h e p a s t p a r t i c i p a t i o n of board members
in t h e t h r e e regional i n s e r v i c e a c t i v i t i e s sponsored by the Michigan
A sso c ia tio n o f School Boards (MASB) evidenced t h e most s i g n i f i c a n t
v a r i a t i o n among any o f t h e t h r e e l e v e l s o f i n s e r v i c e programming.
More than 44 p ercen t of the respondents had a tten d e d a t l e a s t one of
the one-day d r i v e - i n c o nfe renc es , while 54 p e rc e n t had not done so.
S l i g h t l y more than o n e - h a l f o f the respondents (50.5 p e rc e n t) had
attended a one -a n d-o n e-ha lf day o r i e n t a t i o n workshop f o r new board

119

members and board o f f i c e r s ; 48 p e r c e n t had n o t p a r t i c i p a t e d in t h i s
event.

However, only 57 respondents (20 p e r c e n t ) had a tt e n d e d a

s p e c i a l t o p i c seminar; 216 resp on d ents (77 p e r c e n t ) had not done so.

Table 4 - 1 4 . — P a r t i c i p a t i o n o f board members in reg io n a l i n s e r v i c e
programs.
No
Response

A ctivity

Yes

No

Mdn.

f

%

One-day d r i v e - i n c o n f e r ­
ences sponsored by the
Michigan A s s o c ia t io n o f
School Boards ......................

3

1.08

113 44.40

151 54.51 1.55

1.59

O ne -and-one-half day
o r i e n t a t i o n workshops f o r
new board members and
board o f f i c e r s sponsored
by t h e Michigan A ssocia ­
t i o n o f School Boards . .

3

1.08

140 50.54

134 48.38 1.49

1.48

One-an d -o n e-h alf day
s p e c i a l t o p i c seminars
sponsored by the Michi­
gan A s s o c ia t io n o f
School Boards ......................

4

1.44

57 20.58

216 77.98 1.70

1.87

f

%

f

Mean
%

P a r t i c i p a t i o n o f Board Members in
State wide I n s e r v i c e Programs
The v a s t m a j o r i t y o f resp on d en ts had never a tt e n d e d e i t h e r of
the two s t a t e w i d e i n s e r v i c e programs sponsored by MASB.

Fewer than

30 p e r c e n t had p a r t i c i p a t e d in t h e annual Sa turday m id-winter c o n f e r ­
e n c e s , while more than 69 p e r c e n t had n o t done so.

The annual f a l l

c o n f e r e n c e s , which a r e o f t h e l o n g e s t d u r a t i o n o f a l l MASB a c t i v i t i e s ,

120

had been a t t e n d e d by 82 board members (29 p e r c e n t ) , a lt h o u g h 190
board members (68 p e r c e n t ) r e p o r t e d never having a t t e n d e d t h i s f u n c ­
tion.

(See Table 4 - 1 5 . )

Table 4 - 1 5 . — P a r t i c i p a t i o n o f board members in s t a t e w i d e i n s e r v i c e
programs.
No
Response

A ctivity

Yes
f

No
f

Mean

Mdn.

f

%

Saturday m id - w in te r
c o n fe r e n c e s spon­
sored by t h e Michigan
A s s o c i a t i o n o f School
Boards ...................................

7

2.53

78 28.16

192 69.31

1.71

1.80

Two-an d-one-half to
t h r e e day f a l l conven­
t i o n s sponsored by t h e
Michigan A s s o c i a t i o n
o f School Boards . . . .

5

1.81

82 29.60

190 68.59

1.70

1.78

%

%

I n t e r v i e w s With Board P r e s i d e n t s
The t e n p r e s i d e n t s o f l o c a l boards o f e d u c a t i o n , having been
s e l e c t e d and g i v e n , in advance, survey in f o r m a ti o n in accordanc e w ith
t h a t p roced ure d e s c r i b e d in Chapter I I I , were asked t o respond t o t h e
f o llo w in g t h r e e q u e s t i o n s :
Questionnaire?"

"What i s your o v e r a l l op in io n o f t h e

"What i s you r o p in io n r e g a r d i n g t h e g e n e r a l r e s u l t s

( r e s p o n s e s from l o c a l school board members)?" and "What can be done,
in t h e f u t u r e , t o i n c r e a s e l o c a l board member p a r t i c i p a t i o n in i n s e r ­
v i c e e d u c a ti o n a c t i v i t i e s a t t h e l o c a l , r e g i o n a l , and s t a t e l e v e l s ? "

121

Mhat Is Your Overall Opinion
o f t h e Questionnaire?
Nine o f the p r e s i d e n t s (90 pe rc e n t) desc ribed the survey
instrument as being complete and evidencing good o r g a n i z a t i o n .

They

s a id t h a t i t "framed the r i g h t q u estio n s" and t h a t i t "pr es ented
i s s u e s which l o c a l board members e i t h e r are or should be concerned
with."

The terms "comprehensive," " s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d , " and "well

thought out" were used in d e s c r i b i n g the q u e s t i o n n a i r e .
One p r e s i d e n t (10 p e rc e n t) said th e instrument "came acro ss
as a l i s t of probable problem t o p i c s o f school d i s t r i c t s , r a t h e r than
as a p o s s i b l e l i s t o f t o p ic s with which members should be concerned
f o r t h e i r i n s e r v i c e e d u c a ti o n ."

Although he s a id t h a t t h e in d iv id u a l

items pres ented "a good c r o s s - s e c t i o n o f c u r r e n t s u b j e c t s o f i n t e r e s t
t o board members," he suggested t h a t " i n s e r v i c e p r e s e n t a t i o n s should
no t be lin ked to the here-and-now, but r a t h e r t o expanding in d iv id u a l
horizons i n t o the f u t u r e . "
Mhat I s Your Opinion Regarding the
General Resu lts (Responses From
Local School Board Members)?
Five o f the p r e s i d e n t s (50 p e rc en t) s a i d t h a t th e res p o n se s,
o v e r a l l , "were about what I expected them to be."

The m a j o r it y i n d i ­

c a te d t h a t t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e which ind iv id u al board members a tt a c h e d
to t h e "Community R ela tions" categ ory should have been a n t i c i p a t e d ,
s in c e " i t i s the most important t h in g a board o f education do es."
While two p r e s i d e n t s (20 p e rc en t) expressed "disappointment" t h a t
"so few board members f e l t o r i e n t a t i o n f o r board c an d id ates should
be re q u ir e d befo re p e rm itting them t o run f o r o f f i c e , the m a jo r ity

122

view was b e s t s t a t e d by one p r e s i d e n t , as f o llo w s:

"Overall, i t

seemed t h e r e sp o nse s i n d i c a t e d a d e s i r e f o r t o p - f l i g h t ed ucation
with t h e l e a s t concern f o r money, money management, o r employee
m o r a l e - - a t l e a s t as i n s e r v i c e t o p i c s . "
I n d iv id u a l board p r e s i d e n t s e x p re ss e d " s u r p r i s e " over the
r e s u l t s r e p o r t e d f o r each o f t h e fo llo w in g q u e s t i o n n a i r e item s:
1.

The overwhelming agreement accorded t h e proposal t h a t

newly e l e c t e d members should be r e q u i r e d t o complete a l o c a l l y
determined i n s e r v i c e program during t h e i r f i r s t y e a r o f s e r v i c e .
2.

That so l i t t l e a p p a r e n t importance was a t t a c h e d to

Items 12 ("Going A f t e r and G e ttin g Federal D o l l a r s " ) , 18 ( " I n c r e a s ­
ing Student Involvement in School A c t i v i t i e s " ) , 20 ( " M i n o r i ti e s
Awareness T r a i n i n g " ) , and 22 ( " C o n s o l i d a t i n g School D i s t r i c t s " ) .
3.

The f a c t t h a t a m a j o r i t y o f lo c a l board members had

a t t e n d e d one o r more o f the o n e - a n d - o n e - h a l f day r eg io n a l o r i e n t a ­
t i o n workshops given f o r new members and board o f f i c e r s .
4.

The l a c k o f a t t e n d a n c e , by l o c a l board members, a t

both o f the s t a t e w i d e f u n c t i o n s (m id -w in ter c onfe rences and f a l l
c o n v e n t io n s ) .
5.

The f a c t t h a t q u e s t i o n s " o b vio usly a d m i n i s t r a t i v e in

n a tu r e " would be " o f concern" t o board members, who should "devote
t h e i r energies to policy fu n c tio n s."

123
Mhat Can Be Done, i n t h e F u t u r e , t o
I n c r e a s e Local Board Member P a r t i c i ­
p a t i o n i n I n s e r v i c e Education
A c t i v i t i e s a t t h e L o c a l, R e g i o n a l ,
and S t a t e L evels ?
The views e x p r e s s e d by t h e p r e s i d e n t s were most i n s i g h t f u l
and c a n d i d r e l a t i v e t o t h e p l a n n i n g f o r f u t u r e i n s e r v i c e a c t i v i t i e s
f o r l o c a l board members.

The m a j o r i t y (70 p e r c e n t ) view t h e p opula­

t i o n o f l o c a l board members a s an amalgam o f dichotomous e le m e n t s :
t h o s e i n d i v i d u a l s who a r e e x p e r i e n c e d , e i t h e r by v i r t u e o f l o n g e v i t y
on t h e board o r a s a r e s u l t o f t h e i r v o c a t i o n a l involvem ents i n p r o ­
f e s s i o n a l o r m an ag erial p o s i t i o n s , and t h o s e members who a r e i n e x p e r i ­
e n ce d — as measured by t h e same c r i t e r i a .

For e x p e r i e n c e d board

members, i n s e r v i c e programming sh ou ld be o f a s h o r t , s u r v e y , and
p r a c t i c a l - p r o b l e m o r i e n t a t i o n ; f o r t h o s e who a r e i n e x p e r i e n c e d , i t
should be l o n g e r , more i n - d e p t h , and n e c e s s a r i l y p h i l o s o p h i c a l .

The

p r e s i d e n t s s a i d t h a t t o o many p a s t i n s e r v i c e programs h ad, in an
e f f o r t t o appeal t o a l l board members, f a i l e d t o a p p r e c i a t e t h e b a s i c
dichotorqy e x i s t e n t w i t h i n t h e i n t e n d e d p o p u l a t i o n , a nd, a s a c o n se ­
q u e n c e , had been m arg in al in t h e i r appeal t o both e l e m e n t s .
Six p r e s i d e n t s (60 p e r c e n t ) s a i d t h a t a l l f u t u r e i n s e r v i c e
programs s h o u ld be l i m i t e d t o a maximum o f one day and should be
c on ducted on a r e g i o n a l o r l o c a l b a s i s — t h a t board members, p a r t i c u ­
l a r l y f a r m e r s and homemakers w i t h young c h i l d r e n , c a n n o t e x t r i c a t e
t h e m s e lv e s from t h e i r v o c a t i o n a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s f o r an extended
p e r i o d o f tim e .

124

Three p r e s i d e n t s (30 p e rc en t) i n d ic a t e d t h a t th o se i n s e r v i c e
events r e q u i r i n g an extended time period should be planned so as to
i n co rp o ra te weekends.
Two p r e s i d e n t s (20 p e rc ent) in d ic a t e d each o f th e following
concerns:

(1) t h a t board l e a d e r s h ip i s c r u c i a l in convincing new

members o f both the importance and v i t a l need f o r i n s e r v i c e educa­
t i o n ; (2) t h a t local boards must be w i l l i n g t o commit adequate funds
to defray those personal expenses in cu rred in a t t e n d i n g i n s e r v i c e
f u n c t i o n s ; (3) t h a t both t h e local a d m i n i s t r a t io n and MASB must con­
t i n u o u s l y " s e l l " the need f o r board member i n s e r v i c e p a r t i c i p a t i o n ;
and (4) t h a t a l i s t i n g o f resou rce e x p e r ts should be developed and
disseminated t o local boards f o r t h e i r use in con ju nction with the
p r e s e n t a t i o n o f programs, as may be deemed a p p r o p r i a t e t o th e needs
o f local boards.
Ind ividua l p r e s i d e n t s re p o r te d th e following personal views
f o r c o n s i d e r a ti o n in the planning o f f u t u r e i n s e r v i c e e v e n ts:
1.

A s p e c i f i c p o lic y st a te m e n t , r e l a t i v e to i n s e r v i c e ,

should be adopted by each local school board.

Each board should,

th e n , develop I t s i n s e r v i c e goals f o r a s p e c i f i c period o f tim e—
" p r e f e r a b l y a f i s c a l y e a r " —and "measure i t s achievements in r e l a t i o n
t o i t s goals and p o l ic y s t a te m e n t ."
2.

The d e l i v e r y techniques used in p r e s e n t i n g i n s e r v i c e

t o p i c s should be " d i v e r s i f i e d . "

In t h e p a s t , t h e r e have been "too

many i n s t a n c e s of r e l i a n c e on the l e c t u r e method" o f p r e s e n t a t i o n .
3.

Statewide meetings a r e " v aluable f o r r o o k i e s , but not

f o r experienced members."

125

4.

"You must r e a l i z e t h a t bo ard s a r e o nly a s good as they

want t o be.

T h e r e f o r e , MASB should c o n t i n u e t o m a i n t a i n t h e high

q u a l i t y in programming evidenced in p a s t e v e n t s . "
5.

" D i s t a n c e i s a s much a problem as i s time f o r many

board members. . . . The c o s t s o f i n s e r v i c e must, in t h e f u t u r e , be
c a r e f u l l y weighed a g a i n s t t h e a n t i c i p a t e d b e n e f i t s . "
6.

"The s u p e r i n t e n d e n t i s t h e ' k e y . '

I f he i s w i l l i n g t o

t a k e t h e tim e t o go w i t h h i s board members, i f he s e e s i n s e r v i c e as
v i t a l l y i m p o r t a n t , and i f he de m on stra te s t h e importance o f such
a c t i v i t i e s in h i s own l i f e , I b e l i e v e board members w i l l c a t c h t h e
vision a lso ."
Summary
Local school board members w i t h i n Southwestern Michigan have
had a r e l a t i v e l y s h o r t t e n u r e o f s e r v i c e .

Although t h e res p o n d en ts

ranged in l o n g e v i t y from l e s s than one month t o more than twentye i g h t y e a r s and t h r e e months, t h e averag e board member had served
o n l y f o u r y e a r s and two months a t t h e time t h e survey was conducted.
Fu rth e rm o re , t h e p o p u l a t i o n evidenced a pronounced n e g a t i v e skew, in
which t h e median l o n g e v i t y was t h r e e y e a r s and t h r e e months, more
th an 60 p e r c e n t o f t h e r e s p o n d e n ts having se rv ed l e s s than one e l e c t e d
term o f f o u r y e a r s .
The v a s t m a j o r i t y o f res p o n d en ts agreed t h a t c o n ti n u i n g
i n s e r v i c e e d u c a t i o n i s v i t a l l y im p o r tan t t o a l l board members who wish
t o perform t h e i r d u t i e s w e l l .

Although t h e m a j o r i t y d i s a g r e e d with

t h e proposa l t h a t c a n d i d a t e s f o r l o c a l boards should be r e q u i r e d to

126

complete an o r i e n t a t i o n program p r i o r to running f o r o f f i c e , they
supported a suggestion which, i f i n s t i t u t e d , would r e q u i r e the com­
p l e t i o n o f a l o c a l l y determined in se r v ic e program by newly e le c t e d
o r appointed members during t h e i r f i r s t y e ar of se r v i c e .
From among the s i x c a te g o r ie s of t o p ic s presented to them,
respondents repor ted t h e i r g r e a t e s t in se r v ic e needs as being in c o r ­
porated within the t h r e e having a "people" o r i e n t a t i o n —"Teacher
Personnel," "Community R e la tio n s ," and "Student A f f a i r s . "

Conversely,

they were l e a s t desiro us o f a ttending i n se r v ic e p r e s e n ta tio n s asso ­
c i a t e d with the " te c h n ic a l" asp ects of school d i s t r i c t o p e ra t io n , as
were presented in t h e t h ree c a te g o r ie s e n t i t l e d "Business and Finance,"
"Adm inistration," and "General Topics."
In a ddition to the twenty individual t o p ic s in d ic ate d on the
survey q u e s t io n n a ir e , respondents submitted another e i g h t y - t h r e e items
they believed to be o f s u f f i c i e n t Importance to m erit f u t u r e In se rv ic e
programs.
Nearly t w o -th ird s of the board members had attended one or
more o f the local i n s e r v ic e programs sponsored by the county, or
c o u n t i e s , c h ap ter o f MASB.

However, of those two a c t i v i t i e s sponsored

by MASB on a regional b a s i s , only 50 percent had attende d an o r i e n ­
t a t i o n workshop f o r new board members and board o f f i c e r s and l e s s
than 25 pe rcent had attended a d r i v e - i n conference.

A d d i t io n a l ly ,

fewer than 30 pe rcent had attended e i t h e r o f the two In se r v ic e events
annually conducted on a statewide b a sis.
Board p r e s i d e n t s overwhelmingly indic ated t h e i r approval of
the survey instrument, with 50 percent s t a t i n g t h a t the r e s u l t s were

127

approximately what th ey had a n t i c i p a t e d .

The m a j o r i t y suggested

t h a t f u t u r e i n s e r v i c e p r e s e n t a t i o n s be designed f o r e i t h e r e x p e r i ­
enced o r inex perienced board members and conducted on e i t h e r a l o c a l
o r r e g io n a l b a s i s .

Other su g ge stio n s f o r enhancing l o c a l board mem­

ber p a r t i c i p a t i o n in f u t u r e i n s e r v i c e a c t i v i t i e s in clu d ed :

(1) t h e

assumption o f g r e a t e r r e s p o n s i b i l i t y by board o f f i c e r s and c e n t r a l
o f f i c e a d m i n i s t r a t o r s f o r t h e a tt e n d a n c e o f a l l members, (2) the com­
mitment o f adequate funds a t t h e lo ca l board l e v e l to d e f r a y th ose
c o s t s a s s o c i a t e d with i n s e r v i c e p a r t i c i p a t i o n , (3) t h e e s t a b l is h m e n t
of i n s e r v i c e goals by and f o r each lo ca l bo ard , and (4) a d i v e r s i ­
f i c a t i o n in t h e method o f p r e s e n t i n g i n s e r v i c e t o p i c s .

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER
RESEARCH, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Introduction
This c h a p t e r c o n t a i n s a summary o f t h e s t u d y , t h e c o n c l u s i o n s ,
and i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h .

The w r i t e r ' s recommendations

p e r t a i n i n g t o an o v e r a l l de sig n f o r f u t u r e board member i n s e r v i c e
e d u c a t i o n programming conclude t h e s t u d y .
Summary
Purpose o f t h e Study
The s t u d y sought t o c o n t r i b u t e toward an Improvement i n lo c a l
board o f e d u c a t i o n d e c i s i o n making through an i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f i n d i ­
v id u al member p e r c e i v e d need f o r , and p a s t p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n , programs
o f i n s e r v i c e e d u c a t i o n a t t h e l o c a l , r e g i o n a l , and s t a t e w i d e l e v e l s —
e v e n t s p r e s e n t e d f o r t h e primary purpose o f p r o v i d i n g board members
w ith c u r r e n t i n f o r m a t i o n v i t a l t o t h e i r a r r i v i n g a t knowledgeable
d e c i s i o n s , as well a s becoming more s k i l l f u l in t h e performance o f
t h e i r d u t i e s as r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f t h e p u b l i c in l o c a l e d u c a t i o n a l
go vernance.

I t was i n te n d e d t h a t t h e s t u d y would have a d i r e c t

a p p l i c a t i o n t o each o f t h e f o l lo w in g :

(1) t h e enhancement o f t h a t

emphasis given board member i n s e r v i c e e d u c a ti o n a t t h e l o c a l d i s t r i c t
l e v e l ; (2) t h e encouragement o f i n c r e a s e d p a r t i c i p a t i o n by l o c a l
board members i n i n s e r v i c e e d u c a ti o n e v e n t s conducted a t t h e l o c a l ,

128

129

r e g i o n a l , and s t a te w i d e l e v e l s ; (3) the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f s p e c i f i c
t o p ic s o f perceive d need; and (4) the p r o v isio n o f c u r r e n t informa­
t i o n t o th ose l o c a l , r e g i o n a l , and sta te w id e p r o f e s s i o n a l s having
the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r planning f u t u r e board member i n s e r v i c e
programs.
The study derived i t s s i g n i f i c a n c e from the w r i t e r ' s b e l i e f s
t h a t the e x p e r t i s e demonstrated by local board members in coping with
the v a s t l y d i f f e r e n t e x te rn a l environment c u r r e n t l y c o n fr o n tin g them
may determine t h e continued e x is te n c e of l o c a l , l a y - c o n tr o l over pu b lic
e d u c a tio n ; and t h a t d e s p i t e an urgent need f o r more knowledgeable
and s k i l l f u l board members, a syste m atic approach to i n s e r v i c e edu­
c a t i o n (as a primary technique f o r enhancing in d iv id u a l board member
c a p a b i l i t y ) i s v i r t u a l l y n o n e x is te n t.
Review o f P e r t i n e n t L i t e r a t u r e
Throughout most o f our n a t i o n ’s h i s t o r y , school boards f un c ­
tio n e d in a r e l a t i v e l y s t a b l e and congenial environment.

Within t h e

p a s t twenty y e a r s , however, they have i n c r e a s i n g l y had t o cope with
a c c e l e r a t e d demands and mandates f o r change, a circumstance t h a t has
challenged th e c a p a c i t y o f board members to r e s o l v e numerous problems
t h a t f r e q u e n t l y transcend the schools.

The contemporary environment,

hallmarked by e v e r - e s c a l a t i n g imperatives o f boardsmanship, has caused
many a u t h o r i t i e s to conclude t h a t school boards a re a t a c r o s s r o a d s —
t h a t t h e c o n t i n u a t i o n of l o c a l , l a y - c o n tr o l over p u b lic schools may
c o n s t i t u t e an anachronism in educational governance.

130
The l i t e r a t u r e r e l e v a n t to i n s e r v i c e e d u c a tio n f o r l o c a l
board members was found t o be both l i m i t e d and s p o r a d i c i n n a t u r e .
While numerous books, pamphlets, and a r t i c l e s a d dressed th e need f o r
more capable board members, as well as t h e importance o f i n s e r v i c e
events in improving t h e i r performance, a n o t i c e a b l e void in r e s e a r c h
p e r t i n e n t to t h e planning and conducting o f s y s te m a t i c programs o f
i n s e r v i c e e d u c a ti o n e x i s t e d .

All a u t h o r i t i e s a g r e e d , however, t h a t

t h e development o f i n s e r v i c e e x p e r ie n c e s a p p r o p r i a t e t o t h e needs o f
board members was f o u n d a tio n a l t o improving t h e i r c a p a b i l i t i e s , which,
in t u r n , was in j u x t a p o s i t i o n t o enhancing th e governance p ro ce ss of
America's p u b l i c sc h oo ls.
Each o f t h e follo w in g i s s u e s a n d /o r t o p i c s was s y n t h e s i z e d
i n t o the review o f t h e l i t e r a t u r e :

(1) t h e f u n c t i o n s o f school board s;

(2) the contemporary environment in l o c a l school governance; (3) t h e
s u r v i v a l o f l o c a l , l a y - c o n t r o l l e d school b o a rds; (4) t h e e s c a l a t i n g
im pe rativ es o f boardsmanship; (5) a p r o f i l e o f American p u b l i c school
board members; (6) t h e s o c i a l i z a t i o n o f new school board members;
(7) th e valu e o f s y s te m a t i c and continuous programs o f i n s e r v i c e
e d u c a ti o n ; (8) p a s t i n s e r v i c e programs sponsored by t h e Michigan
A s s o c ia t io n o f School Boards; and (9) t e n d i s s e r t a t i o n s r e l a t i n g to
i n s e r v i c e e d u c a ti o n f o r school board members.
Design and Methodology
To a s s e s s t h e p e rc eiv e d needs o f l o c a l p u b l i c school board
members and t h e i r p a s t p a r t i c i p a t i o n in i n s e r v i c e e d u ca tio n programs
a t th e l o c a l , r e g i o n a l , and s t a t e w i d e l e v e l s , a t h r e e - p a g e survey

131
i n s t r u m e n t e n t i t l e d " I n s e r v i c e E ducation Q u e s t i o n n a i r e o f S o u th ­
w e s t e r n Michigan P u b l i c School Board Members" was d e s i g n e d f o r t h e
study.

The q u e s t i o n n a i r e c o n s i s t e d o f t h i r t y item s and was s u b ­

d i v i d e d i n t o f o u r p a r t s , as f o l l o w s :

(1) "Your O p i n i o n " ; (2) "Your

S e r v i c e " ; (3) " P la n n in g f o r t h e F u t u r e " ; and (4) "Your P a s t P a r t i c i ­
p a t i o n i n L o c a l , R e g i o n a l , & Sta te -W id e I n s e r v i c e E d u c a tio n Pro gram s."
Each o f t h e i t e m s , w i t h t h e e x c e p t i o n o f one p e r t a i n i n g t o l e n g t h
o f s e r v i c e on t h e l o c a l b o a r d , s o l i c i t e d an " a g r e e / d i s a g r e e , " " y e s /
no" r e s p o n s e o r n e c e s s i t a t e d t h e s e l e c t i o n o f a r e s p o n s e on a f i v e p o i n t ("1" t o "5") f o r c e d - c h o i c e s c a l e .

The s u b m iss io n o f p o t e n t i a l

fu tu re in s e rv ic e t o p i c s , in a d d itio n to those included in the ques­
t i o n n a i r e , was a l s o en co u rag e d .

A p r e t e s t o f the survey in stru m e n t,

i n v o l v i n g s e v e n t y - f i v e fo rm er l o c a l board members, was completed
a p p r o x i m a t e l y one month p r i o r t o t h e c onduct o f t h e s u r v e y .
The p o p u l a t i o n s e l e c t e d f o r s t u d y comprised a u n i v e r s e o f t h e
322 e l e c t e d and a p p o i n t e d members s e r v i n g on t h e b oa rd s o f e d u c a t i o n
o f t h e f o r t y - s i x So u th w e ste rn Michigan l o c a l p u b l i c school d i s t r i c t s
s p o n s o r i n g k i n d e r g a r t e n t h r o u g h t w e l f t h g r a d e programs a t t h e time
t h e s t u d y was c o n d u c t e d .

C u r r e n t board membership was t h e s o l e

d e l i m i t i n g c r i t e r i o n used i n t h e s e l e c t i o n o f p a r t i c i p a n t s .
The m a i l i n g o f an i n t r o d u c t o r y l e t t e r , i n which t h e s t u d y
p o p u l a t i o n was a l e r t e d t o t h e fo rth co m in g s u r v e y , p r e c e d e d t h e
i n i t i a l d i s t r i b u t i o n o f s u r v e y i n s t r u m e n t s , and accompanying l e t t e r s ,
by one week.

Three weeks a f t e r t h e i n i t i a l m a i l i n g o f s u r v e y i n s t r u ­

m e n ts , a second q u e s t i o n n a i r e , coded t h e same a s t h e f i r s t , was
m a i l e d t o each n o n r e s p o n d e n t .

At t h e same t i m e , a l e t t e r was s e n t

132
to each loca l s u p e rin te n d en t i n d i c a t i n g th o se o f h i s board members
who had not responded and re q u e stin g h i s personal i n t e r v e n t i o n .

Four

weeks a f t e r the i n i t i a l mailing o f survey i n s t r u m e n t s , a personal
telephone c a l l was made to each o f th o se board members who had not
responded to e i t h e r the f i r s t or follow -up r e q u e s t s f o r compliance.
Following the conduct o f t h e survey and an a n a l y s i s o f the
obtained d a t a , an in te rv ie w was held with ten o f th e included f o r t y s i x board o f education p r e s i d e n t s .

The purpose o f t h e s e in te r v ie w s

was t o a s c e r t a i n t h e i r opinions reg ard in g the survey in str u m e n t, the
g e n e r a liz e d r e s u l t s , and th ose a c t i o n s t h a t might be taken in an
e f f o r t to i n c r e a s e local board member p a r t i c i p a t i o n in f u t u r e i n s e r ­
vice education programs.
Findings
The fin d in g s o f t h e study were ob tain ed through an a n a l y s i s
of the obtained da ta r ep o r te d by the 277 board members (86.02 p e rc e n t)
who responded to the survey q u e s t i o n n a i r e .

They were a l s o based on

the in te rv ie w s conducted with t h e t e n board o f education p r e s i d e n t s .
A s i m p l i f i e d l i s t i n g o f the f i n d i n g s i s as f o llo w s:
1.

Local board members w it h in Southwestern Michigan have had

a r e l a t i v e l y b r i e f ten ure o f s e r v i c e , th e average respondent having
served on th e board f o r fo ur y e a r s and two months.

Furthermore,

the population evidenced a pronounced ne g ativ e skew, in which the
median lo n gevity was t h r e e y e a r s and t h r e e months.

More than 60 p e r ­

cent o f the respondents had served l e s s than one e l e c t e d term o f
f o ur y e a r s .

133

2.

More th an 80 p e r c e n t o f t h e r e s p o n d e n t s ag re ed t h a t

c o n ti n u i n g i n s e r v i c e e d u c a ti o n i s v i t a l l y im p o r ta n t t o a l l board
members who d e s i r e t o perform t h e i r d u t i e s in a competent manner.
3.

Nearly t w o - t h i r d s o f t h e res p o n d e n t s d i s a g r e e d with a

proposal c a l l i n g f o r t h e c om pletion o f a r e q u i r e d o r i e n t a t i o n program
by c a n d i d a t e s f o r l o c a l boards p r i o r t o runn ing f o r o f f i c e .
4.

More than t w o - t h i r d s o f t h e r e s p o n d e n t s ag re ed t h a t

newly e l e c t e d o r a p p o i n t e d members should be r e q u i r e d t o complete a
l o c a l l y determ ined i n s e r v i c e program d u rin g t h e i r f i r s t y e a r o f
service.
5.

Respondents r e p o r t e d t h e i r g r e a t e s t i n s e r v i c e "n ee d s,"

from among t h e s i x c a t e g o r i e s o f t o p i c s p r e s e n t e d , w i t h i n t h e t h r e e
a r e a s having a "people" o r i e n t a t i o n :

(1) "Teacher P e r s o n n e l , "

(2) "Community R e l a t i o n s , " and (3) "Stud en t A f f a i r s . "

C o nv e rsely ,

they evidenced l e s s i n t e r e s t in t h o s e c a t e g o r i e s o f t o p i c s p e r t a i n ­
ing to t h e t e c h n i c a l a s p e c t s o f school d i s t r i c t o p e r a t i o n :
(1) " A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , " (2) "Business and F i n a n c e , " and (3) "General
T opics."
6.

The s i x most h i g h l y r a t e d i n d i v i d u a l t o p i c s having mean

s c o r e s in e x ce ss o f 4 . 0 (between "very im p o r t a n t " and "o f c r u c i a l
importan ce") were a s f o l l o w s :

(1) "Improving S tu d e n t Achievement,"

(2) "Improving Communications With t h e P u b l i c , " (3) " B uildin g a
Permanent Base o f Community S u p p o r t , " (4) " S e l e c t i n g and R e ta in i n g
E x c e l l e n t T e a c h e r s , " (5) "Developing a Stron g A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Team,"
and (6) "Coping With I n f l a t i o n . "

134

7.

Only two t o p i c s , "Minoritie s Awareness Training" and

"Consolidating School D i s t r i c t s , " were r a t e d as being l e s s than
"somewhat i m p o r t a n t . "
8.

An a d d itio n a l e i g h t y - t h r e e t o p i c s , which respondents

believed s u f f i c i e n t l y important to m e r it f u t u r e i n s e r v i c e program
c o n s i d e r a ti o n , were submitted.
9.

More than 64 pe rc ent of the respondents had a ttend e d one

or more local i n s e r v ic e education programs.
10.

While 51 percent o f the respondents had a ttend e d a t l e a s t

one regional d r i v e - i n conference, l e s s than h a l f had a ttend e d the
o r i e n t a t i o n workshops or sp e cia l t o p ic seminar events conducted on
a regional b a s i s .
11.

Less than o n e - t h i r d o f the respondents had a ttend e d

e i t h e r the annual mid-winter conference or f a l l convention events
sponsored on a statewide b a s i s .
12.

The overwhelming m ajo rity (90 pe rc ent) o f the board p r e s i ­

dents rep o rte d t h e i r s a t i s f a c t i o n with the survey in strument.
13.

Board p r e s id e n ts believed t h a t f u t u r e i n s e r v i c e p r e s e n t a ­

t io n s should be designed f o r e i t h e r experienced o r inexperienced
members and should be conducted on e i t h e r a local o r regional b a s i s .
Fu r th e r , they believed t h a t a maximum time period of one day should
be imposed on a l l i n s e r v ic e a c t i v i t i e s f o r local board members.
14.

Additional board p r e s i d e n t s ' suggestions r e l a t i v e to

enhancing local member p a r t i c i p a t i o n in f u t u r e i n s e r v i c e events were
as follows:

(1) board o f f i c e r s and c e n t r a l o f f i c e a d m i n i s t r a t o r s

must assume g r e a t e r r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r the attendance o f in d iv idu a l

135

members; (2) each I n d iv id u a l board should e s t a b l i s h i n s e r v i c e goals*
based on l o c a l needs; (3) boards must be w i l l i n g t o d e f r a y th o se
c o s t s a s s o c i a t e d with i n s e r v i c e a t t e n d a n c e by t h e i r members; and
(4) methods o f p r e s e n t i n g i n s e r v i c e t o p i c s should be d i v e r s i f i e d .
Conclusions
The follo w in g c o n c l u s i o n s a pp ea r t o be j u s t i f i e d on t h e b a s i s
o f the f i n d i n g s in th e st ud y :
1.

The a s s e r t e d need f o r more knowledgeable and s k i l l f u l

p u b l ic school board members, as r e p o r t e d in Chapter I , i s c o r r o b o r a t e d
by l o c a l board members.

There i s a c l e a r consensus r e g a r d i n g t h e c r u ­

c i a l importance o f r e g u l a r p a r t i c i p a t i o n in i n s e r v i c e programs, p a r ­
t i c u l a r l y by those members d e s i r o u s o f capably d i s c h a r g i n g t h e i r
r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s as r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f t h e p u b l i c in t h e pro ce ss o f
lo ca l school governance.
2.

Newly e l e c t e d o r a pp o in ted board members should be

r e q u i r e d to complete a planned program o f i n s e r v i c e e d u c a ti o n during
th e ir f i r s t year of serv ice.

The s e l e c t i o n o f a desi gn f o r t h e s e

programs, however, should be e x c l u s i v e l y determined by l o c a l boards
o f e d u c a t i o n , based upon l o c a l pu rposes and n e eds, and should be
s p e c i f i e d in a w r i t t e n p o l i c y s t a t e m e n t .

There i s o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e

mandating o f i n s e r v i c e p a r t i c i p a t i o n , o t h e r than as may be determined
n e c e ssa r y by each l o c a l board f o r i t s members, and t o any requirement
f o r t h e o r i e n t a t i o n o r f a m i l i a r i z a t i o n o f board c a n d i d a t e s p r i o r t o
t h e i r assumption o f o f f i c e .

136
3.

The b r i e f t e n u r e o f s e r v i c e r e p o r t e d by t h e stu d y p a r ­

t i c i p a n t s s u b s t a n t i a t e s a c o n t i n u i n g n a t i o n a l phenomenon.

The l i m i t e d

l o n g e v i t y a t t a i n e d by t h e a v e r a g e board member s u g g e s t s an u r g e n t
need f o r a v a r i e t y o f i n s e r v i c e e v e n t s - - a c t i v i t i e s in te n d ed p r i m a r i l y
t o a s s i s t t h o s e who have had minimal e x p e r i e n c e in school go v e rn a n c e - and f o r an a c c e l e r a t e d e f f o r t i n u r g i n g g r e a t e r l o c a l board member
a tt e n d a n c e a t t h e s e programs.
4.

The s p o n s o r s h i p o f i n s e r v i c e e d u c a t i o n programs w i l l

c o n ti n u e as a prim ary t e c h n iq u e employed by p r i v a t e o r g a n i z a t i o n s ,
governmental a g e n c i e s , i n s t i t u t i o n s , and i n d i v i d u a l s i n t e r e s t e d in
improving t h e c a p a b i l i t i e s o f l o c a l board members, and, u l t i m a t e l y ,
t h e competence d em on str ate d by l o c a l boards o f e d u c a t i o n th e m s e lv e s .
Within Michigan, t h e Michigan A s s o c i a t i o n o f School Boards and i t s
a f f i l i a t e d c h a p t e r s a r e l i k e l y t o remain t h e prime sponsors o f i n s e r ­
v i c e e d u c a t i o n e v e n t s f o r l o c a l board members.
5.

The p r e v i o u s l y d e s c r i b e d d e c e n t r a l i z e d system o f American

p u b l i c school gov ern an ce, i n tandem w i t h v i r t u a l l y u n r e s t r i c t e d c i t i ­
zen a c c e s s t o e l e c t i o n o r a p poin tm ent t o l o c a l boards o f e d u c a t i o n ,
e x a c e r b a t e s t h e need f o r a m u lt i d im e n s i o n a l and m u l t i l e v e l approach
t o t h e p r o v i s i o n o f i n s e r v i c e programs.

Local board members have

d i v e r s e i n t e r e s t s and n e e d s , which w i l l become even more pronounced
a s new and complex c h a l l e n g e s a r e p l a c e d b e f o r e them In t h e f u t u r e .
6.

Local board members have no d e s i r e t o become merely

diplom a-conferring, cornerston e-laying d i g n i t a r i e s .

The overwhelming

m a j o r i t y r e c o g n i z e t h e u r g e n t need t o become, and t o remain,

137

knowledgeable and s k i l l f u l , p a r t i c u l a r l y in th ose a s p e c t s o f school
governance d i r e c t l y r e l a t e d to c l i e n t p r o d u c t i v i t y and community
involvement.
7.

I n s e r v ic e t o p i c s r e l a t e d to the t e c h n ic a l a s p e c t s o f the

o p e r a t io n a nd /o r f u n ctio n in g o f school d i s t r i c t s a re o f d e cid ed ly
l e s s i n t e r e s t and importance to local board members than a r e those
concerning human involvement and achievement.
8.

Time and c o s t a r e the two most s i g n i f i c a n t f a c t o r s i n f l u ­

encing t h e d e c i s i o n made by board members to a t t e n d or to r e f r a i n
from a t t e n d i n g i n s e r v i c e education e v e n ts.

Those p r e s e n t a t i o n s held

in c l o s e s t proximity t o the "home" d i s t r i c t o f the members and r e q u i r ­
ing the l e a s t exp en ditu re of t h e i r time a r e the b e s t a t t e n d e d .
9.

I n s e r v ic e programs should be planned and a d v e r t i s e d as

being intended f o r e i t h e r experienced o r inexperienced board members.
Those events presented f o r t h e b e n e f i t o f experienced members should
r e q u i r e r e l a t i v e l y l i t t l e investment in time—p r e f e r a b l y a few hours—
and should be r e l a t e d to one s p e c i f i c problem o r t o p i c .

Presentations

designed to a s s i s t inexperienced members may be lo n g er (although not
t o exceed one d ay), more in - d ep th in n a t u r e , and inclu d e a h i s t o r i ­
cal p e r s p e c t i v e o f the t o p i c or i s s u e being con sidered.
10.

An i n c r e a s e in the p a r t i c i p a t i o n o f board members in

i n s e r v i c e events w ill be d i r e c t l y dependent upon a heightened empha­
s i s , on the p a r t o f local board o f f i c e r s and c e n t r a l o f f i c e adminis­
t r a t o r s , reg arding the importance o f a tten d a n ce and by a g r e a t e r
w i l l i n g n e s s , on t h e p a r t o f lo ca l bo a rd s, to d e fr a y th ose expenses
a s s o c i a t e d with i n s e r v i c e p a r t i c i p a t i o n .

138

I m p li c a t io n s f o r F u r t h e r Research
I t i s i r o n i c , c o n s i d e r i n g t h e c r u c i a l importance o f t h e d e c i ­
s io n s reached by local boards o f e d u c a t i o n , t h a t t h e r e e x i s t s such
a sc a n t and in c o n c lu s iv e r e s e a r c h base r e g a r d in g b o a rd , and board
member, behavior.

Very l i m i t e d , s c i e n t i f i c a l l y determined i n f o r ­

mation i s a v a i l a b l e to e x p l a i n r e l a t i o n s h i p s among t h e numerous
v a r i a b l e s o p e ra n t w i t h i n t h e f u n c t i o n i n g , m o t i v a t i o n , and s o c i a l i z a ­
t i o n p r o ce ss es impacting the c o n c l u s i o n s reached by b o a rd s , as well
as by in d iv i d u a l board members.

Local school bo a rd s, as a t o p i c

f o r stu d y , have rec eiv e d minimal a t t e n t i o n from e d u c a ti o n a l r e s e a r c h ­
ers.
The t o p ic being co n sid ere d in t h i s study i s a l s o under­
re s e a r c h e d .

L i t t l e i s known about e i t h e r t h e i n s e r v i c e e d uca tio n

needs o f l o c a l board members o r t h e i r p a r t i c i p a t i o n in i n s e r v i c e
education programs, and the r e s e a r c h t h a t has been r e p o r t e d i s l a r g e l y
d e s c r i p t i v e in n a t u r e .

A mere ten s t u d i e s , r e l a t i n g to th e t r a i n i n g

needs o f , and t r a i n i n g d esig n s f o r , l o c a l board members have been
publ ished w i t h in t h e p a s t t w e n t y - f i v e y e a r s .

Among t h e s e , only two

(Kammer, Colorado S t a t e C o l le g e , 1968, and D i e t z e l , U n i v e r s i t y o f
Michigan, 1980) have attem pted t o c o r r e l a t e e f f e c t i v e board member
behavior w ith a tte n d a n c e a t i n s e r v i c e e d u ca tion e v e n t s .
The f i n d i n g s o f t h e study have s i g n i f i c a n t i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r
se v era l o r g a n i z a t i o n s and i n s t i t u t i o n s in Michigan.

Among t h e s e a r e

the Michigan A sso c ia tio n o f School Boards (MASB), t h e a f f i l i a t e d
county o r c o u n ti e s c h a p t e r s o f MASB, t h e Michigan A s s o c i a t i o n of
School A d m in is tr a to rs (MASA), and t h o s e i n s t i t u t i o n s o f h ig h er

139
e d u c a t i o n s p o n s o r i n g g r a d u a t e programs i n e d u c a t i o n a l a d m i n i s t r a t i o n
or educational le a d e rs h ip .

In a d d i t i o n , and i n c o n c e r t w i t h t h e

s t u d y ' s s t a t e d p u r p o s e s and i n t e n d e d u s e s , t h e f o l l o w i n g s u g g e s t i o n s
f o r f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h a r e made:
1.

There i s wide sp rea d a g re em e n t t h a t l o c a l boards s h o u ld

be a c t i v e l y in v o lv e d i n e s t a b l i s h i n g mandatory i n s e r v i c e programs f o r
t h e i r newly e l e c t e d o r a p p o i n t e d members.

However, t h e number o f

boards t h a t a c t u a l l y have i n s t i t u t e d such program s, i f an y, has y e t
t o be d e t e r m i n e d ; n o r have t h e d e s i g n s o f new member i n s e r v i c e p r o ­
grams been a d e q u a t e l y s t u d i e d .
2.
detail.

The c a u s e s o f board member t u r n o v e r sh o u ld be s t u d i e d i n

T h is c o n t i n u i n g phenomenon, havin g d i r e consequences f o r t h e

p r o c e s s o f l o c a l sc hool g o v e rn a n c e , i s i n a d e q u a t e l y u n d e r s t o o d , being
more f r e q u e n t l y e x p l a i n e d t h r o u g h t e s t i m o n i a l s th an a s t h e r e s u l t o f
sc h o larly study.

An e f f o r t sh ou ld be made t o d e te r m i n e whether a

p o s i t i v e o r n e g a t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n e x i s t s between t h e v o c a t i o n a l p u r ­
s u i t s o f board members and t h e i r l o n g e v i t y on l o c a l b o a r d s , and
wheth er o r n o t any o t h e r v a r i a b l e s can be c o r r e l a t e d w i t h l o n g e v i t y
of service.
3.

While i t has o f t e n been s u g g e s t e d t h a t a p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a ­

t i o n e x i s t s between board member p a r t i c i p a t i o n a t i n s e r v i c e e v e n t s
and t h e i r Improved " e f f e c t i v e n e s s , " such a h y p o t h e s i s i s b e t t e r
c a t e g o r i z e d a s a commonly h e ld p e r c e p t i o n r a t h e r t h a n a s a s c i e n ­
t i f i c a l l y d e te r m i n e d c o n c l u s i o n .

The impact o f i n s e r v i c e a t t e n d a n c e

on i n d i v i d u a l s ' p e rf o r m a n c e , as we ll as on t h e enhanced e f f e c t i v e ­
n e ss o f l o c a l b o a r d s , should be f u r t h e r s t u d i e d .

140

4.

Of the twenty i n s e r v i c e t o p i c s included in th e stu d y ,

eig htee n were repor ted as being a t l e a s t "somewhat im p o r t a n t . "

Since

the planning and conducting o f , as well as att end a nce a t , i n s e r v i c e
programs i s both expensive and time consuming, a method f o r making
th e b e s t s e l e c t i o n s from a myriad of p o t e n t i a l t o p i c s w i l l have to be
determined.

I t i s doubtful t h a t t h e r e w i l l ever be s u f f i c i e n t time

and money to p r e s e n t a l l o f th e t o p i c s o f i n t e r e s t to l o c a l board
members.

T herefo re, i t 1s very important t h a t a highly r e l i a b l e

needs-assessment process be u t i l i z e d in th e d e te rm ina tio n o f those
s u b j e c t s of g r e a t e s t i n t e r e s t t o the g r e a t e s t number o f board mem­
b e rs.

The d e cisio n reached by board members reg a rd in g t h e i r a t t e n ­

dance a t i n s e r v i c e events w ill l i k e l y continue to be h e a v i ly Influenced
by th ose t o p ic s s e l e c t e d f o r p r e s e n t a t i o n —as well as by t h e c o s t s
a s s o c i a t e d with att en d a n ce .
5.

A board member i n s e r v i c e program "atten d a n ce p r o f i l e "

should be developed on a s ta te w id e b a s i s .

Within Michigan, t h e r e a r e

no a v a i l a b l e data regarding th ose members who have a tt e n d e d i n s e r v i c e
e v e n t s , nor has a method been devised f o r p r e d i c t i n g member i n v o lv e ­
ment in the f u t u r e .

An e f f o r t should be made to determine whether or

not c e r t a i n i n d i v i d u a l s a r e predisposed to a tt e n d i n g many i n s e r v i c e
a c t i v i t i e s , while o t h e r s a re l i k e l y to a tt e n d few o r none; and, i f
so, th ose f a c t o r s c o n t r i b u t i n g to such p r e d i s p o s i t i o n s .

While

atten d a n ce w i l l l i k e l y remain b e s t a t events conducted c l o s e s t to
"home," and a t th o se r e q u i r i n g the l e a s t e x p en d itu re o f t im e , f u r t h e r
study should be made regarding who the p a r t i c i p a n t s and n o n p a r t i c i p a n t s
a r e and what c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , i f any, each group has in common.

141

6.

In t h e p l a n n i n g o f p a s t i n s e r v i c e programs, M ic h iga n's

529 lo c a l K-12 school boards have g e n e r a l l y been d e a l t w i t h as though
they c o n s t i t u t e d a m o n o l i t h i c e n t i t y .

Such a c ir c u m s ta n c e i s l i k e l y

not t h e c a s e a nd, t h e r e f o r e , a d d i t i o n a l s t u d y o f t h e p e r c e i v e d needs
o f boards o f e d u c a t i o n —c o n s i d e r e d as a whole— should be made.

The

s u c ce ss o f a r e g i o n a l i z e d a n d / o r l o c a l i z e d i n s e r v i c e t h r u s t , a s has
been s u g g e s t e d , w i l l l i k e l y depend upon a t h o u g h t f u l c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f
t h o s e numerous f a c t o r s c o n t r i b u t i n g t o t h e d i s s i m i l a r i t y o f n eeds,
r a t h e r than s i m i l a r i t y in n e e d s , e x i s t e n t among l o c a l boards o f edu­
cation.
7.

The s tu d y should be r e p l i c a t e d i n o t h e r g e og ra p h ica l

r e g i o n s in Michigan o r on a s t a t e w i d e b a s i s .

I t i s im p o r t a n t f o r

i n s e r v i c e p l a n n e r s t o know whether t h e p e r c e i v e d needs and p a s t p a r ­
t i c i p a t i o n p a t t e r n s , a s r e p o r t e d by the res p o n d e n t s in t h e s t u d y ,
c o n s t i t u t e a r e g i o n a l phenomenon o r a r e s i m i l a r t o f i n d i n g s achieve d
on a broadened r e s e a r c h b a se.
Recommendations f o r F u tu re Board Member
I n s e r v i c e Programming
The f o l l o w i n g recommendations p e r t a i n i n g t o an o v e r a l l i n s e r ­
v i c e e d u c a t i o n programming d e s i g n and t o t h e i n c l u s i o n o f s p e c i f i c
t o p i c a l a r e a s w i t h i n t h a t d e s ig n a r e r e s u l t a n t from t h e review o f t h e
l i t e r a t u r e , t h e f i n d i n g s , and t h e c o n c l u s i o n s o f t h e s t u d y .

These

recommendations may be g e n e r a l l y a p p l i c a b l e t o t h e i n s e r v i c e educa­
t i o n o f board members, r e g a r d l e s s o f t h e l o c a l e s i n which t h e y s e r v e .
However, th e y a r e s p e c i f i c a l l y in te n d e d f o r im plementa tio n in Michigan,
having been w r i t t e n in c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f t h o s e l e g a l r e q u i r e m e n ts

142

g o v e rn in g t h e e l e c t i o n a n d / o r a p po in tm en t o f l o c a l board members, as
we ll as t h e i r f u n c t i o n i n g — both i n d i v i d u a l l y and c o l l e c t i v e l y - - u p o n
becoming board members in t h i s s t a t e .
I t i s doubtful t h a t a s in g le "best" design or s e r i e s o f "best"
t o p i c s can be s u g g e s t e d i n f a c i l i t a t i n g t h e v a r i e d i n s e r v i c e needs o f
t h e more t h a n t h r e e thousand members, s e r v i n g on t h e n e a r l y s i x
hundred l o c a l b o a r d s , i n Michigan.

Nevertheless, there are three

paramount c o n s i d e r a t i o n s t h a t sh o u ld be examined a n d , u l t i m a t e l y ,
I n c o r p o r a t e d i n t o a s p e c i f i c programming d e s i g n f o r board member
in s e rv ic e education.
1.

These a r e as f o l l o w s :

Programs o f i n s e r v i c e e d u c a t i o n sh ou ld be p u r p o s i v e ,

s y s t e m a t i c , and c o n t i n u o u s i n n a t u r e .

The o v e r a l l e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f

an i n s e r v i c e e f f o r t w i l l m ainly be d ete rm in ed by t h e de gre e t o which
i t meets t h e needs o f i n d i v i d u a l board members.

Program p l a n n e r s

m u st, t h e r e f o r e , acknowledge t h e i m p o r tan c e o f t h e w id e ly d i f f e r i n g
l e v e l s o f e x p e r i e n c e , d i v e r s e b a ck g ro u n d s, and d i s s i m i l a r e x p e c t a ­
t i o n s e x i s t e n t w i t h i n t h e p o p u l a t i o n o f l o c a l board members.

They

must i n s u r e t h a t programs a p p r o p r i a t e t o t h e needs o f board members
a r e p r e s e n t e d i n a taxonomic manner.
2.

S u c c e s s f u l programs o f i n s e r v i c e e d u c a t i o n a r e o p e r a t i o n ­

a l i z e d a t t h e l o c a l board l e v e l .

The c o s m o p o li t a n n a t u r e o f t h o s e

f o r c e s and e v e n t s c u r r e n t l y i m p a c t i n g d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g p r o c e s s e s a t
t h e l o c a l d i s t r i c t l e v e l n e c e s s i t a t e s a p a r t n e r s h i p among l o c a l ,
s t a t e , and n a t i o n a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s i n t h e p r o v i s i o n o f I n s e r v i c e
experiences.

N o n e t h e l e s s , i t i s t h e l o c a l board o f e d u c a t i o n t h a t

must a d o p t a p p r o p r i a t e p o l i c y s t a t e m e n t s , d e v elo p w r i t t e n program

143

goals and o b j e c t i v e s , commit r e q u i s i t e f i n a n c i a l su p p o r t , and s p e c i f y
t h e atten dance of i t s members.
3.

Programs o f i n s e r v i c e education should maximize board

members* tim e, while minimizing t h e i r expense .

Those events held a t

e i t h e r the local or regional l e v e l , and being one-day o r l e s s 1n dura­
t i o n , w ill l i k e l y be b e s t a tt e n d e d by local board members.

Board

members d e riv e t h e i r l i v e l i h o o d s —d i r e c t l y o r i n d i r e c t l y —from o t h e r
p u r s u i t s and, t h e r e f o r e , t y p i c a l l y have l im i t e d o p p o r t u n i t i e s to
engage in i n s e r v i c e p r e s e n t a t i o n s .
Leadership in the development o f i n s e r v i c e programming designs
should be provided by the Michigan A s so c ia tio n o f School Boards (MASB).
An ad hoc sta te w id e task f o r c e should be convened by MASB f o r th e pur­
pose o f developing pr ototy pe designs f o r each of th e f o llo w in g :
(1) i n s e r v i c e p o lic y s t a t e m e n t s , (2) goals and o b j e c t i v e s s t a t e m e n t s ,
(3) recommended implementation pro ce du res, and (4) needs-assessment
pr ocedur es .

The t a s k f o r c e should be r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f s t a t e - l e v e l

p l a n n e r s , experienced lo ca l board members, concerned c e n t r a l o f f i c e
a d m i n i s t r a t o r s , and o t h e r e x p e r t s —such as u n i v e r s i t y p r o f e s s o r s and
p r i v a t e c o n s u l t a n t s —as may be deemed n e ce ssa ry .

Once the t a s k f o r c e

has completed i t s pu rpose s, the design o p tio n s and o t h e r recommended
instruments should be made a v a i l a b l e to MASB c o n s t i t u e n t l o c a l boards
f o r t h e i r review and u t i l i z a t i o n .

MASB should then urge t h e adoption

o f a s p e c i f i c plan o f member i n s e r v i c e educa tion by each lo c a l board
of e d u c a ti o n , s a i d plan being expre ss ed in a w r i t t e n s ta te m e n t o f
lo ca l board p o lic y .

144
The d e s i g n o f a s p e c i f i c program o f t o p i c a l a r e a s , s e l e c t e d
f o r p r e s e n t a t i o n t o l o c a l board members, should be su bd ivid ed i n t o
two components, a s f o l l o w s :

(1) t h e p rim a ry , o r b a s i c , p l a n o f

i n s e r v i c e a c t i v i t i e s ; and (2) t h e advanced, o r s u s t a i n i n g , plan o f
inservice a c t i v i t i e s .

The primary plan should p r e s e n t a s e q u e n t i a l

l i s t i n g o f t h o s e t o p i c s deemed most c r u c i a l t o t h e needs o f i n e x p e r i ­
enced members and encompass t h e i r i n i t i a l f o u r y e a r s (one e l e c t e d
term) o f s e r v i c e .

The advanced plan should s u g g e s t i n s e r v i c e a c t i v i ­

t i e s a p p r o p r i a t e t o t h e f u r t h e r e d u c a t i o n o f e x p e r i e n c e d board mem­
b e r s — t h o s e having se rv ed f o r more th an f o u r y e a r s .

(The i n c l u s i o n

o f a p r e - s e r v i c e o r i e n t a t i o n program f o r new members, as recommended
by many a u t h o r i t i e s , i s n o t f e a s i b l e in Michigan due t o t h e l i m i t e d
p e r i o d o f t im e —l e s s than t h i r t y d a y s —between e l e c t i o n o r appointm ent
t o t h e board and a c t u a l assumption o f o f f i c e . )
The primary p lan o f i n s e r v i c e a c t i v i t i e s should i n c l u d e t h o s e
e v e n t s a r r a n g e d f o r t h e dual purpose o f i n t r o d u c i n g new members to
t h e o p e r a t i o n o f t h e d i s t r i c t and f a m i l i a r i z i n g them with t h e numerous
r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s o f boardsmanship.

(Fam iliarization e ff o r ts are

deemed t o be more i n t e n s i v e th an a r e i n t r o d u c t o r y o r o r i e n t a t i o n
a ctiv itie s.)

The p l a n ' s sequence should i n c l u d e , a lt h o u g h n o t n e c e s­

s a r i l y be l i m i t e d t o , t h e f o l lo w in g :
Year 1 :
1.

An o r i e n t a t i o n t o u r o f l o c a l school f a c i l i t i e s .

2.

An i n t r o d u c t i o n t o p a r l i a m e n t a r y p roced ure and t h e con­
d u c t o f l o c a l board m e e tin g s.

3.

An i n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h e o p e r a t i o n o f t h e l o c a l board:
p o l i c y and proce d ure s t a t e m e n t s , b y - la w s , p o s i t i o n

145

d e s c r i p t i o n s , th e "chain o f command," o r g a n i z a t i o n a l
c h a r t s , legal s e r v i c e s , a u d i t i n g s e r v i c e s , and s e r v i c e s
r e t a i n e d on a consultancy b a s i s .
4.

An i n t r o d u c t i o n to "The School Code" of th e s t a t e o f
Michigan.

5.

An i n t r o d u c t i o n t o school f i n a n c e , local programs of
community r e l a t i o n s , t h e s t a f f and s t a f f development,
and c u r r i c u l a r and c o - c u r r i c u l a r programs.

6.

Attendance a t the regio na l MASB o r i e n t a t i o n program f o r
new board members.

7.

Attendance a t local county school boards a s s o c i a t i o n
meetings.

8.

Attendance a t t h e MASB mid-winter conference.

Year 2 :
1.

F a m i l i a r i z a t i o n with management concepts and methods:
personnel management and e v a lu a tio n and program manage­
ment and e v a l u a t i o n .

2.

I n tr o d u c tio n to news media r e l a t i o n s .

3.

F a m i l i a r i z a t i o n with community power s t r u c t u r e s and
sp e c ia l i n t e r e s t groups.

4.

I n tr o d u c tio n t o b a sic concepts in ed u catio n.

5.

An i n t r o d u c t i o n t o th e f u n ctio n in g of the s t a t e l e g i s ­
l a t u r e , t h e department o f e d u ca tio n , and t h e s t a t e c o u r t s .

6.

Attendance a t local county school boards a s s o c i a t i o n
meetings.

7.

Attendance a t one regio na l MASB d r i v e - i n conference.

8.

Attendance a t the MASB mid-winter conference.

Year 3 :
1.

F a m i l i a r i z a t i o n with p o l i c y problems and governmental r e l a ­
t i o n s : lo ca l intergovernmental r e l a t i o n s e f f o r t s , energy
use and c o n s e r v a t io n , c i v i l r i g h t s , handicapped r i g h t s ,
T i t l e IX, MIOSHA, and t h e expanding f e d e r a l involvement
in local education.

146

2.

F a m i l i a r i z a t i o n with t h e f e d e r a l c o u r t s and landmark
decisions.

3.

Attendance a t l o c a l county school boards a s s o c i a t i o n
meetings.

4.

Attendance a t one r e g i o n a l MASB s p e c i a l t o p i c seminar.

5.

Attendance a t MASB f a l l convention and m id-w inter con­
ference.

Year 4 :
1.

Attendance a t one r eg io n a l MASB s p e c i a l t o p i c seminar.

2.

Attendance a t MASB f a l l convention and m id -w in ter con­
ference.

3.

Attendance a t National School Boards A s s o c i a t i o n (NSBA)
convention.

The advanced plan o f i n s e r v i c e a c t i v i t i e s should b u i ld upon
those u n de rstan d in gs achieved by board members during t h e i r i n i t i a l
f o u r y e a r s of s e r v i c e .

A d d i t i o n a l l y , i t should enhance t h e c a p a b i l i ­

t i e s o f members in assuming l e a d e r s h i p r o l e s on t h e l o c a l board and
in becoming involved in a r e a
b ility .

and s t a te w i d e p o s i t i o n s o f r e s p o n s i ­

Such e v en ts should i n c l u d e , although n o t n e c e s s a r i l y be

lim i t e d t o , the f o llo w in g :
1.

The p r e s e n t a t i o n o f b a s i c i n s e r v i c e programs t o new members.

2.

An involvement in lobbying a c t i v i t i e s a t t h e s t a t e l e v e l .

3.

An assumption o f a l e a d e r s h i p r o l e in t h e l o c a l county
c h a p t e r o f MASB.

4.

The acceptance o f an appointment toanMASB s t a te w i d e
commi t t e e .

5.

Attendance a t l o c a l county school boards a s s o c i a t i o n
meetings (each y e a r ) .

6.

Attendance a t t h e MASB m id-w inter c o nferen ce (each y e a r ) .

147

7.

A tte n d a n c e

at

t h e MASBf a l l c o n v e n tio n ( e v e r y o t h e r y e a r ) .

8.

A tte n d a n c e

at

t h e NSBAc o n v e n t io n ( e v e r y t h i r d y e a r ) .

9.

A ttend a nce a t a n a t i o n a l - l e v e l i n s e r v i c e program r e l a t e d
t o a t o p i c o f p e rs o n a l i n t e r e s t (once e v e r y f o u r y e a r s ) .

10.

The u n d e r t a k i n g o f a program o f s e l e c t e d r e a d i n g s , on a
s u b je c t o f personal i n t e r e s t , with a r e p o r t o f th e f i n d ­
in g s t o t h e board ( ev e ry y e a r ) .

The s t u d y i s o f f e r e d a s an encouragement t o t h o s e who p lan
i n s e r v i c e e d u c a t i o n programs f o r t h e b e n e f i t o f l o c a l school board
members.

I t w i l l h o p e f u l l y c o n t r i b u t e t o an i n c r e a s e i n t h e knowl­

edge and s k i l l e v id e n c e d by i n d i v i d u a l board members a n d , th ro u g h
them, t o an improvement in t h e p r o c e s s o f e d u c a t i o n a l governance a t
the local d i s t r i c t le v e l.

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

MICHIGAN ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL BOARDS
SPECIAL TOPIC SEMINAR PRESENTATIONS

14 9

APPENDIX A

MASB SPECIAL TOPIC SEMINARS

Year of
Presentation

T itle

Number of
P r e s e n t a t io n s

1973

A dm in istra to r Evaluation

2

1974

A dm in istra to r Evaluation

3

1974

Public R ela tio ns

1

1975

Public R ela tio ns

2

1975

A dm in is tr ato r Appraisal

1

1975

Development o f Goals and Ob jectiv es

3

1976

Winning Mi 11 age E le ction s

2

1976

Basics of School Business

1

1976

A d m inis trator Appraisal

1

1977

How to Win Millageand Bond E le c tio n s

3

1977

A d m in is tra to r Appraisal

2

1977

Pa rl iamentary Law

1

1978

Millage and Bond E le ctio n s

2

1978

New P e r s p e c t i v e s on Public R ela tion s

1

1978

A d m in is tr ato r and Board Appraisal

2

1978

C o l l e c t i v e Bargaining Processes

2

1979

Conducting Millagea nd Board E le ctio n s

2

150

APPENDIX B
THE SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE

151

APPENDIX B

#
INSERVICE EDUCATION QUESTIONNAIRE OF
SOUTHWESTERN MICHIGAN PUBLIC SCHOOL BOARDS MEMBERS
All r e s p o n s e s w i l l be t r e a t e d c o n f i d e n t i a l l y .
o n l y t o i d e n t i f y t h o s e who have r e s p o n d e d .
PART I :

The above number i s used

YOUR OPINION

AS A SCHOOL BOARD MEMBER, WOULD YOU AGREE OR DISAGREE WITH THE
FOLLOWING STATEMENTS?

1.

C a n d id a te s f o r l o c a l bo ard s sho uld be
REQUIRED t o complete an o r i e n t a t i o n p r o ­
gram r e l a t i n g t o school board member
r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s BEFORE ru nn ing f o r
o f f i c e ........................................................................

2.

Newly e l e c t e d o r a p p o i n t e d members
sh o uld be REQUIRED TO COMPLETE an
i n s e r v i c e program, as s p e l l e d o u t in
l o c a l board w r i t t e n p o l i c y , d u r i n g
t h e i r FIRST YEAR o f s e r v i c e . . . .

3.

C o n tinu ing i n s e r v i c e e d u c a t i o n i s
v i t a l l y i m p o r t a n t t o any board member
who wish es t o perform h i s / h e r d u t i e s
wel 1 ....................................................................

PART I I :
4.

AGREE

DISAGREE

.............

..............

YOUR SERVICE
How many y e a r s and months have you s e r v e d on t h e
l o c a l school board?
YEARS

MONTHS

152

153

PART I I I :

PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE

CIRCLE THE DEGREE OF IMPORTANCE YOU ATTACH TO EACH OF THESE TOPICS
FOR FUTURE BOARD INSERVICE PROGRAMS.
Unimportant

Of Minor
Importance

Somewhat
Important

Very
Important

1

2

3

4

Of Crucial
Importance
5

FOR THE BLANK SPACE UNDER EACH HEADING, ADD ANY TOPIC YOU BELIEVE
TO BE OF SUFFICIENT IMPORTANCE TO MERIT A FUTURE BOARD INSERVICE
PROGRAM.
COMMUNITY RELATIONS
5.

Improving Communications

with t h e Public

. . . .

1 2 3 4 5

6.

Building a Permanent Base o f Community Support

.

12

34 5

7.

The Role and Function of Advisory Committees

. .

12

34 5

(_____________________________________________________ )

ADMINISTRATION
8.

Improving A d m inis trator Morale

....................................

1 2 3 4 5

9. S e t t i n g Adm inis trator S a l a r i e s & Fringe
B enefits Programs ................................................................

1 2 3 4 5

10. Developing a Strong A d m inistra tiv e T e a m ..................

1 2 3 4 5

(_____________________________________________________ )

BUSINESS AND FINANCE
11.

Understanding S t a t e Aid C a lc u la tio n s

.......................

12 3 4 5

12.

Going A f te r & Getting Federal Dollars .......................

12 3 4 5

13. Coping with I n f l a t i o n .........................................................
(____________________________________________ )

1 2 3 4 5

154

TEACHER PERSONNEL
14. S e l e c t i n g & Reta in ing E x c e ll e n t Teachers ...................

12 3 4 5

15. Inexpensive Techniques f o r S t a f f Improvement . . .

1 2 3 4 5

16.

1 2 3 4 5

Improving Teacher - School Board R e la tio ns

. . . .

(_____________________________________________________)

STUDENT AFFAIRS
........................................

17.

Improving Student Achievement

18.

I n c r e a s in g Student Involvement in School
A c t i v i t i e s .........................................................

19.

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

E s t a b l i s h i n g a Minimal Competency T es ting
P r o g r a m .............................................................
1 2 3 4 5
(__________________________________________________________ )

GENERAL TOPICS
20.

C o l l e c t i v e Bargaining in an Era o f Limits

. . . .

1 2 3 4 5

21.

M i n o r i t i e s Awareness T rain in g

........................................

1 2 3 4 5

22.

C o n so lid a tin g School D i s t r i c t s ........................................

1 2 3 4 5

23.

I n f l u e n c in g t h e S t a t e L e g i s l a t u r e

1 2 3 4 5

24.

S e l f - e v a l u a t i o n f o r Boards o f Education

................................
...................

(_____________________________________________________)

12 3 4 5

155

PART IV:

YOUR PAST PARTICIPATION IN LOCAL, REGIONAL, & STATE-WIDE
INSERVICE EDUCATION PROGRAMS
YES

Have you a t t e n d e d one o r more o f t h e
25.

l o c a l programs r e l a t e d t o i n s e r v i c e e d u c a t i o n
SPONSORED BY YOUR COUNTY (OR COUNTIES)
SCHOOL BOARD ASSOCIATION? .............................................

26.

one-d ay r e g i o n a l d r i v e - i n c o n f e r e n c e s
SPONSORED BY THE MICHIGAN ASSOCIATION
OF SCHOOL BOARDS? ....................................

27.

r e g i o n a l 1 - 1 / 2 day o r i e n t a t i o n workshops
f o r new board members and board o f f i c e r s
SPONSORED BY THE MICHIGAN ASSOCIATION
OF SCHOOL BOARDS? .............................................

28.

r e g i o n a l 1 - 1 / 2 day s p e c i a l t o p i c se m in a rs
SPONSORED BY THE MICHIGAN ASSOCIATION
OF SCHOOL BOARDS? .............................................

29.

s t a t e - w i d e S a t u r d a y Mid-Winter C onfere nces
h e ld in Lansing SPONSORED BY THE MICHIGAN
ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL BOARDS? .......................

30.

2 - 1 / 2 t o 3 day s t a t e - w i d e f a l l c o n v e n t i o n s
SPONSORED BY THE MICHIGAN ASSOCIATION OF
SCHOOL BOARDS? ...........................................................

NO

APPENDIX C

INITIAL LETTER TO LOCAL SUPERINTENDENTS
REQUESTING THEIR ASSISTANCE

156

APPENDIX C

rriei\_
PUBLIC SCHOOLS

/ POST OFFICE BOX ISO/SEhhtEN SPMNQt. MICHIGAN / 49103
ISIS) 471-2*91

Dear C o lle a g u e :
I need y o u r h e l p ! I am a t t e m p t i n g to c o n s t r u c t a c u r r e n t l i s t i n g o f a l l Board o f
E d u c a tio n members who have s e r v e d t h o s e 46 l o c a l K-12 d i s t r i c t s l o c a t e d w i t h i n
t h e B e r r i e n , C a ss, Van Buren, Kalamazoo V a lle y , and S t . Jo se p h I n t e r m e d i a t e School
D i s t r i c t s s i n c e 1970. I n s p e a k in g w i t h Norm W elnheimer, I have d is c o v e r e d t h a t
MASB had n o t ke p t such I n f o r m a ti o n p r i o r to 1975; t h u s , I found i t n e c e s s a r y to
seek I n t e r m e d i a t e a s s i s t a n c e i n d e te r m in in g th e i n i t i a l r o s t e r s . T hat s o u r c e p r o ­
v id e d th e names o f members, a l th o u g h t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e a d d r e s s e s and t e le p h o n e
numbers were o f t e n o m i t t e d .
I t I s my i n t e n t i o n t o w r i t e a d i s s e r t a t i o n i n which t h e p e r c e i v e d needs and p a r t i c ­
i p a t i o n o f b o a rd members in l o c a l , r e g i o n a l , and s t a t e - w i d e programs o f i n - s e r v i c e
e d u c a t i o n w i l l be d e te rm in e d , a n a l y z e d , and commented upon. H o p e f u lly , t h i s e f f o r t
w i l l a s s i s t a l l o f us i n p la n ning , a f u t u r e c o u r s e of a c t i o n i n t h i s im p o r ta n t a r e n a ;
a t l e a s t i t sh o u ld h e l p to f i l l a v o id i n t h a t no s i m i l a r e f f o r t h as p r e v i o u s l y
been u n d e r ta k e n i n s o u th w e s te r n M ichigan.
E n c lo se d i s t h e l i s t i n g p e r t a i n i n g t o yo ur d i s t r i c t .
you would ask your s e c r e t a r y to

I would be v e ry g r a t e f u l i f

1)

d e te r m in e t h a t a l l members ( e l e c t e d and a p p o in t e d s i n c e 1970) a r e l i s t e d .
( P le a s e add t h e names, a d d r e s s e s , and phone numbers o f anyone o m i t t e d ) .

2)

e l i m i n a t e t h e names o f th o B e p e r s o n s who may h a v e p a s s e d away o r w hose
w h e r e a b o u ts , f o r w h a te v e r r e a s o n , I s unknown.

3)

v e r i f y e a ch a d d r e s s and phone number a s b e in g c u r r e n t ; o r , p e n c i l i n th e
c u r r e n t a d d r e s s and phone number.

A s e l f - a d d r e s s e d stamped e n v e lo p e i s e n c lo s e d f o r y o u r c o n v e n ie n c e .
Thanking you f o r yo ur a s s i s t a n c e and a w a i t i n g your e a r l y r e s p o n s e , I am,
C o rd ially ,

0Jon*N.s S c h u s t e r
S u p e r in te n d e n t

Jen N. I c ta ilw , Superintend*nl *1 School*
Stanley S. Mechlin, AcclManl Superintendent
Hcno Shell*, Director of Comm unity education
Lois Smim, Director ol Media Sendee*
Thome* Topaah, Coord Inolor ot Special Sducslton
Bonits Poustlsn. Supervisor of Health Sendee*

JNS: dk

157

APPENDIX D
SECOND LETTER TO LOCAL SUPERINTENDENTS

15 8

APPENDIX D

PUBLIC SCHOOLS / POST OFFICE BOX 130 I BERRIEN SPRINGS. MICHIGAN / 49103
16161 471-2091

September 24, 19 79

Dear C o lle a g u e:
On O ctober 5, a q u e s t i o n n a i r e I d e n t i c a l to th e e n c lo s e d w i l l be m ailed to each
o f your board members; t h i s advance copy b e in g p ro v id e d f o r your review and
c o n sid e ra tio n .
T h is e f f o r t i s an i n t e g r a l p a r t of my d o c t o r a l program a t Michigan S t a t e .
A d d i t i o n a l l y , and more i m p o r t a n t l y , i t i s a s e r i o u s a tte m p t to determ ine the
needs o f c u r r e n t l y s e r v i n g l o c a l bo ard members w ith r e f e r e n c e to t h e i r past
i n s e r v i c e e d u c a tio n e x p e r i e n c e s ; an e f f o r t from which 1 in te n d to s u g g e st
m o d i f i c a t i o n s to th o s e who p la n f u t u r e l o c a l , r e g i o n a l , and s t a t e - w i d e i n s e r v i c e programs. As su ch , t h i s s u r v e y I s th e f i r s t to " t a r g e t " a l l K-12 board
members from d i s t r i c t s l o c a t e d w i t h i n t h e B e r r i e n , Lewis CaBs, Kalamazoo V a lle y ,
S t . Jo se p h , and Van Buren I n te r m e d ia te School D i s t r i c t s w ith r e f e r e n c e t o t h e i r
i n s e r v i c e e d u c a tio n .
I would g r e a t l y a p p r e c i a t e your m e n tio n in g th e Im portance o f t h i s stu d y to your
board members a t y our n ext Info rm al m eeting and e n co u ra g in g t h e i r e x p e d itio u s
r e m itt a n c e o f t h e su rv ey i n s tr u m e n t. I hope t o have a l l 322 re sp o n se s by
O ctober 25 and w i l l be se e k in g y o u r a s s i s t a n c e i n e n c o u ra g in g th e p a r t i c i p a t i o n
o f th o s e who have n o t r e p l i e d t o my " p l e a s " s h o r t l y a f t e r t h a t d a t e .
Thanking you once a g a in f o r y o u r p a s t a s s i s t a n c e i n d e te rm in in g the l i s t i n g of
l o c a l b oard members and f o r your i n v a l u a b l e s u p p o r t i n b r i n g i n g t h i s p r o j e c t to
a s u c c e s s f u l c o n c lu s io n , I am,
S in cerely yours,

Jon N. S c h u s te r
S u p e r in te n d e n t
JNS:dk

Jon N. Bchuatar. Buparlnlondanl of Schools
•Unlay P. Macklln, AwlaUnt Suparlnlandant
llont Sluiftr, Director of Community Education
Lois Smith. Dirac lor ol Madia Ssnrlcss
Thomas Top a ah. Coordinator ol SpocUl Education
BonlM PauslUn, Supervisor ol Health Sonrlcoa

159

APPENDIX E

INITIAL LETTER TO LOCAL BOARD OF EDUCATION MEMBERS

160

APPENDIX E

PUBLIC SCHOOLS / POST OFFICE SOX 130 1BERRIEN SPRINGS. MICHIGAN /41103

<«!<) 471-2401

O ctober 1. 1979

Dear School Board Member,
In a few days you w i l l r e c e iv e a s h o r t q u e s t i o n n a i r e which has been
s p e c i f i c a l l y d esign ed to determ ine your view s, p a s t p a r t i c i p a t i o n ,
and c u r r e n t needs r e l a t i v e to i n s e r v i c e e d u c a tio n programs f o r
school b o ard members. T h is document i s b e in g m a iled to a l l c u r r e n t l y
s e r v in g members o f th e 46 K-12 l o c a l b o ard s o f e d u c a tio n lo c a te d in
Southw estern Michigan ( t h a t a r e a in c lu d e d in th e B e r rie n County,
Lewis Cass, Kalamazoo V a lle y , S t. Joseph County, and Van Buren County
IS D s).
This i s th e f i r s t r e s e a r c h p r o j e c t o f i t s ty p e t o be conducted i n
Southw estern M ichigan. I t has th e s u p p o rt o f th e e x e c u tiv e o f f i c e r s
o f th e Michigan A s s o c ia tio n o f School Boards.
P le a s e watch f o r th e a r r i v a l o f your q u e s t i o n n a i r e .
i s c r u c i a l to th e o v e r a l l s u ccess o f t h i s p r o j e c t .
S in c e r e ly y o u rs ,

Your respo nse

Endorsed by:

/ jA \.
Jon N. S c h u s te r
S u p e rin te n d e n t

jr. TJorman r. Weinl
Executive D i r e c t o r
Michigan A s s o c i a ti o n o f School Boards

Jon N. •chuiMr, Auporintandant ol Bchodt
•lanky P. Macklln, Aaalatant tupariniandant
liana Shallar, Director of Community Education
Lola Smith. Director ol Madia Sarelcai
Thoma* Topaah, Coordinator ol Spatial Education
■onfta Pauatlan, tuponlaor ol Health Baretco*

161

APPENDIX F

SECOND LETTER TO LOCAL BOARD OF EDUCATION MEMBERS

162

APPENDIX F

PUBLIC SC H O O L S / POST OFFICE BOX 130 / BERRIEN SPRINGS, MICHIGAN /4*103

(SIS) 471-MS1

O c to b e r 4, 1979

Dear S chool Board Member,
T h ro ug hou t S o u th w e s te rn M ic h ig a n , 322 c i t i z e n s a r e c u r r e n t l y s e r v i n g on 46 l o c a l
K-12 p u b l i c s c h o o l b o a r d s o f e d u c a t i o n . L ik e y o u r s e l f , t h e s e d e d i c a t e d men and
women a r e l a b o r i n g t o p r o v id e q u a l i t y e d u c a t i o n f o r t h o s e s t u d e n t s w i t h i n t h e i r
school d i s t r i c t s .
In an e f f o r t t o a s s i s t l o c a l b o a r d members, t h e M ichigan A s s o c i a t i o n o f School
Boards and l o c a l c h a p t e r s o f MASB a n n u a l l y p r o v i d e I n s e r v l c e e d u c a t i o n o p p o r­
t u n i t i e s on a v a r i e t y o f t o p i c s ; s u b j e c t s s e l e c t e d i n t h e b e l i e f t h a t l o c a l b o a rd
members need t o b e v e r y k n o w le d g e ab le a b o u t a v a r i e t y o f t o p i c s i n o r d e r t o s e r v e
e f f e c t i v e l y . As a p u b l i c s c h o o l s u p e r i n t e n d e n t , and a d o c t o r a l s t u d e n t a t M ich i­
gan S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , I have been w o rk in g c l o s e l y w i t h MASB s t a f f members i n
c o n d u c t in g a r e s e a r c h p r o j e c t d e s ig n e d t o p r o v i d e v i t a l I n f o r m a t i o n t o t h o s e who
w i l l p la n f u t u r e I n s e r v i c e p r e s e n t a t i o n s .
The e n c l o s e d q u e s t i o n n a i r e w i l l t a k e l e s s t h a n 15 m in u te s o f y ou r tim e to c o m p le te .
When c o m p le te d , p l e a s e r e t u r n i t i n t h e e n c l o s e d , stam ped e n v e lo p e . ALL RESPONSES
WILL BE TREATED CONFIDENTIALLY. THE CODE NUMBER ON THE FORM IS THERE FOR FOLLOWUP PURPOSES ONLY.
YOUR RESPONSE IS CRUCIALLY IMPORTANT!
AND RETURN IT NOW.

PLEASE TAKE THE TIME TO COMPLETE THE FORM

T h a n king you i n advance f o r y o u r a s s i s t a n c e and prompt r e p l y , I am.
Approved b y :

it y /
Jo n N. S c h u s t e r
S uperintendent

Q rr Norman
w eiim eim er
E x e c u t iv e D i r e c t o r
M ichigan A s s o c i a t i o n o f S chool Boards

Jon N. Schutter, Superintendent of School*
Stanley P. Macklln, Assistant Superintendent
liana Shallar, Director of Community Education
Lata Smith, Director e l Madia Service*
Thomas Top ash. Coordinator of Special Education
Bonita Paustian, Supervisor ol Health Service*

163

APPENDIX G
FOLLOW-UP LETTER TO NONRESPONDENTS

164

APPENDIX G

PUBLIC SCHOOLS / POST OFFICE BOX ISO/ SCRRIEN SPRINGS. MICHIGAN / 41103
_____
ISIS) 471-SBS1
O ctober 2 2 , 1979

Dear S chool Board Member,
Two weeka ago 1 m ailed the en clo sed survey to a l l o f th e 322 board Members
s e r v in g th e l o c a l K-12 d i s t r i c t s throughout Southwestern M ichigan. To d a te ,
I have not r e c e iv e d your resp o n se.
TOUK OPINIONS ARE VITAL TO THE SUCCESS OF THIS PROJECT. S in ce I r e a l i s e
you a re very busy and th a t th e f i r s t m a ilin g may have gone a s tr a y , I am
e n c lo s in g a second q u e stio n n a ir e — which I s in ev ery r e sp e c t id e n t ic a l
to th e f i r s t .
1 urge you to com plete th e atta ch ed and retu rn i t in th e
en v elo p e provided to d a y .
Your resp o n se w i l l be tr e a te d c o n f id e n t ia lly .
i s th e r e fo r fo llo w -u p purposes o n ly .

The code number on th e form

1 w i l l be c a l l i n g you on o r a f t e r November 2nd i f your resp on se i s n ot r s c e lv f d
by th a t d a te .
Thank you very much fo r your c o o p er a tio n .

Jon N. S ch u ster
SuparlntM ident

Jen N. Schualaf, l u p n Mlaiidim at BahaaM
MenMr P. Macklln, AaaMtam tMp>iW>nSws
Sana ghaHar. DWactar el CammunRy BduaaSan
LaM tm isi, Okacler al Madia l i n li n
Thame* T a p e * . CaardtnMar e l SpaeW BduaaSan
BenNs PauaNan, Bupanlu r al Haalti SanHaai

165

APPENDIX H

LETTER TO LOCAL SUPERINTENDENTS REQUESTING
THEIR INTERVENTION AND ASSISTANCE

166

APPENDIX H

1 T 1 C I\_
PUBLIC SCHOOLS / POST OFFICE BOX 130 / BERRIEN SPRINGS, MICHIGAN / 49103
1616) 471-2B91

O ctober 29, 1979

Dear C o lle ag u e :
I NEED YOUR HELP! !
Thus f a r , 2 39 o f th e 322 l o c a l b o a rd members to whom q u e s t i o n n a i r e s
were s e n t have re spo nd e d. While 1 am g r a t i f i e d t o have 74% o f t h e
su rv e y s r e t u r n e d , a minimum o f 275 (85%) i s e s s e n t i a l .
In checking my r e c o r d s , I n o te t h a t th e f o llo w in g members o f your board
have n o t y e t responded t o e i t h e r t h e f i r s t o r fo llo w -u p m a i l i n g s :

1.
2.

3.
4.
5.
1 would be v ery g r a t e f u l f o r y o u r a s s i s t a n c e i n ph o n in g , o r o th e r w is e
re m ind in g, each o f th e above n o n - r e s p o n d e n ts o f th e im portance o f t h e i r
r e s p o n s e . A s i n g l e word o f encouragement from you w i l l undoubtedly have
a b e n e f i c i a l Im pact. As you w e ll know, t h e f i n a l 50 a r e always th e h a rd ­
est to secure.
I f f o r some rea so n n e i t h e r o f t h e f i r s t two m a ilin g s was r e c e i v e d , p le a s e
c a l l me ( c o l l e c t ) and I w i l l be happy to su p p ly a n o th e r surve y In s tr u m e n t.
I w i l l phone each b o a rd member who has not respon ded on o r s h o r t l y a f t e r
November 2 t o p e r s o n a l l y s o l i c i t h i s / h e r c o o p e r a t i o n .
Thank you once a g a in f o r y o u r a s s i s t a n c e !
- C o rd ially ,
r

iy
Jon N. S c h u s te r
S u p e r in te n d e n t

____________

167

Jen N. Schuster, Superintendent of School*
Stanley P. Macklln. A ultlant Superintendent
lien* Shaffer, Director of Community education
Lola Smith, Director ol Media Service*
Tho mat Topaah, Coordinator ol Special Education
Bonita Pautllan, Supervisor ol Health Service*

APPENDIX I

LETTER TO BOARD OF EDUCATION PRESIDENTS
AND INTERVIEW GUIDE

168

APPENDIX I

rricr\_
PUBLIC SCHOOLS / POST OFFICE BOX ISO / BERRIEN SPRING*, MICHIGAN /4*103

(•IS) 4T1.2BS1

I am very a p p r e c ia tiv e of a few moments of your time!
Last f a l l , I surveyed the 322 lo cal school board members from the 46 South­
western Michigan D i s t r i c t s sponsoring K-12 programs. The r e s u l t s o f t h i s
e f f o r t were most g r a ti f y i n g 1n t h a t 277 members (80%) completed and returned
t h e i r "Q uestionnaire."
The dual purpose o f my study, as you may r e c a l l , was to a s s e ss the perceived
needs o f local board members with refere n ce to fu tu re 1nserv1ce education
program to p ic s ; and, to determine board member p a r t i c i p a t i o n 1n p a s t In s e rv ice
experiences a t the l o c a l , r e g io n a l , and s tate-w id e l e v e l s . This inform ation,
I hope, w ill provide a sound b a s is f o r th e planning and conducting of fu tu re
In se rv ic e I n i t i a t i v e s f o r board members.
1 would a p p re c ia te having an opportunity to confer with you about my study;
and, In p a r t i c u l a r , those th re e questions w ritte n on the a ttac h ed "Guide
S heet." As a board p r e s id e n t, you have valuable I n s ig h ts Into the " in s e rv ic e
education of board members" Is s u e ; thoughts and o bservations which I need to
Inco rpo rate Into my study 1n o rd e r to make 1t more s i g n i f i c a n t .
I w ill be contacting you w ithin one week and tak e t h i s o pp ortun ity to thank
you, In advance, f o r your a s s i s t a n c e .
S in c ere ly ,

Jon N. Schuster
Superintendent
JNS:dk

Jon N. Schualar, Superintendent ot School*
Stanley P. Macltlln, Aaalatant Superintendent
Itono Shelter, Director of Community Education
Lot* Smith, Director ol Media Service*
Thomea Topoah. Coordinator el Special Education
■onlta Paualian, Bupanrlcor ol Health Satvlcae

169

170

NAME________________________
QUESTION 1

What i s your o v e r a l l opinio n o f t h e Q u e stio n naire?

QUESTION 2

What i s your opinion r e g a r d in g the general r e s u l t s
(response s from lo c a l school board membersT?

QUESTION 3

What can be done, in t h e f u t u r e , t o i n c r e a s e l o c a l board
member p a r t i c i p a t i o n in i n s e r v i c e ed u catio n a c t i v i t i e s
a t t h e l o c a l , r e g i o n a l , and s t a t e l e v e l s ?

BIBLIOGRAPHY

171

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books
Alexander, Kern; Corns, Ray; and McCann, Walter. Public School Law:
Cases and M a t e r i a l s . S t. Paul, Minn.: West Publishing C o . ,
1969.
Ashby, Lloyd W. The E f f e c t i v e School Board Member.
I n t e r s t a t e P r i n t e r s & P u b l i s h e r s , T968.
Babbie, Earl R. Survey Research Methods.
Publishing Co., 1 9 7 3 .

D a n v i ll e , 111.:

Belmont, C a l. :

Wadsworth

Bailey, Stephen K. "New Dimensions in School Board Leadership."
In New Dimensions in School Board Leadership: A Seminar Report
and Workbook, pp. 96-110. Edited by William E. Dickinson.
Evanston, 111.: National School Boards A s s o c i a t i o n , 1969.
Bendinger, Robert. The P o l i t i c s of Schools: A C r i s i s in S e l f Government. New York: Harper & Row, 1969.
Best, John W. Research in Edu cation.
P r e n t i c e - H a l l , 1959.

Englewood C l i f f s , N . J . :

Callahan, Raymond E. "The American Board o f Education, 1789-1960."
In Understanding School Boards, pp. 19-46. Edited by P e t e r J .
Cistone. Lexington, Mass.: D. C. Heath & Co., 1975.
C isto n e, P e ter J . , ed. Understanding School Boards.
Mass.: D. C. Heath & Co., 1975.

Lexington,

Cubberly, Ellwood P. Public School A d m i n i s t r a t i o n . Cited by
Raymond E. Callah an, Understanding School Boards. Lexington,
Mass.: D. C. Heath & C o . , 1975.
Dapper, G l o r i a , and C a r t e r , Barbara. A Guide f o r School Board
Members. Chicago: F o l l e t t , 1965.
Dickinson, William E . , ed. New Dimensions in School Board Leadership:
A Seminar Report and Workbook. Evanston, 111.: National School
Boards A s s o c ia t io n , 1969.
Goldhammer, Keith. The School Board.
Research in Education, 1964.

172

New York:

Center f o r Applied

173

Gross, Neal.
1958.

Who Runs Our Schools?

New York:

John Wiley & Sons,

Ja co bson, Paul V. Foreword to The School Board, by Keith Goldhammer.
New York: C ente r f o r Applied Research in E d u ca tio n , 1964.
Nationa l School Boards A s s o c i a t i o n . Meeting t h e Challen ges o f School
Board L e a d e r s h i p . E vanston, I l l T l National School Boards Assoc i a t i o n , 1973.
Page, Ruth H. What Makes an E f f e c t i v e School Board Member?
111.: I n t e r s t a t e P r i n t e r s & P u b l i s h e r s , 1975.

Danville,

Rossini 1 l e r , Richard A. O p p o r t u n i t i e s U nlim ited : A Guide f o r Wisconsin
School Board Members. 5th e d . Winneconne, Wis.: Wisconsin
A s s o c i a t i o n o f School Boards, I n c . , 1977.
S t. Jo h n , W alte r. G u i d e li n e s f o r E f f e c t i v e School Board O p e r a t i o n ,
S e r v i c e , and L e a d e r s h i p . Tempe, A r i z . : Arizona School Boards
A s s o c i a t i o n , 1969.
Summers, Gene F . , ed.
1971.

A t t i t u d e Measurement.

Chicago:

Rand McNally,

Thompson, B a rbara . Foreword t o O p p o r t u n i t i e s U n lim ited : A Guide f o r
Wisconsin School Board Members, by Richard A. R o s s m i l l e r .
Winneconne, Wis.: Wisconsin A s s o c i a t i o n o f School Boards, I n c . ,
1977.
T u t t l e , Edward M. School Board L ead ership in America.
111.: I n t e r s t a t e P r e s s , 1958.

D anville,

Van Dalen, Deobold. Unde rstanding Educational Research: An I n t r o d u c ­
t i o n . New York: McGraw-Hill, 1962.
Webb, Harold V. P r e f a c e t o New Dimensions in School Board L e a d e r s h i p ,
by William E. Dickinson"! E vanston, 111.: National School Boards
A s s o c i a t i o n , 1969.
Wynn, R ichard. Foreword t o What Makes an E f f e c t i v e School Board
Member? by Ruth H. Page"! D a n v i l l e , 111.: I n t e r s t a t e P r i n t e r s
& P u b l i s h e r s , 1975.
Z e i g l e r , L. Harmon, and J e n n i n g s , M. Kent. Governing American Schools:
I n t e r a c t i o n in Local School D i s t r i c t s . North S c i t u a t e , Mass.:
Duxbury P r e s s , 1974.

174
P e r i o d ic a l s
"After You Shake Their Hands, Try This New Way to Train New Board
Members Quickly and P r o f i t a b l y . " American School Board Journal
161 (May 1974): 33-35.
Babbie, Earl R., and Brownlee, K. A. "A Note on the E f fe c ts o f Non­
response on Surveys." Journal o f the American S t a t i s t i c a l Asso­
c i a t i o n 52,227 (1957): 29=3?:
Becker, W. E. "How to Make B e tte r Boards."
Journal 155 (October 1967): 23-25.

American School Board

B e ll , Daniel. "Notes on the P o s t - i n d u s t r i a l Society (1 1)."
I n t e r e s t 7 (Spring 1967): 102-108.

Public

Buvinger, Margaret S. "Board Members: Are You Qualified? "
School Board Journal (April 1979): 66.

American

Cistone, Pe ter J . "School Board Members Learn Their S k i l l s Before
They Become Board Members." American School Board Journal 165
(January 1978): 32-33.
________ . "The S o c i a l i z a t i o n o f School Board Members."
Administration Qua rterly 13 (Spring 1977): 19-32.

Educational

Donald, Marjorie N. "Im plicatio ns o f Nonresponse f o r the I n t e r p r e t a ­
t i o n of Mail Questionnaire Data." Public Opinion Quarterly 24
(January 1960): 99-114.
Downey, Gregg W. "Why School Board Members Quit—And Why They're Glad
They Did." American School Board Journal 165 (February 1978):
26-29.
Dyer, Louise. "The American School Board Member and His—and Her—
Era of Fierce New Independence." American School Board Journal
160 (July 1973): 17-20.
Fra ncois, John. " B e t t e r —Lots B e t t e r —Training Is Needed f o r New
Board Members." American School Board Journal 158 (July 1970):
9-10.
Gallup, George H. "Eighth Annual Gallup Poll o f the P u b l i c ' s A t t i ­
tudes Toward the Public Schools." Phi Delta Kappan (October
1976): 187-200.
________ . "Ninth Annual Gallup Poll o f the P u b l i c ' s A t t i t u d e s Toward
the Public Schools." Phi Delta Kappan (September 1977): 33-47.
. "The 10th Annual Gallup Poll of t h e P u b l i c ' s A t t it u d e s
Toward the Public Schools." Phi Delta Kappan (September 1978):
33-45.

175

G rant. W. Vance. "Pu b lic School E xpenditures as a Percentage o f
Personal Income." American Education (December 1978): 50.
Gray, Ron. " I n - s e r v i c e T r a in in g f o r School T r u s t e e s . "
Canada 11 (June 1971): 24-26.
"How Do You Educate Board Members?
17 (March 10, 1975): 161.

Very C a r e f u l l y ! "

Education
Education USA

Hurwitz, Mark W., and Cronin, Joseph M. "Can Local Lay School Boards
Survive Much Longer With Any Real Power?" American School Board
Journal 161 (January 1974): 55-58.
J o n e s, P h i l i p G. "How t o T rain a New School Board Member—And
Ways
t o Help Seasoned Veterans Brush-Up Too." American
School Board
Journal 160 (April 1973): 21-28.
Kerr, Norman. "The School Board as an Agency o f L e g i t i m i z a t i o n . "
Sociology o f Education 38 (F a ll 1964): 34-59.
Manning, William R. "The C r e d i b i l i t y Gap That Is N e u t r a l i z i n g t h e
Public S c h o o ls." American School Board Journal 159 (June 1972):
31-32.
N o lte , M. C h e s t e r . " I t Keeps G e ttin g R i s k i e r by t h e Year t o Be a
Boardman." American School Board Journal 158 ( J u l y 1970): 12-13.
Rose, Lowell C. "Can Local School Boards Survive?"
36 (December 1970): 19-21.
R ussel, Pa t. "Why Boardmen Q u i t . "
(November 1971): 23-26.

Education Diqest

American School Board Journal 159

Smith, R. W in field . "The F i r s t Hard Look a t School Boards."
School Board Journal 161 (August 1974): 7-8.
S t . John, Walter D.
Need t o Know."
27-28.

American

"Why Boardmen Need B e t t e r T r a i n in g —And What They
American School Board Journa l 158 (February 1971):

S t e e r e , Bob F,
"Should t h e S t a t e T r a i n Board Candidates i f Only to
S h ie ld t h e P u b l i c From Bunglers?" American School Board Journal
160 (April 1973): 29.
Svenson, A rthur L . , and Bryson, Joseph E. "Good-bye F o re v er, Old
Rubber-Stamp School Board Members." American School Board
Journal 157 (June 1970): 26-27.
Underwood, Kenneth E.*, McCluskey, Lawrence; and Umberger, George.
P r o f i l e o f t h e School Board Member." American School Board
Journal 165 (October 1978): 23-27.

"A

176

Webb, Harold V. "A New Gallup Study: What t h e P u b lic REALLY Thinks
o f I t s School Boards." American School Board Jo urn a l 162 {April
1975): 36-40 , 58.
Weinheimer, Norman P. "Tell I t Right Up F r o n t . "
Board J o u r n a l 26 (October 1979): 5 , 14.

Michigan School

"What Makes a Good Board Member? S u p e r i n t e n d e n t s Answer." Education
Summary 27 (October 15, 1974): 3.
White, E i l e e n . "How to Show New Board Members t h e Ropes—Without
Beinq S t r a n g l e d . " The Executive Educator 1 (November 1979):
20- 2 1 .

Other Published Works
Andrews, James R. "A Study o f the P e r c e p t i o n s Held by New School
Board Members Toward T h e i r T r a i n in g f o r Board Membership."
D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l 32/06-A (December 1971):

mv.

Calloway, C h a r l e s .
"A P r e s e r v i c e a n d / o r I n s e r v i c e T r a i n i n g Program
f o r Board o f Education Members." D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r ­
n a t i o n a l 3 5 / 1 0-A (April 1975): 6356.
Encyclopedia o f E d u c a ti o n , 1971 ed. S . v . "School Board R e l a t i o n s :
Control o f t h e S c h o o l s ," by Samuel Goldman.
Encyclopedia o f E d u c a t i o n , 1971 ed. S . v . "School Boards: R e l a t i o n o f
School Boards t o T h e ir Communities," by William G. Savard.
Encyclopedia o f E d u c a ti o n , 1971 ed.
by Ja y D. S c r i b n e r .

S . v . "School Boards: O p e r a t i o n s , "

Encyclopedia o f E d u c a ti o n , 1971 ed. S .v . "School Boards: Education o f
Members,11 by Maurice E. S t a p l e y .
Harper, James, J r .
" D e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n : An E x p lo r a ti o n o f Boardmanship
T r a i n i n g Needs o f New School Board Members in S e l e c t e d F u n c tio n s
o f School O p e r a t i o n s . " D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l
3 3/11-A (May 1973): 6011.
Hurwitz, Mark W. "The Personal C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and A t t i t u d e s o f New
J e r s e y School Board Members." D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r ­
n a t i o n a l 32/4-A (October 1971): 1786-1787.
Hammer, Benjamin A. " E f f e c t i v e School Board Behavior a s I t R e l a t e s
t o School Board I n s e r v i c e A c t i v i t i e s in t h e S t a t e o f C olorado ."
D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l 29/04-A (October 1968): 1078.

177

Knight, B i l l y Rowe. "Action Emphases o f Northeast Texas School
Boards." D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s tr a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l 31/09-A (March
1971): 4421A-4422A.
Michigan Association o f School Boards. Boardsmanship in B r i e f : A
Handbook f o r Michiqan School Board Members. Lansinq: MASB,
m

r .-------------------------

________ .

By-Laws.

-------------------------------------

Lansing:

MASB, 1977.

National School Boards A s s o c ia t io n . Research Report 1973-2:
"Training New School Board Members--A Survey." Evanston, 111.:
National School Boards A s s o c ia t io n , [1973].
New York School Boards A s s o c ia t io n . A Seminar f o r New School Board
Members. Albany: NYSBA, 1972.
"Number of Public School D i s t r i c t s With 300 or More Pup ils and Number
o f Pupils Enrolled in These D i s t r i c t s by S t a t e and by Enrollment
Size of D i s t r i c t . " ERS Research D i g e s t . A r l i n g t o n , Va.: Educa­
t i o n a l Research S e r v i c e , March 19797
Pennsylvania School Boards A s s o c ia t io n . PSBA Commission t o Strengthen
the Working R e la tio n s h ip s o f School Boards and S u p e r i n te n d e n t s .
H a rris b u rg, Pa.: PSBA, 1977.
S a l e s , Frederick C a rl. "A Survey o f the O r i e n t a t i o n o f New Board
Members Pra ctice d by Se lec te d Local School D i s t r i c t s . " D i s s e r ­
t a t i o n A b stra cts I n t e r n a t i o n a l 31/10-A (April 1971): 5097-A.
Government Document
Michiqan. General School Laws and A d m i n is tr a t iv e Rules.
Code o f 1976 (1977).

The School

Unpublished Works
Ashmore, Mary Kay. Michigan A s so c ia tion o f School Boards, Lansing,
Michigan. I n t e r v i e w s , 14 November 1978, 6 September 1979.
C itiz e n Boards a t Work: New Challenges t o E f f e c t i v e A c tio n . Cited in
ERS Information Aid, " O r i e n t a ti o n Programs f o r New School Board
Members." A r lin g to n , Va.: Educational Research S e r v i c e , 1975.
F o s t e r , Badi G. " O r ie n ta tio n and T rainin g o f School Board Members."
A p o s i t i o n paper prepared by th e Recruitment Leadership and
T rainin g I n s t i t u t e . A r l i n g t o n , Va.: ERIC Document Reproduction
S e r v i c e , ED 114 930, 1975.

178
Goble, Nick. " G etting Good Board Members and Holding Them." A r l i n g t o n ,
Va.: ERIC Document Reproduction S e r v i c e , ED 137 959, 1977.
Hurwitz, Mark W. "The Personal C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and A t t i t u d e s o f New
J e r s e y School Board Members." Ed.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , Temple Uni­
v e r s i t y , 1971.
L auten schlag e r, Harley M. "A Study o f School Board I n s e r v i c e T r a i n ­
ing Techniq ues." Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , Indiana U n i v e r s i t y , 1956.
Mecklenburger, James. National School Boards A s s o c i a t i o n , Washington,
D.C. I n t e r v i e w , 12 September 1978.
Nicoloff* Lanning G. "Perceived I n s e r v i c e Education Needs o f Members
o f Boards o f Education in I l l i n o i s . " Ed.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , Northern
I l l i n o i s U n i v e r s i t y , 1977.
1980 Michiqan Education D i r e c t o r y and Buyer's Guide.
Education D i r e c t o r y , 1979.

Lansing:

Michigan

Snyder, Milton L. "The New School Board Member." Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n ,
United S t a t e s I n t e r n a t i o n a l U n i v e r s i t y , 1972.
Stefo nek, Tom. "Viewpoints o f Local School Board P r e s i d e n t s : Educa­
t i o n a l Problems, Achievements, and C h a l l e n g e s . 11 Bethesda, Md.:
ERIC Document Reproduction S e r v i c e , ED 151 944, 1978.
T i p l e r , George.
Wisconsin.

Wisconsin A s s o c i a t i o n o f School Boards, Winneconne,
I n t e r v i e w , 3 October 1978.

Weitman, Ronald E. "An A n a l y t i c a l Study o f the I n - S e r v ic e Educational
Needs o f Chairmen o f Boards o f Education in G e org ia ." Ed.D. d i s ­
s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f Geo rg ia , 1960.
Wiles, David K . , and Conley, Houston. "School Boards: T h e i r P o l i c y Making Rele vance." Bethesda, Md.: ERIC Document Reproduction
S e r v i c e , ED 100 022, 1974.