Governance in Transformation: Alberta School Board Chairs’ Perspectives on Governance

ABSTRACTSchool boards are typically removed from nonprofit sector analyses because they are part of the “MUSH” set of organizations (municipalities, universities, schools, and hospitals) that both stand outside of the more typical nonprofit sector and tend to be closely affiliated with government. Nevertheless, school boards offer a unique opportunity to examine the governance of a large system of regulated activity that affects millions of citizens. How such systems should be governed has been a matter of concern for nearly 40 years. This study presents data from Alberta school board chairs regarding their perception of governance transformation being brought about by legislative changes. Five dimensions of governance are proposed as defining the current and anticipated governance domain within which school boards operate. Tensions within and between these dimensions signify symbolic boundary constructions that need to be scrutinized in anticipation of the governance transformation and boundary spanning activities of school boards required by the new legislation.RÉSUMÉLes conseils scolaires sont généralement retirés des analyses du secteur communautaire parce qu’ils font partie de l’ensemble d’organisations « MUSH » (les municipalités, les universités, les écoles et les hôpitaux); ces organisations se distinguent du secteur communautaire typique et ont tendance à être étroitement associées au gouvernement. Néanmoins, les conseils scolaires offrent une occasion unique d’observer la gouvernance d’un vaste système d’activités réglementées qui affecte des millions de citoyens. La façon dont de tels systèmes devraient être gérés fait l’objet de préoccupations depuis presque 40 ans. Cette étude présente les perceptions de présidents de conseils scolaires de l’Alberta en ce qui a trait à la transformation de la gouvernance apportée par des modifications à la loi. Cinq dimensions de la gouvernance sont proposées pour définir à la fois le domaine de gouvernance dans le cadre duquel fonctionnent actuellement les conseils scolaires et celui dans le cadre duquel il est prévu qu’ils fonctionneront. Les tensions entre ces dimensions et les tensions au sein de celles-ci indiquent des constructions de frontières symboliques qui nécessitent un examen minutieux dans le but de prévoir la transformation de la gouvernance ainsi que les activités d’expansion des conseils scolaires exigées par la nouvelle législation.

A Comparison of District School Superintendents' and School Board Chair's Attitudes toward Merit Pay Programs

This study investigated the opinions of superintendents and school board chairs related to the management of incentive programs in a small southern state. Ninety one geographic school districts were surveyed. The first problem examined whether demographic data—years in education, years of experience with merit pay, and race— had an effect on superintendents' and school board chairs' favor or disfavor of merit pay programs. Also studied was whether there were significant differences between the groups in their opinions of the management of the local incentive programs. The functions of management described by Scanlon & Keys1 that were considered were planning, organizing, directing and controlling. The last task was to ask superintendents and school board chairs to rank criteria to award merit pay. Superintendents and school board chairs did not differ significantly in their opinions of the management of local incentive programs. The t test was used to examine the hypothesis at the .05 level of probability. Chi square, x2, was used to examine the hypotheses for the demographic data. At the .05 probability level, there were no significant differences between the groups related to the selected demographics. Both groups agreed merit pay should be a part of the local system, but neither group thought it was an enhancement for the provision of quality education. In ranking criteria to award merit pay, superintendents were more student centered in their responses and school board chairs ranked administrative items higher. Further research was recommended to study superintendents' and school board chairs' opinions related to the role merit pay has in the public education system.