Traditional Process Works: School Governance System Needs Change
To the Editor:
The Sun News desires a nontraditional superintendent for Horry County Schools and wants to keep the system of board governance we have been using for the past seven years. Both ideas would be huge mistakes.
In the spring of 2007, the board decided to take away the authority granted to the superintendent to hire and fire principals, executive directors, and chief officers at will. Under the system created by John Carver, a clinical psychologist from Atlanta, the superintendent (CEO) was granted autonomy over staff decisions and was only limited in his or her actions by specific Executive Limitations devised by the board. The superintendent could creatively operate outside those parameters and control many areas which used to have board input and approval. Obviously, the board saw a problem with some of this and decided to reclaim its advice and consent authority over key staff positions.
In addition, the board decided to move away from Carver’s Policy Governance model to adopt a more user-friendly version known as Coherent Governance, the exclusive model of the consultant firm we have been using since 1999 - the Aspen Group International, which markets both models.
How can the board represent the interests of the people of Horry County, if the people of our district have no idea what is going on? The people never voted to adopt our current system of governance seven years ago. The district administration and the board cooperatively allowed a consultant firm to lead us into a radical, nondemocratic system of board governance. If we continue with a slightly milder version, we will still be getting virtually the same system.
What are the facts about Policy Governance? Less than 1% of school districts nationwide use some form of the model. Carver pointed to Orange County, Florida, as a model district in the year 2000. For the past three or four years, it has not been operating under the model. Cobb County, Georgia, used the model from 2004-2006. A major financial scandal resulted in a criminal investigation and a grand jury’s finding that the board of education was remiss in its duties of proper oversight of the superintendent. Board candidates campaigned against the model, were elected, and traditional governance reinstated. Beaufort County also experienced major financial oversight problems with a bus company, and it has not been operating under the model for the past three years. The model tends to restrict board members free speech and has resulted in numerous cases around the country. A current case is taking place in Racine, Wisconsin, complicated by a major financial scandal. Proper monitoring of superintendents is a common problem, from an outside firm being hired by the Austin Independent School District in Texas to the Jefferson County School District in Colorado placing monitoring reports on their consent agenda.
An extensive investigation into our system of governance across the United States has confirmed my belief that we need to return to traditional governance which entails the use of standing committees and board cooperation with the superintendent in the management of our district. The board need not micromanage, but it must have a deeper understanding and input into all that transpires. It needs to speak with twelve voices, not one, in healthy democratic debate about what is best for students and not accept the rhetoric of the accountability movement and advocates of reform who are benefitting financially from marketing their wares and services in a creative end-around the board.
I urge you to contact your board representative and argue for a return to traditional governance!
Sincerely,
Bobby Chandler
722 Pine Drive
Surfside Beach, S. C. 29575
Home Phone (843) 238-0167
Cell Phone (843) 450-0962
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Hi, I just came across your blog and will be reading it for days to come. I suppose I would be characterized as one of those "very vocal groups and individuals opposed to Policy Governance" in Durango that you heard about when you inquired at one point. I would be an advocate if humans were capable of actually using the whole model, but as I've pointed out here on many occasions, it's easily abused and turned on end if a strong superintendent prefers running the schools herself - and whether or not the board members can rise to the occasion and actually represent their constituents may depend more on the local civic culture than on the model.
Here's a link to a column I wrote in 2005. What a mess has transpired here during the years of using this model - under the guidance of the Aspen Group's frequent consultations.
http://durangoherald.com/asp-bin/article_generation.asp?article_type=opin&article_path=/opinion/opin050313_3.htm
Hi, I had trouble posting the link to the Herald column where I raised questions about the use of Policy Governance in Durango.
We created a website to discuss many issues here in Durango, specifically because the school board would not entertain any dialogue with citizens that did not follow the superintendent's party line.
it is
http://durangoschooltalk.org/
You can access links to Durango's PG saga on this site.. including the column I mentioned - published in the Durango Herald
March 13, 2005
Policy mis-Governance: District 9-R board disconnected from the community
http://durangoschooltalk.org/issues/policygovernance.htm
http://durangoherald.com
Post a Comment