School Boards

The Tucson Unified School District has come under fire recently, particularly in light of several judicial decisions regarding the responsibilities of the district to desegregate the schools, provide culturally relevant curriculum, and stay within the bounds of Arizona law.  TUSD finds itself on both sides of the litigation: on one hand, it must defend its failure to desegregate the schools under the Unitary Services Plan (USP) it negotiated with Plaintiffs, who represent Mexican- and African-American students in the district.  On the other hand, TUSD claims that the State of Arizona violated the Constitution when it passed ARS § 15-112. 

Tucson Unified School District (TUSD) leaders developed a Mexican American Studies (MAS) Program in 1998 in an effort to close achievement gaps, improve academic achievement, and desegregate the district.  In part the decision was made to honor a federal court order to desegregate TUSD schools that has been in place since the 1980s.  At that time, Plaintiffs alleged discrimination against TUSD.  Under court oversight, therefore, TUSD has developed desegregation agreements in collaboration with Plaintiffs, including most recently, a Unitary Status Plan (USP). 
Under the USP, TUSD must provide culturally relevant courses (CRC).  However, under Arizona law, TUSD is not permitted to continue the MAS Program, despite the program’s potential to raise student achievement markers, including test scores and graduation rates.  That is because state legislators enacted A.R.S. § 15-112 to eliminate MAS in TUSD.  TUSD has taken the matter to court to decide whether the law is constitutional.
In 2015, in Arce v. Douglas, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the conclusion that a prong of A.R.S. § 15-112(A) is unconstitutional.  However, the remainder of the statute stands—until and unless Plaintiffs can prove at trial that the Arizona legislature applied the statute with discriminatory intent, or they can show that the legislature violated their First Amendment rights.

In the wake of Arce, Arizona State Superintendent Douglas has implied her willingness to work with TUSD to develop appropriate CRC; however, there seems to remain an unwillingness to acknowledge that A.R.S. § 15-112, as a whole, is problematic.  On the other hand, TUSD has not dealt with matters in the most deft fashion.  The District finds itself repeatedly in the news and in court.  Further, the court has seemed to lose patience with the District’s seeming incapacity to develop wholly appropriate, effective plans for desegregation and high student achievement.  Although Arce was remanded for further consideration, TUSD would be best served by avoiding litigation altogether and settling matters by quiet negotiation and other political processes outside of court.

In early 2009, the Ontario Ministry of Education decided to create and fund a new mandatory internal audit process for all school boards in the province beginning in September 2009 of that year. The 2010-11 projected cost of this initiative was $5 million. Since its implementation, Ministry of Education memos indicate that this new internal audit process has met with some difficulties. Academic literature suggests that internal audits can increase good governance, and provides economic value for an organization. However, a number of factors, such as those identified by principal-agent and resource dependency theories suggest that the effects of internal audits and the ways in which they are received can vary significantly. School boards, especially larger ones, may not share the same motivations and concerns as those of the Ministry in regards to the internal audit process.

This paper explores the reactions of Ontario school board officials to the internal audit function imposed on them in 2009. Specifically, it seeks to answer the following question: “What explains variation (if any) in Ontario school boards responses to recommendations by the regional internal audit teams to reform governance policies and processes”? Data for this research were gathered from an online survey conducted by the researcher and sent to employees at 59 Ontario school boards. It was expected that there would be a clear difference of opinion between larger and smaller school boards about the internal audit process. This, however, was not the case. Survey responses showed no major variation in opinions about this imposed function. Instead, school board employees across the province, like the auditors surveyed in other academic research, saw value in the internal audit process. Some respondents did indicate some frustration with the lack of resources to participate fully in the initiative. The Ministry’s recent appointment of an internal audit coordinator to help facilitate this process demonstrates that the problems with this mandated process may be the result of flawed policy implementation rather than a principal-agent conflict.

Co-authored with Kim Pinkerton and Pernille Ripp, The Students’ Right to Read provides resources that can be used to help discuss and ensure students’ free access to all texts. The genesis of the Students’ Right to Read was an original Council statement, “Request for Reconsideration of a Work,” prepared by the Committee on the Right to Read of the National Council of Teachers of English and revised by Ken Donelson. The current Students’ Right to Read statement represents an updated second edition that builds on the work of Council members dedicated to ensuring students the freedom to choose to read any text and opposing “efforts of individuals or groups to limit the freedom of choice of others.” Supported through references from text challenges and links to resources, this statement discusses the history and dangers of text censorship which highlight the breadth and significance of the Students’ Right to Read. The statement then culminates in processes that can be followed with different stakeholders when students’ reading rights are infringed.

Many school board reforms are initiated and implemented in order to improve the school performance and parental
participation in school governance. Many studies on evaluation of these school governance reforms showed no only the
moderate effect but also some challenges which affected negatively the effectiveness of school board operations in many
countries. The objective of this theoretical analysis is to analyze critically the evidence of some challenges facing the school
boards operations through the participation of parents in school boards across-countries. On this, the study used the
documentary research and analysis. Using the evidences of the studies conducted in Africa, Europa, and America, the study
showed the practices of school boards and participation of the parents in the school governance bodies. It emphasized less
participation and involvement of parents and the frequent conflicts between the members of these structures of the school
governance. The study supposes that solving the challenges of the school boards operations could reinforce quality of
implementation of school governance reform through the governance system of school boards and improve the school
performances. The study proposed the perspective for an “effective, useful, transparent and peaceful school board”.

THIS IS YOUR CUE: TIME TO TAKE ACTION
Call upon the community or general public, parents and youths, mental health professionals, physicians and nurses, educators, Facebook and other internet social media, religious groups, athletes, celebrities, secular and SBNR, school administrators, news media, Hollywood, academia, scientists, employers and employees, business owners and managers, private individuals and public officials, to join their talents, opportunities, and influence to support student mental health and end school shootings. Sharing this article is one way you can help https://www.academia.edu/35809557

For charter schools — and their boards — that have been offered the opportunity to improve, for authorizers that want to be able to consider the improvement option for any of their underperforming schools, and for states that want to support charter school improvement, this framework is intended to help organize and guide both policy and action. In particular, it focuses on improvement within and across four areas of school operation shown by research and practice to be critical to student learning: improvement leadership, talent development, instructional transformation and culture shift.

John Dewey's influence still lurks in the background. Dewey wrote:
"Society in its unified and structured character is in fact of the case." Dewey, to my knowledge, never wrote about RACE. His philosophy, however, in the context of post (de jure) "Jim Crow" America still lurks in the background of American thought about education. Politicians in our democratic society have used education to demagogue American anxieties and fear. Critical Race Theory has become the latest example. Symbolic leadership and past symbols of racism in America have intersected in New Orleans with the resignation of the CEO of a historic school. Her resignation was "A Milestone" in educational leadership, said a prominent Dean from Loyola University.

School districts rely on information systems to a similar extent as private, business organizations, yet the rules and regulations to ensure that school districts maintain adequate security to prevent data breaches and theft have failed to keep pace with private-sector developments. Advances in the private sector include notice-of-breach laws, consumer protection laws limiting individual liability for fraudulent electronic funds transfers, and auditing and reporting of internal controls. The public sector, including school districts, has also made advances in cyber security rules and regulations, but to a more limited extent than the private sector. Because of the sheer number of public school districts and the laws of fifty states governing public education, this article focuses primarily on Ohio public school districts, although public school districts in other states likely face many if not all the same issues. This article argues that current laws make school districts particularly vulnerable to cyber security threats, but that states can take meaningful steps toward improving cyber security for their school districts without waiting or relying on federal legislation.

¡Juntos Podemos!/Together We Can! is a multigenerational, districtwide collective of educators, community organizers, and activists. Located in eastern Los Angeles County, the group developed intentionally and horizontally to address the disenfranchisement of the working-class communities of La Puente and Valinda using the California Voting Rights Act. Drawing from a praxis-oriented approach, ¡Juntos Podemos! explores the process of organizing and its connection to theory and practice. This approach builds from the experiences of members to see how different positionalities influence their participation in the struggle for school transformation. First, we highlight the politics of the school district and history of community-based school organizing from which ¡Juntos Podemos! emerges. Second, we present narratives of two collective members who grew up in different areas of the district at distinct time periods to illustrate how their experiences were shaped by dominant ideologies of schooling and why they became involved in ¡Juntos Podemos! Third, we discuss how our efforts to change the ways school board members are elected as a first step in shifting the composition of the school board. We conclude with a discussion of transformation as an ongoing process that draws on multiple approaches and strategies.

Los Angeles County, the group developed intentionally and horizontally to address the disenfranchisement of the working-class communities of La Puente and Valinda using the California Voting Rights Act. Drawing from a praxis-oriented approach, ¡Juntos Podemos! explores the process of organizing and its connection to theory and practice. This approach builds from the experiences of members to see how different positionalities influence their participation in the struggle for school transformation. First, we highlight the politics of the school district and history of community-based school organizing from which ¡Juntos Podemos! emerges. Second, we present narratives of two collective members who grew up in different areas of the district at distinct time periods to illustrate how their experiences were shaped by dominant ideologies of schooling and why they became involved in ¡Juntos Podemos! Third, we discuss how our efforts to change the ways school board members are elected as a first step in shifting the composition of the school board. We conclude with a discussion of transformation as an ongoing process that draws on multiple approaches and strategies. KEYWORDS Community organizing; California Voting Rights Act (CVRA); narrative; school board; history of activism; Latino/a families and community On a Wednesday afternoon in October 2019 at the Marie Callender's restaurant in the City of Industry, long-time community activists met with attorney Carlos Perez and demographer Jesús Garcia to discuss the possibility of using the California Voting Rights Act (CVRA) to address inequalities in the Hacienda-La Puente Unified School District (HLPUSD). Perez had read an opinion article that two of the activists published critiquing class and racial inequities in the district and that ended with a call to move away from at-large trustee voting (Ochoa & Ochoa, 2019). Over a mid-afternoon snack of soup and pie, Perez and Garcia detailed how they have forced school districts in several California communities from Whittier to Bakersfield to address racially polarized voting patterns that disenfranchise working-class communities of color. Perez explained that he could write a demand letter to the district arguing that they were in violation of the CVRA and that the district would have 45 days to either begin the process of moving to trustee areas or fight it through litigation. Garcia, the demographer, graduated from La Puente High School in 1972 and knew the area well. Perez and Garcia enthusiastically listened to the La Puente activists in attendance to discuss the fruits of their decades of community organizing. At the end of the discussion, Perez and Garcia offered to work with the group to develop a demand letter and draft a map with proposed trustee districts.

This replication-extension study (Earley & Galluzzo, 2015) examined the information seeking activities of British Columbia (BC) school trustees in an effort to understand the transmission of research. Trustees were asked to identify the sources they used for acquiring research and information in the process of decision making. The frequency of use, believed most useful, and characteristics of information sources were examined as well as the influence of demographic and school district variables. One hundred and forty school trustees participated in this study. The most frequently used sources of information were briefing materials from the secretary treasurer, briefing materials from the superintendent, and members of the local school board. The source of information believed most useful was briefing materials from the superintendent. There were no differences between genders on most items, although females were more likely to consult with the community than their male colleagues. Trustees in smaller districts were more likely to turn to materials from provincial organizations and the Ministry of Education website whereas trustees in larger districts tended to turn to local and provincial newspapers. Research reports from university researchers or think tanks were not primary sources of information for BC school trustees who generally sought information that was in close proximity from their school board and community.

Historically power to govern public schools has been delegated to local school boards. However, this arrangement of power has been shifting over the past half century and increasingly, local school boards are targeted as ineffective and antiquated. Teach For America (TFA), typically examined for its placement of teachers, also seeks to develop educational leaders and TFA now encourages and supports its alumni to run for local school boards. The involvement of a national organization, like TFA, with its own national education agenda in local school board elections may reflect the next step in the demise of local control. To investigate whether TFA’s involvement in local elections represents the spreading of a national agenda at the expense of attention to local issues, this research examines campaign messages for both TFA alumni candidates and their opponents. Results indicate that TFA alumni candidates incorporate significantly more messages aligned with TFA than their opponents (35 vs. 11), but they also maintain a focus on local issues as measured by the number of local issue messages they also incorporate into their campaign literature. Rather than debating whether school boards have lost power, this research points to the need to better understand how local politics is changing and expanding as new voices enter the arena.

By 10 January 2017, activists in the predominately Latina/o working class city of La Puente, California had lobbied the council to declare the city a sanctuary supporting immigrants, people of color, Muslims, LGBTQ people, and people with disabilities. The same community members urged the school district to declare itself a sanctuary. While community members rejoiced in pushing elected officials to pass these inclusive resolutions, there were multiple roadblocks reducing the potential for more substantive change. Drawing on city council and school board meetings, resolutions and my own involvement in this sanctuary struggle, I focus on a continuum of three overlapping and interlocking manifestations of white supremacist heteronormative patriarchy: neoliberal diversity discourses, institutionalized policies, and a re-emergence of high-profiled white supremacist activities. Together, these dynamics minimized, contained and absorbed community activism and possibilities of change. They reinforced the status quo by maintaining limits on who belongs and sustaining intersecting hierarchies of race, immigration status, gender, and sexuality. This extended case adds to the scant scholarship on the current sanctuary struggles, including among immigration scholars. It also illustrates how the state co-opts and marginalizes movement language, ideas, and people, providing a cautionary tale about the forces that restrict more transformative change.

Los Angeles County, the group developed intentionally and horizontally to address the disenfranchisement of the working-class communities of La Puente and Valinda using the California Voting Rights Act. Drawing from a praxis-oriented approach, ¡Juntos Podemos! explores the process of organizing and its connection to theory and practice. This approach builds from the experiences of members to see how different positionalities influence their participation in the struggle for school transformation. First, we highlight the politics of the school district and history of community-based school organizing from which ¡Juntos Podemos! emerges. Second, we present narratives of two collective members who grew up in different areas of the district at distinct time periods to illustrate how their experiences were shaped by dominant ideologies of schooling and why they became involved in ¡Juntos Podemos! Third, we discuss how our efforts to change the ways school board members are elected as a first step in shifting the composition of the school board. We conclude with a discussion of transformation as an ongoing process that draws on multiple approaches and strategies. KEYWORDS Community organizing; California Voting Rights Act (CVRA); narrative; school board; history of activism; Latino/a families and community On a Wednesday afternoon in October 2019 at the Marie Callender's restaurant in the City of Industry, long-time community activists met with attorney Carlos Perez and demographer Jesús Garcia to discuss the possibility of using the California Voting Rights Act (CVRA) to address inequalities in the Hacienda-La Puente Unified School District (HLPUSD). Perez had read an opinion article that two of the activists published critiquing class and racial inequities in the district and that ended with a call to move away from at-large trustee voting (Ochoa & Ochoa, 2019). Over a mid-afternoon snack of soup and pie, Perez and Garcia detailed how they have forced school districts in several California communities from Whittier to Bakersfield to address racially polarized voting patterns that disenfranchise working-class communities of color. Perez explained that he could write a demand letter to the district arguing that they were in violation of the CVRA and that the district would have 45 days to either begin the process of moving to trustee areas or fight it through litigation. Garcia, the demographer, graduated from La Puente High School in 1972 and knew the area well. Perez and Garcia enthusiastically listened to the La Puente activists in attendance to discuss the fruits of their decades of community organizing. At the end of the discussion, Perez and Garcia offered to work with the group to develop a demand letter and draft a map with proposed trustee districts.

Historically power to govern public schools has been delegated to local school boards. However, this arrangement of power has been shifting over the past half century and increasingly, local school boards are targeted as ineffective and antiquated. Teach For America (TFA), typically examined for its placement of teachers, also seeks to develop educational leaders and TFA now encourages and supports its alumni to run for local school boards. The involvement of a national organization, like TFA, with its own national education agenda in local school board elections may reflect the next step in the demise of local control. To investigate whether TFA's involvement in local elections represents the spreading of a national agenda at the expense of attention to local issues, this research examines campaign messages for both TFA alumni candidates and their opponents. Results indicate that TFA alumni candidates incorporate significantly more messages aligned with TFA than their opponents (35 vs. 11), but they also maintain a focus on local issues as measured by the number of local issue messages they also incorporate into their campaign literature.