School boards rarely make national news unless someone is shouting. A community member reads a passage from a controversial library book; a teacher’s social media post ignites outrage; a member storms out over masks or diversity policies. Skirmishes over culture war issues dominate headlines, giving the impression that the most pressing questions in local education politics are whether the local school board is too conservative or too “woke.” The deeper and more consequential problem is far more banal: too many school boards don’t govern. They cheerlead.
A new study from the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, Who’s on Board? School Boards and Political Representation in an Age of Conflict, by David M. Houston and Michael T. Hartney, offers an unvarnished look at the nation’s school board members. The findings confirm what I’ve long suspected (and said, including during my own ill-fated run for school board in my upstate New York town): local school boards function less like independent oversight bodies and more like glorified Parent-Teacher Associations.
Houston and Hartney surveyed more than 5,000 board members across 3,000 districts. The portrait that emerges is of a group that doesn’t always mirror the communities they serve demographically. Nearly nine in ten are white; almost half hold postgraduate degrees; one in four is a current or former teacher. Board members’ partisanship and ideology largely mirror the American public’s and tend to align with local voters on hot-button cultural issues, the pair found. They’re also less supportive of charter schools and teachers’ unions than their constituents. However (and this, to my mind, is the troublesome bit) school board members give their districts glowing marks—three-quarters grade their districts an A or B while the public is much less sanguine.
This is not evidence of corruption or malice. It’s something more subtle and insidious: institutional capture. The same dynamic that makes regulatory agencies too cozy with the industries they oversee makes school boards too loyal to the districts they’re supposed to supervise and hold accountable. Most board elections are low-turnout, off-cycle affairs, dominated by candidates with ties to local education establishments. Once elected, they’re socialized into a culture that prizes collegiality and harmony over honest oversight.
———
Did taxpayer funded Wisconsin DPI Superintendent Underly Juice Test Scores for Reelection?
——-
Only 31% of 4th graders in Wisconsin read at grade level, which is worse than Mississippi.
——-
Madison taxpayers have long supported far above average (now > $25,000 per student) K-12 tax & spending practices. This, despite long term, disastrous reading results.
Madison Schools: More $, No Accountability
The taxpayer funded Madison School District long used Reading Recovery…
The data clearly indicate that being able to read is not a requirement for graduation at (Madison) East, especially if you are black or Hispanic”
My Question to Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers on Teacher Mulligans and our Disastrous Reading Results
2017: West High Reading Interventionist Teacher’s Remarks to the School Board on Madison’s Disastrous Reading Results
Madison’s taxpayer supported K-12 school district, despite spending far more than most, has long tolerated disastrous reading results.
“An emphasis on adult employment”
Wisconsin Public Policy Forum Madison School District Report[PDF]
WEAC: $1.57 million for Four Wisconsin Senators
Friday Afternoon Veto: Governor Evers Rejects AB446/SB454; an effort to address our long term, disastrous reading results
Booked, but can’t read (Madison): functional literacy, National citizenship and the new face of Dred Scott in the age of mass incarceration.
When A Stands for Average: Students at the UW-Madison School of Education Receive Sky-High Grades. How Smart is That?