cover image: The Local Governing Board: Asset or Liability?

The Local Governing Board: Asset or Liability?

Current lay board membership was found to come from business owner/manager (35%), professional/technical (27%), and seven other occupational groups. Nearly half were college graduates. Membership qualifications were discussed. A poll of administrators showed that 98% preferred popular election for choosing members. Board responsibilities included planning and policy making, policy enforcement, and evaluation of the policies in relation to the system's goals. Individual members had to know education laws or where to find them and were not to make binding decisions outside the board. Among the favorable opinions were that lay boards are representative and responsive, are outside party politics and the spoils system, provide program continuity and management economy, and operate openly and responsibly. Principal objections were that they are involved only part-time and are subject to pressure from special-interest groups. Recommendations for improving their composition and function included (1) higher qualification for membership, (2) broader membership, (3) outside advisors and other information resources for the board, (4) closer communication with professional educators, (5) more contact with state and federal lawmakers and professional groups, and (6) more community support, service, and funds to offset members' part-time operation and permit them to enlarge their activities beyond regular board meetings. (HH)

Authors

Hahn, Thomas C.

Peer Reviewed
F
Published in
United States of America

Table of Contents