Do School Boards Add Value to Education?
(by Tunya Audain, 091218, comment to blog Report Card by Janet Steffenhagen, Vancouver Sun education reporter on story : Drop two trustees and save money: Ann Andersen, 091217)
That is the title of an article in the Halifax Chronicle-Herald, May 10, 2000. http://www.aims.ca/education.asp?typeID=4&id=510
It is well-worth reading in its entirety, but these are the main points that the writer, Brian Lee Crowley, says would flow from transferring management of education to local schools away from school boards:
- stronger accountability – performance audited on a regular basis
- considerable budgetary savings
- greater responsiveness to local needs
While he mentions the case of New Zealand needing to fix its “massive fiscal problems” of the 80s, he does not use the figure I’ve seen quoted often enough to make you stop and think. For example:
“ (New Zealand) … Prior to implementing direct school-based management, two-thirds of spending disappeared before it ever reached a single student. After the fact, external overheads absorbed only one-third. And student test scores shot up.” http://www.fcpp.org/publication.php/953
What happened was that New Zealand adopted school-based management, replacing regional school boards in 1989. Reports remain glowing to this day for results and responsiveness. And don’t think they don’t have school board conventions. Each school sends delegates for practical workshops (principal appraisal, boys’ education) and the usual tea and sharing and comparing. For hands-on management, not arm’s length direction.
In Alberta, while school boards still exist, many schools have gone the charter route (since 1994), by-passing school boards, making a contract with the Ministry instead.
Neither of these two models, school based management nor charter schools can be called privatization. They are fully publicly funded. The organizational principle they embody is either devolution or decentralization. No middle managers.
Now, on the matter of the Cowichan Valley School District — trustee, Ann Andersen proposing the reduction of trustees from 9 to 7. Good luck, Ann! You’ve already tried twice and could not get a seconder to your motion. Hope some brave (non politically hog-tied) soul does second your motion so that the board plus the community can discuss this important issue.
Especially in light of the Secretary-treasurer’s dire projections of a serious budget shortfall looming.
And, even more importantly, I do hope the discussion can be framed against the lingering questions raised by the Southern Report of May 2008. (See: Knuckles rapped in Cowichan Valley) http://communities.canada.com/vancouversun/blogs/reportcard/archive/2008/05/22/knuckles-rapped-in-cowichan-valley.aspx
Mr. Southern said student achievement has been low for five years. The report quotes:
“Improving learning success for its students is the primary responsibility of any board of education and the Cowichan Board needs to do what is necessary to get the job done. If the level of student learning does not begin to improve in the next school year and continue upward this Board will have failed to do its job.”
Go for it Ann! And why not talk about the broader possibility of disbanding the whole school board and devolving management to each school? Why not sacrifice trustee vanities and administrator self-interest? Do “what is necessary to get the job done” and trust each local school to spend the money wisely and appropriately.