This document has been formatted for printing from your browser from the Web site of the Illinois Association of School Boards.
COPYRIGHT NOTICE -- This document is © copyrighted by the Illinois Association of School Boards. IASB hereby grants to school districts and other Internet users the right to download, print and reproduce this document provided that (a) the Illinois Association of School Boards is noted as publisher and copyright holder of the document and (b) any reproductions of this document are disseminated without charge and not used for any commercial purpose.
Illinois School Board Journal - ARCHIVES
September-October, 2002
ASK THE STAFF:
Speaking 'ends' helps clarify
board and superintendent roles
This issue's question is answered by John Cassel, IASB field services director for DuPage, Starved Rock and North Cook divisions. Contact John at jcassel@iasb.com
Question: Why do IASB staff refer to "ends" when talking about district mission, vision and goals? Is this just another example of educational jargon?
Answer: Yes, IASB staff members intentionally use the term "ends" because we find it helpful in a number of ways. Ends language has a prominent place in our Foundational Principles of Effective Governance where we describe the key task of the board: "the board clarifies district ends."
Allow me to describe how we define "ends" and explain why IASB staff believes it is essential for a school board to learn to "speak ends."
Ends are easily distinguished from means. Ends are about "what" and the "what" is a community question. "What do we want from our schools?" Means are about "how" and "how" is a technical question for experts in education and management. "How can we deliver what the community expects of us?"
The board's job is ends; the staff's job is means. A healthy relationship between the board and the superintendent depends on their keeping these jobs separated. If the board and superintendent really have the same job, they can't help but get in each other's way. If their tasks are mutually complementary, they can both contribute to the vitality of the district.
By focusing on ends, the board spends its time doing what it can do best and empowers staff to implement board policy using their professional expertise. Because ends language is always attentive to the difference between ends and means, a school board is least likely to stray inadvertently into means when using ends language.
If your school board struggles to understand its job, you might try "ends" language. That should give you a clearer focus.
Ends point toward results, not just effort. Too many school board goals focus on means rather than ends. Consider this difference:
Board Goal: The new reading program will be implemented this year.
Ends Statement: All children will learn to read.
Note how the ends statement demands results while the goal statement merely calls for effort. By design, ends language points beyond effort to the result or benefit to be delivered. The real issue is not whether a new reading program has been implemented; it's whether all students are learning to read.
Given a clear ends statement to express the board's expectations, the staff can be counted on to select a new program to pursue those expectations. The "new reading program" can be viewed as a "means" issue.
The school board's most important responsibilities are (a) clearly and passionately communicating its ends and (b) effectively monitoring district performance against those ends. While there may be value in discussing particular programs, the essential board task is articulating the target at which the district is shooting. "What are our ends?" and "Are we hitting the target?" Choosing which program will best accomplish the ends is really a staff question.
Ends are about policy, not just isolated board decisions. What does the school board do? It makes policy. Unfortunately, many school board members think about policy as more about rules and regulations than results. For that reason, some boards use policy to "micro-manage" their districts just as fully as if they were making only ad hoc decisions.
Policy should provide guidance for both the district and the board. In the broadest sense, we can identify four types of policy:
Board process policies - define how the board does business.
Board/superintendent relationship policies - define how the board and the superintendent will work together.
Executive limitations policies (or means limitations policies) - set the parameters for the work of the superintendent and staff.
Ends policies - define the ends of the district: values and beliefs; mission and purpose; vision and direction; goals.
Ends language helps the board locate its "ends work" in the context of policy. Policy work is the work of governance: purpose, direction, continuity, clarity and communication. Ends policies are promises the district makes to the community - clear statements of what the district will provide in return for the community's most precious resources: its children and its tax dollars. Ends are the key work of the board and should define its notions of policy - not the other way around.
Should your board learn to speak ends? Should your board spend most of its meeting time clarifying district ends?
If you want to make a significant contribution to your community and play the board's role with power and effectiveness, I encourage you to make ends "what matters most."