This article was a collaborative effort by IASB Field Services and Communications.
Consider the challenges faced by every school board: the necessity of assuring clear district priorities, saying “yes” to some things, “no” to many more; making financial decisions for a multi-million dollar corporation; working together with seven colleagues who have different perspectives, values and skill levels (likely a reflection of the diversity in your community); and working within the requirements of the Illinois Open Meetings Act, assuring transparency, trust and integrity. It’s no wonder many boards find it valuable to pause and reflect in a board self-evaluation.
Consider two analogies:
Most people, even if they feel fine, schedule a check-up with their doctor on a regular basis. The doctor runs diagnostic tests and the patient walks away with a clean bill of health … or a prescription to remedy the problem.
Likewise, when the oil light comes on in your vehicle, you know it’s time to take it to a garage for service. It’s a warning that if you don’t provide periodic maintenance to your vehicle, you could encounter problems down the road.
Unfortunately, school boards don’t come equipped with a light to signal when attention needs to focus on the board itself. But a board can ensure its own “health” and its ability to work together productively with a regular “check-up” and maintenance work.
That work takes the form of a board self-evaluation. Boards throughout the state use one of IASB’s self-evaluation instruments to develop better communication and understanding among members of the board governance team.
A self-evaluation can help a board monitor its processes: how it conducts its meetings, its planning strategies and its relationships — not only with each other but with the superintendent and the community.
Consider this: the board evaluates its superintendent, the superintendent evaluates the district’s staff and teachers continually evaluate student performance. Why shouldn’t the board evaluate its performance as well?
How it’s done
The board self-evaluation process is fairly simple, and the Association has several processes and tools available for a board to use. In one example, each board member completes an IASB survey — either online or on paper — that takes between 30 and 60 minutes to complete. The time required depends on the length of comments that individuals wish to add. IASB staff then collates the results and prepares a summary report.
Once those reports are ready, the board can schedule a meeting with the district’s field services director to discuss the survey items and other board member concerns. If a representative of IASB is present, the self-evaluation conversation may be held in closed session pursuant to a statutory exception provided in the Illinois Open Meetings Act.
During the meeting, which typically can take about three hours, board members will be able to see the ratings to the questions and the comments from all seven board members. Specific responses of individuals are anonymous, but a board member will be able to compare his or her responses to the rest of the aggregate responses from the board.
Field services directors recommend that the board set aside time for a special meeting to accomplish this work and report that those who participate in the process find it to be valuable.
Consider the following sample comments from school board members when they were asked what the most valuable part of participating in an IASB-facilitated board self-evaluation was for them personally:
• Good chance to build some teamwork.
• Allowing everyone to express their thoughts on the make up of the board.
• We needed to air the past baggage, hopefully now we can move forward.
• Open discussion among board members, with helpful facilitation.
• Discussing ways to conduct timely and efficient meetings without sacrificing the effectiveness and quality.
• Beginning to turn around the communication and trust issues which will hopefully lead to no more use of the board (as a whole or individuals) as a scapegoat.
• Agreement between board and superintendent for pragmatic improvements in their working relationship.
• Agreeing to specific things to do differently — “rules of engagement”; we were in a rut of repeating the same patterns over and over.
• The open frank conversation of the board members and the commitment evidenced by all involved … ideas to take us forward.
Participants also were asked how they thought their board might function differently because of the self-evaluation, and sample responses were:
• Hopefully, have greater respect for each others differences and encourage members to speak up, even if in the minority opinion.
• More tolerance and willingness for difference of opinion.
• I think we will work on getting to know each other better. I think we will work on a board member job description, with expectations and a protocol agreement for future board members and continuity.
• The board now has a common language about how the board conducts the business of the board.
• We were already a very high functioning board, but what was learned and discussed will help to affirm the positive and keep things moving in the right direction.
• Each board retreat has brought the current membership toward a more positive and proactive interaction and approach to leadership.
The board self-evaluation process is not an attempt by an outsider to evaluate the board, nor is it an exercise in blame-fixing or finger pointing. Instead, a board self-evaluation is a means by which a board, as a governance team, steps back and looks at itself and then critically examines it strengths and weaknesses, and then makes plans for improvements.
Prudent patients don’t wait for an emergency to see a physician and prudent drivers don’t run a vehicle until it breaks down. They schedule regular health and maintenance check-ups. Prudent boards do the same with self-evaluations.