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
November/December 2004

Does your board have a moral compass?

by Sandra Watkins

Sandra Watkins is a professor of educational administration and supervision at Western Illinois University in Macomb.

Silence fell over the boardroom. Another "political appointment" had been recommended this evening - the fourth such appointment in the last six months, made and approved in the same manner.

When a lone board member questioned the candidates' qualifications, the superintendent responded that these individuals were "loyal" and "definitely team players." The superintendent didn't offer any other qualifications for the positions.

The real story: none of the four job candidates the superintendent had offered had any qualifications, except for an administrative certificate. And a majority of the board was willing to look the other way while positions were offered to people whose best qualification was being the superintendent's friend.

Central office staff members at the board meeting sat in utter disbelief. They had a wonderful school district, and they were watching it dissolve before their eyes.

"Why is this happening?" they pondered. "Is there no moral authority left on this board? Can't the board see what was going on? Isn't it the board's responsibility to see that good hiring processes are established and followed? Or is that considered meddling, micromanaging and 'off limits'?"

Qualifications, once again, took a back seat to politics, when what the students in this low-income, high-poverty school needed was an exemplary principal. Not only did the students need a quality principal, but the teachers, parents and the community deserved better.

What happened to the moral compass that guided this board of education for years and had made this district a stellar example of quality and high standards? The majority of the board members seem like decent people. Why couldn't they see what was going on? Was a faction of the board bullying the superintendent?

This was the local gossip swirling in the school district. Certainly, the superintendent was aware these newly appointed individuals knew little or nothing about curriculum, instruction, assessments, student achievement and professional development. This particular candidate - now a principal - was less than a mediocre teacher and now, like the three appointees before him, he would be in a key leadership role.

Students would suffer, parents would be misled and the community would lose big time. If not now, down the road there would be a price to pay. No one in the school district spoke out for fear of retribution. Even though folks knew silence was consent, there was too much fear in the workplace for anyone to speak out.

The major dilemma pitted the moral compass and integrity of all the individuals in the school district who knew what was going on against school board members who allowed this to happen. The other ethical issue involved was the educational professionals (or not so professional) who accepted positions they were not qualified for and who lacked the moral fiber to just say, "No."

Shouldn't it be the role of the superintendent and the board of education to ensure that principal and central office positions are filled with highly qualified individuals? How does a school board justify its action when children are at risk of being left behind?

Will "No Child Left Behind" be the catalyst to address these issues and board actions? Wasn't part of the reasoning for NCLB to ensure that children will not be subjected to poor administrative decisions and ethical violations? Why then does no provision exist in the law for highly qualified administrators like the requirements for teachers and paraprofessionals?

Who will address this?

This type of silent scandal, which is definitely an abuse of power, along with patronage and nepotism in hiring practices, rarely appears in the media. Public school scandals involving board members usually focus on mismanagement of funds and resources, discrimination, conflicts of interest, coercion, intimidation, bullying and blatant ethics violations.

In Illinois, school boards are charged with providing a school governance structure that will establish and maintain effective instructional services for the good of all students in the district. This implies that school districts, with board approval, must employ exemplary instructional leaders who possess the knowledge, skills and ability to lead schools and school districts in the areas of curriculum, instruction, accountability, professional development, assessment and student support services.

In "The Lighthouse Study: School Board/Superintendent Team Behaviors in School Districts with Extreme Differences in Student Achievement" conducted by the Iowa Association of School Boards, the findings indicate that school boards can and do play a major role in the academic achievement of students.

In high-achieving districts in Iowa, school board members showed a greater understanding and influence in each of the seven key areas of school renewal and reform:

• shared leadership;
• continuous improvement and shared decision making;
• ability to create and sustain initiatives;
• supportive workplace for staff;
• staff development;
• support for school sites through data and information; and
• community involvement.

In high-achieving districts, "Board members were knowledgeable about the learning conditions in the schools, alternatives for improving education and the needs of all students," the study found. "Board members could mention specific initiatives that were underway and could explain the initiative and identify specific ways that the board contributed to the initiative. Board members could describe the work of staff around the goals in clear, specific terms. They could give specific examples of how district goals were being carried out by administrators and teachers and what was actually happening in the classrooms."

The board members in high-achieving districts also expected to see improvements in student achievement in the buildings after new initiatives were introduced. In low-performing schools, boards thought it would take years to see improvements in student achievement.

The study also highlighted the difference in board involvement regarding attitudes about staff. In the low-achieving districts, board members tended to make negative statements about staff, such as the need to change principals or get rid of poor teachers. The data indicated that they also made few positive comments about staff.

In the high-achieving districts, however, board members expressed a high level of confidence in staff. And they could give specific examples of how staff members showed commitment, how the staff was improving, and how the learning and well being of students was improving as well.

It appears that high-achieving districts with high board member involvement never mentioned micromanaging, meddling and "off limits" topics. The boards appeared to have a moral compass, and they performed with purpose, passion, integrity and commitment to the students in the school district. You never heard board members spreading "false rumors" about staff, or speaking negatively about employees in the district. It is believed that these boards would not have allowed this type of behavior to occur. They were ethical and purpose driven.

Many incidents of boards' unethical behavior have been documented:

• Board members soliciting contracts for software that a board member held part ownership in the company.
• A chairman of the school board requesting two principals help him write the evaluation of the superintendent.
• The chairman of the board bullying a central office employee.
• Board members representing the district at the National School Boards Association meeting and never attending any sessions at the conference.
• Board members golfing with the superintendent at school district expense on a school day.

All of these incidents indicate the need for moral, ethical leaders on boards of education. But how, as a sitting board member, do you ensure that your board of education has a moral compass?

How are ethical violations such as patronage and nepotism dealt with in your district? How are matters handled when there is clear evidence of violations of the Illinois School Board Code of Conduct for Board Members?

In a September 2004 The School Administrator article, "Board Ethics," Paul Riede, an education writer with The Post-Standard in Syracuse, New York, contends: "Concerns over the rules of conduct for school board members have been on the rise in many communities that have either revised old ethics policies or created new ones. And some districts have found that the discussion of ethics codes can itself become divisive for boards if not handled properly."

According to the article, the Pennsylvania School Boards Association conducted a general survey last year and the issue of school board ethics emerged as a strong concern among board members. "(T)hey wanted more guidance on hazier issues involving proper conduct, civility and communication within the board and between board members and the public," Sharon Fissel, PSBA's director of policy services, told Riede.

New Jersey also has wrestled to control nepotism for some time. In "Building an Ethical Board" in the same journal, Robert H. Holster, superintendent of Passaic Public Schools, said: "In 1992, New Jersey created the School Ethics Act to control nepotism, a growing problem in many school districts. It is a problem that would not occur if board members didn't have hidden agendas concerning hiring certain individuals."

Holster claims that until school board members are held accountable for their actions, they will ignore their oath of office. "Having ethical standards without enforcement and/or penalties for violations weakens the system," he maintains.

The article concludes by stating: "Courage to face the truth and correct wrongdoing is the most important characteristic a superintendent brings to the job. Until our school boards all recognize that the school district exists not for individual gain but for the betterment of all, public education will spin horribly away from its fundamental purpose."

In Illinois, board members give willingly of their time, expertise and energy to serve school districts all over the state. These individuals are dedicated and committed to serving the students in their district.

Occasionally, issues come up where the ethics of one board member may be questioned. In these cases, very specific processes and procedures should be in place at the local level. These situations require the board to review the violation rather than hide it under the rug where it can fester and cause board disharmony, lack of focus and result in the disruption of the mission of the school district.

These local processes and procedures for school boards and superintendents should include:

• Annually review the Illinois School Board Code of Ethics and The Illinois Ethics Act (5ILCS 430-1 et seq), which states:

"As a member of my local board of education, I shall do my utmost to represent the public interest in education by adhering to the following commitments:

1. I shall represent all school district constituents honestly and equally and refuse to surrender my responsibilities to special interest or partisan political groups.
2. I shall avoid any conflict of interest or the appearance of impropriety, which could result from my position, and shall not use my board membership for personal gain or publicity.
3. I shall recognize that a board member has no legal authority as an individual and that decisions can be made only by a majority vote at a board meeting.
4. I shall take no private action that might compromise the board or administration and shall respect the confidentiality of privileged information.
5. I shall abide by majority decisions of the board, while retaining the right to seek changes in such decisions through ethical and constructive channels.
6. I shall encourage and respect the free expression of opinion by my fellow board members and others who seek a hearing before the board.
7. I shall be involved and knowledgeable about not only local educational concerns, but also about state and national issues."
• Request the services of the Illinois Association of School Boards for an annual meeting to review the challenges and issues faced by the board, which may include discussions centered on violations of the Illinois School Board Code of Ethics and clarification on the State Officials and Employee Ethics Act.
• Establish an Ethics Committee as a part of the regular board of education structure.
• Ensure that all board of education members adhere to the general provisions of the Illinois state law.
• Introduce/include an ethics component in the educational leadership masters, educational specialist and doctoral programs at all Illinois universities.

Sources

"The Lighthouse Study: School Board/Superintendent Team Behaviors in School Districts with Extreme Differences in Student Achievement," a report of the Iowa Association of School Boards, October 2000

Robert H. Holster, "Building an Ethical Board," The School Administrator, September 2004

Paul Riede, "Board Ethics," The School Administrator, September 2004

Additional goals for board members

In addition to the commitments for board members, the Illinois School Board Code of Conduct also encourages school board members to pursue the following goals:

• The development of educational programs that meet the individual needs of every student, regardless of ability, race, sex, creed or social standing.
• The development of procedures for the regular and systematic evaluation of programs, staff performance and board operations to ensure progress toward education and fiscal goals.
• The development of effective school board policies, which provide direction for the operation of the schools and delegate authority to the superintendent for their administration.
• The development of systematic communications, which ensure that the school board, administration, staff, students and community are fully informed and that the staff understands the community's aspirations for its schools.
• The development of sound business practices, which ensure that every dollar spent produces maximum benefits.