Education Policy in Pennsylvania

1. Education Policy in Pennsylvania Governance & Leadership

2. Group Members • Rosemary Nilles • Lee Burket • Dale Keagy • Elaine Tischer • Jim Thomas

3. Outline • Task • Obsolete school code • School Board • Demographics • Term Length • School Board professional development • Creating consensus • Conclusions

4. Task • Identify issues concerning governance and leadership in Pennsylvania education policy that require state action. Focus • Legislative accountability for student achievement

5. What law needs to change to improve local school boards’ accountability for student outcomes?

6. Pennsylvania School Code • Findings • Written in 1949, • Many Amendments • No comprehensive update since • Contradictory and outdated sections • Language confusing on duties of board • Assessment • School Code is obsolete and lacks vision

7. Pennsylvania School Code • Examples of obsolescence in school board responsibilities • 24 PS 7-740 Water-closets or out-houses • 24 PS 11-1146 Part-time teachers, etc. • 24 PS 15-1516 Bible reading • 24 PS 15-1543 William Penn Day

8. School Board Background • Originally active in day-to-day operations, now focus on policy • Federal and state legislation has moved control away from local boards • Curriculum • Student achievement standards • Personnel • Superintendents and staff now handle day-to-day issues • State holds school administrators responsible for teacher quality and student achievement • Local boards now have little accountability for student achievement to meet mandated standards • Local community holds board responsible for preparing graduates to enter workforce

9. School Board Accountability • Complicated • Requires strengthening credibility and relevance with the community by establishing: • Policy connected to achievement • Budget connected to achievement • Vision • Close relationship with school administration • Culture of ethical school governance • Requirement for Board member development

10. School Board Selection and Qualifications - Issues • School board election cycles • School board director development

11. 3 – 3 – 3 Election Cycle Cycle1 3 Directors – 6 year term Cycle 2 3 Directors – 6 year term Cycle 3 3 Directors – 6 year term

12. 5-4 Election Cycle Cycle 1 4 Directors – 4 year term Cycle 2 5 Directors – 4 year term Cycle 1 4 Directors – 4 year term Cycle 2 5 Directors – 4 year term

13. Election Cycles in PA • Until early 1980s, Boards in PA elected on 3-3-3 cycle with 6 year terms • Given reason for change to a 5 –4 cycle • Difficult to find people willing to commit to 6 years of service • High turnover rate • Other reasons • Time for a change…?

14. Board Demographics in PA

15. Advantages/Disadvantages • 3 – 3 – 3 Boards • Stability • Continuity of leadership • Assurance of experienced board • 5-4 Boards • Quick response to single issues • Potential for “take-overs” and instability • Recommendation – Return to 3-3-3

16. School Board Election Cycles • Findings • Current law specifies 9 members for most districts • Election of 5 members one election and 4 the next, for term of 4 years • Election cycle produces turbulence • Assessment • Member turbulence can causes dramatic policy shifts • Election law could be changed to provide for fewer members each election and/or longer terms providing more stability

17. Board Demographics in PA

18. Board Demographics in PA

19. Board Director Development • Findings • Aging board members • Board members well educated • No background checks or formal training required • School code specifies members to be 18 years old and of good moral character. • Other states have successfully implemented mandatory training to develop board members • Ability of boards to govern and provide leadership not consistently displayed

20. Board Director Development • Assumptions • Older board members may have interest in taxation issues over education mission • Lack of formal training lends towards members functioning in their “comfort zone” and furtherance of personal agendas and/or risk aversion • Developmental training increases member efficiency, focus on board functions and consistency in governance • Learning organizations serve their constituents better

21. Board Director Development • Recommendation • Legislature amend laws to require: • All newly elected Board members attend orientation training (12 hrs) • Annual professional development (4 hrs) • All Board members successfully pass background checks prior to assuming duties. • Variety of options • Administered by state Bd. of Ed. • Funded by school board • Incentives

22. Board Director Development • Training Content • Overview of Education in PA • Legal and Regulatory Environment • District Goals, Programs, Policies • Board Operations • Roles and Responsibilities • Creating a Vision • Personal/Professional Development

23. Building Consensus • Enlist Support of Stakeholders in the Educational Community to: • Educate the Legislature • Educate the Public About the Importance of School Board

24. Creating a Critical Mass of Support • Small Scale: Build Support within the Organizations • Larger Scale: Communication to Legislature and General Public • Full Scale: Bill Introduced • Consider the Opposition

25. Conclusions • Legislature has role in student achievement through school code • School code must be revised to reflect changes in school board roles and responsibilities • Complexity of school policy environment dictates development for school board members

26. Education Policy in Pennsylvania Governance & Leadership

27. References • Institute for Educational Leadership. (2001). Leadership forStudent Learning: Restructuring School District Leadership. Washington D.C. • Pennsylvania Department of Education. Pennsylvania Public School Code of 1949. Harrisburg, PA. • The Education Policy and Leadership Center. (2004). Strengthening the Work of School Boards in Pennsylvania. Harrisburg, PA. • Bloomington • Cunningham • Gehring • Land