1 / 40

Minnesota School Board Member Survey Results Minnesota School Boards Association and

Minnesota School Board Member Survey Results Minnesota School Boards Association and. Introductions. Katie Klanderud , Director of Board Development, MSBA Roberta Thatcher, Manager Customer Strategy and Experience, SUPERVALU

chaney
Download Presentation

Minnesota School Board Member Survey Results Minnesota School Boards Association and

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Minnesota School Board Member Survey ResultsMinnesota School Boards Association and

  2. Introductions • Katie Klanderud, Director of Board Development, MSBA • Roberta Thatcher, Manager Customer Strategy and Experience, SUPERVALU • Candace Raskin, Professor/Director of Center for Engaged Leadership, Director of Edina Site Management and Development, MNSU, Mankato at Edina • Barbara Wilson, Assistant Professor, MNSU, Mankato at Edina • Anne Weyandt, J.D., Founder/Partner, SheridanStoweLLC Presidentemeritus, Anoka Technical College

  3. Agenda • Objective of the Study • Overview of Methodology • Reasons for running for school board • Training • Challenges and Opportunities • Student Achievement • Racial Diversity • Performance Perceptions • Recap and Q&A

  4. Objective of the Study Faculty from Minnesota State University, Mankato, working in cooperation with Minnesota School Boards Association leadership, conducted a research study focused on identifying the characteristics and the work of public school board members in Minnesota. Overall Objective: • Gain insight into how school board members view their role, responsibilities and work as a school board member and compare views to defined roles and responsibilities.

  5. Methodology • Data Analysis and Report out Findings • December 2012/January 2013 • Field quantitative survey (n=390) to current MN School Board Members • October 2012 • Conduct Focus Groups with Current MN School Board Members • August 2012

  6. Running for the School Board

  7. Board members are running for school board to provide a public service and stand up for students Almost ½ report being influenced by friends and family to join the board 2/3 report joining the board to stand up for students 1/4 report joining to stand up for staff

  8. Deeper in the Research • Board members who joined the board to stand up for students or staff were more strongly represented in districts scoring below average and average on statewide assessments. • At a rate of 2.5 to 1 - Board members identified “stand up for students” to “stand up for staff”

  9. Running for School Board in Higher % ESL • There was a significant difference in reasons mentioned for running for the board in higher ESL % districts

  10. Training

  11. 85% feel new board members need training, and 50% feel yearly training for all board members should be mandatory • Only 8% of members feel training is not needed • However, members are divided on whether training should be mandatory for all members

  12. While only ½ feel annual training should be mandatory, 9 out of 10 board members feel MSBA training was effective Thought starter: If training was effective why don’t more feel it should be mandatory every year?

  13. Years on Board Significantly Correlated with… In the last year, have you…

  14. Opportunity exists to have school board members work with a mentor Almost ¼ feel it is important to have an assigned mentor, but only 1 in 20 members currently work with an assigned mentor Thought starter: Members feel these trainings are important to being effective members, but participation in all training is low to modest at best… Why the discrepancy?

  15. Years on Board Significantly Correlated with… In the last year, have you…

  16. Challenges and opportunities

  17. Driving student achievement and dealing with government are the top 2 challenges board members face Driving Student Achievement Dealing w/ Laws and Mandates • While driving student achievement is the most challenging, less than ¼ of board members report being presented with student achievement data monthly Managing controversial issues Challenging Setting school district budget Developing long term vision • Almost 1/3 are presented with data only every 6 to 12 months

  18. Of those districts that reported discussing student achievement data in the last 6 months… • Most of these districts were higher socio-economic districts.

  19. Of those districts that reported discussing student achievement data in the last 6 months… • What is discussed…

  20. Board Topics Differed by Type of Communities Served • Board members’ survey responses varied on the basis of community served: • Urban • Suburban • Rural

  21. Board Topic Differed by Types of Communities Served • Urban boards tend to devote a higher percentage of time to discussions that pertain to student achievement • Suburban boards are more likely to identify the presence of programs to support high achieving students than their urban and rural counterparts • Rural boards were more likely to discuss issues pertaining to students in poverty

  22. Strategic Planning made a difference in Board Topics

  23. Strategic Planning made a difference in Time on Topic

  24. Members feel setting a school district budget is the most important role of the school board

  25. Members feel setting a school district budget is the most important role of the school board • While driving student achievement is the most challenging aspect, it is not given as much time as setting a budget. • After setting budget and driving student achievement, boards spend the most time on adopting policy. • Communicating with the community and maintaining relationship with superintendent are rated more important and receive less time.

  26. Driving student achievement • Rated more challenging in lower performing districts *AYP is the achievement rating given to school districts based on the statewide assessment given in public schools in MN.

  27. MN school districts are made up of increasingly more diverse student populations (racially, culturally, and demographically)

  28. Statewide Demographics

  29. Percent Change in Enrollment, FY 2003 – FY 2011, School Districts and Charter Schools Changing Populations as a Percent of Public School Enrollment, 1997-98 to 2011-12 Source: MDE

  30. School Boards Members demographics do not reflect school demographics

  31. Members should be aware of racial diversity issues and consider discussing more frequently at meetings 2009 USDOE NCES report and 2012 MMEP State of Students of Color report confirm MN has one of the highest achievement gaps in nation between black and white students Thought starter: Are there practices currently in place that create bias towards non-Caucasian students or students of poverty?

  32. Performance Perceptions

  33. School board members overestimate the performance of their district • Only 16% of board members feel their district is performing below average • Over ½ feel their school board is very effective

  34. Two factors strongly associated with Board Reported Efficacy

  35. Digging in Deeper to the Research…Strategic Planning Matters • Strategic planning influences a board’s capacity to engage on critical issues • Student achievement • Racial diversity of the student population • School district performance • Is connected in some way to balance budgets • Leads to higher levels of board efficacy

  36. Findings and Further Research: Strategic Planning • The relationship between strategic planning and a board’s capacity for engagement on key topics related to students and achievement is consistent with the literature (Conner, 2009; Iowa School Boards Association, 2001; Jarman, 2009). • We further hypothesize that strategic planning contributes to board effectiveness by creating a sense of common purpose, but further research is needed to test the validity of this statement.

  37. Further Research Needed • About strategic planning • The need to study districts that plan • Define quality strategic planning • Identify how successful districts use this tool to plan, learn and focus on critical topics.

  38. Recommended Actions… • Review your district’s policies and state law of practices for school board member training.  • Increase the frequency of informed conversations around student achievement. • Use data and professional development to build board capacity to engage on student achievement topics.

  39. Recommended Actions… • Evaluate practices and policies for impact on diverse student populations. • Ensure that board members understand the makeup of all students and families within the district and their current achievement levels. • Engage in a quality process of strategic planning and use the plan to guide board discussions and decisions.

  40. Minnesota School Board Member Survey ResultsMinnesota School Boards Association and

More Related