0.18 Tuyle, v., & Watkins, s. (october 2011). preparing leaders to  (Page 6/6)

Voices of school board members in this study indicated their highest motivators for running for the board were influencing educational policies, along with student achievement and accountability. Respondents were also interested in ensuring taxpayer monies were spent appropriately and claimed they wanted to fulfill a civic responsibility. As Mountford’s (2004) research illustrates, some board members are motivated by dissatisfaction with current district decisions and interested in advancing their own self-interests.

Increased visibility and criticism from internal and external stakeholders ranked high among the challenges facing board members. Family demands, lack of family support, as well as complacency of the current school board were also challenges in running for the board. A surprising number of participants revealed a lack of self-confidence, gender bias, and limited finances, as barriers to running for the board.

Seated board members echoed some of the same concerns. Once seated on the board, board members continued to experience high visibility and criticism from internal and external stakeholders as major challenges serving on the board. In addition, over 54% of the participants indicated their uncertainty about their own abilities in being effective board members. They also perceived personal retribution and repercussions that family members experienced as detrimental. Another perception was a lack of support from the current superintendent. Intimidation from other board members was an additional factor.

Failure to recognize the motivations and challenges in running for the board as well as the challenges board members experience on the board, has tremendous implications in terms of the success for educational leaders. Leaders must possess the ability to assess the perceptions board members have of their roles and utilize this information to facilitate harmony and productivity among the members. Preparation programs for future educational leaders need to include motivational theory, the assessment of emotional intelligence, theories on the change process, knowledge in facilitating relational dynamics, and effective board member development.

References

Deckman, M. (2004, January). Women Running Locally: How Gender Affects School Board Elections. In E-Symposium “An Open Boundaries Workshop: Women and Politics in Comparative Perspective.” Retrieved from http://www.apsanet.org/imgtest/GenderSchoolBoard-Deckman.pdf

Doyle, J. S. (2009). Serving on local school boards: A New York study on relationships , motivation, and purpose . Retrieved from (External Link) .bepress.com/dissertations/AA13361351.

Hess, F. M.&Meeks, O., (2010). Governance in the accountability era.(2010)Retrieved from. The National School Boards Association, The Thomas B. Fordham Institute, The Iowa School Boards Association http://www.aei.org/doclLib/HessFeb2011.pdf

Illinois State Board of Education. (2009). Retrieved from http://www.isbe.state.il. us/research/htmls/annual_stat_report. htm

Mountford, M. (2004). Motives and power of school board members: Implications for school board-superintendent relationships. Educational Administration Quarterly, 40, 704-742. doi:10.177/0013161X04268843

Mountford, M.&Brunner, C. C. (2001). Motivations for school board membership: Implications for superintendents. In C. C. Brunner&L. G. Bjork (Eds.), Advances in research and theories of school management and educational policy: The new superintendency. Oxford, London: Elsevier Press. (pp.135-152)

Wait, G. J. (1996, April). Women and school boards: Motivation for service. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York, NY. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED395393.pdf