November 15, 2023 • 34 mins
Is your school board in disarray? Tensions boiling over? Factions forming? Superintendent ready to jump ship? School boards across the country face unique sets of challenges daily. But one policy-based model known as Coherent Governance® maps out what its founder believes to be, "... the most 'user-friendly' system in the world for effective board governance."
Discover the power of Coherent Governance® in revolutionizing school board effectiveness in this enlightening conversation with guests Dr. John Steach from the Center for Educational Effectiveness (CEE) and Linda Dawson, founder of the Aspen Group and Coherent Governance®.
Also on this episode, CEE and the Aspen Group announce a new merger between the two companies as they combine to bring comprehensive support to school districts across the country.
Learn about this novel, yet universally accepted, approach to improving board performance, creating the foundations for trust, innovation and community involvement while curbing ego clashes among board members and paving the way to success for incoming superintendents.
Expect to gain a deeper understanding of how to navigate the complexities of board meetings and unravel the vital roles of board members and superintendents in shaping a conducive environment that puts student achievement at the forefront.
You can find out more about Coherent Governance® at aspengroup.org or through their books:
- Good Governance is a Choice: A Way to Re-Create Your Board - The Right Way by Linda J. Dawson and Randy Quinn
- The Art of Governing Coherently: Mastering the Implementation of Coherent Governance® and Policy Governance® by Linda J. Dawson and Randy Quinn
You can find out more about the Center for Educational Effectiveness (CEE) at effectiveness.org.
"Outliers in Education" is a project of CEE, The Center for Educational Effectiveness. Find out more at effectiveness.org.
Produced by Jamie Howell at Howell at the Moon Productions.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Outliers in Education is brought to you by CEE, the
Center for EducationalEffectiveness.
Better data, better decisions,better schools.
To find out more, visiteffectivenessorg upbeat music
playing.
Speaker 2 (00:15):
Virtually all educational leaders at some
point have either served on orunder a board of directors, and
more likely both.
Whether you're sitting at theboard table or staring back at
it.
These things that happen in theboardrooms don't always seem to
make the most sense, but likeanything else, there are tricks
to the trade.
We'll get into some of those onthis episode of Outliers in
Education, upbeat music playing.
Speaker 1 (00:36):
I think we really need to change how we look at
what we do in schools.
Everything that we do aseducators, it just comes back to
people.
I love it, even when it's hard,especially when it's hard.
Ultimately, I mean, this isabout what's best for kids.
Speaker 2 (00:52):
Hi everybody, eric Price here with my good buddy
and co-host, eric Bowles fromthe Center for Educational
Effectiveness, welcoming you toanother episode of Outliers in
Education Bullsy.
We've encountered boards at onelevel or another during our
years in education and everysuperintendent in the country
has a board to answer to, and inrecent years things have gotten
especially hot in some of thoseboardrooms.
(01:14):
I know this is a softballquestion for you, but have you
ever been in a board meetingthat's gone sideways?
Speaker 3 (01:19):
More than one, my friend as it turns out and
actually when we introduced DrStiech.
We've had the pleasure ofdissecting several of those
together.
Our careers actuallyintersected at one point.
More recently, I can remember aboard meeting where I actually
bailed out a subordinate, atgreat risks to their credibility
, hoping that the superintendentthought it might be the right
thing, and was 45 minutes infront of the podium trying to
(01:40):
clean up on aisle nine andcouldn't feel my feet by the end
.
So, yeah, I can relate todifficulties and things gone
awry at school board meetings ona level I actually wish I
couldn't.
And when we think about it,boards are really up against a
lot.
These days, schoolsunfortunately become the focal
point of the culture wars.
We're dealing withunprecedented student mental
(02:02):
health challenges post COVID.
So there's just it's a realcomplex environment that boards
are working in.
We believe that, like mostsuperintendents, most board
members are absolutely wellintentioned but oftentimes don't
have a blueprint or frameworkto work from.
Speaker 2 (02:17):
Well, our guests today have more than a few ideas
on that topic.
Linda Dawson, founder of theAspen Group, co-authored four
books, most recently the Art ofGoverning Coherently, and is
committed her career to coachingup boards and board members to
higher levels of performance.
With her is CEO John Steechfrom CEE, the Center for
(02:37):
Educational Effectiveness.
Bullsy does that sound familiar?
Speaker 3 (02:41):
I think it does.
It's actually the place that.
Speaker 2 (02:44):
I work Sounds like your place.
We've invited them here to talkabout an approach to board work
they're working on togetherthese days, called Coherent
Governance.
Welcome to you both.
Glad you're on the show, thankyou.
Thanks for having us.
Well, let's just kind of startoff today by simply figuring out
what do you mean by coherentgovernance.
Can you kind of give us a quickoverview of that?
Speaker 4 (03:02):
In my career spanning now close to 30 years, but
don't tell anybody.
Most boards I work with are inwere incoherent.
They didn't know what their jobwas.
They didn't know how to executeit.
They worked as a collection ofindividuals, not one governing
body, trying to give directionto the system, and so,
(03:22):
coherently, we pulled together asystem that's systematic and
sustainable, that transcendswhat member of the board is at
the table and even who thesuperintendent might be, so that
we can focus on what they'reall there for, and that's
increased student achievement,which, in my career, is very
(03:43):
often the last thing that'sbeing considered.
Speaker 2 (03:45):
Boards just kind of get through some of those other
particulars before they get tostudent achievement.
Speaker 4 (03:50):
You know it's their individual picadillos.
If you have a history intheater arts, you want to come
on and talk about the artsprogram.
If you've got a gifted child,everything better be about the
gifted program and funding,right, right.
So those are just two smallexamples of how it just becomes
chasing the latest whim.
Speaker 5 (04:10):
And I would add in that, having been both on the
board for eight years and in thesuperintendent seat, when I
reflect on what boards do theydo?
What they've typically alwaysdone or, as Linda said, what
they want to do, and the onlyguidance they get is either from
a state school directorsassociation saying this is kind
of what the board's lane is, orthe superintendent trying to
(04:33):
give them guidance on.
This is what you should andshouldn't be involved in.
But prior to my introduction tocoherent governance, there
really was no true framework Icould find that defined what the
true role of the board is in aschool district.
Speaker 3 (04:46):
Well and really getting to that place.
We know right now thatsuperintendent turnover is at an
all time high.
One of the root causes of that,if not the root causes,
oftentimes a breakdown in thatboard superintendent
relationship.
I know how that feelspersonally, being working just
under the superintendency,having worked for six
superintendent situations in 10years and one district at one
point.
So does this provide anyanswers or anecdotes to the
(05:10):
current state of affairs, folks,and could you tell us why and
how?
Speaker 4 (05:13):
It does because it's all written down in very simple,
clear policy here's what youhave to do and here's what you
cannot do as you manage theschool system.
So the superintendent isn'tguessing, but let me say what he
or she can or cannot do.
But let me take anotherperspective, and John can
respond to this as well.
(05:33):
Very often we see board memberscome on and try to find a unit
and the superintendent takes onthe running of the board to
himself or herself, rather thantwo distinct roles the board
role and the superintendent roleand so there's got to be that
clarity of responsibility thattranscends who's sitting at the
(05:56):
table, and it's done throughpolicy.
Speaker 5 (05:59):
And I would say that when I first became a
superintendent, it was in a5,000 student district and we
didn't have the clear guardrailsand goals that coherent
governance can provide.
And it provides guardrails inthe way of operational
expectations, whereas the boarddefines.
This is what the superintendentwill always do, this is what
(06:20):
the superintendent will never doand this is what the board
reserves authority over.
And then, for the goals, theydefine the results of the
outcomes that they want forstudents.
When I went into the district, Iwas trying to figure out what
seven different board membersexpected me to do in the midst
of budget cutting, and I spent awhole year doing what
everything that I thought wasthe best thing possible, really
(06:42):
running myself ragged, trying todo everything I could in the
midst of budget cuts and at theend of the year sat down to an
evaluation to hear all of theindividual board members tell me
all their individual projectsthat didn't get accomplished for
the year.
It was very frustrating to me asa superintendent and not
conducive to me wanting to stayin that type of a situation.
I contrast that with when Iwent to Evergreen In my first
(07:05):
year.
We sat down with Aspen Groupwith Coherent Governance.
The board defined thoseoperational expectations of me
as a superintendent.
They defined the results thatthey wanted me to achieve with
students.
I knew very clearly this was myjob.
This is what the board's rolewas and how I needed to interact
(07:26):
with the board and interfacewith the board to supply them
the information they needed tobe successful as a board and do
their job.
Speaker 2 (07:32):
You were looking in that first position, John.
It was almost like they gaveyou seven different maps that
they wanted you to follow.
That was an impossible position.
Speaker 5 (07:42):
That's exactly it.
You think you're beingsuccessful and then they tell
you yeah, you're successful, buthere's all the things you
didn't do.
They never told me any of thosethings were high priorities.
As I was working through thatfirst year.
Speaker 4 (07:54):
It's really a matter.
I think you'll agree, John,that the squeaky wheel gets the
grease.
If you had seven board members,to think that they even had a
roadmap would be a bigassumption to make.
I really don't mean itdisparagingly, because they walk
into a system that is not.
They're simply elected becausethey have a platform that
(08:15):
somebody supports and they geton and then they figure out oh,
maybe I can push and shove hereand there and make the system
responsive to me.
Then the ego trip begins.
John's exactly right.
You set out these goals forstudent achievement and if
you're achieving them and you'redoing it within the
expectations that the board hasalready stated, you should be
(08:36):
getting an A-plus.
You should be able to move onwith the surety that you've met
what they expect of you.
It's forging that unit ofgovernance instead of
individuals with their ownpicadillos.
Speaker 5 (08:49):
The other thing that it says relative to turnover is
it takes the personalities outof the equation.
Speaker 4 (08:52):
Hopefully.
Speaker 5 (08:54):
Because, independent of who's on the board, unless
the board changes the policies,you're providing that clear
direction to the superintendent.
And when the superintendentcomes in Because we know all too
well there's a lot of turnoverright now in superintendents I
meet with superintendents on aregular basis that ask me if I
have a job opening for them.
They have basically had it withwhat's going on in society and
(09:16):
the way that it's impacting ourschools and when they leave for
the next person to come in toclearly have those guardrails
through, the expectations andthose goals clearly defined for
them to work towards studentresults, they know the roadmap
to success in their first andsecond year as superintendent
and it doesn't create whiplashthroughout the entire
(09:37):
organization of everybody tryingto figure out what's the new
person going to do when theycome in and take control.
Speaker 3 (09:41):
Really along those lines, wondering if either or
both of you can give us anexample of where you've seen
that maybe single issue voterrunning on a platform come in
ego tripping board member andseeing how this policy driven
process really has changed thatatmosphere from concerning to
now we're all working in harmony.
Speaker 4 (10:02):
Let me give you a quick example, and I think I
shared this with John once.
So, john, if you want toembellish on my history, feel
free.
But we worked in a schooldistrict with, I believe it was,
nine board members.
There's a problem right away.
They ought to be like maxed outat five, in my opinion.
I don't care how large or small.
And secondly, a new boardmember came on, a former
(10:26):
military guy, which is fine, buthe had a very clear agenda on
no sex being taught in schools.
Sound familiar.
So he was on less than a yearand somehow got his hands on
stationary for the school systemand this is a large urban
district in the east wrote aletter to all the principals in
(10:46):
the system and said let's beclear, there will be no teaching
of sex in the schools, there'sabstinence only.
If you have a question, contactme below.
And he sent it out without everbringing in a the
administration or B as fellowboard members.
And all hell broke loose, as youcan imagine.
As you can imagine in a verypolitically charged environment.
(11:07):
So the recourse on this was forthem to go through.
We have a policy on process foraddressing board member
violation.
It just doesn't get swept underthe rug or shame on you or you
shouldn't have done it.
They called an executivesession and then a full meeting
to censure this guy and saidthat's not how we play this game
(11:29):
and if you want to help makingthese tough decisions and giving
direction to the system A itdoesn't go out on district
letterhead.
B you have to bring the rest ofus along.
And so he was very quickly putin his place.
For how we work together as aboard and how we give direction
to the school system, that's apretty egregious and you know in
(11:50):
your face example, butunfortunately the level of
seriousness not all that rare.
Speaker 5 (11:56):
And while it may not be tied to an individual, we
recently had a conference withabout a dozen school boards and
superintendents from across thecountry where we looked at
current issues, and those boardmembers bring in those current
issues.
So we looked at AI and education, school safety SEL talked about
those, but from the perspectiveof what's the board's role, and
(12:17):
so, as we analyzed, I led agroup that looked at AI and
education and we looked at it.
Does it really impact thoseoperational expectations or
those guardrails that you'resetting up for the
superintendent?
And all these board memberssaid no, even in the
instructional environment, wedon't think it really changes
the rules to where we need to go, change the policy.
The discussion they got intothen is really it does have an
(12:40):
implication on what are those21st century skills our students
need to have, and do we need togo back and reflect on our
results and our outcomes that weexpect for students and
redefine the results that we'retelling our superintendent that
we expect from our students?
And I think that's a healthydialogue around to have around
these single issues thattypically are manifested in a
(13:02):
single issue.
Board member.
Speaker 2 (13:03):
So this is kind of getting at one of those pieces,
I think, about some boards thatwe just don't know.
There's some things that arejust unsure, like these single
issue folks.
Can you kind of give us apicture of a board where you're
creating a culture where there'ssafety, where you can make some
risks and there's not that feardriven, and maybe some of those
(13:27):
boards where they absolutelyare fear driven?
Speaker 4 (13:29):
I don't know many boards that are fear driven,
unless they're afraid of gettingnegative community reaction.
No board likes that.
We have a client in Coloradoright now who had really serious
gender identity issues, withlots of community lying actually
(13:51):
by outside forces coming intoplay.
And so what we have to do whenwe're working with these folks
is they've got a retreat,they've got to pull away from
the whole thing with thesuperintendent and say you know
what is our role, how are wegoing to approach it?
How do we involve the communityand understanding what's going
on here?
So community engagement isreally at the top of the list.
(14:14):
How do we involve the peoplewho own this school system in
influencing outcomes that arebest for kids?
And very often the last thing wedo is talk to the community or
even talk to the kids.
And yet these rabble rosers Ican cite groups, but that
(14:34):
probably not PC right now sothey're trying to pull districts
apart and get their own agendarunning.
And in John set out a goodexample.
We sat down in brainstormingfour topic areas and said this
is a whole harmless environment.
How do you as a board deal withthese incredibly divisive
things going on in our system ina productive way that's not
(14:56):
going to screw things up.
Did that answer your question?
Speaker 2 (14:59):
I think so.
Yeah, we're going to take ashort break to cogitate and
listen to a short ad.
Of course We'll be back withmore right here.
On outliers in education.
Speaker 1 (15:10):
School districts across the country are turning
their focus to social emotionallearning like never before.
But who is the time?
Now you do, thanks to the wholeeducator series an online SEL
training that you take at yourown pace.
Six modules packed with provenstrategies that will make a
difference right away.
The training was awesome.
The content was amazing.
Speaker 3 (15:31):
This workshop is going to make you a better
educator taught by SEL expert DrGreg Benner.
Speaker 1 (15:36):
The whole educator series delivers strategies to
ease the stress on you whilebringing out the best in your
students.
These strategies, they work.
Speaker 3 (15:44):
You'll be amazed at the results, not only with the
youth you serve, but also inyour own life.
He's telling us strategies thatwe can implement tomorrow.
Speaker 1 (15:53):
Absolutely a home run Professional development at the
speed of life.
Check out the whole educatorseries online SEL training
available now from CE ateffectivenessorg slash workshops
.
That's effectivenessorg slashworkshops.
Speaker 2 (16:09):
Okay, we're back and we're talking about coherent
governance with Linda Dawson ofthe Aspen Group and CEO John
Steech from the Center forEducational Effectiveness.
Speaker 3 (16:19):
John, you mentioned results policies.
Could you briefly talk to usabout what are those four policy
areas that you operate frominside of coherent governance?
Then how to part question,because I can only ask multiple
part questions.
Testing my memory Exactly howdoes this really create a system
(16:39):
of safety and security whereboards can even fail initially
at their work?
Speaker 5 (16:44):
There's four different key policy elements.
Most of the time when you hearschool policy you think of the
three-ring binders that areeight binders thick, that have
literally hundreds of policies.
Those are really the proceduresthat implement most of the
state laws on how a districtworks.
We're talking a whole higherlevel policy.
The first level is yourgovernance culture.
Where the board agrees, this ishow we're going to operate as a
(17:06):
board, this is how we're goingto treat each other, how we're
going to run our meetings andthe ethical level we're going to
hold ourselves to.
Then they set boardsuperintendent relation policies
that define how the board andthe superintendent will work
together and communicatetogether.
The third set are thoseoperational expectations which
create that boundary orguardrails that really frees up
(17:27):
the superintendent to run thedistrict in the best way.
They, as a highly skilled andeducated practitioner in
education, know they need to runthe district.
And the final policies are theresults and often those center
on academic outcomes,socialization and the ability to
work in a working environment,those 21st century skills.
(17:48):
You say SEL and that'stypically elementary, but I
think I've heard it on thispodcast before when SEL grows up
, it becomes 21st century skills.
We're really trying to givestudents those skills they're
going to need to be successfulin life.
And then some districts evenhave citizenship as one of their
results outcomes.
In the end, then thesuperintendent is responsible to
(18:09):
come back to the board annuallywith all of those operational
expectations and all of thoseresults and provide data and
evidence that they have run thedistrict within the expectations
of the board and that they'veachieved the results that the
board wants for their students.
You talk about eliminating fearwithin the organization.
Having lived in bothenvironments, in one environment
(18:30):
without a clear governanceframework, as a superintendent
you're always wondering, lookingat the board, saying, can I go?
And so you've got thishesitancy and the whole
organization starts to fill thathesitancy of who's really in
charge, who makes the rules andam I going to get in trouble for
getting outside of a rule thatI don't even know whether it
exists or not, as opposed towith coherent governance.
(18:52):
Everybody knows this is when Ineed to stop, and unless I need
to stop, I know I can go, andthat creates that environment
for innovation where people knowI have clear boundaries to what
I can and can't do.
Anything within thoseboundaries is fair game to
innovate and try new things.
Speaker 2 (19:09):
Yeah, and I think that's getting at the heart of
that earlier question, because Ihave worked under
superintendents that have workedunder boards and when those
superintendents have fear abouta potential response from the
board, like when we take a lookat outlier all of our outlier
work we look at stuff that youknow is there trust within the
layers?
You know, do students trust theteachers?
(19:30):
Do teachers trust the?
You know the building admin,does building admin trust
central admin?
So now we're really talkingabout what's happening in that
ceiling of central admin right,the soup and that board.
So what would it take to makesure that you've got that
trusting environment so that asuperintendent could get cover
to a building admin so theycould do the right thing for
kids?
Speaker 4 (19:50):
Well, it's all lined up to results and it all has to
be compliant with theiroperational expectations and the
wise superintendent or anybodyin this if you believe in
systemic authority andaccountability, you have to
drive it down to the schoolbuilding and back up again, and
we've in fact worked with schoolteachers on an Indian
(20:12):
reservation in North Dakotawhere they took the operational
expectations, John, and drovethem to the classroom level and
the kids identified what theexpectations and the outcomes
were.
Speaker 2 (20:24):
So is that what you mean by driving it down?
Is it you're getting feedback?
Speaker 4 (20:27):
Driving it down and empowering them.
So you're going to run theclassroom.
You can't violate any of theboard's operational expectations
.
But in fact does the teacherhave operational expectations
and do I have to live up to them?
So it's really a systemic and asystematic approach to good
governance.
Speaker 2 (20:46):
Thank you, I think that's clear and I think that if
I'm just going to ask aquestion from underneath like
I'm looking up in the aquariumand I'm a principal looking up
at this other stuff that happensabove me, what would I sense
with a healthy governance, aboveme with a soup and board, what
would be those things that wayyeah, this looks good and
r-o-raggy not so good above youwhat would those things be?
Speaker 4 (21:10):
Board members who would try to grant themselves
permission to misbehave.
And so there's an annual workplan.
What are we going to focus onat this meeting?
Not just coming in and saying,okay, what's on the agenda
tonight, folks, and it's plannedout a year in advance so that
work can be accomplished.
(21:30):
If something pops up and yoususpend your focus there better
be a darn good reason, becauseyou've got things to get done.
And it also relies on theintegrity of the people saying I
appreciate the questions you'reasking and concerns you have,
but here's what we're focused onthis evening.
If we have other time, we cancircle back to that or we can
(21:54):
schedule it for future dates.
But and then you know Iremember, john, you've probably
been there too we would get donewith school board meetings and
meet the next day as anadministrative cabinet and say
what happened last night?
Do we ever make a decision?
Who made the decision?
Was there a motion and a second?
Do we move forward now?
Speaker 2 (22:14):
You know, and and I think I said that after most
board meetings, linda what Idreaded of that example was as a
long time assistantsuperintendent.
Speaker 3 (22:24):
Oh no, I'm just going to have to clear everything
that was on my calendar that wasmeaningful to address these
things that came up last night.
Speaker 4 (22:30):
Yeah, it's that old thing of reverse, reverse,
reverse, reverse.
And so you know you got to takepeople, that they're word and
people have to be and they arein the system and power to speak
up.
We decided to follow thiscalendar Together.
We set the agenda, we agreed tothat ahead of time and this
train is headed down the trackand look what we're being able
(22:51):
to accomplish for kids.
Get kids at that board meetingshowing what they know and are
able to do, and you know it'samazing that with boards of
education still so often it'snot has nothing to do with kids
and what's healthy and happy forthem.
Speaker 3 (23:07):
Oh my gosh, I have a great story.
When my daughter was seven, shewas at a board meeting Can't
remember why actually at thispoint but when we left she said
how come those five old peopleup there talked about things
that didn't have anything to dowith school all night long?
And I said you are asking myessential question, linda, which
(23:27):
is really a segue into our nextquestion.
We understand there's 10principles that boards need to
follow behind coherentgovernance.
Can you briefly talk aboutthose Don't have to list them
all out and then which one'sreally the paramount or
superordinate responsibility ofa board?
Speaker 5 (23:43):
So I'm going to use one of them as a bridge to get
to the final one, and one of thekey principles is the board
needs to make the big decisionsbefore they make the little ones
, and when you make those bigdecisions around those
operational expectations and theultimate results that you want
for kids, you're not gettinginvolved in the day to day
minutiae and you're not makingthe little, tiny decisions,
(24:04):
which creates two things for theorganization that creates
consistency and coherency, andthat's where staff are going to
thrive, when they know what toexpect on a regular basis, and
things are aligned top to bottom, and you can't have either if
the board is whipping back andforth and everybody in the
organization is getting whiplash.
(24:25):
Probably the biggest one, though, is the board's role in
defining the desired results forthe district students and
requiring that achievement.
Even before I got into coherentgovernance, when I was helping
superintendents and boards, Ihad a slide that I'd show up of
all the different kind ofdecisions that boards would make
around scoreboards,transportation, naming schools,
(24:49):
all the things that boards spendtheir time on.
I said how many of you spendyour time in this area?
And everybody's like, oh yeah,those are all on our agenda all
year long and I said, ok,student progress and student
outcomes how often do you talkabout those?
Everybody wants?
Maybe twice a year.
Under this, that becomes thetrue focus of the board and all
the rest of this should fall inline.
(25:11):
If that's what you're trulyfocusing on and you have a clear
expectation that yoursuperintendent, your
administration, all of yourstaff, they're providing quality
evidence on the true measure ofstudent performance and student
outcomes within your schoolsystem.
Only what gets measured getsdone and if you're measuring how
(25:31):
much it costs to put thescoreboard in the new stadium.
That's going to get done.
Speaker 4 (25:36):
I sat through a three hour meeting on how thick the
wrestling mats should be onetime.
But let me say this in defenseof this system that's boomwacka.
I mean we keep things indisarray because then we can
control it right, somebody cancontrol it.
(25:56):
So in this, if you have afinite set of policies about
operation and you have a finiteset of what we want students to
know and be able to do, we haveto get these lay board members
to know and understand what arethe measures for gauging whether
progress is being made or not.
Most board members come on aboard they don't know a quintile
(26:17):
from a quartile to a standarddeviation and they're not going
to raise their hand and say canyou explain that to me?
I mean there is a certain levelof ego involved in people
running for a board.
So there's this intricacy ofestablishing what does this
community want kids to know andbe able to do and how are we
going to know they're makingreasonable progress in that
(26:38):
achievement?
So it's a network ofcommunication and education.
Speaker 2 (26:42):
Okay, Linda.
So you've mentioned this acouple of times.
There's this merger word.
Can you tell me about what'shappening with the CEE and the
Aspen Group?
Speaker 4 (26:50):
Sure, Okay, as I said , we've been doing this for many
years and wrote the books aboutwhat we're doing and why, but
there's just so much gas in thetank, you know, and my business
partner has decided to retire asof December 31st and I will say
honestly, for five years we'velooked for the right person to
(27:10):
partner with to keep themomentum going.
It would be heartbreaking tohave spent years doing this and
have it just fall off to theside.
So we happen to think that oursystem, out of those available,
has the greatest fidelity, thegreatest assurity of doing what
it says it can do, and we havegreat faith in the intellectual
(27:33):
capacity, the humor, theknowledge, the experience of
John and we're gradually gettingto know you characters.
Speaker 5 (27:45):
I'm sorry.
Speaker 4 (27:48):
And we watched John work in Evergreen, of course,
and that was a tough spot and hehandled it with grace and has
come out on the other end likethe Phoenix here, and so we
think that working with John tobridge these two companies and
forge it into a system ofexcellence is doable.
Speaker 2 (28:10):
John, what's your perspective there?
Speaker 5 (28:11):
When I was in Evergreen as a superintendent,
we were implementing coherentgovernance and I was trying to
create the monitoring reportsfor the operational expectations
, the results, and trying toreally build it from scratch
because there wasn't.
Something was out there.
When I got to CEE, we were ableto connect with a couple of
districts who had just donestrategic plans, that were
trying to figure out how are wegoing to monitor the strategic
(28:33):
plan.
So we got into first thedashboarding business, then
strategic plan facilitation andin the back of my mind I just
kept thinking and I keptreaching out to Randy and Linda
saying I see synergy between usbecause this really can function
properly if we have a boardthat understands their role and
is true governing coherentlythrough policy and I've always
(28:57):
been looking for that connectionand then, with them making this
decision that it's time to turnover the reins.
I thought it was a natural fitbecause if we can help school
boards understand their role,which is in the outcomes,
leaving the strategy to thesuperintendent then the way
we've been facilitatingstrategic planning, the
(29:18):
dashboarding, the way we areable to pull data together, both
on the academic and the cultureclimate and the SELs aspects,
being able to pull that in andshow it in ways that the layman
can understand, gives the boardsomething, gives the community
something, and that we canbetter support those districts
that we're already helping fromtop to bottom.
(29:39):
If you get one thing out ofmisalignment on the whole system
, you're getting back into thatorganizational whiplash and
people having all thatuncertainty.
Speaker 2 (29:49):
Yeah, so in a layman's terms, john, as I'm
hearing this, you've got theguardrails of governance, but
you also need to have that datapiece that tells you where
you're going to be driving.
Is that sort of something?
Speaker 5 (30:00):
Because one of the big concerns when we first
implemented it, the criticism wegot the board got was you're
giving away the farm to thesuperintendent and that is the
opposite of what's happening.
The superintendent has far moreaccountability, because one of
the things that we teach boardsand superintendents is whoever
has responsibility hasaccountability.
So if the board's going to makethe decision, they're not
(30:22):
holding the superintendentaccountable for the decision.
It does happen, but they reallyneed to hold themselves
accountable.
And if you really want to holdyour superintendent accountable,
you've got to delegate thingsand give them the responsibility
to operate the district at thestrategic level and focus.
The true board's real work isfocusing on results and if the
board's truly doing that withfidelity and holding the
(30:45):
superintendent and theadministration accountable,
that's when you've got ahigh-performing system.
Speaker 2 (30:50):
Well, Linda and John, so much here and now.
What we're going to do is we'regoing to hand it over to the
Sultan of Summarization.
Bolsey, what do you have forall of this governance?
Speaker 3 (31:01):
thinking I'm going to dispense with my typical jokes
about not summarizing.
Well, not really.
I guess that reference doesn'tdispense with it at all.
So moving into the summary.
I think on a high level really,we just got a masterclass in
what it looks like to havecoherence from the boardroom to
the classroom, which is manyfolks know is actually the work
of Michael Fohlen, a Canadianresearcher, real prevalent in
(31:21):
education.
So it's great to really hearabout how all this works in
practice from that theory, lindagot started in the work, really
noting that most boards wereincoherent.
By incoherent we mean a groupof individuals functioning kind
of individually all around theirown interests.
And what coherent boards do isthey govern by policy.
They need those guardrails sothat they can collectively
(31:43):
achieve the district's goals.
Identifying how much this workof coherent governance and the
Aspen Group really squares withour culture at CEE was something
that stood out to me as well.
And then really getting boardsto focus on those critical
outcomes for children which wewould think intuitively is what
boards would do in education.
But clearly processes areneeded in order for that to
(32:03):
happen.
One thing that really stood outto me that coherence creates a
culture of innovation.
When we're all clear about whatit is we're supposed to do, it
creates, gives us our bestopportunity to innovate.
And another thing loved Linda'sexample of the school district
in North Dakota reallyidentifying how to elevate
student voices in this process.
So again that boardroom toclassroom notion squares a lot
(32:27):
with episode one of season two,with Randy Russell and his
students from Freeman reallytalking about the same thing.
So another kind of opportunityfor where that rubber meets the
road.
I just love the phrase grantingpermission to misbehave.
It's not really a relevant partof the summary, but I wanted to
throw it in there anyway, and Ithink we all know that there's
probably never been a time wherethere's a bigger need or
(32:49):
emphasis on transitioning towardcoherent governance, whether
we're talking school boards or acourse with other boards and
other governing bodies acrossour country as well.
And what I love about coherentgovernance is it makes it all
about the kids and theiroutcomes.
Speaker 4 (33:04):
Wilson.
Speaker 2 (33:05):
Beautiful.
Thank you, Bulls, John andLinda.
Anything else you'd like totouch on in that?
Speaker 5 (33:11):
I would just want to emphasize that these concepts
aren't just exclusive to schoolboards.
If you've got Congress, youknow the the Congress.
Speaker 3 (33:22):
I wasn't going to go there, Linda.
Speaker 5 (33:24):
If you've got the board of one of your big four
auto manufacturers, believe me,they're not concerned where the
safety sign is hung in the workarea.
They're concerned with how manycars are getting produced, in
the quality of those cars andour school, as much.
As you know, during the 80s and90s we said we need to be more
like business in schools.
I think the boards have to bethe ones to start there and they
(33:46):
need to help themselvesaccountable to saying we are
really results oriented andthat's what we need to focus on.
Speaker 2 (33:52):
Linda, where can we find your most recent book?
Speaker 4 (33:54):
Amazon Is it easiest.
Speaker 2 (33:56):
I think yeah, All right.
Where does anybody find?
Speaker 4 (33:59):
anything Happy Christmas.
Speaker 2 (34:00):
I know Exactly, hey, thank you both for being on the
show.
A lot of fantastic things thatyou had to share with us, not
only from the board and suit,but all of us who are a little
bit further down the food chainand how that affects us, and
that trust and that culture.
So thank you both for being onthe show Great.
Speaker 5 (34:17):
Thank you, eric, my pleasure.
Speaker 2 (34:18):
Thanks for having us and congratulations on your
guys' merger.
That's exciting.
Speaker 4 (34:22):
Yeah, it is, thank you, Thank you.
Speaker 3 (34:25):
And thanks to all of you who are listening in today.
You can find us anywhere youlisten to your favorite podcast
or visit us online ateffectivenessorg.
Until next time.
This has been Outliers inEducation, and that's a wrap.
Speaker 1 (34:40):
If you'd like to find out how to gather the data you
need to help drive positivechange in your school or
district, take a moment to visitCEE, the Center for Educational
Effectiveness, ateffectivenessorg.
Better data, better decisions,better schools Effectivenessorg.
Outliers in Education is brought to you by CEE, the
Center for EducationalEffectiveness.
Better data, better decisions,better schools.
To find out more, visiteffectivenessorg upbeat music
playing.
Speaker 2 (00:15):
Virtually all educational leaders at some
point have either served on orunder a board of directors, and
more likely both.
Whether you're sitting at theboard table or staring back at
it.
These things that happen in theboardrooms don't always seem to
make the most sense, but likeanything else, there are tricks
to the trade.
We'll get into some of those onthis episode of Outliers in
Education, upbeat music playing.
Speaker 1 (00:36):
I think we really need to change how we look at
what we do in schools.
Everything that we do aseducators, it just comes back to
people.
I love it, even when it's hard,especially when it's hard.
Ultimately, I mean, this isabout what's best for kids.
Speaker 2 (00:52):
Hi everybody, eric Price here with my good buddy
and co-host, eric Bowles fromthe Center for Educational
Effectiveness, welcoming you toanother episode of Outliers in
Education Bullsy.
We've encountered boards at onelevel or another during our
years in education and everysuperintendent in the country
has a board to answer to, and inrecent years things have gotten
especially hot in some of thoseboardrooms.
(01:14):
I know this is a softballquestion for you, but have you
ever been in a board meetingthat's gone sideways?
Speaker 3 (01:19):
More than one, my friend as it turns out and
actually when we introduced DrStiech.
We've had the pleasure ofdissecting several of those
together.
Our careers actuallyintersected at one point.
More recently, I can remember aboard meeting where I actually
bailed out a subordinate, atgreat risks to their credibility
, hoping that the superintendentthought it might be the right
thing, and was 45 minutes infront of the podium trying to
(01:40):
clean up on aisle nine andcouldn't feel my feet by the end
.
So, yeah, I can relate todifficulties and things gone
awry at school board meetings ona level I actually wish I
couldn't.
And when we think about it,boards are really up against a
lot.
These days, schoolsunfortunately become the focal
point of the culture wars.
We're dealing withunprecedented student mental
(02:02):
health challenges post COVID.
So there's just it's a realcomplex environment that boards
are working in.
We believe that, like mostsuperintendents, most board
members are absolutely wellintentioned but oftentimes don't
have a blueprint or frameworkto work from.
Speaker 2 (02:17):
Well, our guests today have more than a few ideas
on that topic.
Linda Dawson, founder of theAspen Group, co-authored four
books, most recently the Art ofGoverning Coherently, and is
committed her career to coachingup boards and board members to
higher levels of performance.
With her is CEO John Steechfrom CEE, the Center for
(02:37):
Educational Effectiveness.
Bullsy does that sound familiar?
Speaker 3 (02:41):
I think it does.
It's actually the place that.
Speaker 2 (02:44):
I work Sounds like your place.
We've invited them here to talkabout an approach to board work
they're working on togetherthese days, called Coherent
Governance.
Welcome to you both.
Glad you're on the show, thankyou.
Thanks for having us.
Well, let's just kind of startoff today by simply figuring out
what do you mean by coherentgovernance.
Can you kind of give us a quickoverview of that?
Speaker 4 (03:02):
In my career spanning now close to 30 years, but
don't tell anybody.
Most boards I work with are inwere incoherent.
They didn't know what their jobwas.
They didn't know how to executeit.
They worked as a collection ofindividuals, not one governing
body, trying to give directionto the system, and so,
(03:22):
coherently, we pulled together asystem that's systematic and
sustainable, that transcendswhat member of the board is at
the table and even who thesuperintendent might be, so that
we can focus on what they'reall there for, and that's
increased student achievement,which, in my career, is very
(03:43):
often the last thing that'sbeing considered.
Speaker 2 (03:45):
Boards just kind of get through some of those other
particulars before they get tostudent achievement.
Speaker 4 (03:50):
You know it's their individual picadillos.
If you have a history intheater arts, you want to come
on and talk about the artsprogram.
If you've got a gifted child,everything better be about the
gifted program and funding,right, right.
So those are just two smallexamples of how it just becomes
chasing the latest whim.
Speaker 5 (04:10):
And I would add in that, having been both on the
board for eight years and in thesuperintendent seat, when I
reflect on what boards do theydo?
What they've typically alwaysdone or, as Linda said, what
they want to do, and the onlyguidance they get is either from
a state school directorsassociation saying this is kind
of what the board's lane is, orthe superintendent trying to
(04:33):
give them guidance on.
This is what you should andshouldn't be involved in.
But prior to my introduction tocoherent governance, there
really was no true framework Icould find that defined what the
true role of the board is in aschool district.
Speaker 3 (04:46):
Well and really getting to that place.
We know right now thatsuperintendent turnover is at an
all time high.
One of the root causes of that,if not the root causes,
oftentimes a breakdown in thatboard superintendent
relationship.
I know how that feelspersonally, being working just
under the superintendency,having worked for six
superintendent situations in 10years and one district at one
point.
So does this provide anyanswers or anecdotes to the
(05:10):
current state of affairs, folks,and could you tell us why and
how?
Speaker 4 (05:13):
It does because it's all written down in very simple,
clear policy here's what youhave to do and here's what you
cannot do as you manage theschool system.
So the superintendent isn'tguessing, but let me say what he
or she can or cannot do.
But let me take anotherperspective, and John can
respond to this as well.
(05:33):
Very often we see board memberscome on and try to find a unit
and the superintendent takes onthe running of the board to
himself or herself, rather thantwo distinct roles the board
role and the superintendent roleand so there's got to be that
clarity of responsibility thattranscends who's sitting at the
(05:56):
table, and it's done throughpolicy.
Speaker 5 (05:59):
And I would say that when I first became a
superintendent, it was in a5,000 student district and we
didn't have the clear guardrailsand goals that coherent
governance can provide.
And it provides guardrails inthe way of operational
expectations, whereas the boarddefines.
This is what the superintendentwill always do, this is what
(06:20):
the superintendent will never doand this is what the board
reserves authority over.
And then, for the goals, theydefine the results of the
outcomes that they want forstudents.
When I went into the district, Iwas trying to figure out what
seven different board membersexpected me to do in the midst
of budget cutting, and I spent awhole year doing what
everything that I thought wasthe best thing possible, really
(06:42):
running myself ragged, trying todo everything I could in the
midst of budget cuts and at theend of the year sat down to an
evaluation to hear all of theindividual board members tell me
all their individual projectsthat didn't get accomplished for
the year.
It was very frustrating to me asa superintendent and not
conducive to me wanting to stayin that type of a situation.
I contrast that with when Iwent to Evergreen In my first
(07:05):
year.
We sat down with Aspen Groupwith Coherent Governance.
The board defined thoseoperational expectations of me
as a superintendent.
They defined the results thatthey wanted me to achieve with
students.
I knew very clearly this was myjob.
This is what the board's rolewas and how I needed to interact
(07:26):
with the board and interfacewith the board to supply them
the information they needed tobe successful as a board and do
their job.
Speaker 2 (07:32):
You were looking in that first position, John.
It was almost like they gaveyou seven different maps that
they wanted you to follow.
That was an impossible position.
Speaker 5 (07:42):
That's exactly it.
You think you're beingsuccessful and then they tell
you yeah, you're successful, buthere's all the things you
didn't do.
They never told me any of thosethings were high priorities.
As I was working through thatfirst year.
Speaker 4 (07:54):
It's really a matter.
I think you'll agree, John,that the squeaky wheel gets the
grease.
If you had seven board members,to think that they even had a
roadmap would be a bigassumption to make.
I really don't mean itdisparagingly, because they walk
into a system that is not.
They're simply elected becausethey have a platform that
(08:15):
somebody supports and they geton and then they figure out oh,
maybe I can push and shove hereand there and make the system
responsive to me.
Then the ego trip begins.
John's exactly right.
You set out these goals forstudent achievement and if
you're achieving them and you'redoing it within the
expectations that the board hasalready stated, you should be
(08:36):
getting an A-plus.
You should be able to move onwith the surety that you've met
what they expect of you.
It's forging that unit ofgovernance instead of
individuals with their ownpicadillos.
Speaker 5 (08:49):
The other thing that it says relative to turnover is
it takes the personalities outof the equation.
Speaker 4 (08:52):
Hopefully.
Speaker 5 (08:54):
Because, independent of who's on the board, unless
the board changes the policies,you're providing that clear
direction to the superintendent.
And when the superintendentcomes in Because we know all too
well there's a lot of turnoverright now in superintendents I
meet with superintendents on aregular basis that ask me if I
have a job opening for them.
They have basically had it withwhat's going on in society and
(09:16):
the way that it's impacting ourschools and when they leave for
the next person to come in toclearly have those guardrails
through, the expectations andthose goals clearly defined for
them to work towards studentresults, they know the roadmap
to success in their first andsecond year as superintendent
and it doesn't create whiplashthroughout the entire
(09:37):
organization of everybody tryingto figure out what's the new
person going to do when theycome in and take control.
Speaker 3 (09:41):
Really along those lines, wondering if either or
both of you can give us anexample of where you've seen
that maybe single issue voterrunning on a platform come in
ego tripping board member andseeing how this policy driven
process really has changed thatatmosphere from concerning to
now we're all working in harmony.
Speaker 4 (10:02):
Let me give you a quick example, and I think I
shared this with John once.
So, john, if you want toembellish on my history, feel
free.
But we worked in a schooldistrict with, I believe it was,
nine board members.
There's a problem right away.
They ought to be like maxed outat five, in my opinion.
I don't care how large or small.
And secondly, a new boardmember came on, a former
(10:26):
military guy, which is fine, buthe had a very clear agenda on
no sex being taught in schools.
Sound familiar.
So he was on less than a yearand somehow got his hands on
stationary for the school systemand this is a large urban
district in the east wrote aletter to all the principals in
(10:46):
the system and said let's beclear, there will be no teaching
of sex in the schools, there'sabstinence only.
If you have a question, contactme below.
And he sent it out without everbringing in a the
administration or B as fellowboard members.
And all hell broke loose, as youcan imagine.
As you can imagine in a verypolitically charged environment.
(11:07):
So the recourse on this was forthem to go through.
We have a policy on process foraddressing board member
violation.
It just doesn't get swept underthe rug or shame on you or you
shouldn't have done it.
They called an executivesession and then a full meeting
to censure this guy and saidthat's not how we play this game
(11:29):
and if you want to help makingthese tough decisions and giving
direction to the system A itdoesn't go out on district
letterhead.
B you have to bring the rest ofus along.
And so he was very quickly putin his place.
For how we work together as aboard and how we give direction
to the school system, that's apretty egregious and you know in
(11:50):
your face example, butunfortunately the level of
seriousness not all that rare.
Speaker 5 (11:56):
And while it may not be tied to an individual, we
recently had a conference withabout a dozen school boards and
superintendents from across thecountry where we looked at
current issues, and those boardmembers bring in those current
issues.
So we looked at AI and education, school safety SEL talked about
those, but from the perspectiveof what's the board's role, and
(12:17):
so, as we analyzed, I led agroup that looked at AI and
education and we looked at it.
Does it really impact thoseoperational expectations or
those guardrails that you'resetting up for the
superintendent?
And all these board memberssaid no, even in the
instructional environment, wedon't think it really changes
the rules to where we need to go, change the policy.
The discussion they got intothen is really it does have an
(12:40):
implication on what are those21st century skills our students
need to have, and do we need togo back and reflect on our
results and our outcomes that weexpect for students and
redefine the results that we'retelling our superintendent that
we expect from our students?
And I think that's a healthydialogue around to have around
these single issues thattypically are manifested in a
(13:02):
single issue.
Board member.
Speaker 2 (13:03):
So this is kind of getting at one of those pieces,
I think, about some boards thatwe just don't know.
There's some things that arejust unsure, like these single
issue folks.
Can you kind of give us apicture of a board where you're
creating a culture where there'ssafety, where you can make some
risks and there's not that feardriven, and maybe some of those
(13:27):
boards where they absolutelyare fear driven?
Speaker 4 (13:29):
I don't know many boards that are fear driven,
unless they're afraid of gettingnegative community reaction.
No board likes that.
We have a client in Coloradoright now who had really serious
gender identity issues, withlots of community lying actually
(13:51):
by outside forces coming intoplay.
And so what we have to do whenwe're working with these folks
is they've got a retreat,they've got to pull away from
the whole thing with thesuperintendent and say you know
what is our role, how are wegoing to approach it?
How do we involve the communityand understanding what's going
on here?
So community engagement isreally at the top of the list.
(14:14):
How do we involve the peoplewho own this school system in
influencing outcomes that arebest for kids?
And very often the last thing wedo is talk to the community or
even talk to the kids.
And yet these rabble rosers Ican cite groups, but that
(14:34):
probably not PC right now sothey're trying to pull districts
apart and get their own agendarunning.
And in John set out a goodexample.
We sat down in brainstormingfour topic areas and said this
is a whole harmless environment.
How do you as a board deal withthese incredibly divisive
things going on in our system ina productive way that's not
(14:56):
going to screw things up.
Did that answer your question?
Speaker 2 (14:59):
I think so.
Yeah, we're going to take ashort break to cogitate and
listen to a short ad.
Of course We'll be back withmore right here.
On outliers in education.
Speaker 1 (15:10):
School districts across the country are turning
their focus to social emotionallearning like never before.
But who is the time?
Now you do, thanks to the wholeeducator series an online SEL
training that you take at yourown pace.
Six modules packed with provenstrategies that will make a
difference right away.
The training was awesome.
The content was amazing.
Speaker 3 (15:31):
This workshop is going to make you a better
educator taught by SEL expert DrGreg Benner.
Speaker 1 (15:36):
The whole educator series delivers strategies to
ease the stress on you whilebringing out the best in your
students.
These strategies, they work.
Speaker 3 (15:44):
You'll be amazed at the results, not only with the
youth you serve, but also inyour own life.
He's telling us strategies thatwe can implement tomorrow.
Speaker 1 (15:53):
Absolutely a home run Professional development at the
speed of life.
Check out the whole educatorseries online SEL training
available now from CE ateffectivenessorg slash workshops
.
That's effectivenessorg slashworkshops.
Speaker 2 (16:09):
Okay, we're back and we're talking about coherent
governance with Linda Dawson ofthe Aspen Group and CEO John
Steech from the Center forEducational Effectiveness.
Speaker 3 (16:19):
John, you mentioned results policies.
Could you briefly talk to usabout what are those four policy
areas that you operate frominside of coherent governance?
Then how to part question,because I can only ask multiple
part questions.
Testing my memory Exactly howdoes this really create a system
(16:39):
of safety and security whereboards can even fail initially
at their work?
Speaker 5 (16:44):
There's four different key policy elements.
Most of the time when you hearschool policy you think of the
three-ring binders that areeight binders thick, that have
literally hundreds of policies.
Those are really the proceduresthat implement most of the
state laws on how a districtworks.
We're talking a whole higherlevel policy.
The first level is yourgovernance culture.
Where the board agrees, this ishow we're going to operate as a
(17:06):
board, this is how we're goingto treat each other, how we're
going to run our meetings andthe ethical level we're going to
hold ourselves to.
Then they set boardsuperintendent relation policies
that define how the board andthe superintendent will work
together and communicatetogether.
The third set are thoseoperational expectations which
create that boundary orguardrails that really frees up
(17:27):
the superintendent to run thedistrict in the best way.
They, as a highly skilled andeducated practitioner in
education, know they need to runthe district.
And the final policies are theresults and often those center
on academic outcomes,socialization and the ability to
work in a working environment,those 21st century skills.
(17:48):
You say SEL and that'stypically elementary, but I
think I've heard it on thispodcast before when SEL grows up
, it becomes 21st century skills.
We're really trying to givestudents those skills they're
going to need to be successfulin life.
And then some districts evenhave citizenship as one of their
results outcomes.
In the end, then thesuperintendent is responsible to
(18:09):
come back to the board annuallywith all of those operational
expectations and all of thoseresults and provide data and
evidence that they have run thedistrict within the expectations
of the board and that they'veachieved the results that the
board wants for their students.
You talk about eliminating fearwithin the organization.
Having lived in bothenvironments, in one environment
(18:30):
without a clear governanceframework, as a superintendent
you're always wondering, lookingat the board, saying, can I go?
And so you've got thishesitancy and the whole
organization starts to fill thathesitancy of who's really in
charge, who makes the rules andam I going to get in trouble for
getting outside of a rule thatI don't even know whether it
exists or not, as opposed towith coherent governance.
(18:52):
Everybody knows this is when Ineed to stop, and unless I need
to stop, I know I can go, andthat creates that environment
for innovation where people knowI have clear boundaries to what
I can and can't do.
Anything within thoseboundaries is fair game to
innovate and try new things.
Speaker 2 (19:09):
Yeah, and I think that's getting at the heart of
that earlier question, because Ihave worked under
superintendents that have workedunder boards and when those
superintendents have fear abouta potential response from the
board, like when we take a lookat outlier all of our outlier
work we look at stuff that youknow is there trust within the
layers?
You know, do students trust theteachers?
(19:30):
Do teachers trust the?
You know the building admin,does building admin trust
central admin?
So now we're really talkingabout what's happening in that
ceiling of central admin right,the soup and that board.
So what would it take to makesure that you've got that
trusting environment so that asuperintendent could get cover
to a building admin so theycould do the right thing for
kids?
Speaker 4 (19:50):
Well, it's all lined up to results and it all has to
be compliant with theiroperational expectations and the
wise superintendent or anybodyin this if you believe in
systemic authority andaccountability, you have to
drive it down to the schoolbuilding and back up again, and
we've in fact worked with schoolteachers on an Indian
(20:12):
reservation in North Dakotawhere they took the operational
expectations, John, and drovethem to the classroom level and
the kids identified what theexpectations and the outcomes
were.
Speaker 2 (20:24):
So is that what you mean by driving it down?
Is it you're getting feedback?
Speaker 4 (20:27):
Driving it down and empowering them.
So you're going to run theclassroom.
You can't violate any of theboard's operational expectations
.
But in fact does the teacherhave operational expectations
and do I have to live up to them?
So it's really a systemic and asystematic approach to good
governance.
Speaker 2 (20:46):
Thank you, I think that's clear and I think that if
I'm just going to ask aquestion from underneath like
I'm looking up in the aquariumand I'm a principal looking up
at this other stuff that happensabove me, what would I sense
with a healthy governance, aboveme with a soup and board, what
would be those things that wayyeah, this looks good and
r-o-raggy not so good above youwhat would those things be?
Speaker 4 (21:10):
Board members who would try to grant themselves
permission to misbehave.
And so there's an annual workplan.
What are we going to focus onat this meeting?
Not just coming in and saying,okay, what's on the agenda
tonight, folks, and it's plannedout a year in advance so that
work can be accomplished.
(21:30):
If something pops up and yoususpend your focus there better
be a darn good reason, becauseyou've got things to get done.
And it also relies on theintegrity of the people saying I
appreciate the questions you'reasking and concerns you have,
but here's what we're focused onthis evening.
If we have other time, we cancircle back to that or we can
(21:54):
schedule it for future dates.
But and then you know Iremember, john, you've probably
been there too we would get donewith school board meetings and
meet the next day as anadministrative cabinet and say
what happened last night?
Do we ever make a decision?
Who made the decision?
Was there a motion and a second?
Do we move forward now?
Speaker 2 (22:14):
You know, and and I think I said that after most
board meetings, linda what Idreaded of that example was as a
long time assistantsuperintendent.
Speaker 3 (22:24):
Oh no, I'm just going to have to clear everything
that was on my calendar that wasmeaningful to address these
things that came up last night.
Speaker 4 (22:30):
Yeah, it's that old thing of reverse, reverse,
reverse, reverse.
And so you know you got to takepeople, that they're word and
people have to be and they arein the system and power to speak
up.
We decided to follow thiscalendar Together.
We set the agenda, we agreed tothat ahead of time and this
train is headed down the trackand look what we're being able
(22:51):
to accomplish for kids.
Get kids at that board meetingshowing what they know and are
able to do, and you know it'samazing that with boards of
education still so often it'snot has nothing to do with kids
and what's healthy and happy forthem.
Speaker 3 (23:07):
Oh my gosh, I have a great story.
When my daughter was seven, shewas at a board meeting Can't
remember why actually at thispoint but when we left she said
how come those five old peopleup there talked about things
that didn't have anything to dowith school all night long?
And I said you are asking myessential question, linda, which
(23:27):
is really a segue into our nextquestion.
We understand there's 10principles that boards need to
follow behind coherentgovernance.
Can you briefly talk aboutthose Don't have to list them
all out and then which one'sreally the paramount or
superordinate responsibility ofa board?
Speaker 5 (23:43):
So I'm going to use one of them as a bridge to get
to the final one, and one of thekey principles is the board
needs to make the big decisionsbefore they make the little ones
, and when you make those bigdecisions around those
operational expectations and theultimate results that you want
for kids, you're not gettinginvolved in the day to day
minutiae and you're not makingthe little, tiny decisions,
(24:04):
which creates two things for theorganization that creates
consistency and coherency, andthat's where staff are going to
thrive, when they know what toexpect on a regular basis, and
things are aligned top to bottom, and you can't have either if
the board is whipping back andforth and everybody in the
organization is getting whiplash.
(24:25):
Probably the biggest one, though, is the board's role in
defining the desired results forthe district students and
requiring that achievement.
Even before I got into coherentgovernance, when I was helping
superintendents and boards, Ihad a slide that I'd show up of
all the different kind ofdecisions that boards would make
around scoreboards,transportation, naming schools,
(24:49):
all the things that boards spendtheir time on.
I said how many of you spendyour time in this area?
And everybody's like, oh yeah,those are all on our agenda all
year long and I said, ok,student progress and student
outcomes how often do you talkabout those?
Everybody wants?
Maybe twice a year.
Under this, that becomes thetrue focus of the board and all
the rest of this should fall inline.
(25:11):
If that's what you're trulyfocusing on and you have a clear
expectation that yoursuperintendent, your
administration, all of yourstaff, they're providing quality
evidence on the true measure ofstudent performance and student
outcomes within your schoolsystem.
Only what gets measured getsdone and if you're measuring how
(25:31):
much it costs to put thescoreboard in the new stadium.
That's going to get done.
Speaker 4 (25:36):
I sat through a three hour meeting on how thick the
wrestling mats should be onetime.
But let me say this in defenseof this system that's boomwacka.
I mean we keep things indisarray because then we can
control it right, somebody cancontrol it.
(25:56):
So in this, if you have afinite set of policies about
operation and you have a finiteset of what we want students to
know and be able to do, we haveto get these lay board members
to know and understand what arethe measures for gauging whether
progress is being made or not.
Most board members come on aboard they don't know a quintile
(26:17):
from a quartile to a standarddeviation and they're not going
to raise their hand and say canyou explain that to me?
I mean there is a certain levelof ego involved in people
running for a board.
So there's this intricacy ofestablishing what does this
community want kids to know andbe able to do and how are we
going to know they're makingreasonable progress in that
(26:38):
achievement?
So it's a network ofcommunication and education.
Speaker 2 (26:42):
Okay, Linda.
So you've mentioned this acouple of times.
There's this merger word.
Can you tell me about what'shappening with the CEE and the
Aspen Group?
Speaker 4 (26:50):
Sure, Okay, as I said , we've been doing this for many
years and wrote the books aboutwhat we're doing and why, but
there's just so much gas in thetank, you know, and my business
partner has decided to retire asof December 31st and I will say
honestly, for five years we'velooked for the right person to
(27:10):
partner with to keep themomentum going.
It would be heartbreaking tohave spent years doing this and
have it just fall off to theside.
So we happen to think that oursystem, out of those available,
has the greatest fidelity, thegreatest assurity of doing what
it says it can do, and we havegreat faith in the intellectual
(27:33):
capacity, the humor, theknowledge, the experience of
John and we're gradually gettingto know you characters.
Speaker 5 (27:45):
I'm sorry.
Speaker 4 (27:48):
And we watched John work in Evergreen, of course,
and that was a tough spot and hehandled it with grace and has
come out on the other end likethe Phoenix here, and so we
think that working with John tobridge these two companies and
forge it into a system ofexcellence is doable.
Speaker 2 (28:10):
John, what's your perspective there?
Speaker 5 (28:11):
When I was in Evergreen as a superintendent,
we were implementing coherentgovernance and I was trying to
create the monitoring reportsfor the operational expectations
, the results, and trying toreally build it from scratch
because there wasn't.
Something was out there.
When I got to CEE, we were ableto connect with a couple of
districts who had just donestrategic plans, that were
trying to figure out how are wegoing to monitor the strategic
(28:33):
plan.
So we got into first thedashboarding business, then
strategic plan facilitation andin the back of my mind I just
kept thinking and I keptreaching out to Randy and Linda
saying I see synergy between usbecause this really can function
properly if we have a boardthat understands their role and
is true governing coherentlythrough policy and I've always
(28:57):
been looking for that connectionand then, with them making this
decision that it's time to turnover the reins.
I thought it was a natural fitbecause if we can help school
boards understand their role,which is in the outcomes,
leaving the strategy to thesuperintendent then the way
we've been facilitatingstrategic planning, the
(29:18):
dashboarding, the way we areable to pull data together, both
on the academic and the cultureclimate and the SELs aspects,
being able to pull that in andshow it in ways that the layman
can understand, gives the boardsomething, gives the community
something, and that we canbetter support those districts
that we're already helping fromtop to bottom.
(29:39):
If you get one thing out ofmisalignment on the whole system
, you're getting back into thatorganizational whiplash and
people having all thatuncertainty.
Speaker 2 (29:49):
Yeah, so in a layman's terms, john, as I'm
hearing this, you've got theguardrails of governance, but
you also need to have that datapiece that tells you where
you're going to be driving.
Is that sort of something?
Speaker 5 (30:00):
Because one of the big concerns when we first
implemented it, the criticism wegot the board got was you're
giving away the farm to thesuperintendent and that is the
opposite of what's happening.
The superintendent has far moreaccountability, because one of
the things that we teach boardsand superintendents is whoever
has responsibility hasaccountability.
So if the board's going to makethe decision, they're not
(30:22):
holding the superintendentaccountable for the decision.
It does happen, but they reallyneed to hold themselves
accountable.
And if you really want to holdyour superintendent accountable,
you've got to delegate thingsand give them the responsibility
to operate the district at thestrategic level and focus.
The true board's real work isfocusing on results and if the
board's truly doing that withfidelity and holding the
(30:45):
superintendent and theadministration accountable,
that's when you've got ahigh-performing system.
Speaker 2 (30:50):
Well, Linda and John, so much here and now.
What we're going to do is we'regoing to hand it over to the
Sultan of Summarization.
Bolsey, what do you have forall of this governance?
Speaker 3 (31:01):
thinking I'm going to dispense with my typical jokes
about not summarizing.
Well, not really.
I guess that reference doesn'tdispense with it at all.
So moving into the summary.
I think on a high level really,we just got a masterclass in
what it looks like to havecoherence from the boardroom to
the classroom, which is manyfolks know is actually the work
of Michael Fohlen, a Canadianresearcher, real prevalent in
(31:21):
education.
So it's great to really hearabout how all this works in
practice from that theory, lindagot started in the work, really
noting that most boards wereincoherent.
By incoherent we mean a groupof individuals functioning kind
of individually all around theirown interests.
And what coherent boards do isthey govern by policy.
They need those guardrails sothat they can collectively
(31:43):
achieve the district's goals.
Identifying how much this workof coherent governance and the
Aspen Group really squares withour culture at CEE was something
that stood out to me as well.
And then really getting boardsto focus on those critical
outcomes for children which wewould think intuitively is what
boards would do in education.
But clearly processes areneeded in order for that to
(32:03):
happen.
One thing that really stood outto me that coherence creates a
culture of innovation.
When we're all clear about whatit is we're supposed to do, it
creates, gives us our bestopportunity to innovate.
And another thing loved Linda'sexample of the school district
in North Dakota reallyidentifying how to elevate
student voices in this process.
So again that boardroom toclassroom notion squares a lot
(32:27):
with episode one of season two,with Randy Russell and his
students from Freeman reallytalking about the same thing.
So another kind of opportunityfor where that rubber meets the
road.
I just love the phrase grantingpermission to misbehave.
It's not really a relevant partof the summary, but I wanted to
throw it in there anyway, and Ithink we all know that there's
probably never been a time wherethere's a bigger need or
(32:49):
emphasis on transitioning towardcoherent governance, whether
we're talking school boards or acourse with other boards and
other governing bodies acrossour country as well.
And what I love about coherentgovernance is it makes it all
about the kids and theiroutcomes.
Speaker 4 (33:04):
Wilson.
Speaker 2 (33:05):
Beautiful.
Thank you, Bulls, John andLinda.
Anything else you'd like totouch on in that?
Speaker 5 (33:11):
I would just want to emphasize that these concepts
aren't just exclusive to schoolboards.
If you've got Congress, youknow the the Congress.
Speaker 3 (33:22):
I wasn't going to go there, Linda.
Speaker 5 (33:24):
If you've got the board of one of your big four
auto manufacturers, believe me,they're not concerned where the
safety sign is hung in the workarea.
They're concerned with how manycars are getting produced, in
the quality of those cars andour school, as much.
As you know, during the 80s and90s we said we need to be more
like business in schools.
I think the boards have to bethe ones to start there and they
(33:46):
need to help themselvesaccountable to saying we are
really results oriented andthat's what we need to focus on.
Speaker 2 (33:52):
Linda, where can we find your most recent book?
Speaker 4 (33:54):
Amazon Is it easiest.
Speaker 2 (33:56):
I think yeah, All right.
Where does anybody find?
Speaker 4 (33:59):
anything Happy Christmas.
Speaker 2 (34:00):
I know Exactly, hey, thank you both for being on the
show.
A lot of fantastic things thatyou had to share with us, not
only from the board and suit,but all of us who are a little
bit further down the food chainand how that affects us, and
that trust and that culture.
So thank you both for being onthe show Great.
Speaker 5 (34:17):
Thank you, eric, my pleasure.
Speaker 2 (34:18):
Thanks for having us and congratulations on your
guys' merger.
That's exciting.
Speaker 4 (34:22):
Yeah, it is, thank you, Thank you.
Speaker 3 (34:25):
And thanks to all of you who are listening in today.
You can find us anywhere youlisten to your favorite podcast
or visit us online ateffectivenessorg.
Until next time.
This has been Outliers inEducation, and that's a wrap.
Speaker 1 (34:40):
If you'd like to find out how to gather the data you
need to help drive positivechange in your school or
district, take a moment to visitCEE, the Center for Educational
Effectiveness, ateffectivenessorg.
Better data, better decisions,better schools Effectivenessorg.
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Therapy Gecko
An unlicensed lizard psychologist travels the universe talking to strangers about absolutely nothing. TO CALL THE GECKO: follow me on https://www.twitch.tv/lyleforever to get a notification for when I am taking calls. I am usually live Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays but lately a lot of other times too. I am a gecko.