Procedimientos de mejora de la calidad

School boards, like public schools, are part of the larger sociocultural system in the United States (Lutz, 1975a). Public school governance connects citizens to their schools and provides a democratic opportunity for shaping school culture in line with the values of the larger community. School board meetings provide opportunities for individuals and groups to express themselves and their needs while board members debate, negotiate, and compromise to make decisions (Björk, 2008). When school boards make decisions, their behavior and their processes are enmeshed in the culture of the board. The decisions of the school board are informed by community norms, ideals, and warring concepts.

Lutz (1975a) studied the socioeconomic patterns of communities and school board governance in the communities. Using a cultural lens, Lutz (1975a) identified five propositions regarding the cultural nature of school boards, their decisions, and their responsibilities (pp. 72- 73). These five propositions support the position that the concept of culture is valuable as a way to understand and evaluate school board behavior at the local level.

2.8.1 Proposition 1: Decisions are Political

Proposition 1: All educational decisions are either political decisions or have political implications.

When considering school board decisions and the decision-making process, it is important to remember that school boards are political entities. Some see “politics” as a tainted word, referencing nefarious motives and hidden agendas. Politics is a way of conducting business to further an organization. Politics is more than the manipulation of people and relationships in order to achieve a goal (Martin, 1962). Instead, politics is a process of influence that results in a decision (Lutz & Iannaccone 1969). The decisions reflect values and how scarce resources are allocated in an organization (Björk, 2008). School boards, as political entities, engage in the political process when making decisions.

People tend to act in concert with their political beliefs and emotions (Iannaccone & Lutz, 1970). One expects, then, that school board decision-making will honor the political values of the sociocultural school board system and the larger community. One cannot separate politics from the school board, thus one cannot ignore the political nature of school board decisions.

2.8.2 Proposition 2: School Boards are the Decision-Makers

Proposition 2: Local school boards are the decision-makers about specific public education programs, regardless of the wide range of pressures from all levels.

Although different entities pressure public school boards, the decision-making responsibility for school systems is still the purview of the school board. Community pressures,

state regulations, federal requirements, and other forces may seem to dictate school board action. In reality, however, school boards retain the power to make decisions for the district even if, at times, these decisions are constrained by outside parameters. Sometimes school boards act as “metamediators,” taking competing demands and reshaping them into decisions that support the operations of the district (Lutz, 1975b). A school board may not decide without being affected by the pressures it faces, but it is still the decision-making entity of the district.

2.8.3 Proposition 3: Local School Boards as Sociocultural Systems

Proposition 3: Local school boards are themselves sociocultural systems and behave in fashions dictated by prescribed cultural parameters.

School boards are sociocultural systems within the larger context of American society. Lutz (1975a) outlined that boards have elements of a cultural system, such as artifacts and resources. School boards have values and beliefs, as well as roles and traditions that guide action. Additionally, boards have literature in the form of policies, minutes, and guidebooks. This literature is useful for transmitting culture to future members of the district. School boards behave according to the cultural system, often with recognizable patterns or similar styles (National School Boards Association, 1975).

2.8.4 Proposition 4: School Boards Serve Heterogeneous Cultures

Proposition 4: Local school boards are elected or appointed to serve larger, more heterogeneous cultures (school districts) whose subcultures may have needs, values, aspirations, etc., that differ from those of the school board.

Although school boards are elected or appointed from representatives of community, the limited number of individuals on a school board rarely represents all of the heterogeneous cultures and demographics in a school district (Cistone, 2008). School districts have subcultures that have differing perspectives and competing interests, sometimes not congruent with the board’s perspectives and interests. Subcultures in the district may not see the whole picture or understand the issues in the same way as the board members who engage in decision-making through deliberation. At times, the ideas of the board and the ideas of the community are in dissonance in any school system.

2.8.5 Proposition 5: Decisions Advantage Some and Disadvantage Others

Proposition 5: A monolithic decision-making system cannot effectively serve a heterogeneous culture; further, any one decision made by a local school board will likely advantage one subculture of the school district while disadvantaging another in the heterogeneous culture.

A school board as an institution cannot serve every facet of district culture. Instead, some groups enjoy advantages while others deal with disadvantages. Multiple constituent groups appeal to the school board. These constituents exert influence on leaders directly, and often indirectly (Dahl, 1989). Those who make policy are sensitive to inputs from citizens, but

not necessarily equally sensitive or accessible to all citizen groups (Bloomberg & Sunshine, 1963; Verba et al., 1995). Although board members are the representative decision makers for the district, they may not be the real decision-makers. Instead, they may actually be spokespeople for the more influential people in the community who may not even be in public office, but who may be advisors, confidants, or technical experts (Bloomberg & Sunshine, 1963; Dahl, 1989). These pressure groups and individuals exert power in the process of school board decision-making without being formally part of the process. Resulting school board decisions may help some groups and stifle others.