Heather Sprague smiled when she spotted the neon-orange sign taped to the entrance of the headquarters of the Pittsburgh public school district. It directed people seeking the July 15 meeting of the school board to the committee room on the second floor. Just inside the building鈥檚 double doors, a security guard was posted at a desk to give further directions if anyone needed them.
Until recently, parents and residents who came to observe or participate in the board鈥檚 open meetings had to enter an unmarked door and find their own way to the meeting room, says Sprague, who volunteers in a new effort here to raise the public鈥檚 interest in the school board and improve its performance.
鈥淔or meetings that were supposed to be public, it was pretty difficult for the public to even find where they [were],鈥� says Sprague, a bankruptcy lawyer for the U.S. Department of Justice.
The orange signs represent a small victory in a much larger campaign under way in Pittsburgh to make the school board鈥攚hich until a few years ago was notorious for personal feuds among its members and constant clashes with the former superintendent鈥攐ne of the most transparent, productive, and accountable governing bodies in public education.
A nonprofit group called A+ Schools: Pittsburgh鈥檚 Community Alliance for Public Education, which works for improvement in the 28,000-student district, launched the governance initiative in January.
Known as Board Watch, the program recruits and trains volunteers like Sprague to evaluate the performance of the school board on five good-governance practices鈥攆ocus and mission, transparency, conduct, role clarity, and competency鈥攄uring its public meetings. Every three or four months, Board Watch issues a report card that grades the board on those measures, as well as its overall performance. Board Watch also makes a series of recommendations on how the board can improve.
Since its launch, more than 50 volunteers have signed on to Board Watch. Such an organized watchdog effort focused on the functions of a school board appears to be unique in the nation, observers say.
鈥淭his program is as much about holding the board accountable as it is about engaging the public,鈥� says Carey Harris, the executive director of A+ Schools and the founder of Board Watch.
鈥淭he board works for the public,鈥� she says, 鈥渁nd if the public doesn鈥檛 have clear and high expectations for board members, then it becomes nothing short of a miracle that [members] will do the job that they need to do.鈥�
In the two report cards Board Watch has issued so far, the panel has received mostly mediocre marks. Its strongest point: transparency. Its weakest: role clarity.
鈥淚鈥檓 not sure that the report card outcomes always capture what the majority of us are doing, which is killing ourselves to do the right thing,鈥� says Theresa Colaizzi, the president of the school board, who has served on the board since 2001. 鈥淏ut we have nothing to hide, and they have every right to judge us. I welcome the feedback.鈥�
鈥淚 think that anybody would be concerned that this could bring us negative publicity, but I think we are getting what we deserve based on our performance,鈥� says William Isler, a member of the board since 1999. 鈥淚 think in the long run, this program will help improve the image of the school board in the public鈥檚 eye.鈥�
鈥楽plendid Isolation鈥�
Most of the nation鈥檚 roughly 14,500 district school boards conduct their meetings before very few people. The local education reporter probably attends, along with a few diehards who show up faithfully to complain or cajole. But to draw parents and a broader swath of community members to a school board meeting usually takes a major controversy, like the closing of a school or the firing of a popular teacher or coach.
Volunteers who attended meetings of the Pittsburgh school board take notes on these goals.
SOURCE: A+ Schools: Pittsburgh鈥檚 Community Alliance for Public Education
Such inattention can contribute to the micromanagement, mischief, and malfunctioning that some school boards fall into when no one is watching them do their work, one governance expert says.
鈥淭oo often, school boards operate in splendid isolation,鈥� says Michael D. Usdan, a senior fellow at the Washington-based Institute for Educational Leadership. 鈥淚f no one is paying attention, it makes it much easier for a board to get into the weeds, where it鈥檚 not usually fruitful for them to spend their time.鈥�
Pittsburgh鈥檚 problem wasn鈥檛 necessarily that nobody was watching: The board鈥檚 antics had become a major attraction on a local television channel that aired its meetings. But seven years ago, the board鈥檚 behavior helped drive the district to a low point, when three of the city鈥檚 leading philanthropies publicly announced they would cease making new investments in the school system. The decision was motivated, in large part, by an ongoing feud that members of the elected, nine-person board were having with one another, as well as with then-Superintendent John Thompson.
That withdrawal by leaders of the Grable Foundation, the Heinz Endowments, and the Pittsburgh Foundation was a multimillion-dollar blow to the public schools. It prompted Tom Murphy, the city鈥檚 mayor at the time, to form a special commission to make recommendations on how to stem the crisis in district governance and leadership.
One recommendation from the commission was the need to form a community-based organization to provide leadership and advocacy for school reform. That became A+ Schools, which was organized in 2004.
Harris, the group鈥檚 executive director, says governance was a major concern from the beginning, but it wasn鈥檛 until a community meeting was held during a school board election cycle two years ago that the idea for Board Watch was conceived.
Though the school board had come a long way鈥攊t hired Mark Roosevelt as superintendent in 2006 and has mostly supported his aggressive reform efforts, which have yielded substantive gains鈥攖he public still held largely negative views of the board.
鈥淲hat we heard from people is that they were frustrated with the board, but that they didn鈥檛 really know what the board should have been doing,鈥� Harris says. 鈥淭his was an opportunity to set the community鈥檚 expectations for the board.鈥�
A big obstacle to keeping the board focused on debating and approving strategies for achieving the district鈥檚 goals is the Pennsylvania school code, observers here say. The state law spells out that local school boards are to deliberate and vote on matters such as school field trips, acceptance of donations, and the awarding and renewal of contracts of any size, Harris says.
At the board鈥檚 July 15 meeting, members worked their way through an inch-thick agenda that included contracts as small $7,000.
Five Board Watch volunteers showed up for that night鈥檚 鈥渁genda review,鈥� and observed quietly while the board discussed a range of issues. The volunteers鈥攚ho wear badges to identify themselves鈥攅ach filled out a form to rate the board on several measures, including how often they heard members discuss topics related to the board鈥檚 own stated goals. Volunteers also grade the board on time management and civility in their comments. At least three Board Watch volunteers attend every meeting. Their paper evaluations are collected after each meeting, and are compiled later with results from other meetings to come up with letter grades.
One of the volunteers is Arita Gilliam, whose daughter graduated from Pittsburgh鈥檚 public schools a decade ago. For her, Board Watch became a concrete way to contribute to the district鈥檚 improvement. A pregnancy-prevention specialist who works in the city鈥檚 schools, she says she was appalled by some of the conditions in which she saw students trying to learn.
鈥淭hat鈥檚 what motivated me more than anything,鈥� Gilliam says.
Sprague, who does not have children, says she gets frustrated at times by the length and lack of focus in the board鈥檚 deliberations. At a meeting earlier this year, she says, the board was to vote on clarifying a few words in one sentence in a new edition of the student handbook.
鈥淚t turned into a marathon discussion about whether to change the entire truancy policy,鈥� Sprague recalls. 鈥淚 don鈥檛 like seeing the district鈥檚 resources being used like that.鈥�
That sort of behavior has prompted Board Watch to issue its lowest grades on 鈥渞ole clarity,鈥� one of the five good-governance indicators the school board is judged on. In fact, the board earned a C on role clarity on its most recent report card, a drop from a C-plus in the first report card, due mostly to the board鈥檚 tendency to dwell on line-item expenditures and individual programs, Harris says.
Isler, the school board member, concedes that the board often spends too much time on picayune matters that have little to do with the district鈥檚 main purpose.
鈥淚f you watch any school board meeting, whether it鈥檚 us or some other board, how often do you hear them actually talk about education?鈥� he says. 鈥淪lowly, I think Board Watch is going to help us focus on why we are there.鈥�
The board received its best grade so far, a B-plus, for transparency, a mark that Harris says reflects the improved access the public now has to meetings and the board鈥檚 decision to post its agendas on the district鈥檚 Web site at least one day before it meets.
The sixth annual Leading for Learning report, funded by The Wallace Foundation, examines the school board鈥檚 role in education leadership.
鈥� Click here to read the full report.
Still, there is more work to be done, says Gilliam of Board Watch.
鈥淚 think our neutral perspective is greatly needed,鈥� she says. 鈥淲e really want to see them function better, so hopefully they listen to all of our feedback and apply it.鈥�
Colaizzi, the board president, believes the school board is functioning better now than it has in more than a decade. She points to Superintendent Roosevelt鈥檚 hiring as one example. She also notes that the district recently made adequate yearly progress under the federal No Child Left Behind Act, and is one of five finalists for millions of dollars from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to overhaul the recruitment, training, evaluation, and compensation of teachers.
鈥淲e鈥檝e done all of that as a board on our own,鈥� Colaizzi says. 鈥淲hat Board Watch can do, and I am hoping that it does do this, is bring really qualified people to run for the positions that become vacant to keep us moving in the right direction.鈥�
