In/Exclusive Engagement of School Communities Through School District Decentralization: A Critical Policy Analysis

• In Event: Critical Perspectives on Education Policy and Schools, Families, and Communities: Possibilities for the Public Good

Abstract

In 2015, state policymakers in Nevada passed legislation aiming to break up the Clark County School District (CCSD), the fifth largest district in the U.S., into smaller precincts. During the creation of regulations for the bill, efforts shifted, ultimately maintaining a countywide district in favor of decentralizing power and resources from central administration to school-level leaders. A component of the decentralization process was the creation of School Organization Teams (SOTs) within each of the district’s 356 schools. SOTs are made up of elected parents, staff, and teachers who serve in an advisory role to their school principal in budgetary and programmatic decision making. In many past decentralization efforts, educational leaders and policymakers identified parents as stakeholders in school-level decision-making. Yet, little evidence exists that illustrates parental engagement through decentralization has been meaningful, particularly for marginalized and high-needs students (Bryk et al., 1999; Hess, 1999; Malen & Ogawa, 1988; Smyth, 1993). The purpose of this paper is to present findings from our investigation of the implementation and outcomes of SOTs.

Theoretically grounded in critical policy analysis (Author, 2014), we conducted a qualitative case study (Merriam, 1998) to explore the implementation process and preliminary outcomes of SOTs. We were interested in understanding the power dynamics involved and representation of diverse voices in the SOTs. We collected data about the SOT policy process and outcomes through interviews with key CCSD stakeholders, media articles, and policy documents from CCSD and the Nevada legislature. In the data analysis process we used open coding of the interviews to identify themes regarding stakeholders’ opinions and understandings of the reorganization and SOT processes. Next, we triangulated (Merriam, 2009) interview themes with findings from content analyses of news articles, policy documents, and meeting minutes/transcripts. The newspaper served as an important conduit relaying information between multiple stakeholders and the public in regard to SOTs’ functions.

The findings of our analyses demonstrate that implementation was quick and uneven: as some schools were hosting elections and filling their seats, many schools were still navigating the nuisances of the contested reorganization process and struggling to engage parents. Some SOT members complained about limited training and understanding of their role. Whether SOTs worked effectively depended largely on the school principal. Some principals sought parents’ advice while others treat SOTs as a rubber stamp to their decisions. Finally, the participants raised concerns about the high turnover of SOT members and representation and equity among the SOTs. It seems that little effort has focused specifically on recruiting SOT members who reflect underrepresented populations or structuring SOTs to allow for non-traditional participation.

CPA calls researchers to examine differences between policy rhetoric and reality (Author, 2014). CCDS’s effort to reorganize a school district that is deemed failing by making schools more responsive to their surrounding communities and the families of the students they serve is commendable. Our findings show, however, that the district has much work to do to achieve this goal. District leaders should explore policies that seek to expand SOT participation and ensure inclusive meeting criteria.

Authors

• Sarah Diem, University of Missouri

• Laura Gavornik Browning, University of Missouri - Columbia

• Carrie Sampson, Mary Lou Fulton Teachers College Arizona State University