Validating a Survey Instrument to Assess School Board Members’ Perceptions of Texas’s Lone Star Governance (LSG) Model

• In Event: A Critical Examination of School Board Governance Models: Imagining a Better Future

Abstract

Purpose
The Lone Star Governance (LSG) model, derived from the SOFG but developed by the Texas Education Agency (TEA), aims to align school board practices with improved student outcomes through focused governance. While widely promoted, no empirical evidence exists regarding how LSG is perceived by its key user group: Texas school board members. We developed and validated a survey instrument to measure perceptions of the LSG, its components, fidelity of implementation, and impact on student outcomes as per the self-reported perspectives of Texas school board members.

Perspectives
We grounded this study in organizational leadership theory and policy implementation frameworks, with a focus on governance coherence among elected leaders (Spillane et al., 2002; Honig, 2006). We examined how LSG principles (e.g., vision-setting, evaluation, monitoring of student outcomes), as aligned with the SOFG model at its core, are internalized and enacted by Texas school board members. We also drew from institutional theory to consider how contextual and political pressures shape board responses to LSG-based reforms (Coburn, 2004).

Methods and Data Sources
Following best practices in survey research (Fowler, 2014; Nardi, 2018), we designed this instrument with the LSG framework (see full instrument in the Appendix). After iterative reviews and revisions, we piloted the instrument with six Texas school board member participants. The instrument includes Likert-scale and open-ended items. We used Cronbach’s alpha to assess internal consistency, with values above α=0.70 deemed acceptable (Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994). We used exploratory factor analysis (EFA), employing principal axis factoring with varimax rotation, to examine construct dimensions and validity (DeVellis, 2017; Fabrigar et al., 1999).

Preliminary Findings
The instrument yielded excellent internal consistency (Cronbach’s α=.975), though this high value very likely indicates item redundancy or limited construct differentiation. Factor analysis extracted five components explaining 100% of rotated variance, with the first three factors accounting for ≈79% of pre-rotation variance. Tentative factors included: (1) Strategic Planning and Communication, (2) Monitoring and Training, (3) Student Outcomes Focus, (4) Evaluation Practices, and (5) Community Accountability. The fifth factor was defined by a single negatively worded item, requiring revision or elimination. Two items also showed negative item-total correlations, suggesting they may also be confusing or misaligned, also requiring revision or elimination. These and other issues, possibly caused by sample size issues, along with other issues and findings are included in the full manuscript.

Significance
This validated instrument offers a foundation for assessing how governance reforms like LSG are understood and enacted by Texas school board members. Next, we will use this instrument to survey approximately 7,000 school board members statewide (e.g., using random or probabilistic sampling methods) to understand their self-reported perceptions of LSG implementation, its strengths and gaps, and how and whether its marketing claims are realized with practice. Findings will also support future research and (hopefully) inform policy on school board governance reform. Results may also inform policy beyond Texas (e.g., in Seattle and elsewhere), highlighting the need for clearer, more distinct governance metrics to improve board evaluation tools, accountability, and community engagement.

Authors

• Brandon J. Yuhas, Arizona State University

• Audrey Amrein-Beardsley, Arizona State University

• Margarita Pivovarova, Arizona State University

• Grace Louise Beall, Arizona State University