< PREVIOUS ] [ 1993 Index ] [ Ed Quillen HOME ] [ SEARCH ] [ NEXT >
For the first time in memory, Colorado school board elections will be held along with the general election in November, rather than with the special district elections in May.
The problem with May was that nobody paid attention to
school elections, except for the teachers' union. With the
help of overwhelming public apathy, an organized union
could pack the board with people who believe that there is
a direct relationship between improving education
and spending money.
As a remedy, our legislature moved school-board elections to November, and perhaps this strategy for improving public participation is succeeding.
For instance, Littleton enjoys a lively controversy as
to whether three aspirants are a harmless slate of back
to the basics
advocates or dangerous stealth candidates
from the dreaded Religious Right who will force children to
celebrate a holiday later this month (Creation Day; Bishop
James Ussher reckoned that the world emerged from the
Creator's hand at 9 a.m. on Oct. 23, 4004 B.C.).
However, that could well be the last public controversy from that school board, or any other. There's an influential group that has rules against such unseemly displays of democracy.
Most, if not all, school boards in the Centennial State
belong to the Colorado Association of School Boards, which
issues a monthly newsletter called Agenda.
The August issue carried a short item called Creating
a single board voice,
with advice from one John Carver,
an expert consultant and author on board
leadership.
Among his edicts is that No fragmentation of the
board voice is permitted.
So if you thought you might
see some arguments among board members after the election,
think again. Effective Colorado school boards, like
old-time soviets or efficient juntas, just don't permit the
dread horror of fragmentation.
Nor is this just an isolated precept that somehow crept into a publication otherwise devoted to the promotion of expressing differences of opinion in the marketplace of ideas.
Next to Carver's precepts is a questionnaire to determine whether a school board suffers from this curse of fragmentation:
Do members criticize each other in the media or other public settings?
Do members regard themselves as representing particular constituencies, rather than as part of a team?
Do members have conflicting goals for the organization?
Do board members differ widely regarding the effectiveness of the management of the organization?
Now, we have other elected bodies in this country. Members of the Colorado General Assembly often criticize each other in the media or other public settings.
We expect the people we send to the U.S. House of
Representatives to regard themselves as representing their
districts -- particular constituencies
in the CASB
dialect -- rather than as part of a team.
U.S. Senators have conflicting goals for the organization -- Robert Byrd, for instance, believes that its main purpose is to funnel our money into West Virginia, a goal that is fortunately not shared by either senator from Colorado.
And at all levels of government, from town board to U.S. Congress, the elected officials differ widely regarding the management of the organization.
Schools are supposed to teach children about democracy, about open debate to air differing views and to resolve competing claims on public resources.
But in the world of CASB, our school boards are supposed to function as unanimous voices where no member ever argues with another because everyone has the same opinion.
Moving the elections to November might be a start on
school reform. Now the legislature should figure out a way
to eliminate CASB, where differences are not one of the
glories of American democracy, but a dangerous symptom of
fragmentation.
< PREVIOUS ] [ 1993 Index ] [ Ed Quillen HOME ] [ SEARCH ] [ NEXT >