Do School Board Governance Best Practices Improve District Performance? Testing the Key Work of School Boards in Wisconsin

References

• Alsbury, T. L. (2008a). School board politics and student achievement. In T. L. Alsbury (Ed.), The future of school board governance (pp. 247–272). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Alsbury, T. L. (2008b). School board member and superintendent turnover and the influence on student achievement: An application of the dissatisfaction theory. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 7(2), 202–229.
   Google Scholar
• Ashby, L. (1968). The effective school board member. Danville, IL: Interstate Printers & Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Carlson, M. S., & Davidson, A. S. (1999). After the election: How do governing boards become effective work groups? State & Local Government Review, 31(3), 190–201.
   Google Scholar
• Carver, J. (2001). A theory of governing the public’s business: Redesigning the jobs of boards, councils, and commissions. Public Management Review, 3(1), 53–72.
   Google Scholar
• Carver, J. (2006). Boards that make a difference. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Chait, R. P., Ryan, W. P., & Taylor, B. E. (2011). Governance as leadership: Reframing the work of nonprofit boards. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Delagardelle, M. L. (2008). The lighthouse inquiry: Examining the role of school board leadership in the improvement of student achievement. In T. L. Alsbury (Ed.), The Future of School Board Governance (pp. 191–224). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Denhardt, R. B. (2011). Theories of Public Organization. Boston, MA: Wadsworth.
   Google Scholar
• Devariecs, C., & O’Brien, E. (2011). Eight characteristics of effective school boards. Alexandria, VA: Center for Public Education.
   Google Scholar
• Frederickson, H. G., K. B., Smith, C. W., Larimer, & M. J. Licari. (2012). The public administration theory primer (2nd ed.). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
   Google Scholar
• French, P. E., Peevely, G. L., & Stanley, R. E. (2008). Measuring perceived school board effectiveness in Tennessee: The latest survey results. International Journal of Public Administration, 31(2), 211–243.
   Google Scholar
• Herman, R. D., & Heimovics, D. (2005). Executive Leadership. In R. D. Herman & Associates (Eds.), The Jossey-Bass handbook of nonprofit leadership and management (2nd ed., pp. 153–170). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Heidbreder, B., Grasse, N., Ihrke, D., & Cherry, B. D. (2011). Determinants of policy conflict in Michigan municipalities. State and Local Government Review, 43(1), 32–45.
   Google Scholar
• Ihrke, D., & Scott Niederjohn, M. (2005). Conflict on city councils in Wisconsin. Journal of Urban Affairs, 27(4), 453–462.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jehn, K. A. (1995). A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict. Administrative science quarterly, 40(2), 256–282.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jehn, K. A., & Mannix, E. A. (2001). The dynamic nature of conflict: A longitudinal study of intragroup conflict and group performance. Academy of Management Journal, 44(2), 238–251.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, T., & Ihrke, D. M. (2004). Determinants of conflict on Wisconsin town boards. State and Local Government Review, 36(2), 103–117.
   Google Scholar
• Gabris, G. T., Golembiewski, R. T., & Ihrke, D. M. (2001). Leadership credibility, board relations, and administrative innovation at the local government level. Journal of public administration research and theory, 11(1), 89–108.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gemberling, K. W., Smith, C. W., & Villani, J. S. (2000). The key work of school boards guidebook. Alexandria, VA: National School Boards Association.
   Google Scholar
• Gill, M. (2005). Governing for results: A director’s guide to good governance. Bloomington, IN: Trafford Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Grissom, J. A. (2012). Is discord detrimental? Using institutional variation to identify the impact of public governing board conflict on outcomes. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory. doi:10.1093/jopart/mus042
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanushek, E. (1997). Assessing the effects of school resources on student performance: An update. Educational evaluation and policy analysis, 19(2), 141–164.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herman, R. D., & Renz, D. O. (2000). Board practices of especially effective and less effective local nonprofit organizations. The American Review of Public Administration, 30(2), 146–160.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hess, F., & Leal, D. (2005). School house politics: Expenditures, interests, and competition in school board elections. In W. G. Howell (Ed.), Besieged: School boards and the future of education politics (pp. 228–253). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
   Google Scholar
• Hess, F., & Meeks, O. (2011). School Boards Circa 2010: Governance in an Accountability Era. Washington, DC: National School Board Association.
   Google Scholar
• Hochschild, J. (2005). What school boards can and cannot (or will not) accomplish. In W. G. Howell (Ed.), Besieged: School boards and the future of education politics (pp. 308–323). Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.
   Google Scholar
• Howell, W. (2005). Besieged: School boards and the future of education politics. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, P. A. (2012). School board governance the times they are A-Changin’. Journal of Cases in Educational Leadership, 15(2), 83–102.
   Google Scholar
• Kerr, N. D. (1964). The school board as an agency of legitimation. Sociology of Education, 38 (1), 34–59.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kettl, Donald F. (2005). The global public management revolution (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
   Google Scholar
• Kirst, M. (2008). The evolving role of school boards: Retrospect and prospect. In T. L. Alsbury (Ed.), The future of school board governance (pp. 37–60). Lanham, MD: Roman & Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Klausner, M., & Small, J. (2005). Failing to govern. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 3, 42–50.
   Google Scholar
• Meier, K. J., & O’Toole, L. J. (2006). Political control versus bureaucratic values: Reframing the debate. Public Administration Review, 66(2), 177–192.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mullins, D. R., & Pagano, M. A. (2005). Local budgeting and finance: 25 Years of developments. Public Budgeting & Finance, 25(4s), 3–45.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson, K. L., Gabris, G. T., & Davis, T. J. (2011). What Makes Municipal Councils Effective? An empirical analysis of how council members perceive their group interactions and processes. State and Local Government Review, 43(3), 196–204.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson, K. L., & Nollenberger, K. (2011). Conflict and cooperation in municipalities: Do variations in form of government have an effect? Urban Affairs Review, 47(5), 696–720.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rice, R., Delagardelle, M., Buckton, M., Jons, C., Lueders, W., Vens, M. J., et al. (2000). The lighthouse inquiry: School board/superintendent team behaviors in school districts with extreme differences in student achievement. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association 2001 Annual Meeting. Seattle, WA.
   Google Scholar
• Richards, E. (2011). Choice schools not outperforming MPS. Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. Retrieved from http://www.jsonline.com/news/education/118820339.html
   Google Scholar
• Richards, E. (2013). 88% of Wisconsin public schools make the grade in newest report cards. Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. Retrieved from http://www.jsonline.com/news/education/updated-report-cards-for-states-pubic-schools-to-be-released-today-b9999728z1-224055051.html
   Google Scholar
• Roza, M. (2013). How current education decision governance distorts financial decision making. In P. Manna & P. McGuinn (Eds.), Education governance for the twenty-first century (pp. 36–57). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
   Google Scholar
• Smoley, E. R. (1999). Effective school boards: Strategies for improving board performance. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Svara, J. (1990). Official leadership in the city: Patterns of conflict and cooperation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Walser, N. (2009). The essential school board book: Better governance in the age of accountability. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wong, K. (2013). Education Governance in performance-based federalism. In P. Manna & P. McGuinn (Eds.), Education governance for the twenty-first century (pp. 156–177). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zimmermann, J. A. M., & Stevens, B. W. (2008). Best practices in board governance: Evidence from South Carolina. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 19(2), 189–202.
   Google Scholar