Articles in the Governance category

School board members need to be aware of ALEC, other anti-public education groups

Once upon a time there was a rather odd North Carolina school board member who proposed that all purchasing orders in his very large district — from pencils, to books, to paper clips, to cleaning supplies — be posted online. It was a move that, not surprisingly, would have required the cash-strapped district to hire several additional central office staff, just to keep up with the paperwork.

If this sounds like a very bad fairy tale, well, it isn’t. The board member in question was no ordinary public servant, but a member of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), an ultraconservative advocacy group whose main tactic is to introduce literally thousands of bills each year in state legislatures across the country, many aimed at privatizing public education. Three years ago, ALEC called for the abolishment of school boards, so you have some idea where it stands.

“So if you see something that looks, I would say, overly bizarre, ask some questions,” said Leanne Winner, director of governmental relations for the North Carolina School Boards Association.

Better yet, go to an ALEC meeting. Really. At least you’ll know what they’re up to – and what kind of legislation could be headed to a statehouse near you.

“Knowing what the conversation is — [that’s] the first step to fighting the legislation,” said Janice Palmer, director of governmental relations for the Arizona School Boards Association.

Palmer and Winner joined Roberta E. Stanley, NSBA’s director of federal affairs, for a Monday morning session at NSBA’s Federal Relations Network (FRN) meeting called “Molding the K-12 Debate,” which dealt with the outsized influence of ALEC and the slightly-less-radical Foundation for Excellence in Education (FEIE), founded by former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush.

“One thing they have is money,” Stanley said of ALEC, which is backed by the owners of Wal-Mart and other billionaires. “Copious amounts of money.”

Typically, the bills ALEC introduces in state legislatures come from the same template, barely tweaked to fit a particular state. Sometimes lawmakers introduce them virtually verbatim. Arizona has been a target for years.

“ALEC has seen Arizona as an incubator for model legislation, especially in the area of school choice,” Palmer said.

The state has more than 500 charter schools of varying quality, and statewide public school choice – with districts paying the cost of transportation. Arizona’s public schools are the second worst funded in the country. Yet about $60 million that could have gone to public schools has been funneled to private and religious schools via tax credits.

Lawrence Hardy|January 28th, 2013|Categories: FRN Conference 2013, Governance, National School Boards Action Center, Privatization|Tags: , , , , , , |

ESEA Reauthorization key for NSBA this year

Urging Congress to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA)—and seeking sponsors for a bill to shield local school board control from federal intrusion —are key initiatives of NSBA this year.

That was the message delivered by Reginald Felton, NSBA’s assistant executive director for congressional relations, at a Monday policy briefing at the Federal Relations Network (FRN) meeting in Washington, D.C.

When school leaders visit Capitol Hill this week to meet with lawmakers, they need to emphasize the importance of putting the ESEA reauthorization back on track, he told conference attendees.

“They need to know how intensely you want to move the bill forward,” Felton said. “You have to give them a reason to help them get moving.”

In response to intense criticism over the use of sanctions, as well as other flaws, in the No Child Left Behind Act—the last reauthorization of ESEA—the U.S. Department of Education has responded with waivers to ease some of the excesses of the law. But that’s not enough, Felton insisted.

“We don’t want a quick fix. We don’t want reauthorization to go away [as a priority]. We need a bill that addresses what we need done so the law is more effective.”

At least one audience member expressed frustration with lawmakers, who offer their support yet have repeatedly failed to advance a reauthorization bill to a vote. Felton acknowledged the problem but said that, if school board members don’t make their voices heard, lawmakers certainly will put reauthorization on the backburner.

But when school leaders are face-to-face with lawmakers, he warned, they should not settle for a general statement of support—what’s needed is a specific commitment, whether it’s a promise to co-sponsor legislation or lobby fellow lawmakers to support action.

“If they say, ‘I’m with you,’ then define what ‘I’m with you’ means,” he said.

Meanwhile, Felton also encouraged school leaders to seek co-sponsors for NSBA’s new legislative proposal to protect local school district governance from unnecessary and counter‐productive federal intrusion from the federal education department.

The bill would require the Education Department to establish that new regulations, grant requirements, and other regulatory material is consistent with the intent of federal law and are “educationally, operationally, and financial supportable at the local level.”

The bill is a response to the Obama administration’s increasing practice to guide local and state education policy by tying access to federal funds to new rules and regulations designed to advanced administration policies—and not based on federal legislation that, at least, is more subject to public and legislative deliberation.

“We don’t want local school board authority to continue to be eroded because of what’s happening at the federal level.”

Del Stover|January 28th, 2013|Categories: Educational Legislation, Federal Advocacy, FRN Conference 2013, Governance|Tags: , , , |

Expanded K-12 privatization on the horizon

School board members can expect continued political activity to promote charter schools, vouchers, school choice options, and to expand the privatization of K-12 education.

That was the message of Roberta Stanley, NSBA’s director of federal affairs, who gave a political update on these issues Monday at the Federal Relations Network (FRN) Annual Conference in Washington, D.C.

The charter school movement currently dominates efforts to redesign the traditional public school system, she told conference attendees. At least 1.8 million children—or 4 percent of the K-12 student population—currently are enrolled in publicly funded charter schools.

“Charters are the big name in the game today,” Stanley said, noting that they enjoy strong political support from some urban mayors, governors, state lawmakers, and such federal officials as Education Secretary Arne Duncan and President Obama.

Helping fuel this policy push is money from several large foundations, as well as private entrepreneurs who see the opportunity to tap into billions of dollars in education funding.

NSBA policy isn’t to oppose charter schools but to insist that their authorization and their accountability be the responsibility of school boards, so that the future of children’s educational opportunities remains under the control of the local community, she said.

Accountability is an issue that’s going to continue to surround the charter school movement in the years ahead, Stanley said. More data is needed on the academic performance of these schools, and state and federal lawmakers will need to address better procedures for closing down poor-performing charters.

Although school voucher advocates still are active, school board members will find that a more fast-growth phenomenon is the “explosion of cyber, virtual, and online schools,” Stanley said.

Enrollment in virtual schools is growing at a rate of about 3 percent annually, yet some studies suggest these schools aren’t successful for all students, she said.

That’s not to say that online schools have no future role in K-12 education, Stanley added.

“I understand one of the best [roles] for cyber schools is credit recovery, working with kids who lag behind or are homebound or sick,” or to expand course offerings in smaller or rural schools, she said.

Where school leaders need to watch carefully is in states where state policymakers are too eager to push all-day online learning or seek to use virtual schools as a cheap alternative to brick-and-mortar schools.

“Students need oversight. Students need to be taught to be civic-minded, to learn teamwork-building skills,” Stanley said. “We don’t get that with a child sitting in his or her bedroom at a computer.”

To strengthen its advocacy efforts on these issues, NSBA works with a coalition of 60 education and civil rights groups to broaden the message that serious issues remain to be addressed regarding school choice, she added. This coalition also seeks to block poor policy decisions that will hurt public education.

“This is as sharp a coalition as I’ve ever worked with,” Stanley said. “And we are right on top of it, so we can try to nip these things in the bud.”

Del Stover|January 28th, 2013|Categories: Charter Schools, Federal Advocacy, Federal Programs, FRN Conference 2013, Governance, Legislative advocacy, Online learning, Privatization, School Boards, School Reform, School Vouchers|Tags: , |

Kentucky leads on Common Core

When its state legislature passed the Kentucky Education Reform Act more than two decades ago, the Bluegrass State was lauded as a leader in K-12 education reform.

“In 1990, we were the darling,” said David Baird, associate executive director of the Kentucky School Boards Association. “Everyone was looking to Kentucky and saying, ‘What a wonderful reform you have done.’”

Kentucky basked in that praise for many years – maybe too many years, Baird said Monday. Like just about every other state, even with education reform, too many of its high school graduates were needing remediation when they got to college.

But Kentucky snapped out of its complacency in 2009 when the legislature passed Senate Bill 1, a new education reform initiative that just happened to dovetail nicely with the Common Core State Standards Initiative. Once again, Kentucky was the first state to raise the bar.

Baird and Patte Barth, director of NSBA’s Center for Public Education, talked Monday morning at the Federal Relations Network (FRN) meeting in Washington, D.C., about what school districts should expect from the Common Core – and what the Common Core expects of them. Described as “fewer, clearer, higher,” the new standards aim to help all students be prepared for college or the 21st century workforce.

A state-led program sponsored by the Council of Chief State School Officers and the National Governors Association, the Common Core standards in math and language arts have so far been embraced by 46 states and the District of Columbia. It is built upon the strengths of current state standards.

“[NSBA] supports these because they are state-led,” Barth said, but added that the organization expects more financial support for the program.

“We support more funding to go to research and support of assessments,” Barth said.

Two consortia are developing assessments to align with the common core. The assessments are scheduled to be released during the 2014-15 school year; it’s a scenario that doesn’t give school districts a lot of time.

Among the biggest changes in language arts standards will be a new emphasis on exploring and analyzing nonfiction texts, Barth said. She said U. S. students score highly on international comparisons on their ability to analyze fiction, but do less well on expository texts.

Some English teachers have been critical of the standards, believing it would force them to limit the teaching of literature, but Barth said the aim is to spread the requirements for nonfiction reading across the curriculum and to all teachers.

 

Lawrence Hardy|January 28th, 2013|Categories: FRN Conference 2013, Governance, National Standards, School Boards, School Reform|Tags: , , , , , , |

School leaders can encourage research-based parental involvement

Research shows that parental involvement in schools is a reliable predictor of student success. The more extensive the involvement of parents, the greater the gains in student achievement.

So the question for most school boards isn’t whether they should be increasing parental involvement but how they should be doing so. Board members gathered in Washington, D.C., for NSBA’s Federal Relations Network (FRN) meeting heard from several board members talking about research-based methods at a Monday morning breakout session.

Sue Hull, school board member of Alaska’s Fairbanks North Star Borough, emphasized that the research on parental involvement methods was solid. “So often we go on our experiences, but it’s also what the research has shown,” she said.

Hull outlined the six types of parental involvement: Parenting classes, communication, volunteering, learning at home, advocacy and decision making, and community collaboration. She also discussed how school board could avoid some of the traps of trying to increase parental involvement from a school governance standpoint.

One way to tailor the type parental involvement boards want with the kind of results in achievement they want. “Different activities produce different gains,” she said. “Comprehensive approach is for broad gains. A focused approach leads to targeted gains.”

For individual student achievement gains, expand personal communications such as face-to-face and phones calls. Focusing on home learning, such as requiring parental signatures on homework, and engaging parents in decision-making and advocacy also leads to individual gains in achievement.

To improve the overall quality and achievement for an entire school, engage parents in school decision-making and advocacy. Invite parents in for discussions on identifying school needs and enhance volunteer programs “Volunteers are your natural advocate,” said Hull.

“There are principals who would prefer not have parents come in the door. But district leadership can encourage more participation,” said speaker Chuck Saylors, a school board member in Greenville, S.C. Saylors became the National PTA’s first male president in 2007.

To ensure more parental participation in schools and the district, the board should set clear, measurable annual goals. “Get as specific as possible,” said Hull. Also include parent engagement in staff evaluations, starting at the top with the superintendent and going on down to principals and teachers.

Make sure that these efforts are back with “necessary budget support,” said Hull and also that someone is responsible for the parental involvement efforts.

Saylors’ district, like many others, has a full-time staff member who deals with parental involvement issues, including the PTA.

Saylors and Hull encouraged the audience to cultivate parents as advocates of their districts to local and state lawmakers and legislators. “We have seen the power of parents,” said Saylors.

Kathleen Vail|January 28th, 2013|Categories: FRN Conference 2013, Governance, Public Advocacy|Tags: , |

Get your legislators’ attention, school board members told

With legislative debates looming in Congress over sequestration, the federal debt ceiling, immigration reform, gun control, and more, school board members looking to influence federal education policy have their work cut out for them.

That’s the assessment of Norman J. Ornstein, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and a respected observer of the national political scene.

“You’re going to need every talent you can muster when you go to [Capitol] Hill,” he told school leaders planning to visit federal lawmakers as part of NSBA’s Federal Relations Network (FRN) Annual Conference in Washington, D.C. He spoke at the meeting on Sunday. “Be sure that you get your legislators’ attention.”

Members of Congress are distracted by more than just the legislative challenges that lie ahead, he said. Among Republicans, the re-election of President Obama has some party members questioning the GOP’s hard-line stance on some issues—a stance that some believe has hurt the party’s support among the young, minorities, and other constituency groups whose support will be needed to win future elections.

These questions are all the more unsettling to Republicans because, in the final weeks of the 2012 campaign, some party leaders were convinced GOP candidate Mitt Romney had pulled ahead of the president in the polls—and thus his defeat was all the more shocking.

Amidst their soul-searching, some Republicans are questioning whether it’s time to show the American people some legislative accomplishments, even if it means some compromise with Democrats. It’s a position that has support among some older, influential members of the Senate who are looking to their legacy as legislative leaders.

One possible sign of this new attitude was the end-of-year compromise that put off across-the-board federal budget cuts—the so-called “fiscal cliff,” Ornstein says. In the Senate, 89 senators approved the deal, even though its passage led to an increase in some taxes. At the same time, a small group of senators from both parties is working on immigration policy reform.

“We have a very interesting dynamic at work,” he said.

None of this suggests that a new bipartisan attitude is taking hold in Congress, he warned. Partisan divisions still run deep, and lawmakers face formidable political pressure to hold to the party line. Among House Republicans, in particular, he said, the threat of a primary challenge from unhappy conservatives back home is potent.

What it does mean is that Congress may be stirring from its legislative gridlock and that school board members may face a challenge focusing lawmakers on education issues.

“To get the attention of legislators, to get them to focus on the long overdue need for reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act … to make sure we continue to expand our ability to educate and prepare the next generation for our workforce … it is no easy task.”

Del Stover|January 28th, 2013|Categories: 2012 Presidential race, Educational Legislation, Federal Advocacy, Federal Programs, FRN Conference 2013, Governance, Leadership, Legislative advocacy, Public Advocacy|Tags: , , |

FRN meeting kicks off with rally to protect federal funds, promote school board governance

Participants in the National School Boards Association’s Federal Relations Network will focus on stopping planned budget cuts to federal K-12 programs, advocating for a bill to promote local school board governance, and pushing yet again to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.

At the opening session the more than 700 attendees also learned about what NSBA leaders are calling the “New NSBA,” the organization’s plan to focus further on advocacy for school board governance and public education.

With Congress having “kicked the can” on dealing with the debt ceiling and sequestration’s across-the-board program cuts now slated to take effect around March 1, FRN attendees have come to Washington at an opportune time to influence members on Capitol Hill, said Michael A. Resnick, NSBA’s associate executive director for federal advocacy and public policy. The session served as the kick-off point for the annual FRN conference meeting, where attendees selected by their state associations spend two days being briefed on current topics and then lobby their members of Congress.

On sequestration, Resnick noted that after the deal reached to raise tax levels at the new year, federal programs will be subject to an across-the-board cut of 5.9 percent on March 1, and those cuts will continue for the next nine years. That means for every 5,000 students in a school district, those districts will lose about $250,000, or more if they receive Title I funds for disadvantaged populations.

But keep in mind K-12 programs make up less than one percent of the entire federal budget, and while cuts would be significant to school operations it would be miniscule to managing federal debt, Resnick said.

“When it comes to education we will not sacrifice the vehicle our children need to tackle the economic situation ahead,” he said. “A child does not get to re-do an inadequately funded third-grade education, or the years after.”

NSBA President C. Ed Massey emphasized that public education is being attacked by people who want to privatize systems for their own profit.

“I am so tired of hearing about the cost or expense of education,” Massey said. “Education is not a cost or expense—it is the greatest investment our public can make.”

NSBA has also proposed legislation that would seek to prevent the U.S. Department of Education from overreaching its authority. The proposed bill prohibits the Education Department, in the absence of specific legislation, from issuing a regulation or grant condition that would interfere with local governance, require the Education Department to go through a more rigorous process that would allow school boards and others to comment, and each year require an annual report to Congress on public education law.

Massey also introduced new NSBA Executive Director Thomas J. Gentzel, who joined the organization in December. Massey noted that the NSBA Board of Directors undertook an exhaustive process to find a leader.

Gentzel spoke about the increased legislative advocacy of the new NSBA based on the phrase “from, with and through.” That means more legislation and other initiatives will come from NSBA, the organization will partner with other like-minded groups to promote legislation and other initiatives. Most importantly, he noted, NSBA will mount a strong defense against any proposal that would harm public education or school board governance.

“They’re going to have to come through us to get that done,” Gentzel said. Further, he added, “We are facing a critical moment right now in terms of public education.”

Resnick also noted that in spite of naysayers who use terms such as “failing schools,” data and test scores show that public school students are improving.

And while some naysayers criticize the institution of school boards, Resnick noted that local school board members, the vast majority of whom are elected to their jobs, have proven to be a far more effective governance structure than Congress, which continues to stall on dealing with the debt ceiling and budget cuts, favors continuing resolutions instead of new budgetary guidelines, and has not reauthorized ESEA in 11 years.

 

 

Joetta Sack-Min|January 27th, 2013|Categories: Board governance, Federal Advocacy, Federal Programs, FRN Conference 2013, Governance, Legislative advocacy, Policy Formation, Privatization, School Reform, State School Boards Associations|

Gettysburg offers lessons in school leadership

On the first day of the Battle of Gettysburg, Union cavalry commander John Buford rode into the small Pennsylvania town with 2,900 men—and soon realized he was facing an attacking Confederate force of 13,500. It was not an ideal situation.

But what came next offers a useful lesson for school leaders today. Rather than bemoan his lack of resources, Buford made the most of the men under his command—and successfully delayed the Confederate advance long enough for Union reinforcements to arrive.

“Successful leaders make the most of the resources and assets at hand,” said Michael McGough, an associate professor of education at Pennsylvania’s York College and amateur historian. At Gettysburg, Buford “got the most out of what was at his disposal.”

That was Lesson 3 of McGough’s Sunday morning presentation, “Leadership Under Fire: Lessons from the Battle of Gettysburg,” the closing general session of the NSBA’s Leadership Conference in Washington, D.C.

It may seem unusual to seek education leadership information from a 150-year-old battle fought with rifled muskets and horse-drawn cannon. But McGough argued that the decisions made at Gettysburg—the pivotal battle of the Civil War—still offer significant lessons for 21st century leaders.

One of those lessons, McGough said, is that “great leaders know, understand, can articulate, and hold steadfast to an end goal.”

Abraham Lincoln showed such resolve, he said. Since the beginning of the war, the president had made clear that his goal was to preserve the union—and all his decisions served to advance that goal.

“Good leaders, the best leaders, know how to do that,” McGough said. “The best leaders hold steadfast to the end goal. In your boardrooms, in your discussions, at your board retreats … somebody has got to have that end goal in mind, somebody has to get up and say, ‘This is where we need to end up.’”

Another important lesson from the battle is that strong leaders can offer and accept hard truths, he said. One mistake Gen. Robert E. Lee made during the battle was his failure to heed the blunt warning of his corps commander, Lt. Gen. James Longstreet, that what was to become known as “Pickett’s Charge” was an attack doomed to failure.

“It can be difficult, in a power situation, to accept the truth,” McGough said. What’s more, “in your careers and your service on boards, you have come to situations where you knew something had to be said … you were afraid of a change that was needed, a danger that was approaching. It can be difficult to tell truth to power.”

At Gettysburg, he noted, Longstreet showed great courage in speaking his mind to Lee, who paid a high price for dismissing the warning. The subsequent attack resulted in more than 8,000 Confederate casualties and ended any hope of a Southern victory.

In the aftermath of the battle, the actions of the rival army commanders underscored another valuable lesson: “Real leaders know what comes next and they are prepared to act on that knowledge.”

The Union Commander, Gen. George Meade, showed no such understanding of this maxim after the battle. Content that his army was intact, McGough said, Meade failed to follow up his victory and pursue the shattered Confederate force. Meanwhile, Lee fully recognized the need to retreat and successfully preserved his army—a feat that historians say allowed the Confederacy to continue the war for almost two more years.

The final lesson that McGough shared was that the “best leaders understand and use the power of their words.”

No better example of this lesson exists than the Gettysburg Address, in which Lincoln, in fewer than 300 words, laid out the policy foundation for Reconstruction and, arguably, shaped the evolution of the nation to this day.

“Abraham Lincoln set the stage to heal an entire nation, a nation that had suffered more casualties in this one war than any all others combined,” McGough said. “He knew the power of words and … used them.”

Del Stover|January 27th, 2013|Categories: Governance, Leadership Conference 2013|Tags: , , , , , , |

School board associations help in times of crisis

Robert J. Rader, executive director of the Connecticut Association of Boards of Education (CABE), was having lunch with a friend when he heard the news about Newtown.

“You feel it emotionally. You feel it physically,” Rader said Saturday at NSBA’s Leadership Conference’s Second General Session on serving your members in times of crisis. “That changed everything.”

Except, of course, the duty of CABE to do everything it could to support Newtown’s schools and its member districts across the state. School board members usually think that student achievement is their highest calling, Rader said. But crises like the one in Newtown remind us that securing the well-being of students is a prerequisite, the number one job.

The shootings happened on a Friday; by Saturday night, Rader and his staff had posted information for school board members on how to try to prevent such as tragedy, and how to deal with shootings and the aftermath.

Rader was joined in the Saturday session by Michael Waldrop, executive director of the Mississippi School Boards Association, and Lawrence Feinsod, executive director of the New Jersey School Boards Association.

The devastation of Hurricane Katrina is still very much in Waldrop’s mind. While New Orleans got the most attention, little Bay Saint Louis, on Mississippi’s Gulf Coast, was “ground zero” for the storm, which pushed 12-foot tide surges as far as 12 miles inland.

“And when it went out to the Gulf of Mexico, it carried everything with it,” Waldrop said.

Throughout the region, homes and many schools were reduced to mere slabs. “How do we start school when we don’t even have buildings?” – that was the refrain of some superintendents.

The association responded by contacting makers of modular units, as well as tent venders, and distributed the information to all affected school districts so overwhelmed officials wouldn’t have to do that research themselves. The association opened a trust fund to buy relief supplies. A modest $150,000 was collected, but that money went far.

“We’re trying to set our office up. We need 20 computers,” one superintendent told Waldrop, and he said. ”The next day they had 20 computers.”

New Jersey sustained $37 billion in damage from Superstorm Sandy last fall. Even the school boards association had to close for five days because it was without power, Feinsod said. When it was up and running, he added, “we knew we had to do something, and we had to do it quickly.”

Over the course of 72 hours, Feinsod and his staff contacted all 586 school districts in the state, a mammoth undertaking that got results.

“One group reached out to us in this very complex state,” one school official told Feinsod. “And it was the school boards association.”

Lawrence Hardy|January 26th, 2013|Categories: Board governance, Crisis Management, Governance, Leadership Conference 2013, State School Boards Associations|Tags: , , , , , , , , |

Speaker gives tips on creating a change-friendly culture

Jim Bearden is an authority on change. You might say he wrote the book on change, or at least a book: The Relentless Search for Better Ways. But last summer, when the popular speaker, consultant, and fitness buff heard these sobering words from his cardiologist, all those lofty ideas about accepting and embracing change were put to the test:

“I don’t like what I’m seeing” the doctor said.

Bearden’s artery was 80 percent clogged. He had open heart surgery, and was told by his doctor to become a vegan (“You know what a vegan means?” the native Texan said. “It means if it has a Momma or a face on it, you can’t eat it.”)

Bearden changed his diet, big-time, and did indeed become a vegan; but here’s the interesting thing: faced with similar life-threatening diagnosis and calls to change their lifestyles, he said, only 10 percent of patients would comply.

The same aversion to change is present when individuals get together –in businesses, associations, and other institutions, Bearden said at the opening general session of NSBA’s Leadership Conference Saturday. And it can be equally fatal. Faced with change, “some do what I call hunker down and hope,” Bearden said. But others “look for ways to win, regardless of the hands they’re dealt.”

It is these organizations that are successful.

Bearden outlined seven steps that create a change-friendly culture in an organization. First, ensure that others — your employees, for example — understand what you expect from them. And, if you run a state association, be sure you know what your members expect from you. That requires communication, not just selling your organization.

“It’s a whole lot more about asking and listening than pitching and hoping,” Bearden said.

Among the other steps: identify and eliminate barriers to the behavior you expect, model that behavior, measure performance using your expectations as standards, and honor effort and progress. The goal is to create an organization in which taking well-considered risks is embedded in the culture.

“To me, culture is to an association what attitude is to an individual,” Bearden said.

Risk-taking – change – means there will be setbacks, Bearden said. It comes with the territory.

“The choices you make regarding those setbacks count more.”

Lawrence Hardy|January 26th, 2013|Categories: Board governance, Governance, Leadership, Leadership Conference 2013, School Boards|Tags: |
Page 5 of 232« First...34567...102030...Last »