THE SCHOOL BOARD
By both tradition and legal interpretation, school boards are policy-making bodies for local school districts. The local school board is an instrument of the state government, subject to its control. School board members are agents of the state, subject tot he will of the legislature. They derive their authority from the state.
A Brief History of Local School Boards
Our present system of public education and our model of governance have their roots in the New England colonies. When it was recognized that education was more than a family responsibility, provisions were made for more formal schooling opportunities for children in the New England colonies. Although the record is not clear, it appears that the earliest schools were started voluntarily in larger towns. These schools were governed, as were other governmental functions, largely by decisions made in town meetings. True local control actually existed in such situations.
People soon recognized that many children in the colonies were not being provided the opportunity to receive formal schooling under this arrangement. Appeals to the colonial legislature resulted in action to remedy this situation. Consequently, the Massachusetts Acts of 1642 and 1647 followed, requiring schools to be established in the various towns and villages. These acts established the right of the state to expect its citizens to be literate, and to become educated at least to the degree possible in those early public schools. In many cases officials of the towns were allowed to require parents to teach their children to read, to understand the principles of religion, and to know the laws of the country.
In 1650, the Connecticut Laws were passed, giving the state the authority to remove children from their homes and place them with guardians if they were not receiving the education expected of them by the state. Parents were expected to ensure that their children learned, and masters were held responsible for assuring that their apprentices received a basic education.
For the most part, these early schools were not governed by anything resembling our current boards of education. Frequently control came about from actions taken at town meetings. In many villages this control soon passed to a local minister who became the equivalent of today’s administrator, supervisor, and school board. This single-person control eventually gave way to so-called select committees, sometimes composed of elders and ministers of the churches, but often including lay citizens in their membership. These select committees functioned in a very similar fashion to the school boards of today. This system of governance by citizens of the community continues to the present time with numerous modifications in authority, power, and control.
In California, much public debate took place over education and whether or not it should be supported by public funds or left to the control of private sources, especially the Catholic Church. As early as 1847, San Francisco’s California Star argued strongly for the building of public schools (Hendrick, 1980). Due largely to its efforts, a five-member school board was elected in San Francisco. Public funds were set aside to build a school and to partially pay a teacher’s salary. In addition to receiving some public financial support, additional money was raised by charging tuition for the students who attended. Tuition was based on the program of education selected by the students who attended. Tuition was based on the program of education selected by the student. The 3 Rs and geography cost five dollars per quarter. Grammar grades were available at six dollars. In addition, the following was provided (Ferrier, 1937):
In any or all of the foregoing, together with mental and moral science, ancient and modern history, chemistry and natural philosophy, it was $8. In any or all of the foregoing together with geometry, trigonometry, algebra, astronomy, surveying, and navigation, it was $10. With any of the foregoing, together with Latin and Greek, the fee was $12 per quarter. If any persons were unable to pay the tuition fee, admittance was to be free. (p. 24)
In September 1849, delegates met in Monterey, California, to draft the state’s first constitution. The constitution provided for the election of a superintendent of public instruction. By that date, this had only been done in four other states through the constitutional process. A framework was created for a common school system operated by local townships under the supervision of an elected superintendent of public instruction. Subsequent legislation provided for some tax monies to be raised and apportioned throughout the state for school purposes.
San Francisco appears to have been the first city to take advantage of the new public school laws in California. The city council adopted a Free School Ordinance in September, 1851. The ordinance provided for the establishment, regulation, and support of free public schools. A board of education was created with powers very similar to school boards today. Among the powers and responsibilities of the board were the following: appoint a superintendent, hire teachers, inspect the schools at least twice a year, purchase property, build schools, and prescribe a course of study.
Source of Law Governing School Boards
The United States Constitution does not provide authority for a system of public schools. Every state constitution has provisions for some kind of public education system (although a 1956 amendment to Alabama’s constitution said that the state is not required to provide public education [Education U.S.A., 1991]). It is generally recognized that education is one of the sovereign powers of the state. In 1924, the California Supreme Court (Piper v. Big Pine) ruled that education of the children of the state is:
exclusively the function of the state which cannot be delegated to any other agency. . . . It is an obligation which the state took over to itself by the adoption of the constitution. To accomplish the purpose therein expressed, the people must keep under their exclusive control, through their representatives (emphasis added), the education of [the citizens of the state].
Thus, local school boards are instruments of state government and in the final analysis, subject to the control of the state. A California appellate court decision in 1956 stated “school districts are agencies of the state for the local operation of the state school system” (Hall v. City of Taft, 1956).
In addition to the California Constitution, there are a number of other state sources of law that impact the public school program. The major one is the California education Code which contains codified statutes dealing with education that have been passed by the Legislature. Another major source for school officials is Title V of the California Administrative Code. Sometimes called Title V of the California Code of Regulations, it is a compilation of the policies of the State Board of Education. These policies have the effect of law upon the operation of public schools throughout the state. Numerous other state codes such as the Vehicle Code, Health and Safety Code, government Code, and Labor Code include individual sections that occasionally have an impact on the operation of public education. Decisions reached in the state judicial system often deal with educational issues. They have varying effects on the schools of the state depending upon the level of the court that has made the decision.
Beyond the state level, many federal sources also determine what can and cannot be done in the public schools in the State of California. Although the U.S. Constitution does not say anything specifically about public education, the general welfare clause (Article I, Section 8) has been interpreted as giving congress the power to tax for broad social purposes including the support of formal educational activities. In recent years as Congress has approved a number of special programs, a proliferation of rules and regulations has accompanied the federal funding received on the local level. Other federal and state legislation dealing with a variety of topics including civil rights has had a major impact on the way school officials have fulfilled their responsibilities on the local level. Along with the U.S. Constitution and federal legislation, the federal court system, up to and including the United States Supreme Court, has exerted great influence on the operation of public schools throughout the country through decisions reached on numerous school-related cases.
Characteristics of School Board Members
In previous years school board membership was very low key and members were involved in few conflicts. However, since the late 1970s, societal changes have resulted in growing difficulties for school boards. Board members have become embroiled in many controversial issues and are expected to be knowledgeable about a multitude of subjects including finance, personnel, curriculum, and facilities.
Counts (1928) conducted a study of characteristics of school trustees in 1927. Although many changes have taken place in the way school boards function and the issues that come before the boards from the community; little has changed regarding the characteristics of the trustees themselves. Most are employed as professionals or managers. Economically, the majority are upper middle-class with an income that is above average. Although recent trends have seen higher numbers of females and minorities serving on school boards, white males still dominate board membership. Most recent estimates indicate that about 70 percent have been male and the majority of these have been Caucasian (Campbell, Cunningham, Nystrand, & Usdan, 1990).
There are a number of motives for wishing to have a school board position. Some people represent special interest groups within the community and consider service a way to promote the viewpoints of the particular group represented. Others are truly community-oriented and simply wish to help make the schools more effective in serving the children of the district. Still others are motivated by certain personal goals, including having an axe-to-grind or perhaps having further political aspirations. Studies have indicated that relatively few people actually show much interest in higher office although this is not always the case (Zeigler, Jennings, & Peak, 1974). In fact, in the California Legislature there are a number of Assembly members and Senators who started their political careers as school board members. Several members of Congress representing California initially served as members of school boards. One well-known national politician whose first elected position was on a school board is former President Jimmy Carter (Wirt & Kirst, 1989).
Types of School Boards
California uses a three-tier system of school boards: local, county, and state. Each of these boards has a different function and operates under separate authority.
The Local School Board in California
In California, the State Constitution (Articles 9 and 16) provides the authority for the establishment of local school boards. The specific powers of the local board are determined by action of the Legislature. Such legislation, when signed by the governor, or upon becoming law without the governor’s signature, is placed in the Education Code (or in certain instances placed in other California Codes). In the Education Code the governing board is commonly referred to as the school board. According to the Education Code every school district in the state is governed by a board of education or board of school trustees (Education Code §35010). The powers and duties of a school board are detailed in the code. Education Code Section 35290 indicates that the governing board of any school district shall maintain schools and classes as provided by law. Education Code Section 35291 states that the governing board shall prescribe rules not inconsistent with law or with the rules prescribed by the State Board of Education for the government and discipline of the schools under its jurisdiction.
Prior to 1976, it was generally assumed that boards had no authority to act unless the Education Code specifically granted that power. In that year Education code Section 35160 was added; thus codifying the State Constitutional Amendment of 1972 and changing the Education Code to what is know as a permissive code. This section of the code changed the way boards were able to operate as follows:
On or after January 1, 1976, the governing board of any school district may initiate and carry on any program, activity, or may otherwise act in any manner which is not in conflict with or inconsistent with, or preempted by, any law and which is not in conflict with the purpose for which school districts are established.
Unfortunately, in many instances legal advisors to school districts interpret the code as if its provisions were applied prior to the change in law to make it a permissive code. Legal advice of this kind often counsels school boards not to take some action unless it is directly authorized by statute.
State Board of Education
In addition to local boards of education, California also has a State Board of Education with members appointed by the governor. Provisions for this board are found in the California Constitution in Articles 7, 7.5, and 9. The State Board has been granted power to adopt needed rules and regulations for all public schools in California as long as they are not in opposition to state law or the state’s constitution. Such regulations are placed in Title V of the California Code of Regulations and have the effect of law on school districts and their operations statewide. Title V, along with the Education Code, is a major source of school law in the state.
County Boards of Education
Based on the state constitution and legislation, provisions exist for a board of education in each county. It is possible under some circumstances to have a joint county board of education elected for two or more counties (California Constitution 9, 3.2). County boards of education work with the county superintendent of schools adopting rules, regulations, and budgets for the operation of that office. They county superintendent’s office is responsible for a number of different duties which vary somewhat from county to county depending upon the number of students served in the public schools of the county and the financial support available. In general, services provided include credentialing and related monitoring of teacher assignments, special education programs, business advisory services, and curriculum and instruction assistance to local districts.
Duties and Powers of Local Boards
The local district board of education is the agency that actually operates the public schools of California under authority delegated by the Legislature. Due to a number of restrictions imposed by legislative action and court decisions, both federal and state, local boards and not able to exercise the degree of local control often expected by the public and employees of the district. Although a complete listing of the duties and powers of local governing boards would be extensive, a condensed version developed by Falk (1968) reflects the major duties and powers of the board as follows:
1. To formulate local district policy (budgetary, personnel, educational, disciplinary) under the law.
2. To employ the superintendent and staff as well as other certificated and classified employees. . . of the district. The board alone may hire personnel, usually on the recommendation of the superintendent.
3. To buy land, build, and maintain schools, authorize bond elections, and offer services authorized by law.
4. To hold board meetings and keep records thereof and to see that all required district records (financial, attendance, and so on) are kept and reported annually to the county and state.
5. To obligate the district by contracts for personnel, services, equipment, supplies, and for textbooks. . . . (pp. 72-73)
While many specific items could be added to the list, negotiations are of particular importance. Since the passage of the Rodda Act (Government Code §3540) in 1975, boards have the duty to enter into collective bargaining with employees upon request. Items agreed to in this process become part of a binding contract that further restrict the power of the local board to make decisions on matters affecting the local district.
School board involvement in students’ rights issues is also an area of some concern. Boards must ensure that policies are in place to assure students of required due process when disciplinary action such as suspension or expulsion, is considered. Suspension usually is handled at the administrative level and requires less formal due process than does expulsion which requires action by the school board. The Education Code lists grounds for expulsion, suspension, and procedures that should be reflected in policies adopted by the local board. Boards are also asked to consider requests from students for inter-district attendance transfers. School boards have the final word on such requests with an appeal to the county board of education available when an inter-district attendance transfer request is denied. The local board also has the duty under the state constitution to provide safe, secure, and peaceful schools for the students to attend.
Selection of Boards Members
In general, any registered voter of the school district meets the basic requirements to be a candidate for election to the school board. These requirements are: Must be at least 18 years old, a registered voter, a citizen of California, and a resident of the school district (Education Code §35107). There are a few exceptions to this general rule provided by the state constitution and by state laws. For example, a person may not be a candidate for public office if he or she has sworn an oath to support a foreign government while still a citizen of the United States (Government Code §1023).
Until recently California has banned political party endorsements in elections for school board positions. This has been done with the intention of decreasing opportunities for corruption at the local level. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected that argument in 1990, stating that the ban on partisan endorsement by political parties “illegally restricts political speech” and therefore violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution (CSBA News, 1990, p. 1).
School board elections are usually held on the Tuesday following the First Monday in November in odd-numbered years. This can be changed if school elections are consolidated with municipal elections. The school district may consolidate its election with any regular county or municipal election held on the same day. Joint districts, having territory in two counties, may not consolidate the election if one of the counties has refused to permit a consolidation. The school district must stagger the terms of the board members so that approximately one-half of the seats become vacant at each election. When the date for the election has been selected, the county clerk or the registrar of voters takes care of all the actual details needed to conduct the election.
School board members are elected for four year terms; such terms ending on the first Friday in December. If no successor has taken the required oath of office by the first Friday in December, the incumbent continues in office until such time as the new trustee has become qualified by taking the oath of office. The oath may be administered by any incumbent board member, the secretary of the board, or the superintendent of the school district.
Size of the Board
All school boards do not have the same number of members. They may be composed of three, five, or seven trustees (Education Code §35012). Most school boards in California have five members. Proposed changes in the size of the board may be made by the county committee on school district organization, by registered voters in the district, or by the board itself. Any actual change in size must be approved by the voters of the district in order to become effective.
Student Members of the Board
School districts which have at least one high school may have non-voting student representatives serving on the board. Students start the process by submitting a petition to the board requesting the appointment of one or more students as members. The petition, to be binding on the board, must have the signatures of either 10 percent of the high school students in the district or 500 high school students, whichever is smaller.
To be a candidate, the student, regardless of age, needs to be enrolled in one of the high schools of the district. The student member is chosen by the students at the appropriate hich school, and is appointed to the board by board action. Students may request more than one representative, but the board does not have to appoint more than one. Although the student member is selected by other students, the board may establish the procedures to be used by the students in making the selection.
After being appointed, the student member has the right to attend all open meetings of the school board. Student members do not have the right to attend closed sessions of the board. All board materials distributed to voting members, except for closed session materials, must also be given to student members. Student members may take part in all board discussions and planning, but may not vote on any item of board business. A 1988 survey revealed that about 33 percent of the school boards in the state had student members (California School Boards Association, 1989).
Pay for Board Services
State law allows for board members to be compensated for their services. The board must vote for such compensation in an open session. The maximum amount of money that can be paid to each trustee is based upon average daily attendance (ADA) of the district during the prior year. Table 8.1 shows the maximum amount allowable for the various size districts (California School Boards Association, 1989).
Board members do not lose compensation if they miss a meeting because they are performing services for the school district or if they miss up to two meetings due to illness each calendar year. Otherwise, a board member who fails to attend all of the board meetings receives less pay. An estimated 56 percent of board members receive stipends for board meeting attendance. In addition to such direct pay, legislation allows school trustees to receive health and welfare benefits. Throughout California, approximately 62 percent of board members are covered by their district’s fringe benefit package. The permissive provision of the Education Code also allows school districts to pay for the actual and necessary expenses of school board-related activities. Such expense reimbursement is subject to policies developed and adopted by each local board of education.
Table 8.1. Maximum Amount Allowable for Board Services.
Maximum monthly Prior Year
$60 Up to 150
$2,000 over 400,000
Vacancies on the School Board
Although school board members are elected to serve for full terms of four years and such terms do not all expire in the same years; at times vacancies might occur on the board. Based on Education Code Section 5090 and government Code Section 1023 any of the following may result in a vacancy on the school board:
1. The death of the incumbent.
2. A judicial declaration of physical or mental incapacity.
3. Resignation. If a member files a letter of resignation with the local county superintendent of schools, the resignation takes effect either on the date of the filing or on a future date specified in the letter. The resignation becomes irrevocable on the date of filing.
4. Removal from office.
5. The incumbent’s ceasing to be a citizen of the state or a resident of the school district or trustee area.
6. An absence from the state without permission for a period longer than that allowed by law.
7. The incumbent’s failure to discharge his or her duties of three consecutive months, except when the failure results from illness or a permitted absence from the state.
8. The incumbent’s conviction of a felony or any crime involving malfeasance in office.
9. The incumbent’s refusal to take the oath of office or post a required bond.
10. The decision of a court declaring the election or appointment void.
11. A judicial commitment to a hospital for substance abuse.
12. Failure to elect a member.
Filling a Vacancy
When a vacancy occurs, the school board must decide whether to fill the vacancy by appointment or by calling a special election. The appointment must be made or the election called within 60 days from the date the vacancy occurs or from the date the letter of resignation is submitted (not when it becomes effective). If the board fails to act within the 60-day period, the county superintendent will call a special election. An appointed replacement holds office only until the next regularly scheduled election. An elected replacement serves for the remaining term of the member who is being replaced.
If an appointment is made to fill the vacancy, voters of the school district have the power to cancel the appointment if they are not satisfied with it. To accomplish this it is necessary to submit a petition signed by 1.5 percent of the voters who were registered at the date of he last school election held in the district or signed by 25 voters; whichever number is greater. The provision is included because of the many small districts that exist in California. This petition must be submitted within 30 days of the appointment and will not only cancel the appointment but will also result in the calling of a special election to fill the vacancy. All costs of the special election must be assumed by the local school district.
Recall of the School Board
If the voters of a school district become dissatisfied with the performance of an individual board member they may attempt to remove the member from office prior to the end of his or her term. Registered voters can do this by petitioning for a recall election and then voting the member out of office. Voters may recall a board member for any reason that is not in violation of the Elections Code. Basically this means that a recall may not be attempted if a board member has been in office less than 90 days, has survived a recall election within the last 6 months, or has less than 6 months left until the end of the member’s term.
The recall petition must contain the name and title of the board member, the reasons for the recall, and the name(s) of from one to five residents proposing the recall. The board member has a right to respond to the charges and have the responses included on the petition before it is circulated for signatures. The petition also must contain a request for an election of a successor if the recall is successful. If the member is recalled, the voters must elect a replacement to serve the balance of the term when they vote on the recall issue.
Only registered voters who are eligible to vote for the board member subject to recall may sign the recall petition. The number of signatures necessary to force a recall election varies based on the size of the district. Proponents of the recall have between 40 and 120 days after the petition’s approval by the county clerk to collect the necessary signatures. By the end of the appropriate time period, the petition must be submitted to the county clerk who will verify the signatures and notify the school district of the result. If the petition is sufficient, the school board must order the election. If the board does not take action within two weeks, the county clerk will order the election.
According to Cloud (1952) the first recall election ever held in the United States took place in Berkeley, California, on April 30, 1912. Twenty percent of the Berkeley electors signed recall petitions to remove three members of the City Board of Education from office. These officials were recalled. At issue was the attempt by the three board members to terminate a popular school superintendent, who later served in successful administrative positions in various educational institutions.
Problems as Seen by Board Members
In the 1986-1987 school year a survey was conducted by the Institute of Educational Leadership regarding various aspects of public education. Results of that nationwide study found a number of issues that apply to California schools. School districts reported the following problems that challenge the effectiveness of local boards of education (Danzberger, Carol, Cunningham, Kirst, McCloud, & Usdan, 1987):
1. Lack of public understanding of the role of boards.
2. Poor relationships with state policymakers.
3. Improving teaching in the framework of collective bargaining.
4. Amount of time boards invest in their work versus satisfaction with the accomplishments and ability to determine their own priorities.
5. Board members reported they did not spend enough time on any one important issue.
6. Problems in becoming a unified board rather than a collection of individuals.
7. Need for board strategies and a framework to assess and communicate board effectiveness.
It is extremely important for an efficiently operated school district that a good relationship be maintained between the board and the superintendent. This requires continuing effort on the part of both parties, good communication skills, and a commitment by both to integrity, honesty, and openness with one another. Following a five-year study of superintendent turnover, Giles and Giles (1991) concluded:
. . . there is a general lack of communication between boards and superintendents which begins even during the selection process, continuing ever after. We cannot overemphasize the importance of open communication from the very beginning, including the interview and total selection process. Boards need to put time and effort up front, identifying what is really wanted in a superintendent. (p. 2)
The superintendent is employed by the board as its chief executive. The board is the policy-making body of the school district in its financial, operational, personnel, and curriculum services. Board members, individually or collectively, should not become involved with managerial or administrative detail. When they do, confusion in staff relations and strife in public relations often follow.
One of the most important responsibilities of the school board is to provide for regular evaluation of the superintendent. The board should establish a regular time to review expectations and progress toward meeting those expectations.
Local school boards, as agents of the state, exert much control over issues that take place in the individual school districts; however, as the system and policies grow more complex, local control is a less accurate description. Much local control has been lost to school boards. Opponents of local boards give a long list of failures as justification for curtailing local control. Perhaps the most powerful contenders for a share of local control are teachers’ organizations.
Most experts seem to feel that local boards, local control, and citizen or lay participation are important aspects of our educational tradition that must be continued (Campbell, Cunningham, Nystrand, & Usdan, 1990). One of the results of collective bargaining has been the concentration of power in teacher organizations. The expansion of strikes in recent years in public education is likely to provoke a harsh public reaction. The move toward shared decision-making and site-based management may bring about some positive changes in this regard.
In school systems with strong unions, there are at least two authority systems; often not in agreement with one another. Employees in such systems divide their loyalties between the union and the school board. Noteworthy educational changes can take place only if supported by both authority systems. Board members are increasingly occupied with issues that are only remotely related to classrooms. As boards are faced with increasing mandates from state and federal legislatures and from state and federal courts, they find there are fewer areas where local control is a reality. As that change occurs, much seems to be lost for the lay citizen’s role in democracy as it relates to the system of public education.
The development of school boards from the earliest days of public schooling in the New England colonies has followed a progression from the town meetings to single-person control to today’s multi-member school boards. Various sources of law have provided for the establishment of boards of education as well as giving them legal authority for their actions. In addition to local boards of education, California also has a state board of education and provisions for a board of education in each county. Each of these boards is authorized and controlled by provisions of the State Constitution as well as specific statutes enacted by the Legislature.
There are numerous problems often faced by local school boards, including two special and significant matters: first, the need for positive superintendent/board relationships, and second, the continuing erosion of local control, thereby reducing the power of boards of education throughout the state.
1. Explain five ways in which a vacancy on a school board may occur.
2. Discuss briefly the recourse that electors have if they object to an appointment made to fill a vacancy on a school board.
3. Discuss five problems perceived by board members as factors that challenge the board’s effectiveness.
4. What is the board’s role in establishing a positive relationship with the district superintendent?
5. Explain concerns held by many school boards over the issue of local control.
6. How involved should the superintendent be in working for the election of specific board candidates?
Suggested Projects or Activities
1. Attend a school board meeting and analyze the way the meeting is conducted, interaction of board members and the superintendent, and public participation.
2. Obtain board agendas from two or more school districts. Compare the agendas as to organization, format, and detail.
3. Interview the president of a school board to learn the procedures and criteria used in evaluating the superintendent. Interview the superintendent of the district to obtain his or her perspective of the procedures and criteria used in evaluating the superintendent. Compare the responses.
4. Determine the practices and policies in your district in regard to orientation of newly elected board members and/or candidates for the board.
5. Discuss with a member of your school board his or her feelings as to the role of board members in responding to complaints voiced by employees, parents, or other members of the community
California School Boards Association. (1989). School law: A guide to what every board member should know. Sacramento: Author.
Campbell, R. F., Cunningham, L. L., Nystrand, R. and Usdan, M. D. (1990). The
organization and control of American schools. Columbus, OH: Merrill.
Danzberger, J. P., Carol, L. N., Cunningham, L. L., Kirst, M. W., McCloud, B. A., and
Usdan, M. D. (1987, September). School boards: The forgotten players on the education team. Phi Delta Kappan, 69(1).
Falk, C. J. (1968). The development and organization of education in California. San
Francisco: Harcourt Brace and World.
Ferrier, W. W. (1937). Ninety years of education in California, 1846-1936. Berkeley,
CA: Sather Gate Book Shop.
Giles, S., and Giles, D. (1991, Spring). Board/superintendent relationship suggestions.
Hendrick, I. G. (1980). California education: A brief history. San Francisco: Boyd and
Wirt, F. M., and Kirst, M. W. (1989). Schools in conflict. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.
California School Boards Association. (1989). School law: A guide to what every board
member should know (p. 19). Sacramento, CA: Author.
Campbell, R. F., Cunningham, L. L., Nystrand, R. and Usdan, M. D. (1990). The
organization and control of American schools (p. 215). Columbus, OH: Merrill.
Cloud, R. W. (1952). Education in California (p. 136). Stanford: Stanford University
Counts, G. S. (1928). School and society in Chicago (p. 151). New York: Harcourt
CSBA News. (1990, September). Sacramento, CA: California School Boards
Danzberger, J. P., Carol, L. N., Cunningham, L. L., Kirst, M. W., McCloud, B. A., and
Usdan, M. D. (1987, September). School boards: The forgotten players on the education team. Phi Delta Kappan, 69(1), 53-59.
Education Codes of California. (1991). West’s Annotated Education Codes. St. Paul,
Education U.S.A. (1991, February 4). (p. 151). Arlington, VA: National School Public
Falk, C. J. (1968). The development and organization of education in California
(pp. 72-73). San Francisco: Harcourt Brace and World.
Ferrier, W. W. (1937). Ninety years of education in California, 1846-1936 (p. 24).
Berkeley, CA: Sather Gate Book Shop.
Giles, S., and Giles, D. (1991, Spring). Board/superintendent relationship suggestions.
Quest, p. 2.
Government Codes of California. (1991). West’s Annotated California Government
Codes. St. Paul, MN: West.
Hall v. City of Taft, 47 Cal. 2d 177, 181 (1956).
Hendrick, I. G. (1980). California education: A brief history (p. 7). San Francisco: Boyd
Piper v. Big Pine School District, 193 Cal. 664, 669 (1924).
Wirt, F. M., and Kirst, M. W. (1989). Schools in conflict (p. 151). Berkeley, CA:
Zeigler, L. H., Jennings, M. K., and Peak, G. W. (1974). Governing American schools.
In F. M. Wirt and M. W. Kirst (Eds.), Schools in conflict. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.