Reforming the Governance of Public Education
Public Schools are the Building Blocks of our Communities
Civic Way resumes its look at public education in America, highlighting broad themes that affect every state’s public education system. This essay is about the importance of community and the governance of public schools. In upcoming essays, we will tackle other major issues facing public education—funding, civic education, school choice and accountability. The author, Bob Melville, is the founder of Civic Way, a nonprofit dedicated to good government, and a management consultant with over 45 years of experience improving public agencies.
We cannot seek achievement for ourselves and forget about progress and prosperity for our community. – Cesar Chavez
Introduction
Our economic competitiveness is in large part a function of our public education system. When our public schools are inferior, our ability to compete for jobs on a global stage is compromised.
But economic competitiveness is not the whole story. Our public education system has another mission, to build community and foster democracy. As we debate school choice options, we should consider the implications of such decisions on governance. First, let’s revisit how public education is governed in America.
Current Public Education Governance
The US has over 13,000 public school districts with nearly 98,000 public schools[i] and 50.8 million students. In 2023, 85 percent of all pupils attended public schools, nearly ten percent attended private schools and just over five percent were homeschooled[ii]. Traditional public school enrollment fell during the pandemic[iii] may decline even more in the years ahead. Charter, private and home school enrollment have increased[iv].
The nation’s public education structure echoes its federalism. Every level of government—federal, state and local—plays an important role in public K-12 education. The federal government, led by the US Department of Education, funds only about eight percent of public K-12 education. However, it has an outsized effect on public school laws[v], education policy and accountability.
On average, state and local government each fund over 45 percent of public education costs. However, the state-local ratio varies. Some states fund over 65 percent of costs[vi] while others rely more heavily on local funding. All states play a vital role in regulating—and allocating federal and state funds to—local districts. Every state has an educational agency, some led by governors and others by independently elected officials.
Specialized local governments (i.e., school districts) run virtually all public schools. About 30 states have independent school districts[vii] while the rest have fiscally dependent school districts (usually state-dependent) or blended models. Some states require some degree of county oversight. Many school districts are coterminous with general purpose governments. Many large urban counties have multiple school districts[viii]. In other cases, school districts span several cities or counties.
Local school districts are primarily responsible for managing K-12 education operations. Typically, school districts have an unpaid board of education and an appointed superintendent. Most school boards have three to seven members elected in nonpartisan races[ix]. The US has nearly 95,000 school board members. While their duties vary, most school boards set policies, approve budgets, hire superintendents and oversee performance.
Controlling Public Spending
Until the school choice campaign arrived, the accountability question seemed settled. In every state, it was government that tracked public education spending. The national school reform movement placed great emphasis on improving government oversight of academic standards and testing. At its heart, reform was about government doing a better job of holding educators accountable for student outcomes.
Regrettably, many school choice advocates disregard accountability. New voucher and Educational Savings Account (ESA) programs offer public funds to private parties with limited (if any) guardrails. Such states[x] have chosen to pay parents for enrolling their children in private schools with few standards or controls. In short, parents (or the schools their children attend) receive public funds with minimal accountability.
School choice will not, in and of itself, improve educational outcomes. Funding private interests with public funds and throwing public money at problems without controls is a reckless leap of faith. How do we protect the public against corruption? How do we ensure that our children receive a sound education? We need a governance structure for public education that will help us navigate school choice options.
Government must be responsible for controlling public spending on education. State government should continue to set policy, allocate funds and monitor performance. Local government should continue to deliver core educational services. Both should oversee public funds[xi]. Local government should be allowed to privatize specialized services[xii] through competitive procurement, but without sacrificing control over those services.
Building Community
For decades, Americans have expected local government to run their public schools. This has had some ill effects, such as funding inequities. However, it does express an essential American creed—that public education and community are inextricably linked. That no locality can thrive without outstanding public schools. That our public schools fare best when they enjoy loyal community support.
Our public schools are about much more than job training and college preparation. Those are vital functions to be sure, but they aren’t the only aims. Public schools, by teaching children the virtues of good citizenship, also build community and cultivate democracy. There are many compelling arguments for local control of public schools, but building community may be the most persuasive—and most overlooked.
Local school districts are invaluable community assets. They are a major employer. They offer vital programs like after school care. They furnish unique facilities like athletic fields, commercial kitchens and emergency shelter. They unify communities through sporting events. They have enormous cultural value, especially in small counties. By delivering superior education, they boost property values and generate growth.
Public schools also enable communities to see their children as more than students—to see the whole child as a part of a broader community. Students are often affected by factors beyond the control of teachers—poverty, nutrition, housing and health. Providing more social and health services through public schools—instead of other agencies—will both help students learn and communities prosper.
Investing in Community Schools
Other local governments—counties, cities and townships—should transform their public schools into community service centers. To deliver more community services through public schools, such as childcare, public health, nutrition and case management, for children and their families. To integrate educational, health and social services. To help track and report community needs (e.g., housing, nutrition and health).
This will require smart organizing strategies. Designating a community coordinator for every school. Creating school-based leadership teams with educators, parents and civic leaders. Building a unified civic volunteer and parental engagement program for every school. Expanding neighborhood alliances.
This also will require converting school facilities to community facilities. Safe, welcoming places for residents to meet, connect and volunteer. Collaborative centers for co-locating nonprofit partners. Communications hubs for overcoming the digital divide[xiii]. Platforms for leveraging resources and exploiting promising opportunities.
And state governments will have to develop a community-based funding model[xiv], and fund evidence-based pilot projects, competitive grant programs and capacity-building aid. Finally, it will require every community to establish a foundation to help school districts and families navigate fiscal emergencies.
Governing Public Schools
It is rarely discussed, but implementing a community school model will demand a fresh look at how public schools are governed. Today, most school districts are single-purpose local governments. In some states, governance authority is being shifted to state legislatures. We must explore new ways to closely link public school districts and general purpose local governments[xv] and retain local control of public education.
States should integrate their school districts with general purpose local governments. At a minimum, states should mandate general purpose local government oversight[xvi] and integrated planning/budgeting. In addition, states should authorize county and municipal governance of public schools. In urban areas, this may mean mayoral control[xvii]. In other areas, it will more likely mean county control. States also should offer strong incentives to local government for merging or splitting inefficient school districts.
If public school districts are governed by a county or municipality, will school boards still be needed? Each community must answer this question. Not all school boards add value. Some are dysfunctional and some ineffectual. However, local school boards can bring citizens more closely to their public schools. And elected school boards tend to be more representative—and democratic—than appointed boards. States should empower local governments to establish elected or appointed school boards.
Sizing School Districts
Sizing school districts under general purpose local governments is another important consideration. Surprisingly, the correlation between a school district’s size and its efficiency is little understood. Of course, other factors, such as poverty, student needs and labor relations, can significantly influence efficiency.
About one-third of the nation’s local school districts are very small (less than two schools). Nearly one-half have less than 1,000 students. Small districts tend to be more common in states with substantial rural areas. Texas, with 1,029 districts, and California, with 941 districts, have the most. Some states, like North Dakota, are dominated by small districts (75 percent of its districts have less than 300 students).
Large school districts, while far less common than small districts, serve far more students. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, the nation’s 100 largest school districts comprise less than one percent of all public school districts but serve 23 percent of all public school students[xviii]. The nation’s largest school district, the New York City Department of Education, has over 1,800 schools serving 1.1 million students.
While the size-efficiency relationship remains hazy, one thing is clear. Small districts are more vulnerable to enrollment and revenue losses. In North Dakota, for instance, where the rural population has fallen for decades, the number of school districts have declined from 312 to 173—mostly via mergers. The state’s rural population losses made the continued operation of underutilized school districts untenable. Some states, like New York, offer financial incentives for school district mergers[xix].
Closing Argument
The US needs its public education system to prepare children for the future, not just for jobs but for citizenship. A rigorous public education produces more curious, informed and freethinking citizens, the foundation of self-governance in a democracy. And our communities—the essential building blocks of our states and nation—are only as vibrant as their public schools.
Counties, cities and towns everywhere must embrace their public schools for what they really are—or at least should be—the backbones of their communities. More than just the buildings where children learn, public schools must be the places where we enrich the conditions for learning. Where people come together to renew their communities. Where we ensure a healthy, enduring democracy.