A Case Study of Local Control of Schools Michael Steven Martin University of Vermont
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Vermont ScholarWorks @ UVM Graduate College Dissertations and Theses Dissertations and Theses 2017 Vermont's Sacred Cow: A Case Study of Local Control of Schools Michael Steven Martin University of Vermont Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.uvm.edu/graddis Part of the Educational Administration and Supervision Commons, and the Other History Commons Recommended Citation Martin, Michael Steven, "Vermont's Sacred Cow: A Case Study of Local Control of Schools" (2017). Graduate College Dissertations and Theses. 737. https://scholarworks.uvm.edu/graddis/737 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Dissertations and Theses at ScholarWorks @ UVM. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate College Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks @ UVM. For more information, please contact [email protected]. VERMONT’S SACRED COW: A CASE STUDY OF LOCAL CONTROL OF SCHOOLS A Dissertation Presented by Michael S. Martin to The Faculty of the Graduate College of The University of Vermont In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the degree of Doctor of Education Specializing in Educational Leadership and Policy Studies May, 2017 Defense Date: March 21, 2017 Dissertation Examination Committee: Cynthia Gerstl-Pepin, Ph.D., Advisor Frank Bryan, Ph.D., Chairperson Judith A. Aiken, Ed.D. Kieran M. Killeen, Ph.D. Cynthia J. Forehand, Ph.D., Dean of the Graduate College ABSTRACT When it comes to school governance, the concept of “local control” endures as a powerful social construct in some regions of the United States. In New England states, where traditional town meetings and small school districts still exist as important local institutions, the idea of local control is still an important element of policy considerations, despite increasing state and federal regulation of education in recent years. With its small school districts and myriad governance structures, Vermont represents an extreme case example of the intersection between participatory democracy and the local control of schools. With nearly 285 school boards composed of over 1,400 school board members for a statewide k-12 population of just over 88,000 students, Vermont has the most board members per pupil in the nation. In addition, the state’s patchwork of local districts, supervisory unions, unified districts, and other governance entities make up the most complex school governance system in the country. Following the passage of Act 46 in 2015, Vermont school districts began new voluntary merger negotiations and restructuring through the process known as “unification”. This qualitative case study of Vermont school governance examined the question of local control as a social construct across four school districts which, taken together, represent a range of attributes as defined by geography, demographics, and governance structures. Extended structured interviews comprised of image-based prompts and open- ended questions with 19 school board members provided the principal source of data. A review of state and local documents and interviews with 11 superintendents and policymakers allowed for triangulation of the data. Results suggested these principal findings: 1) multiple meanings of local control coexist, 2) statutory requirements and limited local resources curtail the exercise of local control in practice, and 3) school boards are starting to take a broader view of governance by emphasizing stewardship over micromanagement and redefining local communities beyond town boundaries. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I owe a debt of gratitude to Cindy Gerstl-Pepin for teaching me important things about qualitative research, for serving as my advisor in her last semester at UVM, and for finding the time to work with me in the midst of her responsibilities as Associate Dean. I want to especially thank Judy Aiken for encouraging me to pursue a doctorate and for her undying support and encouragement all the way to the end, even through her sabbatical. Sincere thanks to Kieran Killeen who told me to investigate an idea from his policy class that eventually became this dissertation. Special thanks to Frank Bryan for sharing his deep knowledge of Vermont governance and serving as my dissertation chair. This dissertation would not have been possible without the generous colleagueship and contributions of John Alberghini, Peter Burrows, Jeanné Collins, Jeff Francis, Harry Frank, Dan French, Patrick Halladay, Rebecca Holcombe, Nicole Mace, Bill Mathis, Mike McRaith, Brian Ricca, and Jackie Wilson. Warmest thanks to my parents, Tony and Lauretta, for always encouraging me to keep learning, and to my siblings, Kim and Jake, for inspiring me to become a doctor too. Above all, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to Magali, my wife and best friend who always stood by me, and our sons, Joshua and Théo, who never stopped believing in me. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .................................................................................... ii LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................. v LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................ vi CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ..................................................................... 1 Problem Statement ......................................................................................... 6 Research Questions ....................................................................................... 7 CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ................................ 8 A Greatly Maligned Institution ..................................................................... 8 Grassroots Democracy ................................................................................. 11 A Black Box ................................................................................................ 15 Local Control in Vermont ........................................................................... 17 The Vermont Policy Environment ............................................................... 22 CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY ............... 28 Rationale ...................................................................................................... 28 Sampling ...................................................................................................... 31 Access and Researcher Role ........................................................................ 32 Reciprocity, Trust, and Rapport .................................................................. 34 Personal Bias and the Subjective “I” ........................................................... 34 Ethical and Political Considerations ............................................................ 35 Data Collection Methods ............................................................................. 36 Interview Strategy .................................................................................. 37 Data Analysis .......................................................................................... 39 Procedures to Address Trustworthiness and Credibility ............................. 40 CHAPTER FOUR: THE VERMONT CASE AND DISTRICT PROFILES ....... 42 The Vermont Case ....................................................................................... 42 Commitment to Progressive Education .................................................. 44 Local Governance Tradition ................................................................... 46 Current Governance Reforms ................................................................. 49 District Profiles ............................................................................................ 54 Southern District ..................................................................................... 54 Mountain District .................................................................................... 56 Central District ....................................................................................... 59 City District ............................................................................................ 61 Chapter Summary ........................................................................................ 64 iii CHAPTER FIVE: FINDINGS AND INTERPRETATIONS ............................... 66 Struggling to Define Local Control ........................................................... 66 A Proud Tradition ................................................................................... 67 Participatory Democracy ........................................................................ 70 Multiple Meanings .................................................................................. 73 The Dark Side ......................................................................................... 82 Limits on Local Control ............................................................................ 88 Limited Local Resources ........................................................................ 88 Decision-Making Power ......................................................................... 89 The State Role ........................................................................................ 95 The Federal Role .................................................................................... 97 The Future of Local Control ...................................................................