Capacity and Control: Superintendent-School Board Relations in Locally Controlled Districts

Purpose: In the wake of school board protests nationwide, it is essential for educational leaders, policymakers, and researchers to understand locally controlled educational governance. The stability of educational districts depends on superintendents navigating relationships with their school boards, yet little research exists that addresses board–superintendent relationships in locally controlled districts. Using theories of local will and capacity, and community power relationships, I examine what factors shape the extent of local control enacted by school boards, and how these factors affect superintendent–school board relations. Research Methods: The qualitative case study design is bounded as one multi-district union superintendent and three rural school boards. Data collection included semistructured interviews, ethnographic observations, and document collection to understand the relational dynamics of local control. Data analysis included in vivo and a priori coding, and the development of analytic matrices. Findings: All boards demonstrated local will and some local capacity, which explained the dimensions of enactment of local control. Rural board capacity—tenure, expertise, and residency of board members—influenced the extent of local control. Cross-case analysis revealed a relationship between board capacity, community capacity, and board–superintendent relationships. These patterns are theorized as local control school board–superintendent relationships typology, based on board capacity and local community capacity. The relationships include role contestation, confusion, collaboration, and dependence. Implications for Research and Practice: The study expands the theory of local capacity to include community and board dimensions and describes the complexities of superintendent–board relationships. The study concludes with recommendations for practice, policy, and research on locally controlled school boards.