Hiding in Plain Sight: The Potential of State-Level Governing Boards in Postsecondary Education Policy Agenda-Setting

Morgan, Demetri L.; Rall, Raquel M.; Commodore, Felecia; Fischer, Rachel A.; Bernstein, Sam

doi:10.1080/00221546.2020.1824885

Cited by 19 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Finally, one missing attribute in our models may be information about institutions’ governing boards (see Morgan et al, 2021 ). We wanted to include institutional governing board composition, but given the diversity of these boards, lack of information about individual board members’ attributes, and how board members are appointed, we could not include the variable in this analysis.…”

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

We Want You Back: Uncovering the Effects on In-Person Instructional Operations in Fall 2020

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

We Want You Back: Uncovering the Effects on In-Person Instructional Operations in Fall 2020

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Although many other discourses were present (see Morgan et al, 2021), we consistently identified these five discourses, with statespecific nuances, across multiple strategic plans. After defining and providing representative examples of the discourse, we highlight if and how the education discourse intersects with prevailing equity and inclusion discourses within our analysis.…”

Section: Discourse and Cdamentioning

confidence: 63%

“…The methodology here runs parallel to prior work on SLGBs and strategic plans, which served as the larger study from which this piece was extracted (Morgan et al, 2021). The larger study used collaborative governance and the policy streams model of decentralization agenda setting to identify and contextualize potential dimensions for SLGBs to exert influence as policy actors working to achieve institutional and state-level priorities.…”

Section: Discourse and Cdamentioning

confidence: 99%

Introducing boards to the equity conversation: State-level governing boards and discourses of social justice.

Rall¹,

Morgan²,

Commodore³

et al. 2024

Journal of Diversity in Higher Education

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

State-level governing boards (SLGBs) play integral roles in the leadership and governance of higher education. Oftentimes, though, their role and influence are understated or ignored in scholarship. In this article, the authors recenter the integral impact of these boards and push for a better understanding of their impact on higher education. Specifically, through an examination of 33 strategic plans, the authors consider how SLGBs can better manage the equity challenges within colleges and universities. Recognizing that higher education governance is complex and involves many moving parts, the authors present an argument for how SLGBs can influence postsecondary equity work. This article helps elucidate how SLGBs intersect with prevailing equity discourses and support higher education leaders to better recognize and understand the surreptitious ways equity is absent from pivotal discourses despite the best intentions and measured efforts of entities such as state-level governing boards.

show abstract

“…To demonstrate reliability, we cross-referenced information for accuracy. Akin to the approach of Morgan and colleagues (2021), which used strategic plans to examine aspects of the role of boards in higher education, no team member coded the same board bylaws twice. We aimed to triangulate the perspectives to maximize the distinct interpretations the bylaw review would reveal (Tracy, 2010).…”

Section: Approach To the Study Of Boardsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As we recommend action to combat the historical exclusion of boards, importantly, we acknowledge that we do not assume to know which audience actually engages with the board bylaws. We use board bylaws as a vehicle to expose board inequity because of the implied influence beyond what symbolic purposes may initially suggest about these types of publicly available documents (Morgan et al, 2021). Bylaws are living documents and detail how boards are to operate.…”

Section: A Call For Accountabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

What Does It Take to Lead: The Hidden Curriculum of Qualifications for Service on Public Boards of Higher Education

Rall

Dominguez

Garcia

2022

Teachers College Record

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background/Context: U.S. higher education governing boards have received enhanced public attention over the last decade in response to national media coverage and emerging governance scholarship. Despite the rise of attention on this topic and the maintained influence of board decisions, governing boards remain one of the least understood aspects of higher education. Purpose/Objective/Research Question/Focus of Study: The qualifications required for board member service in higher education are a particularly understudied aspect of boards. Given the limited knowledge of board qualifications, our study aimed to understand what (if any) were the known requirements for service on U.S. public boards of higher education. Setting: A total of 95 public board bylaws representing at least one institution from each state were examined for any mention of the requirements or qualifications for the trusteeship. Both standalone institutional boards and system boards were investigated to account for the diversity of board types. Altogether, the bylaws of 95 boards that govern 842 public institutions in the nation were reviewed. Research Design: The study used qualitative document and content analysis methods to examine board bylaws. Findings: We found that very few boards have any defined (and publicized) requirements for public trusteeship in higher education. We evaluate the findings using a Critical Race Theory and hidden curriculum framework of analysis and discuss the implicit and explicit messages of the board bylaws. This study brings to the forefront that there are either hidden, ambiguous, or little to no requisites for arguably one of the most influential roles in higher education. The lack of transparency in this area may help perpetuate inequity in board representation. Conclusion/Recommendations: If institutions desire to enhance transparency and accountability, it is crucial to elucidate standard practices for filling board seats (including qualifications for board service, who gets to decide on these qualifications, and the ramifications of these practices on equitable board member representation). Boards, governors, and other influential decision-makers should contemplate establishing and sharing requirements for board service so that (a) boards enter into this position with a better understanding of what is required of them, and (b) there are more explicit guidelines to support why and how some groups are overrepresented on the board while others have been historically excluded.

show abstract

Hiding in Plain Sight: The Potential of State-Level Governing Boards in Postsecondary Education Policy Agenda-Setting

Cited by 19 publications

References 45 publications

We Want You Back: Uncovering the Effects on In-Person Instructional Operations in Fall 2020

We Want You Back: Uncovering the Effects on In-Person Instructional Operations in Fall 2020

Introducing boards to the equity conversation: State-level governing boards and discourses of social justice.

What Does It Take to Lead: The Hidden Curriculum of Qualifications for Service on Public Boards of Higher Education

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About