There is a moment every four years when a newly elected Board of Education gathers around the table for the first time. The room looks much the same. The table is the same, the agenda follows a familiar format, and the superintendent and senior staff are often the same people who were there a month earlier. But the people sitting around the table have changed. Some familiar faces are gone and new ones have arrived. Even those returning are now part of a different group.
I have now been through five of these transitions as a superintendent, and if I have learned one thing, it is that getting elected to a board and becoming an effective board are two very different things.
From Campaigning to Governing
Earlier this year, I wrote Considering Running for School Trustee? A Few Things to Know First, a look at what trustees actually do and, perhaps more importantly, what they don’t do. This was my most-read post in years, so as one does when that happens, I have created this as a sequel.
Candidates across BC have spent the last couple of months campaigning, sharing ideas and making commitments. As happens each election cycle, some of those commitments touch on areas where local boards have direct authority, while others involve decisions that are made provincially. Part of the early work together is understanding those distinctions and identifying where trustees can make a difference locally and where they can use their voices to advocate for change. I have been part of enough transitions to know these conversations are important, and the boundaries are not always as clear as they might first appear.
Within their areas of responsibility, boards have considerable influence. They make important decisions about local priorities, resources, policies and the direction of their districts. But there is a difference between campaigning on individual promises and governing collectively, and making that shift is part of the early work for any new board.
Another part of that transition is understanding how governance and operations fit together. The Board sets direction, approves budgets, and establishes policies. The superintendent and staff then turn that direction into the day-to-day work of schools with the Board providing oversight and holding the superintendent accountable for the results.
For example, a board wanting an emphasis on literacy might include this aspiration as part of a strategic plan. The superintendent and senior staff would work with educators to determine the strategy and approach needed to achieve that goal. Trustees need enough understanding of that work to ask thoughtful questions and assess results. The distinction is about where decisions and accountability sit and it takes ongoing conversations to make it work well.
Fresh Eyes and Institutional Memory
New trustees bring questions that others may have stopped asking. They challenge assumptions and see possibilities that those of us who have been around for a long time might overlook. Returning trustees bring history and context. They understand why past decisions were made and appreciate the complexity behind issues that can look simple from the outside. Neither perspective is automatically right. Experience can become an excuse for maintaining the status quo, and fresh perspectives can miss important context.
Institutional memory is also about more than the people around the table. When I studied the superintendency for my doctorate several years ago, I found that the majority of BC superintendents were relatively new to their roles. That kind of leadership turnover is a reminder that we can’t rely on individuals alone to carry an organization’s history.
The memory has to live in systems as well. A clear board work plan, a clear distinction between board policy and administrative procedure, and orientation that is embedded in policy rather than left to chance all help carry what matters from one group to the next. People come and go. Good systems give a new board something solid to build on, and the real opportunity comes from bringing that institutional memory together with fresh eyes.
Learning Takes Time
In 2014, I wrote about the small things that make board governance work and how boards and superintendents support one another. Clear roles, regular communication and shared learning remain central to how I think about governance. One thing that has evolved is my approach to trustee orientation.
We have long used a series of introductory sessions, our 101s, covering everything from finance and facilities to student learning, governance and community relationships. We used to think of orientation as the first winter. Now we think of it as the whole term. The early months are important, but the learning continues through strategic planning and carries on through all four years.
We know student learning takes time. Understanding develops through repeated experiences, conversations and reflection, and there is no reason to assume adult learning is any different. Orientation is also about more than information. It is about building relationships and giving trustees the confidence to ask better questions, challenge assumptions and make thoughtful decisions. I would rather spend a little more time building that foundation at the beginning than rush through it and spend the next four years wishing we had done things differently. There is no prize for finishing orientation first.
And for any newly elected trustees in West Vancouver reading this, you are getting an early look at the orientation playbook we will work through together.
Everyone in the Room Is New
Perhaps the biggest lesson I have learned through these transitions is that orientation isn’t just for new trustees. When the composition of a board changes, the relationships, the dynamics and the questions all change with it, and the way people work together needs to evolve too.
That includes the superintendent. The voters elected the trustees, and the trustees inherit me. That alone is a good reason for me to do a lot of listening in the first few months. They bring a fresh mandate, and I have a responsibility to understand their priorities and help turn the Board’s collective direction into meaningful action.
I have worked with boards with different priorities, personalities and approaches to governance. Each transition has required me to listen, adjust and think carefully about how I can best support the collective work of the board, because what worked with one board may not work with the next. Returning trustees are joining a new team as well. Their experience matters, but so does their willingness to adapt. In that sense, everyone in the room is new.
And perhaps most importantly, the trustees need to learn how to work with one another. Effective boards aren’t ones where everyone agrees. They are ones where people can disagree, make collective decisions and continue to trust one another afterward.
The Work After the Election
There is something wonderfully democratic about school board elections. Communities have the opportunity to affirm a direction or choose something different. But schools don’t start over every four years.
A new board inherits both the accomplishments and the challenges of those who came before it, and its task is to respect that continuity while exercising its mandate to shape the future. A new board also has an opportunity to consider how it will work together. Many traditions and practices will be worth carrying forward, while others may need to evolve as new relationships and perspectives take shape.
Four years from now, the room will probably look much the same again. There will be another election, another group of trustees and another opportunity to begin.
What will matter is less who occupied those chairs and more what they accomplished together.
Note: The image at the top of this post was generated using AI. I also used AI tools for editorial feedback while refining the piece. The arguments and conclusions are my own.