GSBA leads Decatur board through norms, communications and community‑engagement training
Loading...
Summary
Georgia School Boards Association facilitators reviewed governance domains and norms with the City Schools of Decatur board; discussion focused on communications procedures, consultant oversight, the paused K‑2 facilities study, and how the board will use community input going forward.
Valerie Wilson, executive director of the Georgia School Boards Association, and Dr. Samuel King led the board through whole‑board governance training, emphasizing the difference between governance and operations and why agreed norms and protocols matter. "Attacks should not be coming from within this team," Wilson told the board as she urged members to use norms to present a unified governance stance to the community.
Facilitators reviewed the updated governance domains (including a new school‑safety domain) and recommended the board use its self‑assessment results to shape a multi‑year professional development and norms plan. Dr. King urged members to reflect on rituals and routines: "The self assessment should be the core driver of what you use when you build your training plan," he said.
A substantial portion of the retreat became a practical airing of communication failures and expectations. Several members raised a recent district letter that used the phrase "formal action," saying the wording led to community confusion about whether the board had voted to change policy. Board member questions ranged from whether the superintendent should consult the board before hiring consultants that touch board communications, to whether the board wants review rights over ad‑hoc public statements. Chair Dr. Carmen Fulton acknowledged a word‑choice error and apologized for the confusion, while multiple board members and facilitators said the incident exposed gaps in norms rather than an illegal or unauthorized action.
The board also debated how to use community input on major initiatives. Some members proposed standing advisory or working committees aligned to strategic‑plan pillars so community volunteers could provide sustained, problem‑solving feedback rather than episodic public comment. Facilitators suggested adding a strategic‑plan review item to the May retreat and building an action plan for the 'needs improvement' standards identified in the self‑assessment (communications clarity, strategic plan review cadence, and stakeholder engagement).
Other items discussed included the superintendent evaluation instrument (facilitators encouraged linking evaluation measures to the strategic plan), student board member communication protocols, and how the board should balance timely communications with opportunities for board review. The session ended with facilitators identifying several 'needs improvement' standards and a plan to return with a refined norms/protocols draft at the March 10 pre‑work session.
