Navigate Politics in Your School Community in Uncertain Times
Dr. David Dulio, Professor of Political Science at Oakland University and Director of the Center for Civic Engagement, is often asked by local and state media to comment on how to best address contentious issues and work through community concerns. In this podcast, he provides perspective to the polarized political environment, explains how government representatives at all levels define their roles relative to the salience of the issue to their constituents, and recommends to school leaders the three behaviors that build trust with constituents. He advises increased transparency in process and information when responding to a potentially divisive educational issue.
Dr. Dulio offers insight into the origin of the Center for Civic Engagement. “I arrived at Oakland University in 2002 from Washington D.C., where I did graduate work at American University and worked on Capitol Hill for about a year as a Congressional Fellow, through a fellowship program with the American Political Science Association. When I was a graduate student I watched my mentor, James Thurber, at American University create the Center for Congressional and Presidential Studies, bringing people together to talk about important issues. When I got to Oakland University I continued on the trajectory of a normal academic, but always had in the back of my mind that I’d like to start something like that. Fast forward 15 years, the idea of a Center on Civic Engagement fit with the University’s strategic goal and mission. What really drove the creation of the Center which launched in 2018 was recognizing that people don't know much about how their government system works in the United States, and more importantly, the clear indication and evidence that Americans can't talk to each other anymore. ”
“Polarization is one of the buzzwords today and the use of it is becoming greater, when in fact divisions in American politics are nothing new. Take the example of presidential job approval and we can see major division in terms of how people view presidents as far back as the 1960's; even John Kennedy saw some great polarization during his presidency. A lot of people think that it's just Trump that created this great divide in how people view the president. Certainly, Trump was polarizing and was someone who saw very divergent views of his job as president. Towards the end of his time in office, only 7% of Democrats had a favorable view of his job approval, whereas about 85% of Republicans did. And that might seem jarring, however, at the end of Barack Obama's time in office; he was only in the low teens in job approval among Republicans and had over 90% job approval from Democrats. The one time we see some more general agreements about the job the president's doing was Jimmy Carter, who had low approval ratings from everybody. When the president's doing well among one group of partisans, it’s not often that we see him doing well among the other group of partisans. A more important point is that disagreement, that divergence is long-lasting.”
“Polarization in terms of schools occurs because it's become a salient issue. Some data from Gallup at the end of last year showed nationally only 1% of Americans mentioned education as the most important issue the country was facing. As folks think about masking in schools, vaccine requirements, the school board issues, maybe it bubbles up a little more. However when that issue becomes very, very salient and when it becomes relevant to their lives in a very pointed way, it becomes a huge issue. Whether parents should have a say in what children learn in school galvanized and crystallized the issue of education for a lot of Virginians. It changed that gubernatorial race between Terry McAuliffe (D) and Glenn Youngkin (R), and it changed policymaking in Virginia in a lot of ways.”
How does this apply to local schools and school boards? Dr. Dulio explained, “Every school district is an elected government and school boards are the governmental entity representing the people. There are two dominant models for how people perceive their job as representatives. One is the delegate model of representation, where somebody who is a representative acts as if his or her constituents are present. The constituents are simply delegating the authority to cast a vote or make a decision, rather than empowering the representative to do something other than what the constituents want. The second model is the trustee model, where the representative may listen to constituents’ views, but they will use their own talents, opinions, competencies, beliefs, to decide what to do and how to vote. Whether we have a delegate or representative model depends upon the individual representative and how they see their job; the issue; and here is where we get back to the issue of education, the context surrounding the issue; and how important it is to the constituents. How important or how relevant it is at the time will depend or will dictate in some cases how a representative will look at that issue.”
How does a person who is in a school classroom, a principal's office, or central office, respond to these different models when you think about engaging a community with diverse interests and opinions? Dr. Dulio expounded on the point about saliency. “If things are going well or if times are good, a school board member or somebody who works for the district, may approach things as a trustee because they see no reason to do otherwise, and importantly the public might also see it that way, and they're okay with that. If things start to become more salient where more members of the public are thinking about it, they may change their expectation for that representative, whether it's an elected school board member or for a superintendent or a principal where they are now demanding, ‘You work for me. You better listen to what we think. You better listen to our input’. If somebody has been approaching their role as a trustee the shift in that expectation can be jarring, taking them off guard. It might cause some of the biggest problems, where they’re now forced to think about their job very, very differently and even some of the decisions they make.”
For superintendents and school leaders, Dr. Dulio presented strategies for building trust, referencing Dr. Richard Fenno’s seminal study and subsequent book, Home Style: House Members in Their Districts. “Dr. Fenno convinced a handful of U.S. House Members to let him follow them around, observing their behavior. He called this method of research 'soaking and poking', soaking it all in and poking around. He noticed that the most important aspect of the home style of a Member of Congress was how a Member presents themselves to their constituents. Fenno argued that the most important aspect of the presentation of self is trust. Members have to build trust with his or her constituents and they do that by focusing on three things: qualification, identification, and empathy. First, do you have the competencies, the skills, the requisite what it takes to do the job? Second, do you have a connection with the folks? The connection might be wearing the right T-shirt with the high school mascot on it or having a connection to one of the sports teams or one of the clubs. Third, do you understand the needs of the constituents?”
“Achieving these three things for a superintendent or a school board member will help immunize them against the pressures they’re feeling today.” Dr. Maxfield pointed out that not every superintendent has the luxury of having built up that history of empathy or history of identification. What can they do beyond understanding these qualities which are so vital? Dr. Dulio answered, “Beyond that, one key thing for me is being as transparent as you can in two ways: in your processes and in the information that you have. If something is starting to bubble up, share more information because if you don’t, given the Internet and given how good some folks have gotten at F.O.I. requests, someone will find out. If they find it out before you share it, you're on the defensive and you've lost control of the message. While there are some things that shouldn't be made public, folks should show a good faith effort to be open with the public and say, here’s what we're thinking."
“The vast majority of time folks in a school district are probably going to let the professionals: the superintendents, the principals, do their thing. But if something that's really important bubbles up and gets on the public's radar, that's going to change. They're not going to be able to operate as they would in normal times because they are going to have people asking questions, seeking information, looking for answers to questions about what's going on in school, and what are you doing with my kids. If school leaders are just more prepared for that to come, they're in a better position to respond. It can be a sudden change and sort of jerky reactions where they've gone from everyone letting us do our thing, to beating down the door.”
The final advice: “Along with continuing to build trust in the community, it is important to put systems in place with transparency and vehicles for two-way communication as part of the culture of the community and the organization’s relationship to it. As school leaders, planning during the best of times serves you in the more challenging times”.
Dr. David Dulio ddulio@oakland.edu
Center for Civic Engagement https://oakland.edu/polisci/cce/
Fenno, Richard F., Home Style: House Members in Their Districts, Little & Brown, 1978.