Across the country, about 13,500 school districts are governed by roughly 83,000 school board members.
In 2024 and 2025, Ballotpedia conducted a virtual school board listening tour, interviewing 100 board members to develop a deeper understanding of how school trustees across the U.S. view their roles, responsibilities and challenges. The interviewees were from a wide range of districts — urban, suburban and rural; large and small; politically diverse and politically homogeneous. Participants represented 33 states and varied regional and political contexts.
“Common themes emerged across interviews — particularly in how board members understand their role in shaping student outcomes, managing district resources, and responding to community expectations,” the report on the listening tour states.
Conflict
The report found that conflict is common, but not universal, with about half of boards reporting moderate to high internal conflict. However, conflict is not inherently negative on school boards — many board members described healthy tension as essential for strong governance. What differentiates productive boards from dysfunctional ones is not whether they fight, but how they fight — and whether they can move forward afterward.
Sixty-two percent of boards report that conflict, even when heated, results in resolution, often through voting, compromise or structured deliberation. However, political polarization and personal disagreements can undermine board processes. “Boards that invest in governance training, collaborative norms and open communication are more likely to experience conflict as a generative force, rather than a destabilizing one,” the report states.
Board role in academic support
Board members largely described their role in academic support as focused on inquiry, monitoring and understanding, without overstepping into administrative decision-making. Board members also emphasized their roles are community liaisons, bridging communication between the district and the public. Most trustees understood their power is as a collective, “with a small but notable group” believing individual members should challenge or push administrators when results are not up to par.
“Many board members emphasized that while the board should not manage instruction directly, it plays a critical oversight role — setting academic goals, monitoring performance, and holding the superintendent accountable,” the report states. “Others highlighted the board’s role in resource allocation, community alignment, and strategic visioning. Though styles and emphasis varied, most respondents clearly viewed academic outcomes as squarely within the board’s responsibility, albeit at a governance — not operational — level.”
Goals
The survey asked questions aimed at revealing what board members most prioritize. The top themes, in order of importance, were academic outcomes and student achievement; community engagement and public trust; board governance and internal dynamics; financial oversight and resource management; mental health, equity and school climate; and innovation and unique local priorities.
The report states that the responses in this section “reflect a desire to not only raise student outcomes but to reshape how the public engages with and understands the work of the board itself. Across districts, there is a consistent call for trust, alignment and transparency — as well as recognition that local boards face complex challenges requiring long-term strategic thinking.”
Board-superintendent relationship
Out of the 100 interviewees, 41 said their partnership with their superintendent is strong, 43 said there were competing visions and lack of partnership between the board and superintendent, and 16 said they had a moderately strong relationship. The report calls out this high polarization and the need for structured onboarding, governance workshops and annual evaluations.
“The board-superintendent relationship is arguably the most critical factor in effective school governance. While many boards report successful collaboration, others face significant misalignment or political interference. The average rating of 3.07 underscores that governance training, clearly defined roles, and trust-building mechanisms are crucial to sustaining a functional partnership,” according to the report.
Perception
The final question asked in the survey aimed to reveal what board members want the public, specifically voters and journalists, to understand about school board service.
Board members want to be seen more clearly, evaluated more fairly and engaged more meaningfully. Three distinct response types emerged:
- The misunderstood complexity boards — those who feel that the public and press underestimate how complicated the system is.
- The perception-fighting boards — those frustrated by media narratives and misinformation.
- The local involvement advocates — those wishing more voters would simply show up and engage.
“School board members across the country are asking not for praise, but for clarity: clarity of understanding, clarity of narrative and clarity of connection with their communities. The question of what journalists and voters misunderstand most revealed not just frustration, but aspiration — a hope that civic dialogue can move past blame and toward solutions,” the report concludes.
