This exploratory article relies on qualitative data generated from observations and focus group interviews to investigate what motivates citizens to vote in school board elections and how they choose among candidates. Our review of literature suggests that capture theory, dissatisfaction theory, retrospective voting, partisanship, issue voting, character voting, and sociological theories of voting might be useful in better understanding voting behavior in school board elections. We conclude that the greatest potential for theoretical development is found in a sociological approach: According to our data, voters care most about candidate character and seek this information through social networks. We also suggest several areas for future research related to deepening our understanding of school board elections.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AllenA., & PlankD. N. (2005). School board election structure and democratic representation. Educational Policy, 19, 510–527.
2.
AlsburyT. L. (2002). Superintendent and school board member turnover: Political versus apolitical turnover as a critical variable in the application of the dissatisfaction theory. Educational Administration Quarterly, 39, 667–698.
3.
AspinL. T., & HallW. K. (1987). The friends and neighbors effect in judicial retention elections. Western Political Quarterly, 40, 703–715.
4.
BerelsonB. R., LazarsfeldR. F., & McPheeW. N. (1954). Voting: A study of opinion formation in a presidential election.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
5.
BerryC., & HowellW. (2005). Democratic accountability in public education. In HowellW. J. (Ed.), Besieged: School boards and the future of education politics (pp. 150–172). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
6.
BerryC., & HowellW. (2007). Accountability and local elections: Rethinking retrospective voting. The Journal of Politics, 69, 844–858.
7.
BlackE., & BlackM. (1973). The Wallace vote in Alabama: A multiple regression analysis. Journal of Politics, 35, 730–736.
8.
BoydW. L. (1976). The public, the professionals, and educational policymaking: Who governs?Teachers College Record, 77, 539–577.
9.
CampbellA., ConverseP., MillerW., & StokesD. (1960). The American voter.New York: Wiley.
10.
CarterG. R., & CunninghamW. G. (1997). The American superintendent: Leading in an age of pressure.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
11.
ChubbJ. E. (2001). The system. In MoeT. M. (Ed.), A primer on America's schools (pp. 15–42). Stanford, CA: Hoover Press.
12.
CreswellJ. A. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
13.
CreswellJ. A. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed method approaches.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
DanzbergerJ. (1994). Governing the nation's schools: The case for restructuring local school boards. Phi Delta Kappan, 75, 367–373.
16.
DownsA. (1957). An economic theory of democracy.New York: Harper.
17.
FernE. F. (1982). The use of focus groups for idea generation: The effects of group size, acquaintanceship, and moderator on response quantity and quality. Journal of Marketing Research, 19, 1–13.
18.
GarnG. A., & Graham-BrownC. (2003). Oklahoma superintendents: A survey of characteristics and attributes. Rural Educator, 25, 3–9.
HuckfeldtR. (1979). Political participation and the neighborhood social context. American Journal of Political Science, 23, 579–614.
22.
HuckfeldtR. (1983). Social contexts, social networks, and urban neighborhoods: Environmental constraints on friendship choice. American Journal of Sociology, 89, 651–669.
23.
HuckfeldtR., & SpragueJ. (1987). Networks in context: The social flow of political information. American Political Science Review, 81, 1197–1216.
24.
HuckfeldtR., & SpragueJ. (1991). Discussant effects on vote choice: Intimacy, structure, and interdependence. Journal of Politics, 53, 122–158.
25.
HuckfeldtR., & SpragueJ. (1995). Citizens, politics, and social communication: Information and influence in an election campaign.New York: Cambridge University Press.
26.
IannacconeL. (1996). Callahan's vulnerability thesis and dissatisfaction theory. Peabody Journal of Education, 71, 110–119.
27.
IannacconeL., & LutzF. W. (1970). Politics, power and policy: The governing of local school districts.Columbus, OH: Merrill.
28.
KelleyJ., & McAllisterI. (1985). Social context and electoral behavior in Britain. American Journal of Political Science, 29, 564–586.
29.
KeyV. O.Jr. (1949). Southern politics in state and nation.New York: Knopf.
30.
KirstM. (1994). A changing context means school board reform. Phi Delta Kappan, 75, 378–381.
31.
KruegerR. A., & CaseyM. A. (2009). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
32.
LandD. (2002). Local school boards under review: Their role and effectiveness in relation to students’ academic achievement. Review of Educational Research, 72, 229–278.
33.
LazarsfeldP., BerelsonB., & GaudetH. (1944). The people's choice: How the voter makes up his mind in a presidential campaign.New York: Columbia University Press.
34.
LealD. L., Martinez-EbersV., & MeierK. J. (2004). The politics of Latino education: The biases of at-large elections. Journal of Politics, 66, 1224–1244.
35.
MarcusG. B., & ConverseP. E. (1979). A dynamic simultaneous equation model of electoral choice. American Political Science Review, 73, 1055–1070.
36.
McCubbinsM. D., NollR. G., & WeingastB. R. (1987). Administrative procedures as instruments of political control. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 3, 243–277.
37.
MeierK. J. (2002). A research agenda on elections and education. Educational Policy, 16, 219–230.
38.
MeierK. J., & CampbellJ. E. (1979). Issue voting: An empirical examination of individually necessary and jointly sufficient conditions. American Politics Research, 7, 21–50.
39.
MeierK. J., StewartJ.Jr., & EnglandR. E. (1991). The politics of bureaucratic discretion: Educational access as an urban service. American Journal of Political Science, 35, 155–177.
40.
MilesM. B., & HubermanA. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook of new methods (2nd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
41.
MillerW. E., & StokesD. E. (1962). Party government and the saliency of congress. Public Opinion Quarterly, 26, 531–546.
42.
MoeT. M. (2001). Teachers unions and public schools. In MoeT. M. (Ed.), A primer on America's schools (pp. 151–184). Stanford, CA: Hoover Press.
43.
MoeT. M. (2005). Teacher unions and school board elections. In HowellW. J. (Ed.), Besieged: School boards and the future of education politics (pp. 254–287). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
44.
MoeT. M. (2006). Political control and the power of the agent. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 22, 1–29.
45.
MorganD. L. (1998). Planning focus groups.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
46.
MorrisonD. L. (1997). Reasons school board members voluntarily choose not to seek re-election (Northern Illinois University, DeKalb). Dissertation Abstracts International, 57(07), 2780.
47.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2007). Table 83. Number of public school districts and public and private elementary and secondary schools: Selected years, 1869–70 through 2005–06. Digest of Education Statistics. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d07/tables/dt07_083.asp?referrer=list
48.
NiemiR., & WeisbergH. (1993). Controversies in American voting behavior.Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly.
PetersenG. J., & ShortP. M. (2001). The school board president's perception of the district superintendent: Applying the lenses of social influence and social style. Educational Administration Quarterly, 37, 533–570.
53.
ReecerM. (1989). Yes, boards are under fire, but reports of your death are greatly exaggerated. American School Board Journal, 176(3), 31–34.
54.
RenchlerR. (1992). Urban superintendent turnover: the need for stability. Urban Superintendents Sounding Board, 1, 2–13.
55.
RiceT. W., & MachtA. (1987). Friends and neighbors voting in statewide general elections. American Journal of Political Science, 27, 448–452.
56.
RikerW., & OrdeshookP. C. (1968). A theory of the calculus of voting. American Political Science Review, 62, 25–42.
57.
SchaffnerB. F., & StrebM. J. (2002). The partisan heuristic in low-information elections. Public Opinion Quarterly, 66, 559–581.
58.
SheffieldJ. E., & GoeringL. K. (1978). Winning and losing: Candidate advantage in local elections. American Politics Quarterly, 6, 453–468.
59.
SheingoldC. A. (1973). Social networks and voting: The resurrection of a research agenda. American Sociological Review, 38, 712–720.
60.
SongM., & MiskelC. G. (2005). Who are the influentials? A cross-state social network analysis of the reading policy domain. Educational Administration Quarterly, 41, 7–48.
61.
StimsonJ. A. (1975). Belief systems: Constraint, complexity and the 1972 election. American Journal of Political Science, 19, 393–417.
62.
StokesD. E. (1966). Some dynamic elements of contests for the presidency. American Political Science Review, 60, 19–28.
63.
StraussA. C., & CorbinJ. M. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
64.
TallericoM. (1989). The dynamics of superintendent–school board relationships: A continuing challenge. Urban Education, 24, 215–232.
65.
TatalovichR. (1975). Friends and neighbors’ voting: Mississippi, 1943–73. Journal of Politics, 37, 807–814.
66.
ThielemannG. S. (1993). Local advantage in campaign financing: Friends, neighbors, and their money in Texas Supreme Court elections. Journal of Politics, 55, 472–478.
67.
TullockG. (1968). Toward a mathematics theory of democracy.Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
68.
TyackD., & CubanL. (1995). Tinkering toward utopia: Reflections on a century of public school reform.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
69.
WeatherfordM. S. (1982). Interpersonal networks and political behavior. American Journal of Political Science, 26, 117–143.
70.
WilliamsO. P., & AdrianC. R. (1959). The insulation of local politics under the nonpartisan ballot. American Political Science Review, 53, 1052–1063.
71.
WirtF. M., & KirstM. W. (2005). The political dynamics of American education (3rd ed.). Richmond, CA: McCutchan.
72.
ZeiglerL. H., & JenningsM. K. (1974). Governing American schools.North Scituate, MA: Duxbury Press.
73.
ZuckermanA. S., ValentinoN. A., & ZuckermanE. W. (1994). A structural theory of vote choice: Social and political networks and electoral flows in Britain and the United States. Journal of Politics, 56, 1008–1033.
