ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION OF PATRICK L. RICE for the Doctor of Philosophy degree in Educational Administration, presented on February 24, 2010, at Southern Illinois University Carbondale. TITLE: AN ANALYSIS OF THE IMPACT OF SCHOOL BOARD TRAINING AND EVALUATION AS PERCEIVED BY SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS AND SUPERINTENDENTS MAJOR PROFESSOR: DR. KATHY HYTTEN The majority of school board members and superintendents agree that school board training and evaluation is needed to increase school board effectiveness. Although, most board members and superintendents agree, there is not a consensus regarding the form and scope of board training and evaluation. The purpose of this study was to develop a better understanding of the perceptions of school board superintendents and school board members regarding school board training and evaluation. Interviews were conducted from board members and superintendents of two similar sized K-8 school districts located in Southern Illinois. Two focus groups were conducted, once composed of school board members and the other of superintendents from various school districts in Southern Illinois. Board members and superintendents agreed that training and evaluation are important components to the success of school boards. Specifically, many board members--especially newly elected members--fail to properly understand their roles and duties, which often lead to role confusion, challenging board/superintendent collaboration issues, and an increased number of board members with personal agendas. Although training and evaluation were seen as important, there was not a clear consensus regarding the form and scope of board member training and evaluation. Board members were especially concerned about issues related to local control, time commitment, and training expenses, as well as how trainings will be conducted.

Les projets d’aide internationale au développement sont extrêmement divers. Ils visent des objectifs multiples, prennent des formes variées, atteignent des dimensions très différentes et se déroulent dans des contextes très contrastés. Cette extraordinaire diversité suscite un discours méthodologique extrêmement normatif. En effet, concernant l’évaluation de la performance des projets, un seul dispositif est conçu dès le démarrage des projets et de façon invariante pour toute la durée de l’action. Les outils et les techniques de ces dispositifs sont censés collecter et traiter un grand nombre d’indicateurs également identifiés dès la création des projets à partir du « cadre logique ». Ces outils et techniques sont conçus par des instances éloignées du terrain, et redevables à l’égard de bailleurs de fonds. Dans la réalité, on constate cependant que même les projets dotés de moyens conséquents peinent à maîtriser le processus d’évaluation de la performance. Rares sont les praticiens qui réussissent à mener de bout en bout une évaluation de la performance. Plus rares encore sont les projets dont les comités de pilotages utilisent réellement les données issues de tels dispositifs d’évaluation pour éclairer leur décision. Pourtant, les évaluations de la performance sont systématiquement réalisées au sein de chaque projet d’aide internationale au développement. Cette thèse se propose d’expliquer les raisons d’un tel paradoxe. / International development assistance projects are extremely various. They have multiple objectives, take various forms and take place in contrasted contexts. This diversity causes a normative methodological discourse. Indeed, concerning the project’s performance evaluation, a single and unchangeable management tools is designed from the start to the end of project.This management tools is supposed to collect and process a large number of indicators also designed at the beginning, according to the project « logical framework ». Tools conceives far away from the project and accountable to the donors. In reality, it can be seen that even projects with substantial resources struggle to master the process of evaluating performance. Few practitioners are successful in leading an evaluation of performance. Even few are the projects whose committee leaders use, for making decision, data from such evaluation. However, performance evaluation are systematically carried out within each international development aid project. This research proposes to explain the reasons of such paradox.