Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

A political response perspective on intergovernmental relations in education Bartunek, Frank Paul 1992

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-ubc_1992_spring_bartunek_frank_paul.pdf [ 6.32MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0056006.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0056006-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0056006-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0056006-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0056006-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0056006-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0056006-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0056006-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0056006.ris

Full Text

A POLITICAL RESPONSE PERSPECTIVE ON INTERGOVERNMENTALRELATIONS IN EDUCATIONbyFRANK PAUL BARTUNEKB.A., Carleton University, 1969BA. (Honours), Carleton University, 1971M.A., University Of Toronto, 1972A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OFTHE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OFDOCTOR OF EDUCATIONinTHE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIESDepartment of Administrative, Adult and Higher EducationWe accept this dissertation as conformingto the required standardTHE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIADecember 1991© Frank Paul Bartunek, 1991In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanceddegree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make itfreely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensivecopying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of mydepartment or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying orpublication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my writtenpermission.Department of ADMINISTRATIVE, ADULT AND HIGHER EDUCATIONThe University of British ColumbiaVancouver, CanadaDate DECEMBER 14, 1991DE-6 (2/88)11ABSTRACTThis study of intergovernmental relations ineducation explored the nature of school district politicalresponses to provincial government policies in BritishColumbia. Specifically, it examined the practice of aparticular set of political responses (Elkin, 1975):coalition, socialization of the conflict, making use of asupraorganization, exchange, co-optation and penetration.Based on theoretical and empirical studies ofgovernmental policy making (Doern and Phidd, 1983; Lowi,1964, 1972; Rowat, 1980; Simeon, 1976) andinterorganizational influence (Elkin, 1975; Rhodes, 1980), athree dimensional conceptual framework was developedconsisting of policy types, school district types and typesof political response. Ministry policy type was classifiedaccording to !?regulatory! (instructions for school districtsto integrate severly handicapped children into regularschool programs) and “distributive” (guidelines to schooldistricts for capital expenditure allocations). Schooldistrict type was distinguished by school board partisanshipand regional—metropolitan variants. Ultimately, three schooldistricts were chosen for indepth investigation andcomparative analysis.iiiThis study may be regarded as an academic policyanalysis using a multi-case study methodology. Based oninterviews with key district office personnel and schooltrustees, along with document analysis and other evidence,the study yielded thick descriptions of the operationalcharacteristics ‘of each political response in action.This study substantiated the proposition thatpolitical behaviour is characterized by certain patterns orregularities. However, while the “language” oforganizational response proposed by Elkin (1975) providesinsight and guidance for the study of intergovernmentalrelations, it does not appear to be comprehensive. Otherdistrict political responses come into play. Nevertheless,the findings of this study support Elkin’s proposition thatthe political responses of local government organizationsare closely associated with their dependency onenvironmental resources.Application of the multi—case methodology in thisresearch supports the contention of certain policyresearchers that it is possible to combine intensity ofstudy with comparative variations of key variables. Theinter—disciplinary nature of this study, along with thesystematic use of different kinds of definitions and theinteractive opportunities associated with “on site”observation, were found to be very important and necessaryfeatures of this qualitative research.ivThe findings and conclusions suggest that researchshould be undertaken on other typologies of politicalinfluence which were identified in the course of this study.Incorporation of what organizational theorists refer to as“resource dependency theory,” or “the political economyperspective” may aid in examining more comprehensively howschool districts, as special purpose governments, adapt toprovincial government authority.The study concludes with speculations about thenature and usefulness of school district political responseswithin the context of local-provincial relations ineducation.VTABLE OF CONTENTSPageLISTOFFIGURES.xiiiACKNOWLEDGEMENTS xivChapter1. THE BACKGROUND, PURPOSE AND NATURE OF THESTUDY 1BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY 1PURPOSE OF THE STUDY 6NATURE OF THE PROBLEM 9DELIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY 11OVERVIEWOFTHEDISSERTATION 132. POLICY TYPES, POLITICAL RESPONSES ANDSCHOOL DISTRICTS: A REVIEWOFTHELITERATURE 15TYPES OF POLICY 15TYPESOFPOLITICALRESPONSE 22TYPESOFSCHOOLDISTRICT 353. THE CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK, RESEARCH QUESTIONSAND RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 43CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK 43DEFINITIONOFTERMS. 44RESEARCH QUESTI ONS. . . 52SAMPLE SELECT I ON 53MULTI-CASE STUDY METHODOLOGY 56viDATA COLLECTION 66ANA L Y S I S OF DATA 7 0FORMAL, EXPANDED DEFINITIONS 744. COALITION 79LOCALCOALITIONS 81Boardsof Health 81Purposeandduration 82SchoolDistricts 83Purposeandduration 83MunicipalCouncils 88Purposeandduration 88Municipal Advisory Planning Commissions 93Purposeandduration 93CommunityColleges 95Purposeandduration 95Parks and Recreation Commissions 96Purposeandduration 97REGIONAL AND PROVINCIAL COALITIONS 98Members of the Legislative Assembly 99Purpose and duration 99The British Columbia School TrusteesAssociation . 103Purposeandduration 103SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION 107Identification of OperationalCharacteristics 107Operational Characteristics 108viiRegulatory policy characteristics 110Distributive policy characteristics 111Comparison of Operational Characteristics 111Conclusions 1145. SOCIALIZATIONOFTHECONFLICT 119DISTRICT CORRESPONDENCE AND PUBLIC MEDIA 122SchoolBoardLetters 122Substitute or alternate issues 123School District Newsletters 124Substitute or alternate issues 124LocalNewspapers 129Substitute or alternate issues 129REGIONAL AND PROVINCIAL COALITIONS 130The British Columbia School TrusteesAssociation 130Substitute or alternate issues 131TheLegislativeAssembly 133Substitute or alternate issues 133SCHOOLBOARDMEETINGS 135ReactiontoFormalBriefs 135Substitute or alternate issues 135SchoolBoardResolutions. 140Substitute or alternate issues 140Visitations from Ministry Officials 144Substitute or alternate issues 144viiiSUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION. 148Identification of OperationalCharacteristics 148Operational Characteristics 150Regulatory policy characteristics 153Distributive policy characteristics 154Comparison of Operational Characteristics 154Conclusions 1576. MAKING USE OF A SUPRAORGANIZATION 165REPRESENTATION AND INTERVENTION FUNCTIONS 168The Inter—Ministry Children’s Committee 168Sc ope o f use 1 6 8The British Columbia School TrusteesAssociation 173Scope of use 173TheLegislativeAssembly 179Scope of use . 1 79APPROVAL AND DISTRIBUTION FUNCTIONS 185The ProvincialCabinet. 185Scope of use 1 86MinistryofHumanResources 189Scope of use. . 189MinistryofHealth 191Scope of use . . . . . 191Ministry of the Attorney—General 193Scope of use . 1 94ixMinistry of Lands, Parks and Housing 195Scope of use 195SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION 196Identification of OperationalCharacteristics 197Operational Characteristics 198Regulatory policy characteristics 201Distributive policy characteristics 202Comparison of Operational Characteristics 202Conclusions 2047. CO—OPTATION 212LOCAL POLICY MEASURES 214LocalPolicyPrinciples 215LocalPolicyStatements 221LocalPolicyProcedures 225INTERGOVERNMENTAL LIAISON 231School District—Ministry Correspondence 231SpecialConferences 235Telephone Consultation 239SUNNARY OF FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION 243Identification of OperationalCharacteristics 243Operational Characteristics 245Regulatory policy characteristics 248Distributive policy characteristics ..... 248Comparison of Operational Characteristics . 249Conclusions . . . .. . . . . . .. ... . . .. . 250x8. EXCHANGE. 259FORMALNEGOTIATION 261Delegations to the Provincial Capital 262Negotiating positions and skills 262District-Jnitiated Correspondence 266Negotiating positions and skills 266SpecialConferences 272Negotiating positions and skills 273INFORMALNEGOTIATION 277UnofficialPersonalAction 277Negotiating positions and skills 277TelephoneConsultation 282Negotiating positions and skills 282SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION 285Identification of OperationalCharacteristics 286OperationaiCharacteristics 287Regulatory policy characteristics 290Distributive policy characteristics 291Comparison of Operational Characteristics 291Conclusions 2959. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS ANDS PECULATION.307SU44ARY. . . . . . . . 307PurposeoftheStudy 307Theoretical Basis of the Study 308xiResearch Methodology 310The Findings 312CONCLUSIONS 315Concerning the Elkin Typology 315Concerning the Research Methodology 323IMPLICATIONS 327Implications for Research 328Implications for Understanding 332Implications for Practical Training 335SPECULATION 338Speculation on IntergovernmentalRelations 338Speculation on Other InterorganizationalContexts 341BIBLIOGRAPHY 345APENICES 377A INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS IN CANADIANEDUCATION. . . . 378B DEFINITIONS OF ORGANIZATIONAL INFLUENCETYPES. . . 384C RESEARCH PROSPECTUS FOR PRELIMINARY CASESTUDY. . . . . . 387D QUESTIONNAIRE FOR PRESIDENTS OF LOCALTEACHERS’ ASSOCIATIONS 390E BACKGROUND DATA ON THE THREE TYPES OFSCHOOL DISTRICT SELECTED FOR STUDY 393F EXAMPLES OF REGULATORY AND DISTRIBUTIVEPOLICIES OF THE BRITISH COLUMBIA MINISTRYOF EDUCATION. . . . 397G A TYPOLOGY OF CASE STUDIES ...... 400xiiH CORRESPONDENCE REQUESTING PARTICIPATION OFSCHOOLDISTRICTPERSONNEL 402I ADVANCE ORGANIZER SENT TO INTERVIEWEES 407J THE SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEW GUIDE 409K OPERATIONAL PROFILES OF COALITION BY POLICYAND SCHOOL DISTRICT TYPES 414L COALITION WITH PUBLIC ORGANIZATIONS BYPOLICY AND SCHOOL DISTRICT TYPES 420M OFFICIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT REPRESENTATION TOEXTERNAL ORGANIZATIONS 422N STATUTORY BASIS OF COALITION WITH EXTERNALORGANIZATIONS 4240 OPERATIONAL PROFILES OF SOCIALIZATION OFTHE CONFLICT BY POLICY AND SCHOOLD I S TR I CT TYPES 4 2 9P OPERATIONAL PROFILES OF MAKING USE OF ASUPRAORGANIZATION BY POLICY AND SCHOOLDI S TR I CT TYPES 4 3 5Q OPERATIONAL PROFILES OF CO—OPTATION BYPOLICY AND SCHOOL DISTRICT TYPES 441R OPERATIONAL PROFILES OF EXCHANGE BY POLICYANDSCHOOLDISTRICTTYPES 447S SCHOOL DISTRICT-SCHOOL BOARD COMMITTEES 453T STANDING COMMITTEES OF THE SCHOOL BOARD ..... 455U SELECTED PROVISIONS IN TEACHER-SCHOOL BOARDAGREEMENTS.. 457V SUMMARY OF FORMAL, EXPANDED DEFINITIONS OFPOLITICALRESPONSES... 461xiiiLIST OF FIGURESFigure Page1 SELECT TYPOLOGIES OF ORGANIZATIONALI NFLUENCE 282 THEELKINTYPOLOGY 323 TYPESOFSCHOOLDISTRICT 404 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK 455 PSEUDONYMS FOR TYPES OF SCHOOL DISTRICT 786 FEATURES AND ATTRIBUTES OF COALITION 1097 FEATURES AND ATTRIBUTES OF SOCIALIZATION OFTHE CONFLICT 1518 FEATURES AND ATTRIBUTES OF MAKING USE OF ASUPRAORGANIZATION 2009 FEATURES AND ATTRIBUTES OF CO-OPTATION 24610 FEATURES AND ATTRIBUTES OF EXCHANGE 28811 FEATURES AND ATTRIBUTES OF OVERT POLITICALRESPONSES . 31812 FEATURES AND ATTRIBUTES OF COVERT POLITICALRESPONSES 319xivACKNOWLEDGEMENTSThis dissertation would not have been completed withoutthe expertise, assistance and encouragement of others.Through this large-scale project, I have truly learned toappreciate the human dimensions of the research enterprise.I am especially grateful to my research supervisor,Dr. Ian Housego, who shepherded this work to a meaningfulconclusion. His wise counsel and high standards deserveemulation. My sincere thanks to members of my researchcommittee, Dr. Dan Brown and Dr. Graham Kelsey, for theiralways helpful comments and prodigious patience.Indeed, I wish to acknowledge my immense gratitude,through Dr. Jean Hills, to faculty members in the Departmentof Administrative, Adult and Higher Education at U.B.C. forteaching me how to think critically and to write and speakcarefully.My sincere thanks also to Dr. Jamie Wallin, Dr. LorneDowney and Dr. Norman Robinson for their valuable assistanceduring various stages of this doctoral research. MarinaKoskinen always provided cheerful encouragement.A special thank you is due to members of the PoliticalScience Department at U.B.C., Dr. Paul Tennant, Dr. KeithBanting and Dr. John Shiry for their insightful comments andstimulating perspectives.My university examiners, Dr. William Griffith andDr. Donald Fisher, provided stimulating questions andxvdisplayed a wealth of knowledge on my research topic. Tothem, along with Dr. Donald Blake, Chairperson of my finalexamination, I extend my heartfelt thanks.Dr. Richard Townsend, external examiner for thisdissertation, has provided me with a rich storehouse ofcomments and questions for reflection and further study. Ivery much appreciate his deep interest in my study and willcontinue to hold his extensive scholarship in the highestregard.I gratefully acknowledge the financial assistanceprovided by the Canada Council, the Social Science andHumanities Research Council of Canada and the University ofBritish Columbia.Appreciation is due to senior officials of the BritishColumbia Ministry of Education, notably Jim Carter, formerDeputy Minister, Carl Daneliuk, and John Walsh, who providedme with short leaves of absence to write important seqments ofmy dissertation.I am very grateful to Dr. Dante Lupini, formerSuperintendent of Schools in School District No. 39(Vancouver), for his support and expertise. At the same time,I wish to thank the three other Superintendents of Schoolsand, indeed, all school trustees and school district officialswho served as respondents in my study.The U.B.C. Computing Centre, and the Education ComputingCentre, through Dr. Bob Bruce, deserve particular thanks.Bruce McGillivary, who assisted with copious typing in thexvifinal stages of dissertation work, is owed a sincere thankyou.Dr. Barry Lucas kindly introduced me to a whole newbody of policy literature and political inquiry. He is amasterful teacher.School district colleagues, including school trustees,in School District No. 89 (Shuswap) are a wonderful group.Their sustained interest and intellectual curiosity areappreciated.Friends, such as, Bob and Heather Taylor, PatriciaKatcsma, Edith Winters, Sherry Newbold, Bob May, Peter Owenand Alan Nicholls, provided encouragement and assistance ingetting this job done. I am particularly grateful to SeonaghCopeland, Basil and Rocky for their commitment, friendshipand understanding during what proved to be an extensiveproject.This dissertation is dedicated to my parents, Sofi andFrank Bartunek Sr., who taught me that hard work ultimatelyhas a positive outcome.CHAPTER ONETHE BACKGROUND, PURPOSE AND NATURE OF THE STUDYBACKGROUND TO THE STUDYThe literature and events of the 1970s, 1980s and1990s in public administration, and its subfield ofeducation, leave no doubt that these are turbulent timespolitically (Drucker, 1980; Drucker, 1990; Guthrie, 1981;lannaccone, 1977; Mitchell, 1990; Mosher and Wagonner, 1978;Robinson, 1981; Sackney, 1984; Sergiovanni, Burlingame,Coombs and Thurston, 1980; Townsend, 1988). Observers ofeducation as a social institution view the study ofeducational politics as important. There is a growingrecognition, for example, that the development of skills andstrategies for the management of political conflict is amark of successful organization and leadership.Political conflict between school districts andministries of education in Canada reflects the turbulentmood of the times. Relations between these two orders ofgovernment have important effects on the course of publiceducation. Yet our understanding of these relations,particularly the responses of local authorities toprovincial government policies, is very limited. Deeperinsights into the pattern of intergovernmental relations may2accrue from periodic studies of local government response.The political responses of school districts towardsministry of education policies was chosen as the focus ofthis research study. In doing so, this research attempts toprobe the nature or characteristic patterns of schooldistrict political response.Increasingly it is recognized that difficult policy-decisions are being made in a new era of educationalpolitics. This new era is characterized by confrontation andcompetition over the goals of education, resources, and thestrategies for implementation of goals, and involves a broadmixture of political actors including governments, thepublic, and a variety of interest groups. Public educationis situated in a highly politicized environment. Mitchell(1990:166) observes that professional educators and schoolpolicy—makers can draw upon three decades of increasinglysophisticated political research and analysis and,therefore, now appreciate “the essentially politicalcharacter of public education.”Politicization is obvious in a variety of forms.There are, for example, demands from various interest groupsfor cost effectiveness, quality, and equity in the deliveryof services. These demands involve certain consequences,including conflicts pertaining to the allocation ofresources of all kinds, made the more intense because of“tough” economic conditions. Conflict within the public3service sector of education has intensified and has becomemore visible. At the same time, fewer consensual solutionsand more politically negotiated kinds of settlements ofeducational issues seem to occur.Robinson (1981:6), for example, in discussing thelocal level of education, observes that by the late 1970s inboth Canada and the United States, teachers, students,school boards, parents, and citizens had all increased theirpolitical power at the expense of administrators. Robinson,moreover, notes that elections to school boards are beingkeenly contested by community groups representing diversepartisan interests. Such contests produce partisan boards;distinct groups of trustees may hold strong ideologicalviews on issues. Thus, lay control affects crucially thepolitical environment internal to school districts.Public education, however, is not administeredsolely by school districts. The environment external toschool districts, which includes the ministry of educationand its policies, must also be considered in any examinationof political response. Local political reactions may reflectdeep-rooted issues, particularly with respect to socialservices requiring joint attention; such as, education.Observers of educational governance, such as Guthrie(1981), Milstein (1976, 1980), Mosher (1975, 1977), andThomas (1978), state that frequent conflicts occur over theappropriate roles of different levels of government in the4determination and implementation of policy, especially withrespect to the locus of control. Thomas (1978:90) suggeststhat intergovernmental relationships today can be viewed asa matrix of functional policy areas which vary inimportance, and not solely as a hierarchy of superior-subordinate ranking. Discussion of political response,moreover, is applicable to a variety of forms ofintergovernmental relations in education [see Appendix A].One Canadian province, British Columbia, served asthe setting for this particular study. During the late 1970sand 1980s in British Columbia, a number of events appear tohave had a bearing on intergovernmental relations within theProvince. Prominent among these events were three large—scale studies: (i) a series of public forums held by theMinister of Education in 1981 to ascertain the state ofpublic education and culminating in a set of recommendationsentitled “Education—- A Report from the Minister”, (ii) thesurvey of the school system sponsored by the EducationMinistry in 1986 and published as “Lets Talk About Schools-- A Report to the Minister of Education and the People ofBritish Columbia” and (iii) more recently, the Report of theRoyal Commission on Education, conducted under the InquiryAct of British Columbia and submitted to the LieutenantGovernor of British Columbia during July, 1988.These studies were extensive. Each served toidentify educational issues, to ascertain the state of5public reaction to educational services in British Columbia,and to assist in the formulation of recommendations to thesenior level of government. School districts maderepresentations to the various research teams during thecourse of these investigations. A major implication of thesereports was the need to completely revise the School Act ofBritish Columbia, unaltered substantially since 1958. Thisdocument, finally revised in 1989, reflects an importantstatutory basis for the web of relationships among thevarious authorities involved with public education.Other events include the integration of handicappedchildren into regular school classrooms, adjustments in theformula for provincial-local cost—sharing, and provincialmeasures associated with financial restraint. Also, sweepinglegislative changes introduced in 1987 now place theregulation of the teaching profession under a College ofTeachers and provide for an expanded scope of teacher—schoolboard collective bargaining. Such provincial initiativeshave an impact on intergovernmental relations and invitepolitical responses by local education authorities. In acontemporary way, they also serve as a backdrop to thepurpose of this study and the nature of the problem.6PURPOSE OF THE STUDYThe public school systems in Canada’s provinces areadministered by two types of government. One type isrepresented by the ministries of education. The other iscontrolled by local school boards or county councils. Theinclination of researchers has been to focus on one or theother of these types (Awender, 1979). Relations between theministry and school districts or counties remain largelyunexplored. As a result, literature on this topic is scarce.This study addressed a largely unexplored topic. Itfocussed on the political responses of certain types ofschool districts in British Columbia to selected provincialeducation policies.Theodore Lowi (1964, 1972) suggests that there aredistinctive patterns of political activity generated bydifferent types of policy. He argues for increased researchon the subject of different “arenas of power”, or policyenvironments. This study addressed Lowi’s proposition increating and applying a scheme or framework forunderstanding certain facets of intergovernmental behaviourin British Columbia.Using this framework, the main purpose of the studywas to describe the nature of the political responses ofselected school districts to different policies of theMinistry of Education in British Columbia over nearly athree year period, August, 1978 to June, 1981. A particular7typology of six political responses was chosen for analysis:coalition, socialization of the conflict, setting up ormaking use of a supraorganization, exchange [negotiation],co-optation and penetration.Two policies of the Ministry of Education wereselected for study: Ci) the integration of handicappedchildren into regular schools; and (ii) the funding ofcapital expenditure projects in school districts. The firstis typical of a “regulatory” form of policy. The secondrepresents a “distributive” type of policy.Three urban school districts were included in thestudy. Two of the districts are situated in the metropolitanVancouver area. The third school district is located onVancouver Island. These school districts represent threetypes of local authority in education: partisanmetropolitan, non-partisan metropolitan, and non-partisanand non—metropolitan (Bartunek, 1981).The study also had three secondary purposes. Thesepertained to the empirical investigation of one typology ofpolitical response, the construction and application of aconceptual framework, and the conduct of research using aTemulti_casee? mode of inquiry.The empirical purpose involved an examination or“test” of the usefulness of a particular set of politicalresponse categories proposed by Elkin (1975). His categorieswere derived theoretically and had not been investigated8empirically. The question was, would they be useful fordescribing local political responses in the context orenvironment of ministry of education and school districtrelationships? An in—depth field study of one largemetropolitan Vancouver school district undertaken prior tothis research, but in conjunction with it, suggested theiruse might be worthwhile (Bartunek, 1979).The conceptual purpose was to delimit the studyusing a three dimensional construct of policy types, typesof school district, and types of political response.Furthermore, a multi-case approach, involving casestudies of three different types of school district, waschosen for the purpose of describing the differences in thepattern of political responses, if any, across differenttypes of school districts to the two respective types ofprovincial policies.In addition to these research purposes, otherreasons for undertaking this study were that: (i) moststudies of policy types have focussed on policy formulation,not policy consequences or political response (Shiry, 1976;Simeon, 1976; Wilson, 1981) and (ii) while some valuableresearch has been conducted on general intergovernmentalrelations in Canada, particularly federal—provincial affairs(Simeon, 1976; Wilson,1979; Ivany and Manley—Casimir,1981),there is a dearth of work on this topic from a politicalresponse perspective.9NATURE OF THE PROBLEMThe history of relations between local authoritiesand central governments in education predates Confederation.These relations, like the interactions among governmentalauthorities in jurisdictions other than education, oftenhave proven to be intricate and uncertain. Awender(1979:609) observes that “one of the major dilemmasconfronting Canadians throughout most of their history hasbeen that of intergovernmental relations.” Historically, thepolitical arena in British columbia has provided many issuesof contention.Periodic attempts by the Ministry of Education toconsolidate school districts, disagreements over what shouldconstitute appropriate curriculum standards, and regulardemands by school districts for greater local autonomy serveas examples. Ungerleider (1987:135), for example, observesthat educational finance and “the proper relationship”between provincial and local authorities in education “havebeen two inextricable issues since the early years of thiscentury in British Columbia.”From a political perspective, school districts andprovincial ministries of education are often locked in astruggle over issues with respect to power-sharing, finance,and the execution of a host of educational responsibilities10and functions. The participants in this struggle have astake in the outcomes of the various issues. They probe thecharacter of intergovernmental issues in an attempt tounderstand and control the struggle because they have apractical stake in doing so.The student of intergovernmental, relations also hasa stake -— an analytical one -- in understanding thecharacter of practical and theoretical issues. Thisanalytical interest invites certain broader questions. Forexample, do governments really comprehend the nature andscope of the intergovernmental relationships from which manyeducational issues arise? Assuming not, for lack ofevidence, then ancillary questions are as follows: Whatkinds of conceptual perspectives or approaches might beuseful for understanding intergovernmental relations? Andsubsequently, what kinds of intergovernmental research mightbe undertaken? Such questions were asked early during thecourse of general literature reviews of the subject andassisted in the development of the study.The real impetus for these questions, however,stemmed from the concentrated media attention on localprovincial issues during the late 1970s in the Province ofBritish Columbia. In this observer’s view, school districtMinistry of Education relations appeared to be much moreintense and fractious in British Columbia than in theprovinces of Manitoba and Ontario, two provinces where the11observer had resided and conducted general educationalresearch prior to emigrating to British Columbia. Schooldistricts in British Columbia appeared to be constantlyduelling with the Provincial Government on a broad range ofintergovernmental issues.As a result of these early observations andcontinued interest in the local responses of schooldistricts to provincial government policies, an in-depthcase study of the Vancouver School District was undertakento gain further insight into the character of local—provincial relations in education. This field study,involving all senior, central office administrators inSchool District No. 39 (Vancouver) and the Vancouver Boardof School Trustees, was also meant to serve as the basis fora later, more focussed study. Results of this single casestudy assisted in the formulation of clearer purposes forfurther research.DELIMITATIONS OF THE STUDYThe complexity of intergovernmental relations ineducation, and the analytical approach of this studynecessitated that certain restrictions be placed on thescope of this research. Selection of the three differenttypes of school districts in the Province of BritishColumbia was determined according to partisan and12metropolitan criteria. The two Ministry of Educationpolicies, integration of the handicapped and the funding ofcapital expenditure projects, were chosen over otherpotential policies for analysis. Alternate typologies ofpolitical response, as outlined in Chapter Two, might havebeen employed in this research. Elkin’s typology, however,was chosen because it was most suggestive of the means bywhich local authorities manage their interdependence withrespect to other organizations.The methodology used to conduct this research wasthe “multi—case approach”, sometimes referred to in theliterature as the comparative case approach. The choice ofthis approach resulted in “thick descriptive data” whichgave rise to insights into the patterns of intergovernmentalrelationships. At the same time, the applicability of theresults to other provinces remains limited. This limitationis due to the qualitative nature of the research methodologyand to the selection of only three districts, all in oneCanadian province, as the sample for this study.Three “intervening factors” should be considered inany replication: (i) the three year time frame of thisstudy, August 1978 to June 1981, (ii) the dynamic changes inBritish Columbia education subsequent to this period, and(iii) the use of triangulation, in the form of a variety ofdata, requiring intensive analysis and, correspondingly, anextensive commitment of time.13OVERVIEW OF THE DISSERTATIONThe dissertation is divided into nine chapters.Chapter One sets the context of the study, the purpose ofthe study, the nature of the problem, delimitations, and theorganization of the dissertation.Chapter Two provides an understanding of keyconcepts and in related literature. It emphasizes theconcept of political response (Elkin, 1975) inintergovernmental relations and related variables such aspolicy type (Lowi, 1964, 1972), and type of school district.Furthermore, it provides certain insights into the notion ofpolicy impact, an abstract concept important tounderstanding the association amongst policy, schooldistrict and political response type.Using these variables, Chapter Three presents ascheme for examining intergovernmental relations andconducting research of political response within theintergovernmental arena. This chapter also lists theresearch questions, summarizes the procedures used forsample selection and data collection, and discusses themethod used to analyze the data.Chapters Four to Eight inclusive provide findingsand discuss the various political responses of the differenttypes of school district, (1) partisan metropolitan, (ii)14non—partisan metropolitan and (iii) non—partisan and non-metropolitan. The use of these responses is associated withthe Provincial Government policies of integratinghandicapped children into regular schools and capitalexpenditure funding. Particular attention is paid toproviding descriptions of Elkin’s categories of politicalresponse in action. Introductory comments, findings anddiscussion, including certain conclusions pertaining to theindividual responses are provided in each of the chapters.Chapter Nine of the dissertation summarizes thefindings, presents the conclusions of the study, anddiscusses certain implications for research and practice.In a supplementary way, the appendices support andexpand upon certain aspects of the study.15CHAPTER TWOPOLICY TYPES, POLITICAL RESPONSE AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS:A REVIEW OF THE LITERATUREThis chapter presents a review of the literaturerelevant to the dissertation topic. The multi—faceted natureof local—provincial relations leads to the discussion ofinterrelated concepts such as types of policy, types ofpolitical response and types of affected school districts.Together and individually, these concepts assist in probingfor the characteristics of school district politicalresponse to Ministry of Education policies. In what followsin this chapter, each of these major concepts is addressedand defined for the purposes of the dissertation.TYPES OF POLICYA classification scheme devised by Lowi (1964, 1972)suggests a relationship between public policies and theirconsequences. What inspired Lowi in the early 1960s toformulate a typology of political activity was the apparentdisorder and inconclusiveness of predominant approaches topolitical study. Lowi (1964) questioned the suitability ofpolitical case studies, done up to this point in the United16States. The political case studies he surveyed exhibited“discrete facts” rather than “cumulative” elements whichwould facilitate a comparative analysis of cases. Lowiproposed a scheme for cumulating, comparing, contrasting,and generalizing about the findings of political casestudies. This classification scheme is based upon thefollowing argument (Lowi, 1964: 688):(1) The types of relationships to be found amongpeople are determined by their expectations -— bywhat they hope to achieve or get from relating toothers. (2) In politics, expectations aredetermined by governmental outputs or policies.(3) Therefore, a political relationship isdetermined by the type of policy at stake, so thatfor every type of policy there is likely to be adistinctive type of political relationship.Public policies, for Lowi, are defined in relationto their impact or perceived impact on society. Accordingly,Lowi formulated certain categories of public policy. Hehypothesized that different policies correspond to differentgovernment activities or arenas of power. This point of viewhas since been accepted by Adie and Thomas (1982); Shiry(1977); Simeon (1976); and Wilson (1978, 1981). Lowisuggested that each arena is characterized by disparatepatterns of political activity. In other words, each type ofpolicy constitutes a different “policy prism.” These policytypes or prisms serve as indicators of ensuing politicalactivity with varying degrees of clarity and precision.A comprehensive analysis of Lowi’s work undertaken17by Shiry (1977) found that “regulatory” and “distributive”types of policies appear to be most useful for researchpurposes. These two indicators of consequent politicalactivity, according to Shiry, are “narrower in their impact”and hence have more precision (Shiry, 1977: 84).Rather than providing succinct definitions of thedifferent policy types, Lowi essentially describes themeaning of each of his policy types in relation to eachother. By choosing to define the types only in relation toeach other, he leaves their individual meaning unclear.Other shortcomings of the Lowi typology are cited by Harman(1978:17): “(1) not all the categories are logicallyexclusive, and (2) there are empirical difficulties becausethe policy types are expressed in non—quantitative terms.”In the opinion of this writer, the shortcomings stated byHarman are not major ones. Survey research of thequantitative kind advocated by Harman may not have uncoveredthe complexity of political behaviour found through the casestudy mode of investigation used in this research.A more significant problem is the lack of clarity ineach of Lowi’s policy types. Secondary sources wereconsulted, therefore, in order to describe more fully themeaning and usage of regulatory and distributive policies.Makielski (1980: 27), for example, notes thefollowing differences between regulatory and distributivepoll c i e 5:18Regulatory policies are designed to controlbehaviour. Frequently they are attempts to preventbehaviours that are considered to be economicallyor socially dangerous .... Some regulatorypolicies may actually be aimed at protecting whatis considered to be an important interest. Landuse zoning, for instance, can preserve the qualityof residential neighbourhoods .... The originaljustification for regulating the airways was toprevent one radio station’s programmes fromdrowning out another’s.Distributive policies are those which providedirect (and usually economic) benefits to a group.Government subsidies, whether to farmers,corporations, cities, school districts, orhospitals, are the most common examples.The value of Lowi’s typology is that it directs theattention of the political researcher to patterns ofpolitical activity resulting from policy decisions. Inreferring to policy consequences, or outcomes based on aclassification of policy types, Lowi stresses that it is notonly the actual outcomes, but the expectations as to whatthe outcomes can be, that shape the issues and determinetheir politics (Lowi, 1964: 707). This emphasis onexpectations and consequences underlines Lowi’spreoccupation with the concept of policy impact.What may appear as a simple concept dealing with theeffects of public policy actually represents a complexpolitical process. Grumm (1975: 443) describes the varietyof meanings inherent in the policy impact process asfollows:19“Impact” can be a very broad term, indeed, and onethat can have many aspects and dimensions. On atemporal dimension, impact can be feltimmediately, or in the short run, or in the longrun. In terms of stages or phases, it could beprimary, secondary, or tertiary, and so on. Impactmay be direct, or indirect, latent or manifest,intended or unintended. It may be regarded inrespect to its effect on individuals, groups,society, the physical environment, the structureof the political system, inputs to the system, orsubsequent policy outputs of the system.As a result, policy decisions of a provincialgovernment may have wide-ranging political effects on localgovernment. One impact of a ministry of education policywithin a school district, for example, may be thewholehearted implementation of it. On the other hand, inanother school district it may evoke resistance and resultin minimal compliance. A degree of order can be imposed onour understanding of policy—related problems if “impact” isviewed as a pattern of political happenings emanating from apolicy decision or output (Grumm, 1975: 443).Dye (1978) and Sharkansky (1970) advocate that theconcepts of economic and political impact, as understood infinancial relations between governments, be considered inthe study of policy impact generally. The application of theconcept of impact (as it is used in revenue-sharing, forexample) to intergovernmental relations in education isespecially apt, since most provincial education policieshave financial overtones, if they are not altogetherfinancial in nature.20Certain political aspects or dimensions of financialimpact appear then to have an application to the politicalresponses of local education authorities. The followingones, suggested by Juster (1977), are noteworthy:(1) examination of the various political issuesraised by general revenue—sharing, (2) the extentto which state and local government officialssupported or opposed the programme, (3) theassessment of state and local government officialsof the impact of revenue-sharing on local politicsand decision- making, (4) their views about theconsequences of revenue-sharing forintergovernmental relations, and (5) theirpreferences for adjusting the revenue-sharingprogramme in the years ahead.Understanding the political complexities ofintergovernmental relations as outlined by Juster may befacilitated if the researcher concentrates on respectiveportions of this broad subject for analysis. This being theapproach taken in this study, it was thought that clarity inthe formulation of research questions and the researchendeavour overall might better be kept under control. Hawleyand Lipsky (1976: 3), furthermore, note:There has been very little research on thepolitical consequences of intergovernmentalrelationships, and even less has been done toconceptualize the nature of these relationships sothat a framework in which they might be analyzedparsimoniously can be developed.The concept of policy impact, if left looselydefined, is suggestive of other possible kinds of political21activities such as those strictly internal to schooldistricts and policy implementation. Therefore, the term“impact” as used in this study is defined morecategorically. It refers to the nature of the types ofpolitical response used by three school districts withrespect to selected policies of the Ministry of Education.It does not focus on political activity internal to thesedistricts often associated with policy implementation.The concept of policy impact suggests thatclassification or categorization generally would be anappropriate analytical tool for identifying and describingpolitical interaction between governments. Theclassification of policies according to type, for example,is regarded by many policy researchers as an importantelement for the analysis of policies and their impact (Adieand Thomas, 1982; Hayes, 1981; Lowi, 1964, 1972; Salisburyand Heinz, 1970; Shiry, 1977; Simeon, 1976; Wilson, 1978,1981).According to the perspective outlined above,policies determine politics. The policy impact notion of thepolicy process is an alternative to the conventional viewwhere political behaviour is seen to determine policy.Investigation of the meaning of “impact” was helpful indistinguishing different policy types-- regulatory anddistributive, and the various possible outcomes orconsequences; such as, “political response.”22TYPES OF POLITICAL RESPONSEAs noted earlier, the political reactions of schooldistricts to provincial education policies serve as thefocal point of this study. A basic premise of this researchis that public policies have a political impact. Policiescan and often do stimulate responses from the organizationsto which they directly apply, as well as to otherorganizations in the environment. Easton (1965: 127)considers it vital “to trace out the consequences of theseoutputs as they affect the environment” if there is to be acomprehensive understanding of policy relationships. Thisstudy has attempted to accomplish this objective.The concept of impact presented by Grumm (1975) andLowi (1964, 1972) characterizes intergovernmental relationsas a stimulus—response relationship. For example, ifministry policy is viewed as the stimulus, school districtreaction is the response. This notion of stimulus andresponse is referred to by Evan (1972: 78) as applicable tointerorganizational study, of which intergovernmentalrelations is, of course, a special case. Evan notes that thepattern of research in organization behaviour has beenexactly the reverse of the stimulus—response variety found,for example, in behaviouristic psychology.Evan suggests that the study of interorganizationalrelations should start with the assumption that(DC3‘.0C)‘ti‘(5‘130‘-i’‘(10P30CDCD0X1CD0Fl00(P‘10U)FlC)F5Fl‘(3ftFl<CT)F—iFl‘.0F-‘<10ft10<10‘.0F-CDC)CDP3I-”‘-.‘C)P3I—’C)P3I-”P3I-”P3P3P3FlCDFlftC)ftCDiC)Zi‘1‘.C))HCDtC)ftftU)<CD‘-3*0‘-s-oCDI-”Di<CDC)<NCDP30C)P3<trU)JiftU)ZNCD1—CDCD:iU)P3CDP3iFlU)CDFl’t5CD••0555P301ZCDi-01ft‘-3P3tTCDf—‘.0ruCDftftft1-’<OCDP3CDDiP3’rJ‘.<U)•cttYU)0‘-“--fttT0r3IFl•ftQCD<FlCDU)P3U)ZU)0Di5U)‘-1CDI—”0C:ft•C:<(DiD-tCDrtC)(JU)0•<U)10U)(0U)ftftFlDiFli-U)FlP3-U)*-ftft‘-3P3C)ft‘(5ctFlC:CDCD‘ti3J’00C)0Y’(1)FlM<•0FlCDDi<0U)C:Di0C:Z’-”C)<CDC:‘-“C:(P5CDU)ftCDFlU)(3f--‘t3FlP35U)P3CDZ0P3C)0FlC:U)U)‘(5‘FlI-H,I—’0rtCDF1CD5ZQCDIftC:C)Zi—CDU)00-ftC:‘.0P3CD-P3i--t’0Fl‘.0CDU)ftS(0:i‘<C)‘<0Flft—C)H,010CDSwU)CftCDP3<YCD‘(50Zi-ti0t-’•‘(35ftO0F-U)(DF1—.CTCTCDCDftFl0U)CT00C)0P3Qi-tii-”T0-CDF<01P3oi-tiftH,U)()I—’<P3H,t-’U)P3P3Q10CDP3_15CDU)Zi-’DiC)ft5F-”ft•Fl<1H,01U)P3(0SC:0.’C)CTP3f-’CDP3U)U)CD”t-(ii0ftU)U)FlC)‘(5C)ftDiI-”•i-’-CDI—’<ft‘-30Z••Fl0‘<(PC:DiC:Flftt3ftCD‘<CD<O.’•C:’.QDiC)U)00I-ftFlfti-tiCDft‘.0U)C:NU)5CDi-•FlCDfti-i,‘(5DiU)ftCD0U)CD0U)C:U)’<SU)SU)i-tiCDCDftHI-’-I—’‘1U)FlIC)(PDiCT0CDCD5TIM‘(505CDZ01C)<•ftU)P3C).’10ftFlQj(DP3U)—Fl0C)(00(1)C:•i—’rt.I--<Q.’U)-’•CDC:C:C)U)I—’‘-3JCD“ftCDU)•P3P3-’015ftU)U)ftP3-3I-”0I-”CTDi.rtFlP3ftCDC:I-”U)DiDiU)Fl503CDCDOJP3(D-’ftCDIU)I—’-FliftP3CDC:‘(5U)‘(5FlSCDP)P3CDc-t0.,CD0.,C)CD10CDFl(1)CDC:<(PCDCDDCD5CD00-(1)CDCTftHC:0ZF—”<CDCDP-CU)FlFl5P3i—’F-’CDDiP3C)(D<(D(1I—’00P310‘.0ftCDC:I—’i-’•CD*ftrf0ctU)U)P30-“H,FlTU)DiP31ftC)CDCD5CDFl<rtFlC:Dift0)1CDftyi-.CD010‘(3CD0P3010CDFl5F-’5i-’•‘-P30ZI-’’-’ZF-’i-”P3U)CDCDDi0CDNNCTct‘1ft‘rj<DiP3CDFl-’-5’-I---’0U)>‘3‘.0ft“ftDiDi(PCD0“U)ctC)<ZCDCDP3t)-’-CDft0C)ftftI—’0ftF—’Fl0O-FlO.CYU)U)ftDiCDC:CDZS‘--“‘-‘I-”)i-’-ft‘-‘U0Fl0CDCDftI—’C)SFlFlCTU)i-’•CD00CDCD‘-‘C)ZCD‘.0C:CTI—”T50(DC:-‘-C)iCDFlU)3H,U)0‘<SU)0C:DiCDP3C:FlH,U)TP3•UIDi•CD‘rj<ftctctctH,CDQi-’DiftFlCD‘150CDI0CD0.’0U)0Fl-‘•<0CDC)FlF-’‘15‘101ftiFlOCDI—’•FlftI—’-U)(PCDC)(0CD-U)ZJP3CDft0‘tIU)H,P3Di‘U0CDSCDU)ftCDP3CDCDU)0C:I—’CDU)CDFlF-’0C:H,U)CT)0.’0FlI-.’-C)DiFlft0H,CTC)<ftP-IFlC)ftI—’ftft-.ft.....‘.CDClP3ftDiCD‘-‘ctP3DiDiJ01I-’QCDct0I—’iC)CD0F-’U)F-’CDFl10(P‘.<24to as “the hidden dimension of government” (Awender, 1979).This view may have been widespread in the past. The growinginterdependence of organizations suggests thatintergovernmental relations, and other forms ofinterorganizational activity, are becoming increasinglyvisible. Pfeffer and Salancik (1978: 92), for example, statethat as a consequence of the growing interdependence oforganizations, organizations make more demands on each otherin order to obtain a degree of control over each other’sactivities. The objective for doing so, according to thesewriters, is to predictably meet or protect thereby the needsand interests of each.The essence of the argument so far concerningpolitical response is as follows: The concept of policytype, and its inherent notion of impact, assist in viewingthe complexity of political relationships associated withintergovernmental relations. Political influence is thegeneral means by which governmental organizations attempt tocontrol their interdependence. The mutual exchange ofinfluence is analogous to a stimulus—response relationshipamong living organisms. Local response, in the form ofpolitical influence, is exerted on the Ministry of Educationeither when school districts are reluctant or unable tocomply with ministry policies (the stimuli), or else whenthey wish to affect the distribution of provincial benefits(Bartunek, 1979, 1981a, 1981b).25The manner in which school districts respond toministry policies is important. It has been found, forexample, that organizations which are constantly subjectedto successful influence attempts by external organizationsplace themselves in situations where their long termsurvival is threatened (Pfeffer and Salancik, 1978: 95). Inorder to protect their autonomy and to reduce constraints,the local school district may take actions to influencereciprocally the objectives and demands of the centralauthority.Influence is a fundamental element in the process ofpolitical interaction between individuals and groups. Itoccurs in transactions or exchanges which have behaviouralconsequences. Picus (1991) suggests that a routine purposeof intergovernmental grant instruments is to steerrecipients to some desired behaviour or outcome. Picusobserves, for example, that the State of California duringthe 1980s successfully enacted a series of incentiveprogrammes designed to encourage school districts toallocate increased resources toward instructionalexpenditures. In this case example implementation decisionswere left up to the recipients rather than to statespecifications. Thus, intergovernmental grants were embeddedeffectively in the school funding formula to stimulatedesired local action.Similarly, case study findings on the politics of26public school choice during the era of educational reform inMinnesota found that legislators can exert significantleverage on the restructuring of public schools (Mazzoni,1991). This research suggests that intergovernmentalpolitical influence occurs within a spectrum of differentpolicy arenas. The arenas possess unique characteristics andmay be essentially stable or alternately unstable anddynamic. Mazzoni adds that powerful influence strategies areavailable to top-level officials to buttress theirpersistent efforts at personal persuasion.Given that modern organizations exist in a complexenvironment composed of other organizations, norms andsituational factors, it follows that there will be a certaindegree of interdependence between organizations and relatedenvironmental characteristics. I-lodge and Anthony (1979:62)refer to this interdependence as environmental interface, inthat the organization will establish linkages with theenvironment in order to maintain a degree of opennessbetween the organization and its environment. Linkages andpolitical responses, however, are not synonymous terms.Linkages, for purposes of this study, are deemed to beconstituent parts of political responses.In discussing linkages, Hodge and Anthony (1979:62),moreover, suggest the following important consideration:The organization must decide which mechanisms andprocesses it will use to interface with its27environment and the extent to which the interfaceshall function. For example, the organization mustdecide such practical issues as ... Who shouldprovide the organization with information oncustomer/client needs and satisfaction, and howshall it be provided? ... And how shall theorganization interact with government regulatoryagencies?Townsend (1971) in a study of school board policymaking in Chicago, noted that the work oninterorganizational analysis by Thompson and McEwan (1958)might be used as an alternative conceptualization fordescribing school system politics. This alternative suggeststhat conflict and collaboration between organizations caninvolve the strategic use of various types of interactionsuch as coalition, co—optation, bargaining and competition(Townsend, 1971:263). Moreover, in an earlier study, Tennant(1962) studied the degree and means of school boardinfluence on the Government of British Columbia. Tennant’sstudy identified certain direct and indirect means by whichschool boards enlisted support for local influence. Thisstudy also discussed political responses used in selectedareas of educational administration. The political responsesof one type of educational authority to another may bethought of as ways in which organizations exert influence.A search of the literature resulted in theidentification of several typologies of organizationalinfluence. Four such sets are outlined in Figure 1. Thesetypologies of organizational influence are brieflyHESKETT(1972)ELKIN(1975)SCHARPF,REISSERT,KOTTER,SCHLESINGER&andSCHNBEL(1978)SATI-IE(1979)RewardCoalitionProblem-SolvingEducation/CommunicationCoercionCo-optationPersuasionParticipationExpertnessExchangeBargainingFacilitationandSupportLegitimacyPenetrationCoercionNegotiationIdentificationSocializationoftheConflictCo-optationSettingtiporMakingUseofaManipulationSupraorganizationCoercionr)Figure1SelectTypologiesofOrganizationalInfluence29summarized in Appendix B. Two of the four typologies havebeen tested empirically (Heskett, 1972; Scharpf, Reissert,and Schnabel, 1978). The set described by Heskett (1972),for example, has been applied to a major American study ofintergovernmental relations in education (Milstein, 1976).This particular typology is sometimes referred to as powerbases (French and Raven, 1959; Freisen, 1975).The two other sets of organizational influence(Elkin, 1975; Kotter, Schlesinger, and Sathe, 1979), do notyet appear to have been investigated empirically. Both haveelements in them which correspond to the empiricallyinvestigated typologies. This suggests perhaps theimportance of these elements and their prevalence inpractice.Elkin’s typology of political response stemmed fromhis research in comparative urban politics, particularlylocal government in England and the United States. He noted,for example, that local governments in England were moredependent for resources on the central authority or nationalgovernment than were their American counterparts on state ornational governments. In this respect, he provided thefollowing observations:The degree of bargaining varies, as does thedegree of dependence, and so a variety of types ofrelationship are present, running from the use ofintricate strategies to extract resources whichattempt to draw in attentive publics, to insulatedroutinized patterns, where the professional30relationships of civil servants dominate theproceedings.Elkin’s objective was to formulate certain conceptsin order to enable a better analysis of the differences hediscovered in comparative urban politics. He acknowledgedthat organizations such as local governments have what hecalls “defined geographic competency”, which here is takento mean legitimate authority within given boundaries. Hemaintained that much of what is interesting about localgovernments was situated outside of the organizationalboundaries (Elkin, 1975: 162). In this sense, Elkin sharedthe point of view of Evan (1972), Pfeffer and Salancik(1978) and Tennant (1962).Elkin supported his call for the use of morespecific concepts to analyze interorganizational orintergovernmental relations by also observing the followingshortcomings in present approaches:It is also worth noting that at present systemsapproaches in urban politics are unsatisfactorybecause the conceptualization is often at so higha level of generality that in practice conceptsseem to be headings for a lengthy list ofvariables and little else. Such system theoristsstart with concepts whose scope is so broad as toencompass an enormous range of empiricalexigencies which means that the concepts lack anycutting edge.Elkin advocated the following concepts for the studyof intergovernmental relations: coalition, socialization of31the conflict, setting up or making use of asupraorganization, exchange (negotiation), co-optation, andpenetration [see Figure 2 ]. Elkin predicted the usefulnessof these concepts for understanding reciprocal influenceswithin a network of governmental organizations. He concurredwith Thompson who suggested earlier that each of theorganizations in this kind of network has a domain, orsphere of competence, which it seeks to protect or expand(Thompson, 1967).Elkin suggested that the local organization whichserves as the focus of study in the interorganizationalnetwork has a range of available strategies by which tomanage its dependence on other organizations (Elkin, 1975:174). In addition to providing “a language” for theunderstanding of some of the basic problems of comparativepolitics, Elkin also took note of other characteristics oflocal authorities, such as, the political culture, thepresence of political parties, and the classification oflocal authorities as “city” or “metropolitan” in type. Suchcharacteristics, specifically the classification of thelocal school board as partisan or non—partisan in membershipand the school district as metropolitan or nonmetropolitan, are also taken into consideration in thisresearch. A prime reason for doing so was, in conjunctionwith other factors, to ascertain the differences, if any,among districts.POLITICALRESPONSEDEFINITION(Elkin,1975)COALITIONreferstoattemptsbythefocalorganizationtojoinwithothers,forexample,tomaketheprovisionofsomeresourcemorepredictable.SOCIALIZATIONOFTHEisanattempttowidenthescopeofconflictbyinvolvingpreviouslyCONFLICTuninvolvedparties,who,hopefullywillalterthebalanceofopinionandresourcesfacingtheorganizationdispensingtheresource.SETTINGUPORMAKINGreferstotheattemptbythefocalorganizationtoshiftthearenaUSEOFASUPRAORGA-ofdecisiontooneinwhichitismorefavoured.ThismaybedoneNIZATIONbyshiftingthedecisiontoanalreadyexistingorganizationinwhichthefocalactorandtheotherorganizationareumembersuorworkingtowardssettingupsuchanarena.CO-OPTATIONreferstoattemptsbythefocalorganizationtoincorporateintoitsowndecision-makingstructuretheorganizationonwhomitisdependentsoastoassureregularsupportforitsactivities.EXCHANGEoccurswhenthefocalorganizationattemptstobargainwiththeorganizationonwhomitisdependent.Eachmayofferanincreaseinsomeresourceoranincreaseinthereliablityofitsprovision.PENETRATIONreferstoattemptsbythefocalorganizationtopenetratetheorganizationonwhomitisdependent,usuallybytryingtointroducesomeofitspersonnelintothelatter.Thisisthereverseofco—optation.Figure2TheElkinTypology33Additional reasons for using the Elkin typology areavailable. For example, this typology does not appear tohave been applied empirically to the study ofintergovernmental relations in education. Moreover, severalof Elkin’s organizational responses were found to be presentin the in—depth case study of intergovernmental relationsinvolving School District No. 39 (Vancouver) which wasconducted by the author prior to this particular research(Bartunek, 1979). This finding added weight to the potentialutility of these political responses.That preliminary study of one local authority ineducation resulted in the following queries: Do schooldistricts, other than the one in the preliminary study, usepolitical responses, such as, those reflected in the Elkintypology? If so, what are the operational characteristics ofsuch responses? Would the political responses of schooldistricts categorized according to different partisan andmetropolitan types be similar or different with respect toregulatory and distributive policies? And what might thesepatterns of political activity look like? This dissertationattempts to answer these questions.Before establishing a scheme for the classificationof school districts according to partisan and metropolitanvariants, it is acknowledged that other categories of impactmay be formulated; such as, political activity internal toschool districts and their implementation profiles. However,34it should be kept in mind that the study of politicalresponse is the focus of this research. The other twocategories of impact are not emphasized analytically.It should be understood that the concept of impactused in this research is behavioural in nature. Thedifferent categories of possible impact—- politicalresponse, internal politics, and policy implementation--may be highly interrelated in practice. In this study,however, certain analytical distinctions have been drawn tofocus on the description of one category of policy outcomesor consequences, political response.A major difference exists, for example, betweentypes of political response and policy implementation.Policy implementation is oriented to the internalenvironment of school districts and refers to ways in whichschool districts attempt to execute or install ministry ofeducation policies. Political response, on the other hand,may or may not be oriented to the execution of ministrypolicies. This concept refers to how local districtsgenerally reacted to features of the external environment.This reaction is contingent upon the respective states oftheir internal environments and assessments of opportunitiesand constraints in the external environment.Classification of school districts according totype, moreover, assists in examining political responsesunder differing conditions of local governance. Also of35interest is whether school districts expressed theirresponses to ministry policies similarly or differently.TYPES OF SCHOOL DISTRICTIn an extensive review of intergovernmental studies,Rhodes (1981) cautions that the literature on the topic ofinterorganizational analysis reveals certain limitations ofthe interorganizational approach. According to Rhodes(1981:88), the literature of interorganizational analysisrarely explores the consequences of interdependentbehaviour, particularly the use of strategies for policymaking, but rather tends to be concerned with variations inthe patterns of interaction for their own sake.To counter the apparent weakness ofinterorganizational analysis for policy studies, Rhodes(1981:88) emphasizes the need to incorporate considerationof what Perrow (1972:199) refers to as the “figure”, or theinteractions of organizations, as well as the “ground”, orthe values and the distribution of power within anorganization. The importance of “ground” for understandingintergovernmental relations is underlined by Simeon (1976).In his study of policy-making within Canadian federalism,contextual factors such as the interests brought to bear onthe policy process and the wider environment are consideredto be important determinants of interactions.Rhodes (1981:90), however, underlines the point that36the literature on intergovernmental relations may beunsuccessful to date in reconciling the analysis of thecontext with the analysis of interactions. Nonetheless,Rhodes (1981:90) maintains that the literature onintergovernmental relations demonstrates that the linkbetween ground and figure is essential to any attempt atexplaining interactions and their consequences for policy.lannaconne and Lutz (1974:29) state that educationalgovernance can be viewed from the perspective of theideological and demographic dimensions of politicalsubcultures such as school districts, or what Perrow andRhodes refer to as the “ground”. If educational governanceis viewed from this perspective, according to lannaccone andLutz, then major differences exist in the politicalbehaviour of urban and non-urban school districts,Differences, of course, can also exist within bothcategories of district. The struggle for local control ofeducation in metropolitan areas, for example, is generallyregarded as being different from that in urban areas. Onecharacteristic difference is the evidence of local civic(partisan) political parties in some metropolitan schooldistricts of Canada.The significance of the term “metropolitan” alsobears examination. For purposes of this study, it is deemedto be a very large and densely populated urban area,comprised of several distinct communities and a number of37different local governments. This meaning of the termclosely resembles, but is not synonymous with, thegeographic boundaries and jurisdiction of the regionaldistrict form of government in British Columbia andelsewhere in Canada. A functional description presented byNorton Long (1973: 36—37) is instructive:In large measure, the metropolitan area is akind of natural governmental ecology in whichinstitutions, groups and governments havedeveloped a system of largely unintendedcooperation through which things get done and thearea considered as a system functions. The owlsand the field mice, the oaks and the acorns, theflora and the fauna of the woodlot have workedover time a most effective system of unintendedcooperation that, barring catastrophe, preservesand maintains a systemic balance, though one thatevolves over time. By and large, we accept asimilar system of unintended cooperation forrunning our economy. ... The metropolitan area asa system for handling common problems is a goingconcern. The rather considerable problems of verylarge populations living under great diversity ofgovernments have been managed.Local civic political parties (other times referredto in the literature as civic action movements) in Canadianeducation are particularly a metropolitan phenomenon(Williams, 1977:3). Such civic parties attempt to mobilizepublic support by sponsoring a slate of candidates to schoolboard office. These civic parties tend to displayideological differences (Neilsen and Robinson, 1980). Forpurposes of this study, therefore, school districts withlocal party representation on the school board are referred38to as partisan in nature. Other school districts areregarded as non-partisan.Peterson (1974:350) and Williams (1977:3) state thatschool board members do not tend to be elected because oftheir affiliation with political parties, and seldom claimto represent a particular segment or group within thecommunity. Research in the politics of Canadian education,however, shows that school board elections are notcompletely non-partisan. Work by Williams and others(1977:3) on educational governance in metropolitan Torontofound the following characteristics pertaining to thestruggle for local control: (i) in some localities thepolitical party network did play a major, though lowprofile, role in school board election campaigns; (ii)school board candidates did not avoid existing politicalparty machinery; and (iii) in several locales, according toWilliams (1977:3), notably Toronto, Winnipeg, Vancouver, andMontreal, “citizen—action movements” actively campaign fortheir candidates’ election to school board office.The involvement of civic political parties, orcitizen—action movements, makes for a partisan struggleamong competing ideologies and groups. The objective of eachof these political groups is to win local control ofeducation. This competition raises the question whether thepartisan or non—partisan basis of the struggle for localcontrol in metropolitan communities is reflected in schoolt-1-Ft00P3J’i-•th11C)CDçLQtOC)CD1DiQl0—aii-iP3FtI-”I-”Q.*Pt,rtNN0DiDii‘1CDZrtFtLaoP3‘-“P3P-’00Cto:i0-ci‘<uiI-..ttiDiDioI’P3(Mici(UCDU)Dlp3Q..P1F-I—’DiP3oFtDiC)oI—sFtU)CD00CD<La-CDCDDi-.‘<I—iFti—iroP3cx)0CDU)rioMiri<oU)0t)tJFtZCDPt,P3“<CD0-CDP3P3U)c01U)U)‘<C)0U)U)0Mi<I-..C)U)U)CDFt-0I-”CD0DiFtU)U)LaCDCD-Ø0P1P3CDP)01C)F—iCDPcIU)l-•P1MiCD0Cl,i-’•P3CDCD0CD0’FtCDCDCtFt01CtCDFt‘IooU) P3LaFtCDCDU)LaI-’CliFtU)5P3-‘•0Ci3U)CDU)‘.‘.DlCtFtf-’P1CDU)-1.<i—i.—QiNC)icCDCtFt0<P3U)CDMiFtI-I-’P1CDU)U)0tOCD-Ft1QI—’.LatO<Di0CDtOP3CDt,toP1CD‘1Pt,U)i-•iP1P30CtNoFtU)P1U)DiCDDiLaFtDC)CDDiDiCt-‘•FtJ0U)C)HP3)oU)0NCtDiC)DioPcICt1CDU)00‘-CT)FtCD0U)0U)DiI—’i-’‘CDCtDi01DiMiCD‘1C)ociDiC)t,tP10U)70P3U)MiCD)1FtFt‘1i-’DiP1LaDlU)FtC)*-‘•-P1-“U)C)0*P3C)FtP1P3rit,0(UI—’-CDU)F-’U)Di•CDCiCDU)-I-’•)DiC)P1DiI-’CDt’.)C)DiU)CD)CDDiU)P3DiP1U)‘-C)0-‘U)U)0C) 0U)t$PciCiCD‘-10t,CD0‘-‘U)CDU)0FtMiCi)FtMiHU)C)0CDFtCDU)CP1CDCtP1C)U)CtDiCDU)15’FttT0P317’I—’00Ft0FtCDCDMiMi0I-’tOoi-.HP3PcIDiiiiiP3P1LaCtCt01P1CDDi(UCDFtP1P1—I-”01La(I)MiNCD0<P30Di‘t.5<S—FtCDCDP1I-,.Z‘1U)oCi0CDZCDFtU)CDIP1CDiC)t,0C)CDçtDit,•DiPc)‘10F-’‘1CtI—’LaCT)-‘I-”Fto<Ft<<:‘-3i.-’.DiDit,CDJ’0DCDP1CDP1C-U)CDU)DiI—,I-’Z-CDDi<Ci-‘--U)FtI-”FtC)i—’--‘.—Di00I-,0iPcI0U)IPc)P3F-’U)DiP1FtCDP1FtI-”DlCtFtI—’-Ft0-’FtP11-”U)-CD0U)DiU)Di01Pt)DiEli—’CtU)-.0ElU)P1U)I-’I-’-‘-“CDCDC)CtP3CtFtCDDl-U)FtlQi0CD•01CD001DiElF-’CDU)0H-QiElFtDiIDiH-DiElEl0CD-FtCtP301HP1CD00HPt,C)ElPc)F-’CDCD0P3ElP1F-’ri0.,Ft‘ElLaCDDiCt0CDEl‘-‘-0DiElP1FtElMiElIEl Di E Di ‘-1 CD El CD U) U) 0 Mi Ft CD U) Ct El C) Ft 0 ci- CD Ct CD CD ElP3 C) C)hiDi0H•0P1LacicicP1H•riCDElCDU)LaU)DiElFtElLa00CD ‘1 CDFt0,ElHH-hiU)MiCDriCDCDElU)FtCD DiFtP1<C)Pt,ElCD U)1.00cMiCD U)U)FtC) ElooEl0•I--’0‘-31-’-ElU)CDFt P1 1-”C) FtH El Ft CD P1 CD Tn Ft Ct 0 Ft H- U) U) Ft Di P1 CD H-I—,I—.U) Ft P1 Di Ft CD ci HtO 1 0 El 01LaHP1U)0Ft P1El1-’-0C) Ft P1 CD F-’ Di Ft 0 El U) H- Ft Ft CD H 1.1.U) Ft P1 0 I-I,CD C) Di Ft H- 0I-,. U) C) F-’DiDiU)U)U)U)H-H-U)MiFtH•U)CD 01FtPt, CD U) 0 Mi U)P’IC)H-El-La0c:0P1I—’CDciH(.0U) Ft P1 1‘-3C)ElCtCD P10CDMi(.040DE4RAPHIC TDCTME’I’LITAN NON-ME’rPOLITZNPARI’I SANIDDLICALPOSTURENONPARTISANFigure 3‘Pypes of School District41deficient by Bacharach (1981:21), since “there is a tendencyto overemphasize the chaotic nature of action inorganizations.”Examination of the actions of what Bacharach refersto as “collectivities of individuals within an organizationor the organization as a composite of groups is preferredfor the above reasons.” Another reason is that the potentialof the group approach has not been fully developed.Bacharach (1982:22) underlines his faith in the researchpotential of the group perspective of school districts asfollows:A third alternative that focusses on the groupbest reflects the realities of school districtgovernance and administration, while taking intoaccount the holistic and individualisticperspectives. What is needed is an approach toschool districts that affords the researcher theopportunity: to adopt a holistic but integratedview of the school district; to use concepts thatare amenable to comparative analysis; to examinethe interorganizational and intraorganizationalaspects...; and to emphasize the dynamics oforganizational process.This chapter has presented a review of theliterature on certain fundamental variables or features ofintergovernmental relations. The review determined thatintergovernmental relations is multi—faceted in nature,comprised of types of policy, types of political responseand types of affected school district. Moreover, it assistedin providing an understanding of the theoretical basis of42political response. Further exploration of the politicalresponses of local education authorities to the provinciallevel of government may provide new insights into thepolitical consequences of policy decisions.Chapter Three describes the conduct of the inquiry.It outlines the conceptual framework of the study, theresearch questions, and the research design.43CHAPTER THREETHE CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK, RESEARCH QUESTIONSAND RESEARCH METHODOLOGYThis chapter consists of three major components.They are the conceptual framework which outlines theassociation among certain variables and dimensions, theresearch questions which guide the study, and the researchmethodology. Definitions of key terms used in this studyfollow the conceptual framework. Several considerations arepresented with respect to research methodology. Theseinclude a description of how the sample of three schooldistricts was chosen, an overview of the “multi—case”methodology, data collection, and a summary of the meansused to analyze data.CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKPolicy type, type of political response, and type ofschool district were chosen as the main variables in thisresearch study, preliminary to data collection and analysis.Through repeated inspections of the data and furtheranalysis, these variables assisted in maintaining a focus on44the identification, description and comparison of politicalresponse characteristics as shown in Figure 4.In turn, aspects of these variables served asclassificatory labels for data analysis and description. Forexample, policy is differentiated according to two typesregulatory and distributive. The types of political responseare those found in the Elkin typology. At the same time,four possible types of school district were distinguished:(i) partisan metropolitan, (ii) partisan non—metropolitan,(iii) non—partisan metropolitan, (iv) non-partisan and non—metropolitan. Subsequent research, however, determined thatthere were no instances of the partisan non—metropolitanschool district in British Columbia.As this study is exploratory and descriptive innature, one representative case of each of the threeremaining types of school district was selected foranalysis. Of most interest for purposes of this study,however, was the variable, political response. Consequently,the construction of “expanded definitions” for the six typesof political response assisted greatly in obtainingdescriptions of the nature or operational characteristics ofeach political response.DEFINITION OF TERMSThe vocabulary of public policy and politics isoften characterized by a wide range of possible meanings.45SCHOOL DISTRICTREGULATORYPOLICYNONPARTISAN PARTISANMETRO. METRONONPARTISAN PARTISAN& NON- & NON-METRO. METRO.DISTRIBUTIVEDescription of PoIitcaI Response CharacteristicsFIGURE 4POLITICAL RESPONSEMAKING USE OF ASUPRAORGANIZATIONCOALITIONComparison ofPolitical Respon3eCharacteristicst+Conceptual- Framework46Definitions, therefore, are provided for terms fundamentalto this study so as to establish their meaning and ensureconsistency of use. Several different kinds of definitionsassisted in the conduct of this study: lexical orconstitutive, denotative, theoretical, statutory or legal,and the formal, expanded variety. The constitutivedefinitions which immediately follow, according to Dunn(1981:283), give meaning to terms by using other synonymouswords. This kind of definition is most frequently found indictionaries. It is informal or suggestive and reflects aconnative form of meaning using the simplest or shortestmeans for identifying or explaining the matter to be defined(Hayakawa, 1978:53).An expanded definition, on the other hand, is a typeof formal definition. It provides the class, group, orcategory in which the term belongs, as well as thedistinctive characteristics which distinguish the term fromother members of the particular class (Weisman, 1975:202-203). This kind of definition resembles the scientificprocess of classification. It frames the meaning of the termto be defined by listing qualities, making comparisons,and/or itemizing elements or components (Weisman, 1975:203). The formal, expanded definitions constructed in thecourse of this study for each of the six political responsesare an outcome of systematic classification of empiricaldata. They are found at the beginning of each of the‘t3Q.DlDiI’tlDiDiC)U)Q.U)DiCDi10C)C100CI-”C‘1C)Ct0.,Ii—’CtCtIi-’U)CtI-HI.U)U)‘IC)00IC)DiCDCD‘t5C)—-hCt‘10‘tiC)‘1i‘1C)‘1r-.QCD0—0CD‘10ii0‘ZJCDCtHCtCZ‘DC)CDDli—’ZDiU)I’-’‘-CtNDiCDCDMi-JCC)Di•CtCDltDi0flCDCtCtF-’(iiU)CtçtC)Ct‘iCDDirtTjCtMiCDClI-’-Ct‘1‘-“—“<0Cl‘1Di‘1‘10DiC)‘•CtCC)C)HC)CD<U)CtCti—’•lC)CtCtMiCDC)‘1Dii-”‘-4U)CtI—’CDDi•‘-‘•‘Ct0U)U)F-’tlZ0DlCti-’.‘-a.Di01‘1‘-“CD‘-1DiCtCDU)()zDi0CtIiiCtI-’.U)tiCt-CtMiU)lCD00Ct0çt(1)C)DiCD‘10lU)MiCtCCD5Dirt0‘tJIIDi‘-“CD‘rjCDMii0ZCtCDU)CDU)U)0‘40C)i-’•DiC)CtC)CD0U)CDU)-CDF-’c-F0U)00CD“<Ct‘1CDC)DDlCDDiU)Cttii-’•0,-‘•Ctt.QC)‘1Ct‘1C)CDU)‘-“C)CtMiCt‘.0Di0C)‘-‘•Ct•CDU)C)0C)CDCD0CDiZDiC)Di‘-‘-,.QCtF-”Ct‘1‘1U)I—’Ct0‘lCt.0cI—’Di1—’0ç‘t3CDCDCt‘-“F—’I-’-MiCDCDU)I-’tlCD01DiDiDiC)Ct0<U)I-”CDCtDiCDCt:i‘-<CtU)I-”JCDCt‘TjU)‘-‘1‘1C)CDDi‘-‘•CD•.CD‘--0CDCD<C‘C)CD0ClCDC)Z0U)I-”U)CD-‘C)U)CDCDCtC)CDMi—Ct‘T3tiCDC)CtF—’‘1CtMiU)F-”tO00Cl0‘10‘-<C)‘-i‘C)i-”Ct<Di0U)0IZMiCDU)tri‘icCD‘CIc-FP.)0U)U)F-”‘-CCtCi-C)CD‘-‘SClCt‘-‘C)CDCDCD‘-<‘C)CDDiU)CDCtCDCt‘<CDDii-”0‘CIMiICDCU)•‘1Cl-U)DiU)CtDiI—’DiCDDl0Cl‘1-•0ClCl)I-’.I—’•5‘-‘C)‘1CtMiCDCD0CD0‘CI‘.01-”CtCtU)-“‘--‘•uzcrMit)‘1N‘.0C)‘-0••)C)Ct-—-DiDlCDririC)‘.00Ct-0CtU)tODiCt:iDiDi‘-<i—’-‘1F-”CtU)DiI—’0U)CtCDCt‘tO0CDCDCtlMiCD‘TiI-’•frt’‘1)C)F-”0Di)0’‘1i‘—‘-‘i,.Q00ci0CD0ciDl<-‘•NiyCt0c.F-’Ct<U)itOI-’-CDU)DiCDCDI-”U)iCDU)U)0N0<CtCD3C)•‘i‘-iDiDiMiDi‘-‘-DiC)‘.<CDZ110)CtL?iU)Cl)0<DiCDF-”I—’CtiI-”MiCDC)CDDiC)C)Ct‘cCtci00-Di0Z‘-100I—‘SJ’ClCtciF-’ciCtCtCDMiI-CDCD‘-<0‘1F-’‘C)CDDi‘1000‘-‘•F-’U)0I-’Ct‘-<CDMiDiCti-”‘-“U)CtI—’t-ZC)CDH-0DiU)H‘.Q‘.<‘1U)Fl,ZCD0U)(f)C)H:iDictItJCDC)i0Q-<10CDDiCDftCtQ‘rjIi—0cn0‘-1CDJH.CD0U)CDU)IC)0rjftQi-3iCDzJH-ftci-CU)0Mi0‘-a-0H-Mi0CDMi-<U)U)ci-U)ftU)H-H-0CJCCD1I-ft0‘iH-rjU)rt1U)ICCDCDDiQiCDDi0U)0‘-‘-DiP1CC)DiI-U)30?t3ftbP1ftH0U)Dir-tI—aDiCDI—ilCDH-CDP1H-QDiC)H-CtDi‘<ci-<H-0C)CD‘1Cii-rjN0U)TjCDQ.0..C)DiCC)H-0ci-DiF-CDP1CD1H-HP1ftC)CH-U)H-U)MiU)Q..ci-ZCD‘0H-0‘0<CDU)Di•0U)CLOU)U)0U)iCDI-ftCDH-U)Di•DiC)DiI—0c-I-CDi3CDft<0CD0Mi0DiH-0P1‘-0U)DiP10..H-Mi‘3F-ZCDH-CD00‘0U)DiI—aci-CD0Di‘CICrJH-DF—i•*‘jC)<CD0MiI—.‘00..J0‘10ftP1H-0C)c-I-Mi‘CI‘-<DiH-I-’•ftC)I—CDCDftftCft‘-iC)i-’-----‘-<H-iCDCDP1MiC)‘-“C)C)ftC)0‘CIH-H-‘-<ci-C*‘-<CMi0U)Z0ftH-I—’DiCC)U)DiMiCDU)‘0H-DlH-ftU)ftDiI—aCDU)‘1P1DiU)P1C)0CDH-ftDici-C)ci-‘0C)0H-Mi<CDCU)C‘--Di‘-ii0..C)C)CD‘1u0ClDiP1CDDiH-‘-i-0CD•‘CICD‘1I-<fJiQftric)..-<MiCCDHP10Mi—CDDiDlI-”MiIIH-IftC)I—’HH-ftftC)H-H-0)ftftDiI—H0CDU)H-ft‘.0C)CDCDH-DiC)MiQi‘0‘.00CD<CCD‘-1iU)H.CD‘zP101-’0P1CDU)CDftDiC)Di0U)--0-’I-’ftMiU)MiH-U)jC)HU)ftCNH-ftCDMi•CDC)DiC)C‘0CDP1CDDi‘(3DiH-0P1U)0QiCDU)DiC)P1ftC)‘ti‘0P10CD•P-hC)ftCDHCDi0P1Qi‘CS0•tYftftQH-U)P-ftI—’0HCI--’0C)CDHH‘-ICD‘1ftU)0C)I—’‘.0H-H-ft3H-‘-<CD00..U)c-i-CDC)H-()CTH-ftU)HCDZ050CDU)000CDU)C)CDlHU)MiMici-U)ci-I—’CDMiftftU),<H-‘1DiDiDiHP1Dift‘‘(5ftH-MiH-U)P1U)ft01-’Di0C‘CI0CDCMi0C)U)CDCDU)F—’•ft‘10..0F-’U)DiMiP1ft<I—’HftCDHC)HP1DiC)HDi0CD0‘1‘-<CDP1iZMiCD•U)CDU)ftCX)It,(fftC)Cl)0ftCS)<bi00I—’P3IC)0CDCC)P3‘1Mi0Di‘1C)ftCDCDC)‘1)C)ft0ft‘1ftF-0DiftDiCD1-”H0DiZIt)‘iiU)CU)i—iDi0U)‘-I-”CDDiCD-“DlC)031P3DlF—sIt)CDctDiN‘-1ftft‘IU)b’‘1Li001Di010C)Di‘‘QftIIft0P3ftLi-ftI-MiftDi0<0‘--0DiDi-“U)C)01t-CU)3rnU)i-’U)3Mift0r-•0iftft—0LQCD00Dii-Di01MiiiMi0ft-iCD‘1F-’b0DiSCDI-”‘.0ft1-“‘.DDiDi0C)‘1‘1C)0)—‘ftJ<C)CD0’0ftft1Di03CDCDCDftII‘<CDft(‘3MiCDDi‘-11—’DiCDftZDi—CDCDD01ftIftftu’0‘-‘SU)(.jU)ftC0•‘-C0CDC)‘lU)C)t’3CCD-U)‘1)00.’0‘CiDiTJCl)C)‘—U)‘-(C)0II—’CD0ftCDIt)CDft0Dl0Di<‘(1DiCS)0I-0C)0C—’0‘-1‘.0oCDZCDftI-”0ftC—’CDI—’CDCDC)0o-ftI-”‘.0‘-“fttiCDDi0C)MiCD<I-’‘1C)iftP3‘10Di0CDCi)00DiDiDi:i0iU)C)F—’0.’‘-i0.’‘1I—’ft)MiC)ft‘CI‘-‘U)00‘-o0CD•C)DiCX)0U)MiMiZP3i-’•1—’01‘-C000QU)rtftHit.Q‘1C)‘1I-’.‘njP3U)CD—0MiCDi—’•‘-C0CD$2CftDiDi‘1C)I-.’Miftft‘10•‘-1Di‘1U)U)03—HCDC)P3CD3DiiftC)C)0CD0..’‘1IftU)CD$2I—’I—’•ft0U)00•DlCD0CDF-.’ftMiU)ftftMiU)ft0‘1CDftr-.’h..’.03ftU)Di1t(I-’01ft‘1U)0‘-0‘-3CD‘<C)‘1CD0U)01D-r-jDiCD‘ti‘Ci0.’ft‘-‘•CDC)000DiII0i-’-I-.’-U)ZftC)CU)I—’Di0—U)CDI—.’U)C)ft(1)00It)I—’F—’C)U))1.ftU)‘1ftC)F-.’MiU)U)DiI-’-0CDft‘1U)C<ftF-’C)T0)Dir-’I—’.C)CD0•I-’-U)C‘-0DiC0ftC)U)ft0DitTP3CDC)0F-.’ftI—’CDftU)U)C—’iI-’-i-*HU)0.’DlC)DiU)ftC)CDIt)U)Di•C)C‘1r-.’•‘Io0.’‘-‘.‘-“Di0C)‘-i0ftCD‘Tj<F-.’I-”0C)ftMiC)0ftCD0DiF-’MiDl-‘•I-.’-0U)tl3’0C)I-’DiC)0C)0.’C—’C)ftftftF-’0U)C)F—’C)U)‘—‘-CD‘-‘-CDI-’.‘-CDiF-’‘Ift000C)ftU)a‘-‘•ftI—’00.’0I-’Mi101Ctftft‘-<P1C)‘U)DiDiTi01I-”CDU)•F-”I—’DiftCD03U)i‘1CU)003‘-0••‘.0011-.’1-.’ift0.’ft‘-CU)DiDi‘.0‘1DiDir-3ftftZHftftftJCDftCD01ftC)CDZCDDiDi0U)•0ftU)CD0-iftU)0150Non—partisan metropolitan. Awithin a metropolitan areapolitical party on the school board.Non-partisan and non-metropolitan. An urban schooldistrict outside of a metropolitan area without alocal political party on the school board.TypologyA particular form of classificatory scheme ordefinition in which non—arbitrary and ordered distinctionsare made with respect to the subject matter.PoliticsA form of behaviour characterized by competition andconflict between organizations and groups seeking toinfluence authoritative decision-making for purposes ofcreating a desired outcome or form of order out ofdiversity.Intergovernmental RelationsA form of governmental relationships primarilyreferring in this study to the provincial context ofinteractions between local school districts and the Ministryof Education.schoolwithoutdistricta localDiitiitCDftDi(fiCDiiit‘tjii0Dlc-I-00I—’U)i-DiI—’0>DiU)Di‘1tT‘-fto0‘—•00cnI-ht-c-I-c-I-(DCU)U)CDZt.C)I—s(flitCD0ftitCDDift-,CD0s—tiqo‘-i0CDDiw‘—t‘10TjftCDU)::CI—’CDi0CDft0ttc-I-CDs—-H-H.C)C-DiU)s—•Z‘-0I-Q’s—i—-CI—itTTI—’‘1CDl-CD0s-i’CDs--0Di0‘-<CC‘-“CDDlDl0.ft0OCDDiit<CDitft0c-t•)i-I-CD(J()oDi‘—1I—CDCDDiCDCD,—•0jitCDlI—hC)c-I-DlU)c-I-‘—1U)•Cs)ci0s-’•CDDi‘1H--<ft‘10U)‘-“DlHU)‘1Dls-IDi0‘ICDI-ti0DiMiF—itj<DiDii‘-‘•‘-“cnCD0::3I-hs-ic-i-‘-IH-H-0‘Ti50‘rjDiI-s-ZU.CD0CDCDi0fto‘-<CDit0ftDl-‘1t-iMiCDI-iCD0Di‘tJit‘-“CDCDH‘-0CDQDi‘-IH-U)rDiitU)I—’0CDZU)i0‘1I—H-itCDiDiJ’CT)I—iU,c-tft‘tiCD<r-U)H-0ZU.CDit1t’HCDCDH-0ZCDCDDi‘Tic-tOIH.itI-i‘1DiZrt‘10-,Ti)‘1H-DiCDc-I-DiCDIH-CD1)itU)0C)i—’CDI--’0H0it0H-CDDic-i-‘.tiU)-,r-CDZ0..IDiDift<0CD0DiCD‘ICD‘-0c-I-‘1QI—’CT)50-.CDDiCDCDCD0‘Ti‘-1DiftHiiitU)(TiDiI--s-i(fl•r-rtODiCDH‘ti1‘-‘-Di‘tiCD00CDCDI—’U)CDoftNH-0HCDU)HCD‘1ZitCU)tyDiU)ft00i‘tiU)CDDiCDF—’I-’U)CDftftH3ft0U)s-iitys--CH-H-it(I)I—’H-‘10H-CDlCftDl0I—’DiU)0•H0‘<Z<I—’U)HI—’I—’CDI—’0I-tiH-CDZU)CDCDCDDlDiU)Mi0I-hDi0tyCD•‘-00I—’U)0tOitI—’MiCDI-CCD‘-Ct-’•U)ftCDCs-QHft<Di:iMiZs-’-0Di0-.C0t’ICDftft‘10MiI-I0‘-<Di0..0‘10)0..CDU)it0DiH-DifrhI—’HftCCD‘—C0DitO0H-0DiH<DiH-II01‘1‘1CDDic-tftU)ftH‘1ciCDlDityDiDlU)ft0CDDi0..DiCD0ititU)C0•s--‘-II-iCDc-I-C00c-I-ft‘TiU)c-t0CDI-’-itH-DlitI—’C0CDCD‘1‘TiCDDlU)‘1<F-’CD0‘-1)Dl0CD‘1U)c-tCDCDCD‘1‘.0CD•I—’‘rj0s--..,s-..U)‘-‘‘<-00CDH-U)H-0‘TjDis-C)N—‘-30ci—htlI-tiftZ‘.00MiI0CDDiCDfts—’-‘—‘-itI-’0CDDiI—’U)DiDlCDI—’‘<Dl‘-<000‘-<MiU)DiI—’i-.CDft‘-<ftCU)H‘1‘—‘-0CDU)DiC,-,——•I—.—oCt—Q.ci)ci)0—()Cf—0U)‘tS—I?ft‘10‘rjt5k<Ofl5-”10‘-<‘-“‘t300ci)0(Dhi(0‘tjf-i-hiQU)ci‘—‘I‘-‘CD-I—a—CDCDU)0t0I-”—Mi—0i-i10—.-rii-..i—•InCD00)ci)0)CftjCfCl-0fti-”Ct0h<1‘1‘-0‘10Ct0ci)i-0CDi)ci)CfCDto*:0Qjhitict0U)i-i0O<‘hictCDMU)0PiC)0)CDCD)Cl-CDCDtICD0ci)ZF—’c1-0trcn‘1‘-3—CDci)ci)0OftP)i-Jci)f-CDCDI—aU)-tiInIrtU)U)hiI—’toCDCl-CD<CD‘1(D3OECfCf0i—’i‘-(00CDci)<‘1flU)CDhiU)‘-<CtCDC-I-0•‘1i-tiU)0)CD-..tirl-0(I)CDU)ci)‘t50i‘1I-U)0i‘-3I—’ci)ci)0ci)Cf‘1ICDCDCD0CD0ci)Cl-ci)ci)’Tjci)OQjCD‘TCtci)CDhiCDU)‘T)U)Cti-•ft00i-‘100U)U)r)0)CD‘-<0CDCfF—Cfhi0ci)ci)ftCD0CDCD‘-C‘rjCD)Q..tihiIftf-•‘1Ct0CtIniU)CDU)U)‘1ftCDQ.CD‘-<‘-•Cl-CDCD‘-<CD•,-‘•‘-1CDQaI-”10f-”U)00‘Z‘1CDhi00‘1‘-“L’IU)0•Qa(DH0‘thiP)CDci)‘1C<0t)‘1(1)CfP)Ohici)ci)0CDCtU)CfCD0f-f—sCDhiCfCD01-“t3hiCfQJCII—sI—’t30CD0)CDU)‘-<W0(0(0Cf‘-•i-•CDftfttQ0Qa‘1‘1‘C3‘1‘-“U)<hi‘-l’i00CDci)U)CD0fl(Dci)(DCD0-hiCDci)CfCD’-lhici)U)U)U)hiU)0CtCQJU)CfQCDci)U)Cf0U)I—’CfCDCD0-•U)Ct0c‘1CDCD“ci)Cf‘1Cf00U)t-K)hiOOCD0ci)CDci)00Qa0)0)C)10MiM,ZZ(J)00tO00CDI—-01CDU)P)0CfU)P)U)1ci)tYhiZ(_)0Q.CDCDCDI-CfCDOO‘1‘-<hiInJ0‘-3.)U)hiInjI-’•’tJU)‘-CU)‘lU)0ci)U),.QIn)CD0Qa0I—’Cf0CDU)0-•‘—-In)0-’0c0U)0i-”f-’00)0000)CtCDCDfJftCU)I-”ZftDCfCDCD1U)U)Cf0tYU)Cl)0’0)Cf‘-“CfI-’•‘-ci)U)Z0’‘1CfCftO‘-C‘<—iU)i—•0H-i0‘1ci)CD-‘•‘—ci)I—’.Hci)0i-—ci)0)0OCtOU)ci)U)hiU)U)U)C)0Cfhi0riU)P)00’Oftftci)CfCDCDhiCt0ci)I—’Cf‘1‘1H-hiU))—0Ct•ftQaU)(DOCfCD‘tibH-00‘<CCD‘-C0(00)0U)I—’U)‘1H-In)0ci)0’-0Qa’CDHftf—iCfCDU)CDci)‘1‘U)CDU)Hci)U)0CDU)ci)‘-3Cf0ci)U)ft00k-’In)U)U)H-‘-<<U)0CfCD0000U)ci)I-’OO0ci)U)CD••CDiCfCihii3U)Ct0H-ZInjU)Cf1H0’U)00’0‘-CCf0U)(D‘-<ci)U)InJCD‘<‘tICl‘-“CD’<(T)’lhiIn0I-’hiU)0’•<00‘-CU)ci)0CDCtP)O1•CDci)I-’00MiCl-H-ft‘-CU)CDZ‘-<00)‘1H-ZU)Cfi-a.•)t1Q,0HftU)0Cf<0CfH--Cci)H-H0CfCf0)HnNftftH.Y0U)ci)0CDCDci)H-(DH-ITF-’ci)ftI—’(ii(D(QU)U)—U)QCDCDCDCDF-’U)I53SAMPLE SELECTIONEarly in the course of this research, a preliminarycase study of one Metropolitan Vancouver area schooldistrict was conducted in order to gain some insight intoministry—school district relations (Bartunek, 1979). Theschool district selected was coterminous with the City ofVancouver [see Appendix C]. It had a partisan school board.Interviews were conducted with twenty-threeinformants: fifteen senior, central office officials andeight of the nine school trustees. The findings of thispreliminary study led to many questions. One question waswhether there were other school districts with civicpolitical party representation on their school boards. Asecond question was conditional on the first. If there werecivic political party representation on other school boards,then what might the political responses of these districtsbe in comparison to school districts with non—partisanschool boards?A questionnaire was subsequently devised anddistributed to presidents of local teachers’ associations(who monitor school district activities, particularly theschool board, very closely). This questionnaire, whichappears in Appendix ID, was administered to a panel ofsixteen such presidents. The survey determined that therewere eight school districts of the partisan type, and all ofthese districts were situated in the metropolitan Vancouver54area. No partisan districts were identified outside of thismetropolitan region of British Columbia.Subsequently, the superintendents of schools inthose school districts situated in the three metropolitanareas of British Columbia-- Victoria, Vancouver and PrinceGeorge—— were contacted in order to ascertain thereliability of the results of the questionnaire administeredto the presidents of the local teachers’ associations.Additionally, various other knowledgeable persons affiliatedwith the British Columbia School Trustees Association, thetypology of school district types as outlined inSubsequently, one case was chosen from each ofgroups of school districts outlined in Appendix E.Background data on British Columbia schoolof the British Columbia TeachersProvincial headquartersFederation, and the Department ofUniversity of British Columbia,purpose. These additional sourcesonly eight school districts ofwere situated in the metropolitanSince there are elevenwithin the metropolitan Vancoverthree non-partisan metropolitanGreater Vancouver area. A selectnon—metropolitan school districts“purposive sampling” resultedPolitical Science at thewere contacted for the sameconfirmed that there werethe partisan type, and allVancouver area.school districts locatedarea, there were thereforeschool districts in thesample of non—partisan andalso was compiled. Thisin the construction of aFigure 3.the threedistricts55were obtained from a variety of sources in addition to thepresidents of the local teachers’ associations. Thesesources were the British Columbia School TrusteesAssociation (B.C.S.T.A.), British Columbia TeachersFederation (B.C.T.F.), and the Ministry of Education. Therange of information outlined in the background dataassisted in the selection of the three cases for intensivestudy. All three districts were urban ones.Because of the sensitive nature of this research,assistance was received from various knowledgeable personsin gaining entry for the purpose of collecting data. Forexample, the selection of the appropriate non—partisan andnon—metropolitan school district for study was difficultsince the majority of school districts in British Columbiawere representative of this class. Therefore, afteridentifying eight school districts of this category forpossible in—depth study [see Appendix E—3], this researcherand his faculty supervisor called upon the senioradministrative staff of the British Columbia School TrusteesAssociation to assist in the final determination.The case study carried out preliminary to thisresearch also assisted in the selection of an example of aMinistry of Education policy to reflect each of the twotypes of policy under study. In the preliminary study, alist of Ministry of Education policies was identified which,from the school district’s point of view, contained56particularly contentious ones. Ranked high among thepolicies to which the school district responded politicallywere the integration of handicapped children into regularclasses, and financial policies in general. The financialpolicies included capital expenditure projects planned bythe school district. As a consequence of this finding andfurther study of regulatory and distributive policies, twoexamples were selected. Integration of handicapped childrenwas selected as an example of regulatory policy. Capitalexpenditure was chosen as an example of distributive policy.The respective policy statements and the legislativeauthority underlying each of these two policies are outlinedin the Appendices [see Appendix F].MULTI-CASE STUDY METHODOLOGYThis investigation consists of several case studies.Case studies are exploratory and descriptive in nature. Assuch, they are designed to gain familiarity with aphenomenon and achieve new insights into it, especiallywhere there is little knowledge and understanding of thephenomenon to serve as a guide (Selltiz, Jahoda, Deutsch andCook, 1967). Cases involve the intensive study of selectedphenomena. Selltiz, Jahoda, Deutsch and Cook suggest thatthe following characteristics are indicative of casestudies:57(a) The attitude of the investigators is one ofalert receptivity, of seeking rather than testing;(b) there is an exploratory element related to theintensity of the study of the situation selectedfor research i.e. “one attempts to obtainsufficient information to characterize and explainboth the unique features of the case being studiedand those which it has in common with othercases;” (c) there is a reliance on the integrativepowers of the investigators and on their abilityto draw together many bits of information into aunified interpretation.The nature of field studies as a particular type ofresearch design also warrants review. Selltiz, Jahoda,Deutsch and Cook (1967:50) in defining a research design as“the arrangement of conditions for collection and analysisof data in a manner that aims to combine relevance to theresearch purpose with economy in procedure” state that itfollows that research designs differ according to theresearch purpose. Selltiz, Jahoda, Deutsch and Cook providefour broad groupings of research purposes below. Theseauthors state that the first is characteristic ofexploratory studies, the second and third pertain todescriptive studies, and the fourth purpose ischaracteristic of research which tests causal relationships:(1) to gain familiarity with a phenomenon or toachieve new insights into it, often in order toformulate a more precise research problem or todevelop hypotheses; (2) to portray accurately thecharacteristics of a particular individualsituation, or group (with or without specificinitial hypotheses about the nature of thesecharacteristics); (3) to determine the frequencywith which something occurs or with which it isassociated with something else (usually, but not58always, with a specific initial hypothesis); (4)to test a hypothesis of a causal relationshipbetween variables.Selltiz, Jahoda, Deutsch and Cook (1967: 51) cautionthat the different types of design are not mutuallyexclusive. Elements of two or more of the four broadgroupings noted above may be present in any given research.Similarly, Guba and Lincoln (1981:371) acknowledgethat the content of a case study is determined chiefly byits purpose and that any case study may have multiplepurposes. These authors, moreover, present four classes ofpurpose and state that the classes include most of thepurposes found in case studies (Guba and Lincoln, 1981:371):(i) to chronicle, that is, to develop a registerof facts or events in the order (more or less) inwhich they happened; (2) to render, that is, todepict or characterize; (3) to teach, that is, toprovide with knowledge, or to instruct; and (4) totest, that is, to “prove’t or to try.Guba and Lincoln emphasize that the purposes differin at least three respects. For example, each of thepurposes has a factual orientation, an element ofinterpretation and a judgmental quality. Furthermore, Gubaand Lincoln (1981:373) cross the four purposes mentionedwith the three elements -— fact, interpretation andevaluation -— in order to construct a typology of casestudies [see Appendix Gi. Each cell in the typology,59moreover, is divided into an “action” and a “product”dimension respectively. Guba and Lincoln (1981:272) relatethat “the verb describes what the case study analyst does inpreparing that kind of case study, while the noun indicatesthe nature of the resulting case study.”The typology of case studies is useful fordiscussing the class of purpose specific to thisinvestigation. All four purposes are reflected to varyingextents. The exploratory and descriptive nature of thisstudy, however, dictates that the primary purpose mostclosely resembles a rendering activity in the sense ofilluminating meanings. Testing, in the sense of attemptingto ascertain the usefulness of Elkin’s typology of localgovernment political response, is another important purposeof this investigation.Kerlinger (1973:406) concurs with Selltiz, Jahoda,Deutsch and Cook concerning the characteristics ofexploratory and descriptive field studies. Moreover, hesuggests that the strengths as well as the weaknesses ofsuch studies be considered. Chief strengths, according toKerlinger, are that exploratory studies are strong inrealism, significance, strength of variables, theoryorientation, and heuristic quality. Kerlinger maintains thatsince this type of research aims to discover or describerelations, it is indispensable to scientific advances in thesocial sciences. On the other hand, Kerlinger notes thattrC!)‘t3U)C)CtP3CDC)P3U)CtrCtZ<P3CD0CtC)P3P3-•P3CD)H-UCDI-i-CDP3Mi(U(flCtCDCDU)H-P3‘10’CDCD0<lCDJP3tH-Cti-’H-CDU)F—’F—’ctC)U)Ck<JCDHCDCtC-tU)CDU)0F-U)‘-<0U-)CDU)I—’‘1P3Ct‘1‘1P31CDP3•tOU)kH-hiCDP3-<Ctb‘-‘(UMiU)‘1CD‘1CDH-U)30CtCtQiI—’P3F—’tY0‘-‘-:iU)C)CDtTCDCDCtCDP3Cl)10P3Ct‘—iCDP)CEDCDMiC)CDI-’U)CtC)*iHi-I-’-Z‘10tOU)U)C)CDC)C)CDctCti-’-P3CDC)-CDP3MiCDP0U)C)0F-’U)U)P)0CU)0Ct0-‘-‘D0U)I—’CDCD0Ct‘10CU)P3CDI-’ZU)CD—3CDçtC)CDC)01CDrttOU)U)-U)CDZP0HtOOC)P3P3‘1rt•‘rj‘iCDCDCD0H-,(UP3U)-‘0P3H-P0U)P3U)P3CDU)H1t0U)‘1CD-U)‘riCDI—’‘1CtCDCDH-MiU)HU)CDCD01I—’U)F-IP301-CDCDP)F-’U)iCDU)Ct—CtH-0CtCtCD—ci--i01CDi-’-C))0CC)QMiH-fl1.D01I—’P3ci0’CtCDCt0’i-’P30C<CDC)—1CDHI—’U)IIMiU)U)••-<1H)CtCDCl)HCDci-tCD‘lU)HC)H-P30’CDHi0’H’0U)CtU)Y’H-—CDH-‘-0C)CtCDCD0H-HMi01CtP30P0U)CDC•I—’‘<CCtCtMiCD‘.0H-CDZ101rtF—’01‘1P301F-’3U)MiMirCD0HiP3H-IU)ci-0‘rj01CD-CD0CD00-0I—’<CDF-’Ht0‘1C)MiMiU)C)C)‘-<0CDC)HC—00Z’U)U)1:3—hiiCDCC)-P)CU)H-,0MiU)-MiCDctCtCD0CDt)U)CDU)‘.0CtU)U)HC)CD‘..0‘1CF-’F-’C)U)Ct—3C)CDU)U)U)0•ci-—3P30’Mi-‘c1—’P3CDC)‘1‘.0CDCtCD)‘()F-’C)H-P)CD0Ct0P3C‘—‘-0010P0U)••P00CDC)‘rjH-C)H,3U)C)•CP3H,CP30’Ct‘10U)Ctci-H0t7CDCDCtHC)‘-CU)CDU)P00I0CtC‘-30101C)CtH-,C)c-I-I—’H‘.0U)U)P3‘1‘CDCDP3CU)Ct0C)HHC)3‘CDc-I-CDCDCDC)U)‘10Mi—JU)P3C)U)<H-3CtCDU)CtU)P3CDCDDP3—HF—’U)‘-CP)P3‘0CDtU)‘03’CtCU)0-,CtP3C)CtCD‘1‘1U)MiC‘1CD‘1U)0F—’P3H13HH-0Ct001CDCCDHhiMiU)I—’<<0C)P30tIH<F<U)0.’C)U)0P3U)ZCt0-stI‘10P3MiCDU)CtHC)C)U)CtI—’U)*CDI—’C)Z‘-10)CtCCtCP3‘-<‘<CH5—CD‘-ICDc-I-0•HC)CtP3tIU)U)i‘rjCDZP3P3—U)‘<0P3CCD010U)CDCtCDU)U)U)‘0‘0C‘0U)U)C)01CDCtCDU)U)CDCtU)CDU)X’U)‘0Ct0P301CDF-tiP3‘.<CD•‘1C)‘1P3CI—’F—’U)Ct0H-U)CDIIH-C)C)C)0-F—’IJU)C)Ci-H-MiCDCD‘0CD<U)0C)U)‘1‘<CDCDU)0CC)I—’P3I—’U)P<CD0‘1F—’C)C)C)C)Ct0.,U)CDCDCtCtU)0-)0-P3U)‘1CtP3H-II‘0H-P3U)CCt‘1U)HU)-U)CDH-CCtCU)CD‘0CtU)‘1‘I—’U)Ct‘0U)H,0U)‘C)‘-1U)‘0CCtCD0H-:iCDF—’U)P3‘.0CDci-I—’ICDCtH-•‘-C01C‘-iCD‘-<U)CD0CU)0H-01CDU)‘.0CDCtCt‘-IC)U)3‘10P3CDH-CDJ’Ct0‘CDCi-HI-’CD)C)U)CDCt0‘-1H-CtCDCD0MiCDCDU)01Ct-<01CDt)’-Cl)•Mi-U)H-U)C)61(a) types of political response(b) types of policy(c) types of school districtThe politics of the policy process in education isan under-researched topic in Canada. However, severaldoctoral dissertations and masters’ theses or specialprojects in the politics of Canadian education have used acase study format. Some notable examples of doctoraldissertations are the studies conducted by Housego (1964),Martin (1968) and Stapleton (1975). A master’s thesis byStapleton (1971) and a special project conducted at themaster of education level by Proctor (1980) are instructivetoo. A doctoral dissertation in political science by Shiry(1977) also used the case study approach. In this latterstudy, several cases served as the basis for theinvestigator’s finding that different patterns of politicalactivity resulted from different types of policy. Moreover,Lowi (1964, 1978) strongly recommends that the comparativecase study approach [or multi case study as it is referredto in this dissertation] be used to study the politicalconsequences of different types of policy.Organizational theory, when considered as a tool forunderstanding how organizations function, can be advancedthrough the multi-case approach. Mouzelis (1973: 66—68), forexample, finds fault with both the single case studyapproach and the survey method. The single case study,62according to Mouzelis, has methodological weaknesses, sincethere is uncertainty whether its findings are applicable toother organizations, and since, by definition, one cannotascertain relationships between variables in a comparativemanner (that is, through an examination of how they differin other organizations). On the other hand, Mouzelis seesthe survey method as producing perhaps more “generalized andmethodologically more valid findings—- but of a superficialor trivial character.” Mouzelis (1973: 68—69), therefore,seems to concur with Lowi in providing this rationale forwhat he refers to as “the usefulness of the comparativestudy of many organizations”:.comparative study does not automatically meansurvey study. The conflict between methodologicalrigour and deep insight is not as insurmountableas we often like to think it is. We are notnecessarily forced to a sweeping and superficialexamination of hundreds of cases once we abandonthe intensive one—case study. By strategicallychoosing a few cases (say two to five), it ispossible to combine intensity of study withcomparative variations of significant variables.And by the ‘intensive-comparative’ approach of afew similar cases, generalizations can be builtup, valid in well-circumscribed and narroworganization contexts. It is in this way thatsystematic knowledge, having a cumulativecharacter, can be developed. Moreover, suchlimited knowledge could become a sound basis forthe formulation of organizational typologies;typologies which are not arbitrarily constructed,but which are closely tuned to research findingsand the requirements of theory. It is by suchtactics that ultimately we may achieve widergeneralizations cutting across bureaucracies withthe most various aims and within the most variouscultures.63The multi-case or comparative case study approachrepresents a particular type of research design among arange of alternative methodologies; such as, observation,experimentation, questionnaire surveys, and the interviewtechnique. As such, the research design outlined in thiscomparative case study reflects what Labovitz and Hagedorn(1976:55) refer to as “the logical manner in whichindividuals or other units are compared or analyzed” whileat the same time serves as “the basis for makinginterpretations from the data.” The multi—case approach ofthis study is deemed to be an appropriate choice of researchmethod, since the aim is in keeping with the desire “todescribe-, decode, translate or otherwise come to terms withthe meaning, not the frequency, of certain more or lessnaturally occurring phenomena in the social world” (VanMaanen, 1979: 520).The multi—case approach is a qualitative form ofinquiry. While this form of research can encompassquantitative measures, and indeed in many cases should doso, it has certain features which distinguish it from thepredominantly quantitative variety of research. Das (1983:301) states that qualitative research combines the rationaland intuitive approaches to knowledge and focusses typicallyon the unfolding of “process” rather than “structure”. Otherdistinctions between qualitative and quantitative researchare implicit in the response to the question of the reason64for an emerging interest in qualitative research (Das, 1983:302—305):The frequent use of survey research and the factthat even minor variations in survey design canaffect response rates has made researchersquestion the nature and quality of the variablesused in organizational research. ... Given thesefindings, there seems to be very little reason forbeing overly fascinated by any research tool. Thisincreasing disenchantment with traditionalresearch tools has brought some researchers tounconventional and qualitative methodology.There is an increasing preference today for a moreholistic view of organizational behaviour; thatis, certain organizational researchers today areinterested in understanding the gestalt or thetotality of behaviour of the unit under study.It may very well be that certain organizationalphenomena cannot be validly measured at allwithout using qualitative techniques....Qualitative tools may facilitate theunderstanding of complex social interactiontypical of all large organizations, since itprovides a forum for integrating knowledgeemerging from different disciplines andinductively synthesizes them.Through qualitative research the investigator isable to record and understand political behaviour from theperspective of informants and their particularcircumstances. The approach allows for the use of differentkinds of data at the same time —— interviews, observations,and various types of written materials or documents. Unlikequantitative research, the potential response options areopen-ended rather than closed or standardized in nature.Insight into the case study mode is provided by Mason and65Bramble (1978:34) and Mintzberg (1979:586) respectively:Case and field studies are very similar. Usually,case studies involve looking at one person, group,project, institution or agency. They are basicallyintensive investigations of the factors thatcontributed to characteristics of the case underinvestigation. (Patton, 1982:7).Measuring in real organizational terms means firstof all getting out into the field, into realorganizations. Questionnaires often won’t do. Norwill laboratory simulations, at least not inpolicy research. ... We do not yet understandenough about organizations to simulate theirfunctioning in the laboratory. It is theirinherent complexity and dynamic nature thatcharacterize phenomena such as policy making(Mintzberg, 1979:586).The research literature suggests that thecomparative case study approach is sometimes referred to byalternative labels. Among others, some examples are multi-site qualitative research, comparative field study,comparative research, qualitative case study, and the multi—case approach. Long (1982:2) notes that the case study, inits several variations, may very well be the most popularmode of inquiry in the literature of educational politicsand policy study. At the same time Long (1982:2) recognizesas did Bordeleau et al (1977) and Townsend (1977) that “theweight and balance of studies in the field of educationalpolitics and policy—making in Canada show that few studiesattempt a comparative treatment, and works in which atheoretical scheme coherently informs an analysis of factsor events are few in number”.o0U)Hi0iC).QU)U)04-‘•UiU)‘1Cl)0‘1U)U)o‘tj‘-<1HiCDCrtft-•04CDCT)CDU)i-tiCDci-ciCD0iCDCCHiCDHiC)U)U)U)CCU)1ftSCDU)0OaHiI-’-0CDri-CD0404I-”DlU)‘1ftI-”H-CDftii0ZDl‘<<0jftCDCDiCDCD‘104C)i-‘1CDU)ftbI—a0U)U)CDHiftDiU)CDU)C)-0I-”U.H<H.‘1CT)HDlNCDCDNU)‘-3C)H0I<U)U)ftU)DiCDC)DlDiCD•CD0fi-I—’I—i03ftft‘1H-CDU)iQU)DiU)i-t5ftoci-IHCDti‘1C)ZCDH-CD0ftC)50<CDH•00QjDiCD‘10U)i-iDi0HiJ5‘1CDCoHDi0CDftCDC)FiDiCJC)ftI—’H,U)CDftDi‘-10<‘-Ici-ftci-DiC)Z’DlDiJDlCDU)CDi-CT)CD‘10ftci-‘1C)Di‘1U)CDCD‘<i-’•ZCD‘-ftCD‘1ftU)C)H1.0HiU)U)Z0CD<CU)CDCDDiCD04CDCfti-i-0CDQIi-DiU)ftU)‘1(1)-I—’ftCDU)CD5QCDfiCDoCD‘-ctCDIF-D?1U)CD‘1t3-CDi0Cl)‘1DiU)0DiCDCDC)CDQ’50CD<Hi04HIIft-Di‘-04“0H-IS)0CDci-0O0‘-3i--DiU)H-CS)CD0DiHiU)ft0ci-Cci-If)I-hDiC)U)ft505ci-DlZi-I-HU)C•)C—C)H-i—ifJ‘c_SHHi‘.0lC)CD0405F--i00ci-C1U)ciS00‘1H•i-”‘c__SCDF-’tO‘1-ci-U)DiDiftCDCS)Hici-CD-.-U)U)004U)I-”CCDU)U)ftCDftDiU)‘.0HIIHci-HCDCl)HiftH-CDL’I‘C,I-’-CX)0ci-U)0HU)04CftC0oCDC)0I-CDDlftHiC)ftCDI—’0QiF-’CD‘-3F-’‘-‘•.‘1DiZDiCD<0)HU)—‘—Ii-’•DiCXtDici-H-5F-’ii‘-‘-ci-CDDi•ftHQftci-C)C‘.00.C)U)U)SCD10‘C,‘C,H-Qj‘.—H•ZftF-’11H-CDCDU)C)‘i0‘1iDi0C)•0CDHiU)rtCD‘1-CD0riDiDi‘1U)Di0ci-CD0•I-’-U)i.Q‘1‘1CDftftftci-l-CD0‘1I‘C,C)Hi0ftCHH-U)H-C)HiC)0t30HiDiCD‘10C)‘1C)U)C)0DiDi5‘1Dii-’-l”DiCDZCHiCD‘-C0‘1ctC)CDU)U)‘-CCD5U)Di‘C,F-’DiU)H-0CDftCDCDDiDi0CD5ftci-DiC)‘C_S04‘iU)C)-F—aDi‘t3I—’C)IIft0CD‘1H-ftft0•ci-HCCD)I—’-<Di01—’0CDZ‘c__SDiS‘1CDtlI-’-C)04CD:iSU)ftU)10CDI-iH-C1‘.0I—’U)ft—‘C_SCDCDF-’0IF-’HU)0CDCD04‘1DiftH••CDDi‘-<ci-C)U)—1-’-104CDCD‘-C-C)H-H-0ft)U)ftHi5DiCD1C)0Qi‘c_SSH-‘.0CD‘C,C)i—’Cci-DiHi5CD‘1F-’‘c_SC)Di040‘-CCDCDI-’H-C)3ftH-‘C,CDCDDiU)I—’H-C)ft<0DiCF-’U)‘1UsHiHtJftH-CDft110CDCDDi0Dici-CDHiU)C)CCDi-s-‘-CDiC)ft‘-CU)‘-‘•0C)C)CDriCDH•0‘1DiH•DiHi5C)ctC)ftDiDi‘c_SCD0‘1‘.0ftDiC)U)<Z0DiDiCU)U)ft-‘-1CDU)<04CDCDQi‘-1I—’DiF-’CDU)CDCDCD67of “source—based knowledge” is important. Topolski (1976:393-395), for example, reviews several possible ways ofclassifying source-based knowledge and suggests that theclassification of potential data into “direct” and“indirect” sources is essential for methodological analysisin historical research.Both direct and indirect sources of data were usedin carrying out this study. Direct sources consisted ofpublished and unpublished materials. Indirect sourcesconsisted of selected interviews within each of thedistricts. Unpublished materials were comprised of boardminutes and district policy manuals from each district.Published literature pertaining to each of the two policyissues under consideration was also reviewed. This reviewwas undertaken to gain familiarity with each of the twoprovincial policies prior to the collection of more focusseddata within school districts.As soon as permission was granted to conduct thestudy within each of the districts, the policy index andschool board minutes in each district were reviewed. Thepolicy index facilitated the identification of districtpolicy relating to each of the policy types. The schoolboard minutes which were examined covered the beginning ofthe calendar year in which the integration policy wasannounced, to the conclusion of the gathering of interviewdata—- that is, January, 1978 to June, 1981. In reviewing68school board minutes, notes were made of items relative tothe research questions.Published materials of various kinds were alsoconsulted subsequent to field work and concurrent with otherkinds of data collection activity. These materials werepublications emanating from organizations with a stake inthe two policies under study. Examples of such publishedmaterials were the School Act, provincial statutes otherthan the School Act, Ministry of Education policy circulars,Debates of the Legislative Assembly (Hansard) for theProvince of British Columbia, the British Columbia TeachersFederation Newsletter, “Education Today” - the officialorgan of the Ministry of Education, various publications ofthe British Columbia School Trustees Association, such as,“From the Legislature” and “The Newsletter”, and news—related items carried by community newspapers in BritishColumbia.Those interviewed within each school district wereselected senior central office officials, elected trustees,and the most senior member of the executive committees ofthe local teachers’ and principals’ associations who hadknowledge of the responses of their districts to the twoprovincial government policies. Respectively, in eachdistrict these respondents were the superintendent, thesecretary—treasurer, the supervisor of special services, thechairman of the board, at least one school trustee other69than the chairman (the one who had served longest on theboard), and the presidents of the local teachers’ andprincipals’ associations. A minimum of eight interviews washeld in each district. An additional interview was held atthe suggestion of the superintendent of schools in thepartisan metropolitan district for a total of twenty-fiveinterviews in all.Permission to conduct this study and to holdinterviews was obtained by initially contacting thesuperintendent of schools in two of the districts. In thethird district, the non—partisan and non—metropolitan type,initial contact was made with the chairman of the schoolboard and the superintendent concurrently. Subsequently, aletter was sent to them formally requesting permission toconduct the study [see Appendix H]. Included with thiscorrespondence was a brief summary of the proposed study.Upon gaining entry, an “advance organizer” was sentto each of the respondents some days before the interviewwas to be held [see Appendix I]. This communication servedto focus the topic of the upcoming interview for respondentsand confirmed the date and the time of the interview.Interviews were most often held in the offices of theprincipal informants and mostly consumed the greater part ofa range of one to two hours.The instrument used to collect these indirect dataconsisted of a semi-structured interview guide [see AppendixU)Di(D•1C)fti-.’.‘rjiift‘“‘-•,Q0CDMiI-.C4CDDiCDF-’CDiP1CDDiZ(VCiP-tiDiCiP1‘—‘P1QC)U)Di<ft0C)‘Tiftrt1-tiCDCDC)I—’i-ti0<CDU)ftCDC)0CDCDCD0TiU)ftCDJI-’0DiCl)U)DiU)•P1CDP1P1P1it‘<P10.,Q.j‘1‘--<CDU)<<iI-’-CDQIICDC)C)Mii-•Q.,itP1I-”I—”DiLa0‘-“i-”DiDiftC),-‘-.-3CDP1CD(VCDt)ft*IU)DZDl-•-•C)zCiC)LJftU)0ititU)i-tit,.QDi•LOC)0-‘-‘TiC-,CDTiCS)U)Di‘-‘)-‘1-’-CiftU)U)ft1ftI-’.ft‘-‘P10C)U)C)U)C)CDI-’-CDitCDC)U)0ftDlU)0P1DiCDU)U)ft‘rjft‘Ci)I—’ft)U)CDDlP1CDU)U)ftftHCDCDI—”0CDC!)ftU)I-”ftU)a.,•U)‘-“C)CiP1l’j’0CDftP10CDit(VU)<CDCDZCD-I—’P1CiTiDiCDDiTiP1Ci)0CDCDU)Di0LaU)LaU)U)ZDlTiçtD00MiCDDi•‘TJftJ’CD•CDTiU.Z000DI—’CDP1U)<CDftZ0DlU)U)P1CDft0cn0I-’DlDiCDCDt-t.U)CDCDDiftftEt-”ClCDP1rtP1P10U)0.,DiCDTiU)U)CDP1C)‘-i-0‘-“CDDiCDMiZCDU)P1tTDiCiCl)‘-0I-”U)00ftU)I-’•ftftP11-’U)‘1MiC)MiftC)0CiTiMiJftt’CDCt’CD‘r1CDCDftCDCiMiU)TiP1DiDl‘1ftCDP10..•Mi0P1DiCD•itU.U)00ftZCDrCl)TiCiCiU)CDU)‘1U)P1P10ClU)CD1—4i-nP1DCii—CDt-’-CDCDt-’•CDft-CDCC)0CVU.D‘-3I-’CDtTDl0U)TiCiftU)DiU)‘1ftCDDi0F—’itt-Cl3TiP1DTiCD‘1ftC)DiP1trCDDiMi‘TjCDDi0..00CDCDCDCD3C)CiDiftftP1Dlfti-”-‘•C)‘TjU.I—’‘-‘•Dit-’•CitIDiCDCDft-‘•0.,CDftP1I-”Di-<-0rQ,ft<U)0..Mi)P1LaCDI-’MictJ’DCDLaDiCD-‘•CDft<0Z)CDU)QC)‘-3CD(VTiP10..CDCllftftCiCD>‘C)CDCT)Ci0<00..CDU)LaP1CiCDDiU)CDU)Ti5CDD‘ZJMi0..CiP1I—’CU)CDU)U)U)DiMi0DiTiftCD‘-‘ftQ..‘1U)CDCDfti-”D0..ft‘10Di0..Ci0“<I-”U)0..Di00TiftZCDLaZDiCD0P1CD0ftCDftP1Di0..ftD0Z‘-‘-iCiCDClDi00‘rjC)ftDii-‘1U)ZC)DiI-’U)0..ftC)MiCD0ftDi0..LaCDU)itft-DiMiDiCDftCDP1CD-CD‘-‘00..C)DiTiCDP1JC)CDCDtOP1ftDiP1MiCDC)C)CD0..ftCDF—’C)P1CDDiftDlMii-n0‘-‘1-’-C)ftCi0P1CD0..U)CD0..0ft0P1I—’i-’•CD0U)Ci0ftCDCDP100..LaP1CDI-”P1I-’DiCi0t1-‘-“ftitU)0..0nCD0..TiDiCiC):iDit3ftDi0I-”CDCiCT)U.0Ctft0U)I—’QDiCDI-”LaftZP1U)CF-’CiI—’CiU)xLa0CD0ftCD000U)•I-”P1La0CDDlCDftP1MiCDMiMiMiiti-hZU)U)U)U)0i-’•‘1Di0CD‘-3DiCDCDftftTiCDftCD<U)MiCDCD0..t3C)0..U)I-”Mi1-.’P1ftftftDii-’.DiQiftCDCDft00CDDl0CDC)CDitC)C)1-.U)itH0DiP1—I—’MiCDCD)0DiCDCl)U)DMiU)CDU)—3CD71the classification of all data. Interview questions on theother hand, served as a specific means to subdivide the datainto more readily understandable and detailed elements foranalysis. At later stages in the analysis, formal, expandeddefinitions for each type of political response wereidentified. These formal, expanded definitions, initiallyformative, evolved into summative ones and assisted in thefurther understanding of each political response type.The written texts of the twenty—five interviews wereinitially classified according to type of school district.The eight or more written texts pertaining to each districtwere then searched in turn using Elkin’s definition of eachpolitical response type for answers to the key interviewquestions and certain probe questions.The search for pertinent data was facilitated inthat during each interview, sets of questions pertaining toeach of the two policy types had been asked in rotation andwere recorded. However, regardless of this ordering of rawdata, there remained considerable overlap or fusion in theanswers of respondents to the various categories ofpolitical response and policy type.Therefore, in order to ensure the identification ofall relevant data, it was decided to colour-code thesegments of the written text which corresponded to theinterview questions for a particular policy type. Each timea particular answer to an interview question was colour-72coded, the coded response was transferred from the writtentext to 38 cm. x 28 cm. paper sheets with matrices outlinedso as to group the data.Each of these sheets reflected the researchquestions, the different groups of interviewees, and thetype of school district under study for each of the twopolicy types respectively. On each of these sheets, forexample, a matrix was constructed consisting of a row ofcategories along the top margin listing the types ofrespondent—— district official, trustee, president of thelocal teachers’ association, and president of the localadministrators’ group -- and a column of categories alongthe left margin listing sets of interview questions. Eachset of interview questions corresponded to one of the majorresearch questions of the study. In this way, most of thecells in the matrix eventually were filled with datapertinent to the analysis and interpretation of trends.Colour—coding and grouping of data also includedattention to responses other than those outlined by Elkin.The data were examined in this respect using the threetypologies of political influence other than Elkin’s [seeFigure 1]. As a result of this examination, certain otherpossible responses, as discussed in Chapter 9, wereidentified. The individual political responses in thetypology under investigation, however, were found to beexpressed broadly enough by Elkin to accommodate other less73generally defined responses.After grouping the data according to policy type,respondents, and research questions, it was decided tosynthesize the material by writing a summary of findings inorder to determine and describe the kinds of patternsevident. Subsequently, a detailed and lengthy summary wasmade of each of the political responses according to typesof school district and each of the two policy typesrespectively.This initial summary of patterns provided valuableinsights with respect to general differences in politicalactivity as they related to types of school district andpolicy types. This summary, however, proved to be of limiteduse in determining the nature or operational characteristicsof each political response. Therefore, it was decided to reexamine the raw data for more explicit categories orproperties of Elkin’s political response types. As a result,formal, expanded definitions were constructed from thegeneral meaning provided by Elkin (1975), other literatureon the selected political responses, and considerable reviewof the interview data. This undertaking yielded a moreappropriate basis from which to identify the operationalcharacteristics of the political responses.74FORMAL, EXPANDED DEFINITIONSFormal, expanded definitions played an importantpart in subsequent analysis of the data and the presentationof findings. The systematic identification andclassification of basic properties, for example, enabledfiner distinctions to be made in the data and consequentlymore focussed interpretation of each response in action.Formal, expanded definitions, therefore, serve a valuablepurpose in qualitative inquiry.The need to identify the features and attributes ofeach response became evident early in the classification andsummarization of data. The Elkin typology provided onlyvague notions of how each response might be exercised inpractice. Consequently, the literature from which Elkinderived his meanings of each political response wasconsulted to obtain further clarification. This literature(Schattschneider, 1975; Thompson, 1967; Guetzkow, 1966),along with Elkin’s (1975) perspective and initial analysesof data, assisted in the identification of a class ofcharacteristics for each response. These indicators wereused together with Elkin’s definition of each response in atentative or formative way to further analyze data and tosummarize findings. Upon reviewing summaries of the evidencecompiled for each response with the supervisor of thisdoctoral dissertation, it became evident that these explicitdefinitions, formal and expanded in nature, would be helpful75for further probing the operational characteristics of eachpolitical response.After considerable reflection and research on therole of definitions generally, and for each of the politicalresponses under study, the value of formal, expandeddefinitions for making distinctions in the presentation offindings and for addresssing questions of validity andreliability was clear. A particular doctoral dissertation ineducational administration (Moore,1973) was helpful inshowing how vague or unclear terms might be broken down intomore specific parts. Selected literature in politicalscience (Chandler and Plano, 1982; Schattschneider, 1975;Roberts, 1971; Selznick, 1953) and organizational theory(Handy, 1976; Evan, 1976; Thompson, 1967; Guetzkow, 1966)was consulted to ascertain the range of possiblecharacteristics for each political response. In doing so,care was taken to protect what Patton (1980) refers to asthe inductive nature of the organizing patterns in theresearch already in place.The published materials of various kinds, relatingto the responses of organizations with a stake in the twopolicies under study, assisted in the establishment offormal, expanded definitions. These secondary sources alsoprovided important evidence for substantiating the politicalresponses in action.The summaries of findings on hand and the literature‘1 CD MiH’CD a’ 0 Cr TI 0 I-’0 H a P3 0 CD MiH’H’Ct I-” 0 0 MiCD P3 C) TI 0 I1 H’rtH-C) P3C) 0CDU)U)CrTIH’ort CU)CrCDCD•U)P3C)*U)I-::P3P3CD‘-CCrC)U)P3OCDC)HCrU)U)CDçt0‘-1‘1HTIH-CDCtCDU)MiC‘-iCrCDCrP3-‘•H-CtC)‘1H-U)CDi.00 P30CrP3Mi0TI‘1 0 TI CD ‘1 Cr CD U) Mi 0 ‘-C Ct CD C) I—’P3 U) U) H Mi H C) P3 CrCroCD C)o-1MiCD 3 ‘1MiCDH-ti0-iU)HTI CD‘.0C)Cl)H•C)L’IP3 rtTI0H’:iC) H CrCr CD H’a’H H C P3 I—,TI 0 Ct C) P3C)0::3-‘-CU)CD‘1 U) C) Cr CD ‘-C H’ U) Cr H’ C) U) H Cr C ‘1 U) CD H’ CD *2 CD 01HH’CrrrCDtT’‘-CU)0OjCDHIIU)zU) CDCD1tiCrCt-P3P3CtI—’H 0 t’If—sIHU)I’U)ICtQ:1CDCDCl)0 TI CD ‘-C U) CrH 0 P3 I-I0 Cr (U Cl) C LJ CD C) Cr U) U) U) U) Cr CD 01 HoH-0X’MiC)P3P3P3C)MiU)‘-CCt-CD0iCl)Crt-’U)U,‘.0P3P30.,CtP3C)‘-CP3CrctI—’iiU)HU)C)iCHCrU)H-U)I—’C)0H’CDtiCtCrH-HCr‘-tNCDH-CDCMiCrCD‘-CU)U)U)C)C)CrH-P3‘-CCDCrU)0.,i-’CDC)tH’U)H-*2-CDU)U)U)CDHU)TI0CDHU)U)Cr01U)Ct0iCrC)U)U)H-U)CtMi1H0C)Q..,-HC)H-Mia’i0C)U)H-Cr1‘TJH-oCrCD*2CtC)H(I)0‘.0‘<-0H’U)Z0CrMif--’CD0CrCtMi0H-CrC)0CD‘1ZC)CD0U)‘-C‘-Ca’U)0U)CD‘10<‘.0CDCDCrU)HtiTIMi0U)tiH-I—’QU)H-CDI—’Cr<C)CDoH’CDU)CD-iiU’CDa’tCtZ0rtTj‘HCl)‘1H-CrMiCD()3Hja’C)H-*2U)STI‘ozMi*2‘.0a’U)H-CD0U)Mi•H-0H-U)MiZI—artCDH-<Z‘-00CtH’Ha’C)CD‘.0C)U)‘-CU)CrMi7’U)•F-’HC)CDU)Crc-FC)CrU)HU)SCrCDI-’U)HCtiC)(UCr‘.0J’CT)H-F—’0CZ‘-C0CD0CtH-t-Itrj-U)CDCt0P3CrH-TI‘1U)‘1U)D’I—’I-’CN0CDQCD0—CDCtCDI—’Cl)Cl)U)11a’I—’CD¶1H’CDCl)‘TjCDHHU)Ct•0U)iU)HCtCrU)U)CrMiC)C)U)‘-3Cl)CtC‘-CP30C)U)CtCDCDCtH’H‘.0tC0I—’HH)C)CD‘10U)H‘.0CtCDa’CrU)0P3H-‘-U)CrCrC0MiC)CD0Ct0‘-<CrTIC)7’‘.0U)MiCDTICDCD0TITIi-ti0U)‘-CU)CDMiCr0(I)CDI—’-U)I—’CD0U)0CrCDCtU)U)H-Cl)Ct‘.0H’(I)CDCtCrCD0CDCiH0C)‘-CCCD‘-1‘-CC)P3CDi‘-C‘-C:i<CDU)U)01P3CDCD0C)CDU)F—’0.’I—’—F—’•CDi-tiCD0.,—TI00P3U)C)0CtMiCl)F-’01U)HCD‘1Ct‘-CCrMi0U)H-HCC)C)CD)CrCrU)‘-C01F—’CD3F-CDMiH-H‘1U)0il)H-CD‘-CCDri‘.0CDU)CDU)SU)01CrU)‘1U)•TIC)I-’C)Mi0t-3HU)oCDtU)‘1CDCD*2SCDU)U)CDU’TICDCr-‘TIU)CD-U)H)‘I(UCrZ01CDCrCtCDU)MiCD01TI0CDCD‘1Mi(T))Ca’C)i—’TIU)‘-CCDCr0F—’U)•CrMiH-*2HH-<H-U)01CDCD)CrCDIIH-t0CDa’HCrC)a’::3H-y’C)100U)Mi‘-CU)001U)U)TI‘-1CDCrC)CrMi5CrCDCDH’CDU)CD‘-CU)1<CU)C)HH-CrCrU)TIH’CCDCttiTIoisH’CD0isCl0C)U)f-IU)CDMiU)CDHisCrU)U)CrHU)CrU)0HC)CU)U)‘-CisU)1’JisH-‘.0F-’U)0U)CDH’CtCT)Cr‘1isU)I—’isCDC‘.0isCDCDU)CDC)STIisCDCD010CtisU)isI—’0CrCrCrU)Mi0U)P3CD0—1i-ti(YC)0ft‘1Clft‘1wU)i—.‘rjClCl00cCDZCDC)C)PiPi0P)CDI-’P)<ftU)U)I-U)ftft‘CDU)Cl)(P‘1I-‘t5C)Cfl00CDftrtftCtP)00)0c000rI-CDiQ-•U)‘-1ri0C)c0I-U)F-I-’0)‘-1‘-i0)0)‘-“HC)ftU)HI—’U)U)ClU)Q)i0)iC)C)U)0)CDI—iCD<CDCD‘-‘•CDClftClftftftCDF—’C)HU)U)ClftI-.I—’•U)XjI-”CD0U)-‘•U)0)0CD0)CD-0H0)U)i-’ftCDP)ZftU)CD0)•ZU)HCDtjftZC)I-’ft‘-1‘-1‘1ftH01F-’-C)U)ftI-”0)I—i<ftCDI-’-Ht3CD0U)0‘TIft‘TjCDC)ftZ•CD0)C)F-”(J)0)H,JClU)o‘iU)U)ftL)ftC)CDF—’)CDCD‘rJ-‘•CDCD•CD0‘-‘.‘ZjU)ftc‘-‘U)H,ftU))<000HU)U)01U)ftCD‘10).Q01‘TICD‘xJ0CDCD‘TIiCD0ft‘-1r-0U)0C•0-CDCD•U)H0‘-‘-CDCDCD‘ØCD‘1CDH<HCDCD*‘-<C)‘.00-0‘-<‘TIHHCDC)CD0)I—’)C)F-’H,0F-U)CD‘1ft1Ift0)U)‘TIH’ZCD0)U)U)0)‘TI‘-1-0)CDftCD0)0)ftU)r-i-CD‘TI0ft0C)ClCDftc‘-ift0)CD‘TI0)0)ZtClU)0)0Cl(lft‘-‘•00)F-’U)HU)0)0)“JHCD‘TI‘10JU)CDH,I—’ZCD)I—’I-”U)ClCD‘-<C)<CDHU)‘.0•ftC)Clft‘.0C)0)0)CD‘TI01tC)0U)H,ftQ)‘TICDH0)‘-HZ‘-0)CDJ0)Cl‘1ft0‘-‘‘TI0)H00)Dft0)‘TICDCH<ClCDC)0)0)ClftI-’-ftI-’.P)‘tJ‘1ftU)ftClCDCl1—’U)CDftCU)00)CDC)cji<•01cr‘-<CDC)HH’C)HcCD•ftI-”U)ft0)ClftCDftCD‘-ftU)C)U)0)0F-”U)ftCDHftCDU)0CDftDH,C)0CDI-”H‘TICDcH‘-1Cl00)‘TIhh(.QCDH,ClC)‘-“HClU)HftH’P)0CDHi0)U)CDCDCD0)I—’HHctZ0F—’ftU)U)C)cC)CDClClftU)C)C)CHCDZ‘TIftCt0)FCDCDCD<HC)t$00‘TIft‘U)C)ftHClCDU)CtC)Hi0)<‘E0)Ctç‘-<oftI-”U)U)ClI—’CDft0<‘-•F—’‘TIClHi0’U)ft‘TI00)-0)CD0)CDCDI—”00Hi‘TICDftI—’‘TjC)‘-1U)C)HMftP)00)0ftH’ftoCDtTU)0I-”CDC)0)F—’H’F-”0)H,CDCD1iHctU)CDH-CD0ftF-’0I—’U)CDClU)CD0C)CDZ<0‘TICD0)CDU)‘t5‘.iU)0)H,ftCDC)‘TI‘TIU)CDI10I-”Hft‘TI0)0‘.00ftCDfttYci00)CDF-‘1H’U)ftH’‘-<0HCl‘-<0)0)0)ftClHCDF-”0H‘TIHiH-‘TIU)CrU)U)H-C)ftftCDCDftCDCDF—’C)C)0)00)a)f--’-U)ClciU)ClCDU)I0CrC)0)C)ftH0)000)U)H’00)I00)0ftCD0)H0‘-“000)H’ft(0ftH’ClH,H’H,CD0U)Cl)3F—’H’TYPESOFSCII(X)LDISTRIOrPSEUIX)NYMSPartisanNetroo1itanCoastSchoolDistrictNon—PartisanMetropolitanPortSchoolDistrictNon—PartisanandIslandSchoolDistrictNon- MetroolitanFigure5PseudonymsforTypesofSchoolDistrict79CHAPTER FOURCOALITIONCoalition refers to attempts by the focalorganization to join with others, for example, tomake the provision of some resource morepredictable (Elkin, 1975: 175).The study revealed that the three school districtshad combined with other organizations such as the localmunicipality and the provincial school trustees’association. They did so to exert influence over theprocurement or maintenance of resources, including technicalassistance, necessary to comply with the provincialpolicies.The meaning of coalition used here is distinct fromthe term “alliance”. An alliance in politics generallydenotes a union for a narrow range of purposes. It tends tobe relatively long-term in duration. Examples would be atreaty or a confederation. A coalition, on the other hand,can address a spectrum of objectives. It refers to a pactbetween organizations which may be intermittently short termor long term in duration.Thompson and McEwan (1961: 185) distinguish betweena coalition and a merger. The basis of this distinction isthat two or more organizations in a merger become fused80permanently. As a result, one or all of the original partsmay lose their identity. A coalition, on the other hand, isperceived to involve joint action toward only limitedaspects of the goals of each member. The right to withdrawfrom the coalition, moreover, is retained by each member.Repeated inspections of the data and additionalreviews of the literature subsequent to data analysisresulted in the following formal, expanded definition ofcoalition as a political response:(a) the school district combines with organizations externalto the school district; such as, the local municipality oranother school district;(b) the external organizations have either a localjurisdiction, such as, a board of health, or a regional andprovincial jurisdiction, such as, Members of the LegislativeAssembly;(c) the association between the school district and theexternal organizations is recorded in officialcorrespondence, school board minutes or officialpublications and is acknowledged by interviewees in thestudy;(d) a specific purpose, common to both the school districtand external organizations, serves as the basis for thecoalition. The purpose can be expressed as support for, oras a demand, with regard to Ministry policy;(e) the purpose of the coalition is publicly acknowledged bythe parties to the coalition;(f) the duration of the coalition is variable; that is,either short term or long term.School district coalitions are described in thischapter under three headings: type, purpose, and duration.81These headings issue from the formal, expanded definition ofcoalition and further analysis of data. Findings arepresented in an integrated fashion. The “purpose” and“duration” of coalitions, for example, are reportedaccording to instances of the two different coalition types.School districts coalesced with a wide assortment oforganizations in responding to Ministry policies. Thejurisdiction of these different organizations serves as abasis for classifying coalitions as “local” or “regional andprovincial”. As local coalitions were more numerous, theywill be presented first.LOCAL COALITIONSSchool districts were found to have participated ina variety of local coalitions. Organizations with whichschool districts coalesced were boards of health, otherschool districts, municipal councils, municipal advisoryplanning commissions, community colleges, and municipalparks and recreation commissions. Findings are reported herefor each instance of these local coalitions.Boards of HealthThe jurisdictional boundaries of boards of healthwere found not always to coincide with school districtboundaries. Boards of health sometimes covered a greater82geographic area. Nevertheless, the community serviceorientation of local boards of health essentially coveredthe entire population of school districts.Purpose and duration. School districts coalescedclosely with local boards of health in response to theintegration policy. For example, coalition with theMetropolitan Board of Health for Greater Vancouver by one ofthe metropolitan school districts took the form ofdiscussions concerning the delivery of educational servicesin conjunction with community treatment services for thehandicapped. The medical personnel affiliated with theMetropolitan Board of Health for Greater Vancouver suppliedthis district with technical information. This informationassisted the school district in projecting costs andmanpower needs for realigned services to such children.Such cooperation was long term in duration. It wasaided by the fact that a school trustee sat on the localboard of health as an official representative of thedistrict. Also, there was close collaboration betweenexecutive officers of the board of health and thesupervisors of special services in the school districts.This collaboration involved matters pertaining to thepersonal care needs of individual students.In the metropolitan Vancouver area, this interactionwas especially important because of the absence of anothermechanism described as follows:83In a formal way, there used to be an officialcommittee for special education services inmetropolitan Vancouver. It was composed of thesupervisor of special services, thesuperintendent, and a trustee from each schooldistrict. The committee was a metropolitan onewhich dealt with matters related to the educationof the handicapped throughout a number ofdistricts. Most of the kinds of topics which thiscommittee dealt with now are handled through theboard of health. ... We make damn sure that ourconcerns get discussed, since two of our trusteessit as the district’s representatives on the boardof health.(Interview with Supervisor of SpecialServices, Coast School District)School DistrictsSeveral school districts “neighboured” or weresituated immediately adjacent to the school districts understudy. There appeared to be steady communication betweenthese school districts, particularly with respect tomaximizing the quality of special services for handicappedchildren. The professional relationship or collegial bondbetween these districts was especially well established.Purpose and duration. School districts held regulardiscussions with neighbouring school districts concerningshared programmes for specific categories of handicappedyoungsters. As a result, one school district entered into alimited term agreement with two neighbouring districts forthe purpose of offering a joint programme for hearingimpaired students. At the same time, another school district84was party to an existing agreement, made prior to theannouncement of the integration policy, with an adjacentschool district. This prior agreement facilitated theimplementation of provincial policy. It did so bystipulating that students from these other school districtscould be sent to one centrally-located school district forthe testing of speech, hearing and other learning—relatedimpediments. Both metropolitan and non-metropolitan schooldistricts entered into fixed term agreements for thesepurposes. Such agreements were common.The availability and deployment of teaching staffhad a bearing on the formation of coalitions between schooldistricts. For example, the numbers of students enrolled inspecial education programmes was an especially importantconsideration in the allocation of teachers for suchprogrammes. The following interview comment provides aglimpse into this factor:It wouldn’t make much sense for the district tooffer a complete programme for four or fivestudents. In addition, there would be all sorts ofdelays in getting staffing approvals for it fromthe Ministry of Education. Instead we offer ajoint programme with two neighbouring districts.Questions such as to what extent can programmes beimplemented for different students, or how quicklyshould the district implement it for certaincategories of handicapped student, are for theadministration to work out.(Interview with Senior School Trustee,Port School District)85School districts expressed support for Ministrypolicies by agreeing to work within the broad guidelines ofthe policies. This willingness, however, was less pronouncedfor the integration policy than for the capital expenditureone. Coalitions with neighbouring school districts, however,demonstrated a positive orientation to Ministry policies.School board minutes are illustrative:The District Superintendent referred to reciprocalarrangements with Metro Districts regardingstudents attending schools in Port SchoolDistrict. Twenty—eight students were affected. Nofees were charged except for special educationprogrammes involving three students from PacificSchool District (an adjacent district).(Minutes of Port School District)School districts also expressed demands directed atthe Ministry of Education and other ministries of theprovincial government through coalitions with other schooldistricts. The demands were oriented to the clarification ofprovincial policy and the need for additional resources. Thefollowing example is indicative of this tendency:There was general paranoia on the part ofofficials and trustees when the policy wasannounced by the Ministry. In discussions aroundthe board table, there was fear that the Ministrywould shut down Jericho School for the severelyhandicapped and other such institutions. At thispoint in time also, the Vancouver School Districtwas debating the merits of the handicapped policywith the Ministry of Education. Some metropolitanschool districts openly supported the VancouverSchool District in its struggle with the Ministry.86Coast was one of these districts. Trusteescontinue to follow the situation very closely.(Interview with Superintendent of Schools,Coast School District)School districts apparently preferred forming shortterm coalitions with each other. One school district, forexample, initiated a joint proposal for “a pilot programme”with certain neighbouring school districts concerning theintegration of the hearing impaired, for Ministry ofEducation approval. Accordingly, this programme was to belocated in and administered by the initiating schooldistrict. The following interview comments providebackground for the joint proposal:Sometimes, school districts attempt to anticipateMinistry policies which will be applicableprovince—wide. This school district is noexception. As the principal advisor to the Board,I work with the Chairman and other trustees todetermine what innovations are in the bestinterests of the district. By mounting a pilotprogramme in special education within thisdistrict, for example, and one in which otherdistricts have a stake, we are demonstrating tothe Ministry that we are addressing problemsthrough local initiative. Before makingrecommendations such as the pilot programme, wemake certain that the district has consideredalternative courses of action and has sought theopinions of others. We do our homework and it paysoff. The Ministry consented to our proposal fortwo reasons: first, because of the work that wentinto planning it; and second, because it is prettydifficult to argue against a joint effort byschool districts which in the long run saveseveryone money.(Interview with Superintendentof Schools, Coast School District)87This type of initiative did not appear to be unusualor uncommon among the school districts. Moreover, theseparticular coalitions were periodically renegotiated. Suchcoalitions provided a means of adapting Ministry policy tofit local circumstances. This was true for both theintegration and capital policies. The following examplepertains to capital expenditure:The Ministry and the school board tend to operateon an ad hoc basis in processing capitalexpenditures. Each project requiring approval islooked at fresh from the start. Teachers sit onthe buildings and properties committee but they donot have a vote. As teachers, we notice trusteesfeel that more attention should be placed on theworking relationship between the municipality andthe school district, especially on the topic ofplaying fields and new schools. The relationshipcould be better, but all we ever hear about is“the public versus the school”. The public alwayshas something to say about school facilities. Whatgets reported, however, is the debate with theschool. The municipality gets off scot-free.(Interview with President of Teachers’Association, Island School District)The capital expenditure policy also stimulated shortterm coalitions, but to a much lesser extent thanintegration. One example, provided by a senior metropolitanarea school trustee, occurred when several metropolitanschool districts jointly petitioned the Minister ofEducation by letter for the alleviation of the financialburden to local taxpayers caused by the dramatic rise inproperty taxes during 1979.88Municipal CouncilsMunicipal boundaries tended not to coincide withschool district boundaries. As a result, the jurisdiction ofmore than one municipal council spilled over into schooldistricts. This linkage necessitated school districtinteraction with several municipal councils over a widerange of issues, particularly buildings and property.Purpose and duration. With one exception, schooldistricts did not coalesce with municipalities in respondingto the integration policy. The exception arose because alocal municipality in the region operated a “shelteredworkshop” form of programme for the severely handicapped. Asa consequence, there was already some interaction betweenthe district and municipal personnel on the sharing ofprogrammes and facilities. An “historical reason” wasoffered for this state of affairs:Island School District inherited the shelteredworkshop and the special relationship withThorndale municipality at the time as the smallerschool district in the region was amalgamated withIsland School District. Local feeling in theThorndale area at the time was strongly supportiveof the handicapped, and because this communitycontinues to be supportive, Island School Districtdoesn’t dare abolish the program. Relations withthe village of Thorndale and the school districtare quite good. Paperwork is kept to a minimum. Atthe same time, there are pockets of support forthe handicapped in other parts of the districttoo, particularly by the parents of such kids.None of the other groups in the district whichwork on behalf of the handicapped has the kind oflongstanding relationship with the board as does89the village of Thorndale.(Interview with Supervisor of Special Services,Island School District)A more typical example of coalitions prompted by thecapital expenditure policy was furnished by a secretary-treasurer who said:Capital expenditures require a building-by-building analysis. Different schools havedifferent requirements. Most schools are used bythe public as well as the kids. Various needs ofthe total community and individual neighbourhoodsoften have to be taken into account. To do thejob, the municipality and the school district haveto work together to ensure that facilityspecifications and construction contracts areacceptable to higher authorities. Cost-sharingbetween the school district and the municipalityrequires approval from the Ministry of Education.Furthermore, if the municipality requests fundingfrom the Provincial Facilities Fund concerningrecreational facilities to be cost—shared withschool districts, then the project cannot startwithout the approval of the Ministry of MunicipalAffairs. The extra-large gymnasium at FalconridgeSchool was constructed through a capital grantwhich was two—thirds borne by the ProvincialGovernment and one-third by the municipality andschool district. Municipal and school districtpeople collaborate closely when seeking financialaid from provincial authorities.(Interview with Secretary—Treasurer,Port School District)School districts tended to undertake extensive jointactivities with municipalities on capital expenditurematters. These coalitions had the potential to become quiteprominent. The partisan nature of one school board waspartly responsible as this example shows:90School board politics is tied to the action of thetwo political groups on the board: the CoastCitizens’ Association and the Coast Voters’Association. The Coast Citizens’ Association ismore involved in the community and education. Theyactively represent various community interestgroups. The Coast Voters’ Association, on theother hand, is more conservative. It is made up ofbusinessmen and lawyers. Each of these two groupson the board has counterparts on municipalcouncil. This connection with the municipalityassists the board in dealings with the ProvincialGovernment since the board is demonstrating a widebasis of community support. Trustees, moreover,are functioning as part of a larger group and notstrictly as individuals. There is strength innumbers and political affiliation, especially whenthe voters and taxpayers are backing you. Thedistrict’s position with the Ministry as a resultcarries more weight.(Interview with President of Teachers’Association, Coast School District)Of the various municipalities in their respectiveproximities, the three school districts coalesced the mostwith the largest municipality co-terminus with each schooldistrict’s boundaries. Such interaction was typically longterm in duration:There is a fair amount of interaction with themunicipal council, especially since themunicipality initiates proposals for thedevelopment of municipal facilities adjoiningschool sites. There is a need for both thedistrict and the municipality to know of eachother’s plans, development sites and operatingfacilities. Wheelchair ramps for the handicappedin adjoining municipal and school districtfacilities is an issue before us at the moment.(Interview with Superintendent of Schools, CoastSchool District)When school districts and municipalities coalesced91over capital expenditure matters, they took the opportunityto express their dissatisfaction with provincial educationpolicies generally. The two metropolitan Vancouver schooldistricts exemplified such behaviour. In metropolitanVancouver the capital expenditure policy appeared tostimulate coalitions because of perceived inadequacies inthe mechanics of intergovernmental financial relations. Thisdimension of coalition behavior will be discussed in thenext chapter.Heavy community use of schools outside of classroomhours also necessitated regular collaboration betweendistrict and municipal officials. An example concerning theme-lding of adult-oriented programmes with availablefacilities provides insights:Whenever possible we collaborate to improve schoolfacilities for public use. For a nominal fee, allthe schools are available to the community outsideof school hours. One school -- closed due to lackof enrolment and the advanced age of the facilityis leased to the municipality for one dollar peryear. The municipality then sub-leases thisparticular school to the Y.M.C.A. For communitypurposes. The school district, however, stillretains ownership of the building. The jointmanagement of the facility really involves theschool district, the municipality and the Y.M.C.A.(Interview with Secretary-Treasurer,Port School District)Besides school board representation on municipalagencies, school trustees held informal meetings withmunicipal councillors at least once a year. Central office92officials, moreover, stated that that there is also regularinteraction with executive officers of the municipality inorder to remain knowledgeable of one another’s plans. Thisarrangement was described in the following manner:It is difficult to talk about coordination whenthings are jumping up all around you. The districtis experiencing an unanticipated and suddenpopulation increase, mostly due to people movingover here from the Mainland. The City has itshands full too in attempting to accommodate thedemands which these new people are placing on themunicipality. Nevertheless, the district has takenthe initiative to work together more with CityCouncil. Indeed, the District was heartened byencouragement from Carl Daneliuk, one of theassistant deputy ministers in the EducationMinistry, regarding the school board’sdetermination to emerge with a five to ten yearmaster plan for development. Such a plan wouldenable the district to be more realistic and intune with what other local agencies are thinking.(Interview with Secretary—Treasurer,Island School District)Much of the interaction between the school board andthe municipal council also included agencies of themunicipality, such as the municipal advisory planningcommission. While the municipal council made final decisionsin respect of transactions, the advisory planning commissionstudied school district proposals and made recommendationsto the municipal council.93Municipal Advisory Planning CommissionsSchool district coalitions with a municipal advisoryplanning commission resulted from a broad cross section ofjoint community interests. Members of the advisory planningcommission, for example, were selected and appointed by themunicipal council from applicants among the citizens withinthe community. The advisory planning commission studiedschool district proposals in respect to possible impact onthe community and its various neighbourhoods. This agencyworked closely with the municipal planning department andthe elected council of the municipality.Purpose and duration. School districts were proactive in municipal planning matters related to education.For example, one school district badgered both the municipaladvisory planning commission and the municipal council toundertake joint planning with the school district. Planningrequirements pertained to the provision of roads, utilities,and the servicing of new subdivisions in which there was tobe future school construction. Ultimately, the advisoryplanning commission, the municipal council and the localschool district became closely aligned in the planningprocess. Prior to this joint endeavour, however, planning inthis particular municipality had frequently overlooked94school site requirements. The affected district decided toremedy this neglect by establishing the following “Buildingand Site Acquisition Policy”:The Board is committed to the concept of longrange planning to ensure that educationalfacilities and services are provided in the mostefficient way possible to meet the needs of theschool district. Consultation, therefore, shall bemaintained throughout the planning process withthe school community, school staff, Ministry ofEducation and neighbouring municipalities. Everyeffort shall be made to design schools, andadditions to schools, to provide the best possiblelearning environment.(Minutes of Island School Board)Trustees in another school district sought andobtained the cooperation of the advisory planning commissionand the municipal council on the joint use of gymnasia. Thisundertaking included cost sharing for the construction andmaintenance of such facilities. Trustees and officials inthis school district believed that because the Ministryfavoured such arrangements, capital expenditure proposalswould receive a more favourable reception. Indeed, boardminutes in this particular school district record that theSecretary-Treasurer held meetings with the Director ofPlanning for the respective local municipality. Thesemeetings did not focus upon any school facility inparticular. Rather the meetings concerned the general roleof the school board relative to community planning, or“planning for planning” in the municipality and school95district.School district coalitions with the municipalplanning commission were mainly long—term endeavours as thisexample shows:In acquiring a school site there must be apopulation justification for it. In other words,an adequate number of students must reside in thearea. These students need to be in place at theproposed site before the Ministry will approve aparticular program. If this condition is met, thenthe board sits down with the municipality todiscuss the site and possible shifts inpopulation. As a result, the district finds itselffollowing a management—by—objectives way ofaddressing the issue. This planning processappears to be compatible with the Ministry notionof five year projections.(Interview with Chairman of the Board,Island School District)Community CollegesCommunity colleges were located in each of the threeschool districts studied. Coalitions with these collegeswere very close—knit since school trustees from severalneighbouring districts served as official representatives oftheir school districts on the colleges’ boards. Suchrepresentation provided a first-hand opportunity to monitorand guide the articulation between elementary and secondaryand post-secondary education in each community.Purpose and duration. Both school districts andlocal community colleges had a stake in capital expenditure96issues. The fact that certain school trustees served asofficial representatives of their respective schooldistricts on the community college board facilitated long—term coalition.School districts and community colleges jointlyshared certain facilities. This joint use was taken intoaccount by school districts when rationalizing capitalexpenditure proposals to the Ministry. The experience of oneschool district, depicted in the board’s minutes, provides acase in point:The Secretary-Treasurer reported on a telephonediscussion with the Deputy Minister of Educationrelative to Mountain College occupying theBramblewood School facility. The above subject wasfully discussed and the Board was in agreementthat a letter be written to the Deputy Ministerdetailing the “motion” received from MountainCollege and stating that the board had now decidedthat the use of the Bramblewood facility would beprimarily for community purposes and that it woulddiscuss this matter with the municipality beforetaking further action.(Minutes of Port School Board)Parks and Recreation CommissionsThe mutual desire for joint or integrated use ofschool and municipal facilities for adults and childrenalike served as a basis for considerable co-operation withparks and recreation commissions. This interaction assistedin the development and delivery of co-curricular and extra-97curricular programmes for children in the school district.Examples were outdoor track and field facilities, parks,swimming pools and access ramps to these facilities for thehandicapped.Purpose and duration. The two metropolitan Vancouverschool districts coalesced with their local parks andrecreation commissions extensively. They did so with respectto the planning and design of various outdoor services,playgrounds, and playing fields. A superintendent of schoolsattested that these joint arrangements were emphasized incapital expenditure proposals:If you look at the map of the district on my wall,you will notice right away that schools aresituated right next to parks. It shows you justhow close our working relationship has to be. Wetry our best to maintain good relations. ...Itpays off when we need their assistance during thecompilation of capital expense proposals.(Interview with Superintendentof Schools, Coast School District)Coalitions also took the form of local “ad hoc”committees. This variant was suggestive of all threefeatures of coalition. It took the following form:In the case of a proposed extension of primaryclassrooms to a school, the board formed acommittee comprised of the principal, teachers,parents from the immediate neighbourhood andrepresentatives from the municipal recreation98commission who wished to use the new space foradult purposes after school hours. This committeeassisted in the planning of the proposed facility.In the course of its work, it interacted with thelocal advisory planning commission and therecreation commission. Given the composition ofthe committee, it had a “mousetrap purpose”. Theidea was that because of the representation onthis committee, a community expectation was builtup through the committee. The committee reallyserved as “a political base” should the districtrequire it in dealings with the Ministry ofEducation. Any committee structured in this mannerhas a mousetrap purpose. It is both an advisorybody to the district and a basis of politicalsupport.(Interview with Assistant Superintendentof Schools, Port School District)Planning for capital expenditure projects took intoconsideration the education of children and adults.Coalitions with the parks and recreation commission assistedin ensuring joint use of municipal and school districtfacilities.REGI ONAL AND PROVINCIAL COALI TI ONSSchool districts coalesced with two organizationsrepresentative of this type, the British Columbia SchoolTrustees Association (B.CS.T.A.) and the LegislativeAssembly. The B.C.S.T.A. functioned as a private interestgroup or association of school boards. The LegislativeAssembly, however, was a public, governmental organization.It consisted of duly elected M.L.A.s, or Members of the99Legislative Assembly who represented specific electoraldistricts. These organizations served as important forumsthrough which school districts “lobbied” for additionalresources. The “regional group” meetings of the B.C.S.T.A.’sten branches, and the annual general meeting of the wholeprovincial association were especially important forums.Members of the Legislative AssemblySchool district coalitions with members of theLegislative Assembly were esentially “provincial” incharacter. Although members represented “ridings” or“electoral districts” on a regional geographical basis, theforum for the expression of the coalition was either on thefloor of the Legislature or by way of intervention with theprovincial government bureaucracy in Victoria and with thecabinet minister responsible.Purpose and duration. School districts communicatedfrom time to time with members of the Legislative Assembly.They did so as a contingency, in the event that the help ofM.L.A.s was required to clarify policies or to procureadditional resources.The political ideology of the school board was animportant factor. Certain insights are provided in thiscomment of a senior official:Political parties on the school board make adifference. Patrick MacDonald School for the100handicapped, for example, an institution operatedfor a long time privately by the British ColumbiaAssociation for the Mentally Retarded, would neverhave been incorporated into the school district ifit weren’t for the fact that the trusteesaffiliated with the Coast Citizens Association, apro—education and N.IJ.P. group, were elected tothe board during the 1977 election. ... Sometimesit is unfortunate that party politics is now foundat the school board level. The two parties on theboard often do not see eye to eye. The two groupsof trustees maintain close contacts withN.D.P. and Social Credit colleagues in theProvincial Legislature. Due to this split on theboard, there are political provisions to befulfilled in addition to educational ones.(Interview with Secretary Treasurer,Coast School District)The political values of school trustees alsocultivated coalitions with respect to the integrationpolicy. In one of these school districts, a senior trusteedescribed graphically the predisposition of fellow trustees:We have a responsive board which always welcomesdelegations to it. The board has never turned downa request for educating the handicapped. Theschool board is in keeping with the kind of townwhich Island City is, an N.D.P. mill town. Theblue collar workers and the lumber industry arenot the only factors which make the citypredominantly N.D.P. in outlook. Ever since theestablishment of the community college, theacademics there have sided with the policies ofthe New Democratic Party provincially. In doingso, they have reinforced the socialist flavour ofthe town. School trustees favour the N.D.P. also,but do not always abide by provincialN.D.P. policy.Seven of the nine trustees on the schoolboard have an N.D.P. orientation. However, onmatters dealing with the integration policy, eventhe two conservative trustees sympathize inprinciple with the kinds of decisions which the101board makes.(Interview with Senior School Trustee,Island School District)A further example involved a school districtrepresented by three members of the Legislative Assembly. Inthis instance an M.L.A. lobbied the Minister of Education,at the request of the school district, for the procurementof classroom aides and monies needed for the individualizedprogrammes of newly integrated handicapped pupils. Thefollowing speech reported in Hansard displays the commitmentof this M.L.A. to local education:Mr. Chairman, I would certainly like to add mysupport to the request by the first member forCentral City Centre and Coast North that theMinister of Education make a statement about thepolicy, and certainly the philosophy, of hisGovernment.We also find in a statement from the GreaterVancouver Regional District that the Government’scontribution to the basic education programcertainly in the Greater Vancouver area, and thatincluded Coast School District —— declined inrecent years from 45.3 percent in 1973 to 28.8percent this year. Now the Minister can challengethese figures if he wants. They’re not my figuresThe other statement that the Minister made inspeaking to the table officers of the B.C. SchoolTrustees in January of this year was that hisMinistry was not planning any major legislativechanges related to education. He said none wereplanned before, maybe, the 1981 sitting of theLegislature. They expressed some alarm about this,and I want to express some alarm about that too.(Speech by M.L.A., Coast School District,Debates of Legislative Assembly)102School boards also interacted with members of theLegislative Assembly concerning the capital expenditurepolicy. The support of a local M.L.A., for example, waselicited in gaining Ministry of Education approval for anaddition to an existing school facility. A senior schooltrustee, who also functioned as the chairman of the financecommittee, rationalized the need to coalesce with theM.L.A., as follows:Many Ministry of Education policies are quiteminor in the context of the total administrationof the district. Currently, there are no seriousproblems with regard to either the integration orthe capital expenditure policy, ... but I am notsaying that we haven’t had problems. The districttries to live within its means. Whenever a problemdoes arise, however, the district gets involvedwith B.C.S.T.A., or some other group, includingthe M.L.A.s, if need be, to iron out the problems.School districts generally tend to throw things atthe Ministry from all sides when they have a needto do so.... Once I even met with one of ourM.L.A.s, a former trustee on the Coast Board andone who held ideological views completely oppositeto mine, in order to see to it that a badly neededaddition to a local secondary school was approved.(Interview with Senior School Trustee,Coast School District)Similarly, evidence showed that coalition withmembers of the Legislative Assembly can be regarded asessentially supportive of Ministry policy in a philosophicalsense. This aspect of coalition also involved the monitoringof the Ministry of Education, other ministries of theHi‘1U)U)t-‘tiHCDCDU)rtU)U)‘1•)I-1ritoU)‘-J.U)CDi-•CDL’‘t3Qi0Ct‘-“000•CD0C)E‘1C)ZU)CxlCDU)CDU)‘1ZJ—.t3’rjCnr1i-QiCflrrOOIi•<Z1_iU)U)U)U)Z(D(I)U)1ftU)tD00CD0C)Ct-CtI-”CtCT3‘i0i1iQU)1CI)IU)IC)I‘-CTcti—”U)<U)(D<-i-’rjCDftriU)I—’1ctO00CD0ftU)ftCD-ctotYU)01U)0)U)friZft‘-ICD(DC)C)QiI.U)C)tTF-<ft‘10CD<U)CDF—U)CDw-’CDH0U)U)fli—a1’-•-‘•00U)0U)C)HiU)U)t3ft0CD‘t50OCTU)CDctO-U)ctri)U)0i-”CDU)U)riMi0Qj1Hi<‘1toU)0HftU)’-<iOU)•C)•0tOHi0I_ri0HiCDU)CDU)01<ri<LE‘<CDU)Qitot.Qftftft0)0U)HiCTCD•C)WriC)U)00O0)0II-,.<CC)CJ0iC)H-Tct-C)0ft0001‘-“C)‘t301‘-iC)0)CDcU)ftZCD(I)010cU)ZU)iC)DCDZCDCDU)‘-ii0C)U)(I)1-.ft(D.tn0U)0U)XCDft0Qi010t-U)C)i—iC)U)-(DCD‘-“ctctCD0U)-Hit-iftftCDOQJF-’-O-ECDi-itQU)CT‘-i-U)0‘--C)ri—I‘-•Q.-Qj0)ft0)CDCl)001U)0<0rtCDOrtU)ftU)Hil—ft0QiC)U)3JC)CDU)riHiU)ft0-1CDMift01CD‘-i-to‘-I•CDZU)U)-CDCD<I-i•.0CD0riri0QjI—a0-3ft‘—“U)‘-<CD-1ftU)CD0U)‘—0r-iU)U)0U)0CDCDU),—ri•‘rjtOI—a-)COC?)‘-“U)CDE’--CTOf-U)<<0CD0I-”U)10C))(DC)I-•F-t)F-’HiCDU)(DCDU)‘-“001ftftZtoU)‘-i-CDftU)ftrift(Th‘-“‘-“7U)c-I-CDCT0ct’..clU)01CDt1—-<CTC-,-U)ZC)U)U)U)CD0)C)‘1CDlb000)ftft0CDtOCDCTC)I—’I—iftU)HiCDrIOCD-“ftCD‘-1‘-“0I--sriCxl01))O‘-<U)ftCD)U):t0)01<‘-•‘t50ftUctCDCDU)TiCiLOOU)CDI—’I—’C)CTh‘-II—’CDU)HCD‘-“CDft0ClI-”ft•—“CDU)U)U)ftri010i-r-01U)U)Cl)<QiU)0c-I-C)1-U)U)HiU)-QiCD’rJ‘-a-CD‘—i..ftC)•U)i--C)riCtU)ft0U)U)H.t1I1.CDZU)00‘--sftI-”CDct‘1<100)0))U)ftft•CDCl-0)0)C)‘1l—HTiECD‘1CTtoU)tOftft0CD‘--ic-I-CDZ”i—i‘1U)c-I-ftU)ft—0ri.CDH0U)CDc-ItoCD••‘-<U)‘-‘•-•tT0U)—0ftrI01riC)ftC)00U)<0ft-U)cI-0CDU)c-IJU)c-IC)ftCD0‘1ftU)CTCDCD‘-“(D001C)CD0•U)‘1CD‘1)0U)(D01(DCDU)CDCDct-U)c-II))0TiU)<C)Tic-I-U)QjU)U)U)CD01.ft‘VCD0I-”‘1‘-<ftZI-.HiftCDU)C)t--‘—iCl‘10CDftH00‘t5‘-“CDMi0TiCDCDU)<U)00-0U)CDC-’-IOHiI-hU)’-<U)Hi0ClU)c-IU)‘10CDU)U)f—.c-IHiCDC)ftftC),-C)00U)CDCDftU)tsC)‘-“o-<-i‘1-•CD010U)CD‘<U)104through the services of B.C.S.T.A. This involvement alsopertained to the expression of demands related to thesatisfaction of local educational objectives. Such demandstook this form:The Board has written to the Minister of Educationmore than once to convey that political statementson the question of the handicapped are not theanswer. In these letters the Board stresses theneed for a better approach to educating thehandicapped. The open—ended nature of theMinistry’s policy invites court action by parentswho have handicapped children in special,segregated classes. Without the efforts ofB.C.S.T.A. in assisting school districts to avertlegal challenges by parents, some districts wouldnot have had a chance. The B.C.S.T.A. distributesvaluable legal advice to school boards. Thisassistance reduces the potential for lawsuits.(Interview with Senior Trustee,Island School District)Alternatively, school district demands were conveyedto the Ministry, as this interview comment shows:The Ministry has responded pretty well, but theynever really cover the total costs of educatingthe handicapped. We always have to remind them ofunique features related to the programmes of ourspecial needs children. It helps that the chairmanof the board is also an executive member ofB.C.S.T.A. The Chairman sometimes speaks directlywith the Minister because of this dual capacity.The discussion is usually right to the point andpretty lively. The fact that our board chairman isan executive member of the trustees’ associationaffects how we respond to the provincialgovernment. The municipal people also becomeinvolved as do other political groups. It becomesa total kind of response. The extent of theirinvolvement varies according to the issue andmostly for financial questions. Quite often when105the matter of local autonomy is at stake, groupsare stimulated to speak up for each other.(Interview with Superintendent of Schools,Island School District)The B.C.S.T.A., therefore, was used for the purposeof making known to the Ministry that capital and othergeneral financial allocations provided to school districtsrequired improvement. School district coalitions withB.C.S.T.A., however, were not always compatibleundertakings. For example, the disposition of one schooldistrict was described thus:Port School District is not in favour of largescale political action, especially thegrandstanding variety carried out by the VancouverSchool District. The aims of the Vancouver SchoolDistrict go against the aims of Port. This isbecause the actions of Vancouver School Districtare often very shabby and ill—conceived. We preferto act alone, but sometimes we join with otherschool districts on really major questions.Education of the handicapped is not a major issuein Port School District. District personnel keepthemselves informed of the implications throughthe B.C.S.T.A. However, we don’t really work muchthrough B.C.S.T.A. either. We have recentlyconsidered pulling out of the organizationcompletely because trustees don’t like the way inwhich B.C.S.T.A. is heading. They should beoperating more in our interests. Port SchoolDistrict pays 100 percent of its budget from localfunds and deserves more attention.(Interview with Senior Trustee,Port School District)School districts attempted several initiatives inconjunction with the B.C.S.T.A. One district placed the106following motion on the agenda of a B.C.S.T.A. annualgeneral meeting (A.G.M.) held during the course of thisresearch study:It is believed that quite often land suitable forschool sites is subdivided and new homes are builtand occupied without any consideration given toproviding a school site in the immediate area.Suitable school sites should be included incommunity plans. School boards should not berequired to purchase land for school sites....Be it resolved that the B.C.S.T.A. encourage theMinister of Education and the Minister ofMunicipal Affairs to initiate legislation thatwould require subdivision developers to provideland for school sites at no cost to the taxpayers.(Motion by Island School District,Minutes of Annual General Meeting,B.C.S.TA.)A senior school trustee remarked that metropolitanVancouver school districts were especially disposed tocoalitions. This representative of a metropolitan schooldistrict added that “we have a great deal of clout when wewant to use it.” Mostly this “clout” was exercised throughthe “Metro B.C.S.T.A.”, the metropolitan regional group ofthe B.C.S.T.A., for capital and other financial matters. Asa result, long term coalitions with other school districtsappeared to be sustained partly through mutual involvementwith the B.C.S.T.A.C)P30Ct,-.‘rjU)CDU)tDC)CD‘TICtU)P10U)‘1CDCF-00Cl<‘1C!)CDU)P1X)P3i-n1‘-1CD0‘-•f—iP3CD‘Tj0CDU)<CDI—aC)P3rrI—iU:)i-•i—ii--<0‘tJCDCl‘-0iCP3i-iCDC)P3i-•Ii0iCt)i-CD‘TIft‘<ftt--ClCDC)N01U)U)HI—’I-”i-h)CDCtU)rJ)o1I-”r-C)i-’•i-”‘<Ct0i-s.Cli-.CD‘Tjoz‘-CD‘.0CDftZ‘-3Z“<C)C)C)U)CDCl)Ci)Ct‘.0P3•‘.0‘TIci)I-”P30P3P31)CCDCDCD•P3Z‘TIP3CDClrtP3p-”P3U)‘Xct‘TIC)U)i.-Cl‘1F-tiU)CN0CDC)•ft0‘-“CDP3Cl)I-”Cl0‘T3P30U)tYI0CDftI7C)tp3C)‘rJftCDU)C)C)CDCl‘13‘-ICDCD‘TIft‘-“0‘-“0rtC)Z‘1‘-“ClCD00H,ri‘-1‘1CDCDP30)‘10<00•‘-‘CDCtH,0U)CDCDril—JftZCDU)‘10‘T3U)U)C)P3i-”U)I-i‘-“Cl‘.0CD‘-10CDCDCDrtZC)CDU)—‘.0i-’•i-nCDCDCDC)iP3(1)l-ct0CZClI‘1‘tCDCDYClftft‘iCD0<CDI—rtH,Q3‘il‘—‘•‘.0•—ftCDi—i0)•CDC)‘1“1CD‘1I—a‘-‘•‘hI-IH,MiU)•0Q0Cl)P3<U)<ClU)‘.0CDfti-CDCDi-•ftC‘<C)t‘T5CDP30C)C)MC)Ct‘1CDCD‘-“0CDU),.QCt<rtCD•i-nP3C)i-C)U)Cl00‘1C)-C‘-“ZCDCDU)CDC)CDt1C)0C)C)0•CCD0o‘1Cl•DC)‘1ftCtP3P3,--U)H,3rridU)I—’0I—’P3C)ftU)ZClU)C0<ClrtCD-.i-”CDCH,ci-P3P3“rCDci-H’0C)l-’1U)0Cl)oiI-i0‘-‘i‘-<CDH,CDU)0ci‘1ci-‘1ci-Clrt0P3ftP1)P3cnU)‘1.‘.0P3CP3CDiClC)‘-IU)CDCtZP3I—’‘.0C)ft—.--‘1U)C)1-”P3C)P3U0CD(I)‘-0—CDU)0C)C)0)rt‘Tjci-Q,P1‘-1‘.0ClCtP3U)Ctci-i-ILiNC)t3ftH’0—31H’C)U)CDCDC)0I—’P30‘-‘‘-‘P3CcrP3‘-‘‘-‘‘10Z‘-CDCl)ci-ZU)Z‘TI•.iC)ci-0CH-P3Z•C)U)C)Hci-C0C)ci-‘-0ci-‘-“0U)U)ClC)0)‘T5oCDU)CD‘-1I-’-C)40CD0I—’CDci-<I—’rtYCDCl)Z‘CtClCDP3t’JClP3ZH-P3CClH’C)Cl)P3ci-C—C)U)ClC)ClClCDci-I—II-’Cl-0Cl‘-‘-C)U)C)‘-‘.‘-‘.0CD0)—‘.0P3H,U)0CDCtZP3U)—iP3C)H’‘1‘TIClci-P1Cl‘.0H-ci-ci-U)‘TII-”H‘0H-0‘-00H1H’000C‘TIU)P3-5P3ci-H’H,HH-ci1CDClrtODH’P-’-HH,C)ftr-P3<P3H-CD‘TI•.P3‘--0C)CDci-‘—‘-P3CDI—’j10I—’-I-IC))‘-1ci-iU)‘-<‘10CtF-’CP3C)0f-ClHU)CDCDH,i0)‘-<Cl‘1P3ci-CDC)—‘-‘-0ci-Cl0‘)M1-H’ci-CDCDci-H-CD‘-<‘1C‘r<00U)H-U)U)‘TI‘1U)CH-i-hci-CtU)Z0CD0Tci-U)ClP30)P3)0CDP3‘-‘-Cci--‘Ztj-P3P30ci-P3‘10ci-P3H’ftU)CD‘)P3CDClCDci-iI-i-,Cl)H’CDci-0U)‘-<-‘iCD‘.0H’CDC)0U)Li.‘1CDU)C)C)CrCtH-CD ‘1(ThCDH-0U)NU)CD0ClH’HiCr I-’-Cr0::3 CDJ_U)C) 0 U)U)HU)ClCr I-.’0U)C)U)0ClU, CD0 Li.‘t3CDoC)I-rrH-HCr<H-CDC)U)U)0 HiU)CrClCD U) CDCD ,<It,CDciotTCI_ICtI-i.H-C)CD0H10:::5U)Ct::CDHriNU)U)C)rtCtH•0ozHiCrooU)i.QCtCDCDCrII CDCDClriLI. o HHzCrrr‘-“3C)‘-‘.10000iCtJI-”U)CDCDH-CrCrI10HH’10cC)Ct0U)C<CDCDI—sCrCDCD‘1CtCDoU)•IICrU)CDJ’CT)C)U)CDFt000U)00it3I—’‘1I-’U)CD10CD1tU)0’•U)I-’ICr)H(I)HNCt0U)U)IiU)t)10CrH’H-U)CDHC)I—’U)oCt::iU)I-.C)U)U)I-i.U)•HiU)U)oH•II0‘-30CDU)C)U)ClC)CDI-’CrU)CDC)CDCroU)IICD<C)U)HClCDCDU)U)rClU)CtH-HU)HiC)HH’U)CtItI0C)H-U)U)0CrCrHitOF-H-Cr1<0C)D•’LI.Z0CDCDlU)‘1EHt-CDI-’--H-U)H-U)CrCrCl0HHiH-C0CDC)CtiU)CrI—iCr0H-U)CoC)U)‘I)U)CDCDU)ClU)U)ClU)C ‘1ClDl CrCrH-J’oCDHi-I—sCD‘-3H’U)HiCrCDoCDCHiI‘10U)CDtJU)CDC)U)..‘1oDU)Dl-CtCtH•H-0t<0Ct‘-iItH-CDU)oU)t—U)U)0C)•CtHiU)C)I-I‘-30U)U)U)C)CDU)I—iCrH’CDCr‘1U)tTH’H’CrCD0U)CrCDiCr‘-I—HH-C)ItU)CiiCCrCD‘1tYCDHiU)U)CD0U)‘1U)H‘1CDC)U)CDU)U):iClCl0H’Hi-<CT)CrX0C)C)U)00DisU)I—’U)I-’U)H-H’CDCrU)U)H-CrCt00::zt)0HiCD—HiClCD H’H’CD I-I 1< 0 Cr CDHi‘-10 IIoU)t3CrU)CCDCl‘1CDU)CrCr H‘Tjo‘-::0U)10 I-I U)U)“<CD U)1YU)CD:: ClClU) CrU)U)C) CDClIIU) ‘1CDClClU) 0HiHiI-I 0U) CD I-ICrH’C)CDCDU) Ct U) H H’ H Cr ‘-3 CD C) 0 U) H’ H Cr H-0 U) U) H’ U) 0 II CD Hi I—’CD C) Ct CD Cl I-’ 0 C) Di H’ C) 0 C z H-Cr 1<Cr ri CD CDII CD HiCD II CD C) CD U)0 CD ‘1 Di Cr H 0 U) H’ n U) ‘-1 U) C) Cr CD ‘1 H- U) Cr H-C) U)0 CD ‘1 U) Cr H-0 U) H’ C) U) ‘1 U) C) Ct CD ‘1 H’ U) Ct H’ C) InCrCrC)HiJriCD0CH’CC)U))DiIfl1:3I-’C)CriHCtCDHCrHCDC)H0ZU)Di0i10—U)U)U)U)1CU)Clo‘t:3U)‘i‘tiCDC)CD0‘1‘50or-<DiI<CrCD‘10CD•ClCt‘1‘1Cl-‘-3H’U)0ZCDU)MiU)U)CrCD CDHU)U)0ClCDCDCl0<H’U)CD‘-3H’0I-’CrtT’tOCCDCrCl0H’Di0CDCC)b’‘1U)‘-1U)H’U)F-’‘C)‘t5I-’H’CDI’-’Hi0U)H’00CU)l3HiH’CDHiDlCiHiU)Cl‘-1C)HHH‘CICDI—’U)C)U)CD0H0CtCrInCrU)U)‘-I*CDCr0H’CD•CDHHiH-C)CD0CtCrC)It3H’U)00DiH’Di‘10H’U)‘t5CDU)HiCr•Cl<C)H’CDCDCrC)DiCDU)U)“1U)‘1C)I—’CD0ClClCDU)0U)C)U)‘-l0U)CrCDClH’ClI—’0cDFEATURESOFCOALITIONASAPOLITICALRESPONSEATTRI BUTESOFCOALITIONTYPESOFCOALITIONoLOCALCOALITIONSFlocalmunicipality,boardofhealth,parksandrecreationcommission,otherschooldistricts,communitycollege]oREGIONALANDPROVINCIALCOALITIONS[BritishColumbiaSchoolTrusteesAssoci ation(B.C. S.T.A.)’,andtheLegislativeAssemblyIPURPOSESOFCOALITIONoTOSUPPORTMINISTRYPOLICIESFlocalmunicipality,boardofhealth,parksandrecreationcommission,BritishColumbiaSchoolTrusteesAssociation(B.C.S.T.A.),andtheLegislativeAssemblyIoTOMAKEDEMANDSONTHEMINISTRY[otherschooldistricts,BritishColumbiaSchoolTrusteesAssociation(BCSTA)andtheLegislativeAssemblyIFigure6DURATIONOFCOALITIONSoSHORTTERMFadjacentschooldistricts,localmunicipalcouncil,municipalplanningcommissionandadhoccommunitycommitteesIoLONGTERMFboardofhealth,BritishColumbiaSchoolTrusteesAssociation(B.C.S.T.A.),municipalplanningcommission,parksandrecreationcommissionIFeaturesandAttributesofCoalition110i.e. requests for additional manpower, material resources,and clarification of Ministry policy statements, and“support i.e. a desire to comply with senior governmentpolicy. Of the two attributes, support for Ministry policywas clearly the most important consideration of schooldistrict personnel. Local coalitions generally served as“supportive” mechanisms for the implementation of Ministrypolicies.“Demands” appeared to be expressed in a limited,situation—specific fashion in order to address mattersrelated to policy execution. The chief reason for doing sowas that many aspects of Ministry policy statements wereunclear.The findings indicated also that long—termcoalitions were more prevalent than the short-term variety.Long—term coalitions were associated primarily with localorganizations. This development appeared to be due in partto the nature of the problems confronting the schooldistrict and the need for continuous interaction because ofoverlapping jurisdictions.The variables of policy and school district typeserve as further bases for discussing operationalcharacteristics.(1) Regulatory policy characteristics. Theoperational characteristics of coalition in response to theintegration policy are presented according to school111district type in Appendix K-2. The predominant linkages, orthe external organizations with which school districtsmainly combined, were the board of health, other schooldistricts and the provincial trustees’ association.(ii) Distributive policy characteristics. Theoperational characteristics of coalition in response to thispolicy type are presented in Appendix K—3. The predominantlinkages, or the external organizations with which schooldistricts mainly combined, were local municipal agencies,the local community college, and the provincial trustees’association.Comparison of Operational CharacteristicsDid operational characteristics vary? Yes,differences in kind and number were discerned with respectto individual policy types and between policy types.The operational characteristics of coalition inrespect of regulatory policy differed according to schooldistrict type. The most obvious differences entailed thepartisan metropolitan school district (Coast). This districtused Members of the Legislative Assembly (M.L.A.S) as anintergovernmental linkage for regulatory policy. Otherdistricts did not.The operational characteristics of coalition fordistributive policy differed according to type of schooldistrict. Again, these differences were due primarily to the112use of M.L.A.s as an intergovernmental linkage by thepartisan metropolitan school district (Coast).Appendix K-4 provides a profile of the differencesaccording to the concentration or focus of intergovernmentallinkages with respect to features and correspondingattributes. The partisan metropolitan school district(Coast) displayed the most concentrated use of operationalcharacteristics for regulatory policy. Concentration of usewith respect to distributive policy was less clear—cut.Certain general observations on coalition as apolitical response accrue from the operationalcharacteristics. These observations are summarized inAppendix K—5. For example, school districts mostly coalescedwith public organizations external to the school district.The sole exception was the British Columbia School TrusteesAssociation (B.C.S.T.A.) which functioned as a privatelyincorporated association. Nevertheless, the B.C.S.T.A.served as an advocate of the public interest not unlikeother public bodies noted in this study.Selected public organizations with which schooldistricts either actually coalesced, or had the oppportunityto do so, are outlined in Appendix L. The school boardsappointed trustees to liaise with most of theseorganizations.A complete list of the organizations to which eachof the school districts appointed representatives in a113liaison capacity is outlined in Appendix M.After identifying the organizations external to theschool districts with which coalitions did take place, itwas also noticed that a statutory basis for coalitionsappeared to exist. The School Act and other provincialstatutes actually encouraged school districts to enter intojoint ventures or coalitions with certain types oforganizations. This statutory basis for coalitions wasapplicable to all school districts in British Columbia. Itwas interpreted, therefore, as a constant factor rather thanas a behavioural feature of coalitions.These statutory provisions are outlined in AppendixN. Elkin (1975:172), however, cautions that little in theway of actual relationships can be deduced from the “formal-legal situation.” He states that legal characterizations ofcentral-local government patterns are likely to be“insufficiently differentiated and too static” to capturethe complexity of relationships and issues.The operational characteristics of coalition andassociated observations, moreover, serve as a basis forcertain conclusions and related informed speculation.114ConclusionsThe findings suggest two general conclusions aboutcoalition as a political response. Firstly, school districtsappeared to respond to Ministry policies through a networkof coalitions. Coalitions within this network appeared to bealready well-established prior to the announcement of thetwo policies.This finding not only sustains the notion thatorganizations are not wholly self-sufficient, but suggeststhat school districts are embedded in an environmentcomposed of “sets” of organizations. The three schooldistricts were found to be members of multiple andoverlapping sets of coalitions. Depending on circumstances,the coalitions were either dyadic, triadic, quadruplet orcharacterized by a greater combination of members. Elkin(1975:171) adds that:A useful image in capturing the openness of citypolitics is that of a network of governmentalorganizations having as its focus the localterritorial unit. The level of interdependence isrelatively high between these organizations in thenetwork as compared with that between theseorganizations and other actors.Participation in this network of coalitions appearedto be influenced by environmental uncertainty and resourcerequirements. There may, however, have been another reason.The overlapping jurisdictions of local organizationsappeared to demand that information be shared for purposes115of planning and co-ordination. A perspective offered byHanson (1979: 96), for example, appears to acknowledge thisP055 i b i 1 i ty:The school district surrounds, and is surroundedby, one of the most complex mixes of coalitionsfound in modern organization. This feature existsbecause, among other things, the school cannotconceal vital information as so many otherorganizational types can and do. The organizationof the school is not only public business; it is“local” public business.The means used by organizations to acquireresources, according to Pfeffer and Salancik (1978:2),consist of federations, associations, competitiverelationships and a social-legal apparatus defining andcontrolling the limits of these relationships. Thisstatement appears to characterize each school district inits network of coalitions with respect to the Ministry. Useof this network, however, did not appear to be a completelyharmonious undertaking. For example, Andrew (1983: 162)observes that the fact that there is tension withinintergovernmental relations indicates that local governmentinstitutions are more than just service delivery units.Institutions such as school districts are perceived to begovernmental units which “coalesce, channel and reflect” theinterests of different groups within the community.The literature, however, suggests that coalition asa form of association for assuring the provision of116resources has received little attention to date. On thecontrary, most writers appear to have concentrated on theproblem of using or deploying resources (Pfeffer andSalancik, 1978:3)The second finding arising from the operationalcharacteristics is that coalition as a political responsewas expressive of co—operative, not competitive, behaviour.The school districts attempted to co—operate with otherorganizations in supporting the intent of Ministry policies.This purpose of coalitions suggests that politics can becollaborative and supportive as well as a form of behaviourtypified by competing demands and conflict. 1-lousego(1972:16), for example, notes that the consensus arisingfrom a “coalition of organizations” is only made operativeeither through cooperative action or through action of asuperior body such as a provincial government.Coalitions were found to be an expression ofcollaboration and a form of co-ordination. School trusteesand other local politicians appeared openly to express theirpolitical affiliations. Ideology did not appear to be amajor impediment in dealings with the Ministry. On thecontrary, it appeared to facilitate coalition behaviour.The close working relationships among localadministrators, moreover, reinforced the purpose ofcoalitions. It has been noted, for example, that whenpersonnel from different organizations are constantly in117contact because of organizational interdependency, they andtheir organizations will likely develop stable structures ofinteraction and behaviour to manage the interdependence andreduce uncertainty (Pfeffer and Salancik, 1978:220).Graves (1964: 70), moreover, notes that the practiceof cooperation between adjacent units of local government ispossible and may be advantageous in almost any functionalarea within which local government units operate. Schooldistricts in metropolitan areas, for example, especiallyappear predisposed to coordination, since financialassistance from senior levels of government is coupled withrequirements of planning and coordination (Adrian, 1976:216).Moreover, Adrian (1976: 216) has noted that inmetropolitan areas a vast and complex communication networkexists among the professions in various fields. In thisparticular study, coalitions between and among schooldistricts, and school districts and municipalities inmetropolitan areas, appeared to be closer knit thancoalitions in the non—metropolitan area. This tendencyappears due to some extent on the communication network ofthe various administrators and politicians who represent thedifferent jurisdictions in metropolitan areas. Perhaps alsoit may be due simply to the greater number of jurisdictionsin the metropolitan region which, as a consequence, warrantsa high degree of coordination.o-iQU)t-t(Dcc-<:3—U)-0ftoC)S—tTCDP’c-•:3rCD0Q0U)F—rtCDCDct0-•tIU):3C)CDfl•tO:30CD‘iQ.Q)CDCDçt(I)Wt—ZorttO0.)0rt0)00ftCt-0I-”0-00F-00U)<tTU)CYCDU)JCD0)r-CD•‘Tjft-“C)‘1CU)0<CDCD‘1ftCDCD0)HICDQ.0)‘1U)CDtO00ft0)ftU)ftU)CD0)0)ZftU)ft1hCl0U)0)CDIItsII-IC50Ct)CDCD00I—i-0)CD0)0)c0):3U)1Cl)f-frh0oCD0SQ,fttitOCDQ‘-0t-1-iCtCD0‘I’ooMi:3i0CD‘1I-”U)tO‘1Cl)C)•tOCD‘-s.(t)CDzft<0)Z0)CDCD0‘<CDNftrii‘<0)I—”Clft<CDII0)CD1Ci00:30CD0:3U)0ClU)Cl—.•CD0<CD—HI-”o0ftftO‘3ftI-<C0-’t7-J•U)t-CD••CDCD119CHAPTER FIVESOCIALIZATION OF THE CONFLICTThe focal organization attempts to widen the scopeof conflict by involving previously uninvolvedparties, who, hopefully, will alter the balance ofopinion and resources facing the organizationdispensing the resource (Elkin, 1975, 175).Conflict is endemic in political life. Leftunrestrained, it can impair intergovernmental relations.School districts, therefore, attempt to controlintergovernmental conflicts. Socialization of conflict orthe expansion of it serves as a strategic means of control(Schattschneider, 1975, 6).The theoretical literature disclosed that Elkin’sdefinition of this political response was incomplete. Thework of Schattschneider (1975), a political scientistresponsible for originating the concept, was instructive inproviding a more complete meaning.According to Schattschneider (1975), localgovernments have two options for resolving conflicts withothers. They may restrict it by “privatizing” conflict andkeeping the number of participants and issues to a minimum.On the other hand, they may socialize conflict or expand itsscope. Socialization of the conflict, for purposes of thisstudy, therefore, means appealing to other organizations and120advancing different issues so as to exploit or discount theposition of the adversary. Included in this definition iswhat Schattschneider refers to as the substitution of issuesor the “displacement of conflicts.”The data clearly showed that the three schooldistricts responded politically to provincial authorities byinvoking “substitute issues”; that is, issues not directlyrelated to the content of the two Ministry of Educationprogrammes under study. Political behaviour, as a result,appeared to stimulate displacement or substitution of oneissue by another. This process was most often expressed asimprovements deemed necessary to meet certain local ideals,values or expectations. Some examples were the desire forimproved communication among government ministries, theperceived reluctance of the Ministry of Education toacknowledge school district expertise, the perceived erosionof local autonomy, and the desire for amendments to theProvincial Education Finance Formula pertaining tointergovernmental fiscal arrangements.Ways in which school districts appealed to otherorganizations, and the instruments used for socializingconflict were also considered important by respondents inthis study. Analysis of the data revealed the use of thefollowing devices: (i) provision to other districts ofschool district letters addressed to the Ministry, (ii)district newsletters to parents and taxpayers, (iii) the121local newspaper, (iv) the British Columbia School TrusteesAssociation, (v) the Legislative Assembly, (vi) reaction toformal briefs, (vii) school board resolutions, and (viii)visitations from Ministry officials.Repeated inspections of the data and reviews of theliterature subsequent to data analysis resulted in thisformal, expanded definition of socialization of the conflictas a political response:(a) use of the response is ad hoc;(b) the school district attempts to draw organizationsexternal to the school district into the conflict between itand the Ministry of Education on a spontaneous basis inorder to change the balance of forces affecting the outcome;(c) visible use is made of certain instruments such asletters, newsletters, and members of the LegislativeAssembly and the media in attempting to widen the scope ofthe conflict and to modify the expectations of the Ministry;(d) school district personnel perceive the conflict asintense;(e) the school district attempts to displace the conflict oraugment it with the substitution of other conflicts, or withinsertion of different conflicts. It does so by focussing onwhat it considers to be equally important but completelydifferent issues or conflicts. The purpose is to demonstratethe merit of the school district’s position.The substitute intergovernmental issues invoked bythe school districts and the instruments used forsocializing conflict served as the two features of thispolitical response. The instruments for socializingconflict, moreover, were grouped into three categories:122(i) use of district correspondence and public media,(ii) use of regional and provincial coalitions, and(iii) use of school district meetings. These categories,moreover, were found to accommodate the substitute issuesraised by school districts. Findings, therefore, arereported in an integrated fashion. Substitute issuesreflecting the “displacement of conflicts,” for example, arereported in conjunction with the three types of instrumentsused to socialize conflict.DISTRICT CORRESPONDENCE AND PUBLIC MEDIASchool board letters, district newsletters, and thelocal newspaper constituted this particular category ofinstruments for socializing conflict. The initiation andsubsequent sharing of school board letters with otherorganizations appeared to be carried out spontaneously. Onthe other hand, the deployment of district newsletters andof the local newspaper appeared to be carefully planned.School Board LettersThe organizations with which school boards sharedcorrespondence had a general stake in the outcome ofMinistry—school district conflict. In some instances theywere ones with which the districts had formed a coalition.Individual school trustees were chiefly responsible for123suggesting that selected correspondence be shared with otherorganizations.Substitute or alternate issues. The school boardsshared communications directed to the Ministry about theintegration and capital expenditure policies with theBritish Columbia School Trustees Association, other schoolboards, and Members of the Legislative Assembly.In the course of reacting to the two Ministrypolicies, school boards invoked other intergovernmentalpolicy issues. These different policy matters, however, wereperceived to impact the local administration or managementof policies; such as, integration and capital expenditure.School board minutes provide insights:It is moved that the Board write to the Ministerof Municipal Affairs, Bill Vander Zaim, concerninga recent statement he made about the eliminationof school boards, and request clarification of hisview arid an explanation of what form of countygovernment he is looking at; that it also write tothe Minister of Education requesting his reactionto this statement, and further that the Boardwrite to the Premier requesting a statement ofpolicy on this matter.It is moved that the letter from William VanderZaim, Minister of Municipal Affairs, responding tothe Board’s concerns regarding his statementsabout local school boards be received; that theBoard’s views regarding the casual manner ofproposing major changes in local government bereferred to the B.C.S.T.A. Executive; and that astudy be made from within our Board as to thepossible impact this will have on the district.(Minutes of Island School Board)124Because school boards informed the B.C.S.T.A. oftheir correspondence with the Ministries of MunicipalAffairs and Education, this activity ostensibly resembledcoalition. Socialization of the conflict, however, should beperceived differently. This particular response involveddifferent school board expectations. There did not alwaysappear to be a clear expectation by the school districtinitiating this response that other organizations, includingthose with which the school district coalesced, would besupportive.District personnel, moreover, extended writteninvitations to M.L.A.s to visit the school district. Suchinvitations appeared to be designed as opportunities forfurther discussion of broad issues and possible expansion ofconflict.School District NewslettersThe school districts issued various kinds ofnewsletters to the public. The two Ministry policies tendedto be featured in conjunction with local response to otherProvincial Government policies. Newsletters were distributedregularly. They appeared to be an important component of thedistricts’ community relations strategy.Substitute or alternate issues. Socialization of theconflict appeared to be facilitated by an intricate system125of local newsletters. In one school district, separatenewsletters were published by individual schools, thedistrict central office, and the local municipal hail as ajoint venture between the district and the municipality. Thefollowing commentary reflects the pride shown by thesuperintendent of schools responsible for these activities:Our district in some ways pioneered the use ofnewsletters for other school districts. We did itby carefully organizing our publications, bymaking sure that we had something to say, and bynot over—killing the subject matter. Lots ofcolour and the right choice of words helps. Theresult is that we produced a set of publicationswhich was for a long—time -- and still is —— theenvy of many districts. The Board makes sure thatparents, taxpayers and the public know aboutdistrict activities through our publicationsprogramme. We even sent a copy to the Minister ofEducation. He liked it and said so in acongratulatory letter. In the reply to us he citedour effort as an example for other districts.(Interview with Superintendent,of Schools, Port School District)Both school trustees and district officials werecritical about perceived Ministry infringements on localautonomy. One trustee observed that the educationalinitiatives of the Provincial Government tended to be “illthought out and poorly communicated.” While these sentimentsdid not appear in newsletters verbatim, the use ofnewsletters provided a means of accentuating the need forlocal control of schools.A district official noted that local problems126appeared to be compounded by “an over-zealous Ministry”. Headded that:The real action takes place inside schools.Newsletters get the true picture out to thepublic. There is a great deal of territorialinvasion by the Ministry of Education. TheMinistry has gone beyond its mandate foreducational governance. The Minister forgets thatthere is another level of governance besides theMinistry level and the school district level andthat level is the school. The latter is veryimportant, but it is one which tends to suffer dueto the machinations and conflict between the boardand the Ministry. Consequently, the administrationof the school, school staffs and parents are allbeing compromised by the Ministry of Education.The crux of the problem is that the Ministry isinsensitive to local turf, ... the territorialrights that go with the smooth operation of adistrict.Interview with Superintendent of Schools,Port School District)The school districts tended to place the welfare ofchildren at the forefront of their communications. A seniortrustee stated that capital expenditure projects were notdiscussed solely in terms of dollars and building supplies.Trustees compared their respective districts to other schooldistricts characterized by a similar socio-economic pattern.These comparisons were reported in school districtnewsletters. In one district, the comparison revealed thatpupil behaviour and general attitude to schooling wererelated to standards in school facilities. The implicationwas that pupil behaviour could be improved if the Ministryprovided more discretionary authority for local capital127spending.School districts also appeared to use newsletters toimprove their image. In doing so they appeared to bereacting to the Minister of Education who had suggested thatperhaps school districts did not deserve special status.Instead he advocated that they be “lumped” with other groupsin the province; such as, the “parents for the teaching ofFrench.”Newsletters appeared to reflect school boardsensitivity to voter and taxpayer opinions amidst thepressures of working within the provincial—local context.Responsiveness to the wishes of the local electorate, in theopinion of school trustees, became difficult for schooldistricts saddled with unexpected changes in Ministry ofEducation policy and organizational structure.School districts wanted the Ministry to grant morediscretion for local decision—making. This viewpoint waspremised on trustee perceptions of local autonomy,increasingly complex local responsibilities, and the highly-regarded expertise of professional staff. These viewpointsalso were addressed in B.C.S.T.A. newsletters distributedthrough the central office of the school district.The reluctance of the Ministry to acknowledge schooldistrict expertise was another contentious issue. Expertisewas viewed as an important resource for attaining districtobjectives. It was featured in school district newsletters128and acknowledged by a senior trustee in this manner:This district is very fortunate to have asuperintendent of such calibre as we do. He isvery alert and strives to prepare us for all sortsof contingencies related to Ministry policies. Weoften don’t know what to expect from Victoria and,when we do hear from them, we sometimes don’tfully understand what they mean. Thesuperintendent has more than once saved us frommaking the wrong decision; he helps us tocomprehend the total picture.... Other centraloffice officials are adept too. The board likes tothink that part of the reason for the high qualityof work by officials is due to the recent exercisewhere each official had to list their jobdescription in as specific a form as possible. Thework of each official, therefore, can be brokendown into sets of functions. The assistantsuperintendent of operations, for example, hasspecific responsibilities in that he functions asthe director of instruction, supervises thedevelopment of the special approval allocationsand maintains contact with the Ministry ofEducation, coordinates the district’s buildingprogrammes and planning, including the capitalexpenditure process, and develops systems topromote communiciation both with the public andwithin the school district.(Interview with Senior School Trustee,Island School District)Newsletters mainly originated from local schools andthe district office. Two of the three school districtsemployed full—time “public relations” staff to handle thisfunction. News items pertaining to the integration andcapital expenditure policies were generally fused with otherdistrict news. These items commented on how the district wascoping with local educational problems and the kinds ofconstraints outstanding.ct1’T3C)Di*CDFQJOJ<<’CStrtU)’t5WCDCD0‘1DiQJCDCD---“DiDitit-”DiDi0CDI.OI-iZCDtnCDcQ*U)U)Z0U)Dit5DiDiC)U)tiC)iU)ctrtC)C)<rtCtCDCDtiDtiCDCDDiCD.OOF-”titIOJtiCD0.,cl-U)•Z-‘•CDU)I-’-U)cCtI-”Ct.C)C)<<C)C)LJ.,<Dir1-HCx:3Or1-c-t-CDCDCDrtcc-t-CDtitO(DCDCtCfl-U)titiIU)CDQiCD‘-0V)0U)rtici-Ot-”CD‘-‘•CDCnCDci-i-’•t-’•rtrtf-’rl-I-•C)Q.,ct•DiJDiLQDiflCDU)DiDiU)t0c-i-tiwt-i’<0U)’øct-OYU)CU)ftOct<OCtO0CDCDOt-’-tlU)CD<U)CD’-<I--C)tici<U)Dir1ftlOCD0riD,H.OCDrI-DiriU)Zi-W<’t30jCDCDfl0tiOO•CDOCDO00I-’O.,0CDO0CtflDiti1CD0C)U)CDyØI--P1OtiDiCt<çflQo‘<ri-Zci-<OQJt.OCDCD<CD<CDU)i—”CDtZCDOi’ICDCtCDC)cVOCttiOOC)tjt.<ti‘II—’t--”Dici-‘-lCDI-tiCDci-‘-1U)Cl)U)C/)I—’U)ci-I-”Cl)CD01‘-“tic-i-CD-.cl-tiC)ctU)O’-’-C)t5C)•CD‘-lCDU)DiCDOZOtT‘-lrtbCD•0jO0Qi.iQOti’<CtCtU)U)C)CODiçtoftOCD-ci-C)rtC)l-’ODiZDiF-’CDCt0CDU)CDO’-lQCD•Qtr00.,‘IEWWl—’CDU—CD(DCDOU)•ci-ODiOCD‘I)’I0DiI-’-ZDiDirtt<U)bci-ci-C)ci-<CDtictrtI-’t-”‘IDici-cCDDiCDCtQiDiOi-’Ot-tiCDtiCtCDI-”DiQ.--<DiU)C)icCDCDOU)(DcnC)U)OC)F—’Dic-tC)U)cictci-cl-ftO’-<U)I-’U)ODi‘t5O<•ciC)Q-’-CtCDF-OCDDiCDC)<‘ItirtrtOci-Z’I’-t0Oci-CD‘iC)•Di’irltrQ.,CtCt-OCDc.O’tJ000U)CtU)CDDi(I)OF-’U)1rlOU)C)QrtflU)cU)rI<0‘I0Dirt7(DiDit-ci-Di’-ltlci-OCDci-’-”OCDrtH-tiCD’t3CD‘-1CD0c-i-t-OU)rt0iMiU)QJQJDi‘-ItOLOCDI-’ri-CDI-’U)CD<U)01<CDU)<‘—•Dici-‘Ici‘-“Di<‘tiDi:iU)CD00DiU)tICDDiZftU)CDC)Qici-C)3tiC)CDDiDi0‘10Ct0‘-1U)rt‘TLII—’I-,.çU)ft‘Tj-(U)C)<i_C)<DiCD‘I0t3IZ•ci-CDI—’CD1—’01CDZI—’jCD‘1‘-<‘ICJU)U)H(I)I•-“•ct‘-U)C)C)lU)30)•0CDU)U)I-hN0ID)CD‘<‘tJC)ci-c-i-U)I-hCD0ci-C)>I—’CDU)c-I-Di0Cl-CD3ftC)‘IDiU)‘10C0CD0-’U)01CDCDCDI—’ci-U)0‘-1U)CD0iCDC)I—’ci-U)U)0-‘.Ct01(ft‘-1‘-10I—’‘-•00tTCDCD‘-1CD1U)‘I00DiU)U)Di-ci-I—’DiU)•C)‘tSi-Q‘1‘1Di‘-1U)ft0CDci-i_C)ci-i-•‘—‘010-iDiciftr-CDC)ci-I-’-U)0.,U)ciU)CDci-CDU)DiCDCDCDiCDU)ftU)‘Ici-01‘IU)ci-01Ii0-,CDCDci-DiCDDiDiDii—”ctciI—’CD‘—‘•‘zci-C)01i-’-0DiCDI—’CDI—’‘TjCt)ci-I—”F-ci-<CD•U)CDDiCDDiI—’‘1DiI-’-Ci--0C3ci-Di0Z‘IU)‘ICS)0‘t3CDCDU)CDDi‘tiiiCDCt)001ciC)ft‘I1J’DiDiZI—’U)CDftEnF’ci-‘t,ftTiftU)CDCDCDCDCDIiCDftDi0•0U)CD—1101CD0-iDiTiMiCDU)U)CD‘-3I-hftftU)I-CU)I-’.C)Mi::3ftU)CDCDC)0CD‘IDiDiU)CDCD0ci-ZDiC)C)ci-ci-Q01••0.’ci-0Hip-’.0iCD0C)DiZU)ci0C)0‘-“ft-CDI—’CD‘ZjC)‘IftiçCDU)Dit-’•CDDifttYftciTiCtC)‘ICDQ‘1I—’‘ICDftCDHDi0HC)0CtU)ftC)TiC)I-’.)0I—”(I)ftCD0DiDiTijC)iClI-’ftI—’‘-‘CDI-’-‘-“I-’-*t)ci-ft0C)0-ift0U)I-”I—’I-’0Ct0‘-“DiZftft‘-‘•CDI—’-ZDitiU)U)C)CD130(Interview with Senior Trustee,Coast School District)Information released to parents, taxpayers and thelocal electorate emphasized how pupil programmes benefitedfrom each school district’s expertise. When issues wereoutlined through correspondence and the public media, carealso was apparently taken to affirm that the schooldistricts were working hard to resolve intergovernmentalmatters in dispute.REGIONAL AND PROVINCIAL COALITIONSThe three school districts appeared to socializeconflict through two coalitions. These were with the BritishColumbia School Trustees Association and with theLegislative Assembly. The former was employed more than thelatter. Both coalitions were regional and provincial inscope.British Columbia School Trustees AssociationThe British Columbia School Trustees Association wasa regular recipient of school district letters to theMinistry, and of other kinds of local information. Schooldistricts hoped that the trustees’ association wouldultimately publicize their concerns in provincialnewsletters and at meetings of the association.131Substitute or alternate issues. Copies of thevarious B.C.S.T.A. newsletters were sent regularly toMembers of the Legislative Assembly, to executive members ofthe British Columbia Teachers’ Federation, to the BritishColumbia Association of Colleges, to the Union of BritishColumbia Municipalities and to senior officials within theMinistry of Education and other ministries. Proceedings ofthe Annual General Meetings of the B.C.S.T.A. appeared toreceive in—depth coverage in the public media. Accordingly,concern about the integration policy was directed to theMinistry of Education at these meetings in this manner.At the 1980 B.C.S.T.A. Annual General Meeting, themembership recognized the need for Associationpolicies concerning the education rights of allchildren.The B.C.S.T.A. Executive, at the time, stated thatthere were three important points that needed tobe addressed in this area:(1) At the present time there are no clearlystated provincial policies in British Columbiaconcerning the education rights of all children.(2) A commitment to school districts from thegovernment is required to safeguard the principleof equal education opportunities for all children.(3) B.C.S.T.A. recommendations on the moral andfinancial issues surrounding this area of concernwould be of great value to school districts and aneeded influence on those responsible forprovincial policies.(Minutes of the Annual General Meeting,B.C.S.T.A.)While school district personnel viewed their132expertise as vital to the success of Ministry policies,Ministry officials were not accorded the same distinction.Interestingly, no mention was made of the role or the“expertise” of the Ministry in educational governance by thechairman of the Coast School Board in his dual capacity as aB.C.S.T.A. Executive member:It seems to me that one of the most importantelements of education in our society is that weguarantee the continuance of free thought bykeeping education free from any central politicalor special interest group control. Control must bein the hands of local lay people. And, it seems tome, the founders of our society guaranteedcontinuation of that local control and theresultant continuation of free thought by givingto the public the sovereign right of decision inthe education of its children. ... An effectiveeducational programme requires that both partners(trustees and teachers) respect theresponsibilities of each other. The public isrepresented by, and speaks through, elected schoolboards and has the right to decide on the kind ofeducation children shall have.(B.C.ST.A. Reports—- Newsletter)Coalition with the B.C.S.T.A. was an instrumentalmeans of socializing conflict. This result was partly due tothe ease with which the B.C.S.T.A. could determine the localposition of all school districts on a given Ministry policy.The corresponding position or response of school districtson a province—wide basis could then be quickly summarizedand published. Moreover, the literature produced by thetrustees’ association generally suggested that the perceivederosion of local autonomy was a very contentious issue.U)LI0LI(1)0LIMi‘ti‘-0t300U)0CtQ0CDP3CDCCD‘-“LI‘-I‘-<MiMi00‘Ti0U)‘TiQ0P3u00MiLIi(D‘C,(D‘-i-c‘-i-C‘i‘C,P3<C‘-C00P3I-CtCDQ0‘-‘C,LI0CtCDU)P30MiP)QU)flCtP3U)‘t5Cl)0iU)CDH-CDHtZHCDMiLI000WI--I—rt0rn010-..‘C,P3aj)3CDCtOjMiONHCDP3i-s-LI‘—‘-“<U):i—H-BBCDOOCDI—iCrJP3CDU)0‘-3U)I-0WLIOCDMiCD‘.00CDCtCI-U)U)I-IF—it3Ct0CDctCtZ-’’-s300H-U)TCCDCDP3‘-<CDCiCDP30-yr’-BZLI0‘1‘C,CDCD‘C,-0U)ct0Z0CtiCDCtP3(DCD(DCDCDU)CDCtLI3’Ct0H-01•CtHI-ACtLIZ01MiCDZ0LIHH-CP3LI<•CD0tyc-l-rtCt-P30101CDP3i-i-0rttnCt01CDt’010•LICDrtCDH-P3U)H-‘--U)‘C,CDCDHCrtP3H•LICDP3H0’t5<P30CtU)‘C,ZLICDrt-CDU)<C)U)CtP3•CDLICDMiCCDF-Cl-CHCD0CDU)CDCDCT)MiCD•0CtU)1WP3rtU)-rtH-LI<P3CDU)U)U)U)U)lU)Ct-C1)CtCt—YCtCl-CDCDLIQ.00.,U)0H-0lCDH-JZMiH-CtCDU)CDC,Mirt0CDH0CDZlBOP3CDP3ZH.Mi0H-I—’0P3Mil30Mi0I3ZLI0’.0CDU)HZP3LIU)CDP3ZH-‘VCt0II-(D(IJctP3’<’tJHZCl-CtU)CtCl-U)CtiP3I-’-<Z0HZCDCDZP30‘-I-CDZ0ZCDYCtLICDWOOZQ1U)OP3rI-P3ZZ01CD0I-’CDU)ECDLICt(flMiHI-4CD’rJ‘-<LI‘C,0U)CDP3H-0-CD0‘<‘VP3I-’CDI—’••0‘C,HCI—’Di0‘riLI00..LIU)HU)F-’CtCDCDLIP3‘.0I—’Mi‘.C)CtCtP3C1CD‘C,C0CtZOcnCtH-00I—’‘-0000CDH-trP3‘C,0LI0H(flU)I-’‘C,CD0LI<LI0-‘ZLI0CDZHLIOflZCDHF-”LIP3U)P3CDZHU)CDU)U.•Z0CD0LIP3’<P3ZCtH-I-’Cl-I—’LIP3•Ct0P30H•tj0CtP3I—’CDZP3DiI-’rtZCtCDLI0CtMi•HcnU)0jQjZCl-0Ct0ZCDDiU.‘IH-0‘VP3CDCtH-CDU)CD0P3CDCD0CD-010LI•I-JB01P3CtI—’CDH’<P3P3‘Ti01CDZ—P3•<P3CD(DZU)-<CtCtH-CtCDH-0101•H-P3LIU)00•H-Ct-H-IDiP3‘C,CDCDZ1rtØCDU)LI00U)P30..U)U)U)<Di‘.0I—’(DI-’-Ort(D0Z01—’CDU)DiCDLIP3U)H,-<Ct0<P3CDP3Z00(1)1—’P3CLICl-ctU)ZCDF—’P3CDU)I-’Z0‘rJDi0CDClU)tT‘-<CDP3l--00LII--’OCDCDDi0I—’‘<0U)10CDi•P30ZZLIDiU)0•LI‘C,tJCtP3LICtDiP3P3‘VH-01LI0‘1U)H‘-3ZCDCI—’CtCflCDkLIH0J0101ZP30-.CH-CDBU.tnLICDZP3CDOZi-’-H-•H-H-3H-Pt<,Q•CDCCDU)CDQC-t-LIP3<ZrntCDU)Z0-.Z0DiCI—’.0LICDLIH-10Ct•LICl-‘.0‘.0CCtCD‘-3‘rJI—’Cl-CD00•ZCtLICDLI0CDCDZZLICD-B01Ct’C,ctctOH-•H-0U)DiCtCD010CDZ’t0ZH-CDP30-‘C,0‘C,CttZH-I—’0H-U.BCDCD0P3P3H-LICtI—’Cl-LICt0HClZ‘-<CDCDU)HLIU.CtU)I—’LICDU)P3U)0H0CtZCDI-’U)CDCtDiZ0ZCDU)01P3Cl-LIU)ZCDCU)P3LICCH-CtLIU)H-CDU)00bCtCDU)HZHH-Ct,—Cl-ZLIU)CBI-’ZU)CD,.o<0ow0Di‘.0CD•U)CDCDCDCt01‘.0U)CDCtMiCD134side of the House we hear what great help thatGovernment has been to the taxpayers of BritishColumbia.I want to protest something now. That is the factthat I understand the municipalities of BritishColumbia have been told to include in their taxnotices a statement to the effect, in essence,that their Provincial Government is so greatbecause they have been given this increased moneyfrom revenue-sharing. They have been told to putthat in their tax notices. I say if they aretelling the municipalities to put that in theirtax notices, the municipalities have a right tosay how much the provincial school tax hasincreased and how much this Government has droppedits share. This Government when it comes to PR issomething else.... I think we had better startlooking at what kind of autocratic government wehave over there running the affairs of thisProvince.(Debates of the Legislative Assembly)The potential for expanding the scope of conflictthrough provincial coalitions was considerable. As notedalready, the B.C.S.T.A. shared newsletters and communicatedwith all Members of the Legislative Assembly. At the sametime, the debates of the Legislative Assembly were availablefor public consumption by constituents in local electoraldistricts through daily newspapers. B.C.S.T.A. newsletters,moreover, incorporated extracts or summaries of selectedlegislative debates. Similarly, the local teachers’associations distributed extracts to their members.Both types of coalition appeared to play major rolesin socializing conflict, particularly through theintroduction of intergovernmental issues other than the twoMinistry of Education policies under study.135SCHOOL BOARD MEETINGSThis category of instruments for socializingconflict consisted of three devices: (i) reaction to formalbriefs, (ii) school board resolutions, and (iii) visitationsfrom Ministry officials. The first two of these instrumentswere employed during formal public meetings of the board.Reaction to visitations from Ministry of Educationpersonnel, on the other hand, occurred during privatemeetings of Ministry officials, trustees and districtofficials.Reaction to Formal BriefsThe three school boards and their district officialsreceived periodic briefs from organized interest groupsconcerning the two Ministry policies. These groups were onessuch as the local teachers’ association, the local chapterof the association for children with learning disabilities,and parent groups affiliated with individual schools. Theprocessing of such briefs provided an indirect opportunityto react to Ministry policies.Substitute or alternate issues. Neither the schoolboards, nor district officials appeared to be preoccupiedwith any single issue or interest group. Intergovernmental136issues appeared to be processed as they emerged fromdiscussion. The substance of these issues appeared tonecessitate subsequent Ministry—school district interaction.One superintendent of schools, for example,described the following action taken by the districtofficials:When the local chapter of the Association forChildren with Learning Disabilities presented theschool board with a three page brief suggesting anorganizational plan for the integration of thehandicapped, we worked hard to avoid turning theproblem into a politically contentious issue....But, we were only half successful. It isdifficult to keep discussion of a problem to itseducational value. Since the substance of theChapter’s brief pertained to programmes, staffing,and the housing of an appropriate learningenvironment for the children, the school boarddirected the staff to compile a study of thefeasibility of implementing the proposals in thebrief. Ultimately, the substance of the brief andthe staff study were channelled to the Ministryfor consideration.(Interview with Superintendentof Schools, Coast School District)Briefs from the local teachers’ associations werepresented to school boards by the respective presidents ofthe associations. These briefs mainly pertained to teacherwelfare issues. Ramifications of the Ministry’s integrationpolicy were outlined in this manner by one president:The main areas of concern which we try to includein our briefs to the board deal with financialcosts. Everytime there is a change in theeducational program, there is a financial cost.137The expectations and views of the classroomteacher are seldom taken into account. Littledirection is provided to these individuals andonly a meager amount of financial aid isavailable. Also, the classroom teacher is simplynot trained to cope with the many problemsunderlying Ministry policies; such as, integrationof the handicapped. ... We usually send copies ofthese briefs to the British Columbia Teachers’Federation (B.C.T.F.) in Vancouver.(Interview with President,Island Teachers Association)Teacher associations emphasized that the integrationpolicy affected working conditions. Teachers anticipated anincrease in workload. These briefs, therefore, suggestedthat “proper implementation” of the Ministry’s policy wascontingent upon smaller classes. One president summarizedthis impact on teachers as follows:The board sees the handicapped issue and the needto spend money on capital projects essentially thesame way as the teachers do. Teachers in otherdistricts, however, have quite a problem withtheir boards over the integration policy.Vancouver School District, for example, isexperiencing tremendous difficulties because ofthe large numbers of children with learningdifficulties. Teachers have not been properlyprepared to deal with the infusion of handicappedchildren into their classrooms, and classroomaides are not always provided. There is also thematter of financial costs.(Interview with President,Port Teachers Association)The school administrators’ groups, on the otherhand, preferred to channel briefs to the district officials.In contrast to teacher association briefs, this1 38communication appeared to be informal. It tended to addresscases of individual children rather than a broad category ofproblems or personnel. The president of the administrators’association in one school district provided this insight:There is good rapport between the administratorsassociation and the central office, particularlythe special education department. In many ways,the administrators’ association represents thesame kinds of interests as the teachers’association—— economic welfare, personnelpractices and professional development. Bothgroups influence policy-making within the districtregarding Ministry policies. Unlike the teachers,however, the administrators’ group deals withissues more specifically. Administrators deal withmatters regarding the transfer of staff. We try tomatch teachers who have corresponding skills andthe disposition for working with the handicappedwith the different kinds of special educationclasses. We work in the same way, I guess, thatthe superintendent and his staff attempt to matchadministrators to particular types of schools.(Interview with President,Island Administrators Association)During school board meetings, officials and schooltrustees reminded parents, taxpayers and others inattendance that the Ministry never totally covers the costof educating the handicapped. In the course of beinginterviewed, one senior trustee reflected this tendency byreiterating that “The Ministry appears to be pretty rigid atthe present time. It is penny-wise and pound-foolish.”Moreover, the “Capital Expenditure Projects Branch”of the Ministry in Victoria was perceived to be insensitiveto the local “economic booms” being experienced by the small139urban centers in British Columbia. The need for “meaningfulMinistry assistance” was voiced at school board meetings,given changing community circumstances.Local administrative staff in special education, notthe Ministry of Education, were deemed at school boardmeetings to have borne “the lions’ share of work” inintegration of the handicapped. These staff were creditedwith “specialized knowledge”. It consisted of a technicalinformation base pertaining to diagnosis, care andavailability of regional services. These considerations alsoappeared to serve as substitute intergovernmental issuespertaining to the integration of handicapped children. Whileacknowledging that relations between officals of thedistrict special education department and the Ministry weregood, school districts attempted to deflate Ministryresponsibility for successful implementation of theintegration policy.Ironically, in the course of suggesting otherissues, or what Schattschneider refers to as substitutingone conflict for another, district officials took pride intheir role as civil servants who tried to do their utmost“to avoid matters getting out of hand” or “politicalproblems” with the Ministry. One superintendent, however,could not refrain from saying that “thanks to the foresightof local professional staff, integration already hadcommenced to a limited extent in school districts sometimeCoCoøCtDibCDCDDiCl)C)DiC)i-CDC/)ocirti-•CD>‘ci0t50MiC)CDri-ij’DiCl)CD‘-•DitO5rtMiMiCl)iFtFtiiCDt-1tOC)CDci<CDCD0‘-“0oc-t04iii-”CDCo‘riCDCD(C)DiFtCD‘1C)0Cl)‘1ZI-”DiDi*CD0.,I-Cl)U)ririCD‘-toFtFtCDU)Ft1C)‘TjFt‘-‘CDciFtICDCl)CD0H‘1ci0.’FtCDFt-I—’CDCl)01•01<<w<FtCtCl)Cl)CD<‘xJt-ciFt04Cl)CDCDDl‘-30•CD—CD-“CD‘1Cl)ciDiFtrt-‘1Li.DiCDI-I’CDI-’CDC)Ft1jtT0C)0CD0Di<0Cl)0‘-3‘104DiI-”IICtFt0MiDirtcit3FtCDI-’•MiCnDiDiC)C)‘10Ct‘-“FtCDi04Ft0iiCl)C3CDFtCl)H00I-’FtCDCt-(C)<‘1CD0cici‘i‘-‘DiC)‘-‘SDi<Cl)ciCDty’CD0I-.’Cl)CD040Ft0I—’Di0F—’MiZtnFtU)0FtCDCtI—’04C)0F-’F-’C)0CD‘-1Cl)Cl)‘-CCDCD<CDCDMiciCDC)‘10‘1Di-Ft‘1toCDTHftDiCDMiC)0.’i-’-‘-1tO‘-iDiCl)Cl)0i-’•CDCl)MtCDiDit-’X0DiFtFtCl)Ftrt0HCDZC)<0Ct‘-“CD‘1ciFtI-’.<i0.,04FtiCD‘1‘-‘•Cl)‘-<CDMiCD0Cl)0.’Di0CD‘-.‘-Cl)‘-‘‘10Cl)Cl)00oit3i-...0’U)FtMiCl))ici0•‘1Cl)MiC)C)Li.Ci)Ftc-tCDMiCl)ci‘-.‘CDFt‘1‘1iCD‘1CDDiDiCl)‘-3C)0DiC)‘-CDiDi0Di‘-1<ZI—’C)ijMtFtCDI—.’Ct‘-<Cl)FtciiCDFtFt0104CDC)CDi-’•toC)DiCDciCi)hIt0Cl)FtC)0.’03DiI—’1—’‘1C)‘1C)CD0i—’C)Co(C)0‘tI-‘Di‘tiCDDi0‘tDiC)0.’0ZFtI-’‘t5Dl‘1Di‘tSDi‘1Ft‘-Ci0FtFtF--’0..‘10.’(1)CtH-0.’CDHCDCl)tY0‘10i-’-CDCDCDCDF—’CDFtC)0Cl)Cl)0F--’C)1-”0C)‘1Zt’Di‘1DiDiCDZ0i-’•DlF—’ZI—’Ct‘—•i--C)H-FtCDCl)FtI—’CD04I-’‘1CttrCDCtIFtil‘-‘-ZCDFtcito01‘1C)DiCDCl)to•FtCDU)0H-CD00.’Ft-ciFtZ11IIH‘tS)Cl)ci‘1H-Cl)0.’H-t0U)<Cl)Cl)‘tto00CtCDtoDi0.’CDDiciCDYtTciDiCD‘t)CDFt‘-3citoCD0toCl)‘tiCDDiCDZC)CDFt0.’CDCl)DiDi‘tCl)MiCDCDe-’-FtZ-C•‘-.‘-Ft‘1FtCD-.oDi0..‘1‘-CCl)‘-.‘-CDDi0..CDFt00..CDCtDiFtF—’toH-Dl0‘-CCtH-ciCl)‘-CCD‘1I-’CDiiF—’FtDi‘-CCl)‘1C)CD)CDCDotOI—’I—’FtCDFtCDDi‘-cCt0..CDCD<Di‘t3H-I—’C)‘-1CDCl)C)CD0ciI-’U)•ii‘1i<CDFtP-ICl)•C)Cl)0C-’0LiFtFt0-‘-“H00I—’FtCtCD0_ito•‘-1-.C)0i0C—’H0ciHCl)CD-‘tX)Di5CDZci01C)C)i-’‘rj•0..0.’0FtCY’Di0Dio‘-3to‘t3C)C)0CD0..H-0CtCD‘-1FtDiCD0‘-‘•ciCt‘iDi0DiCDCl)t-H0Di0I—’Di0DiCtFtZ‘-CI—’0DiCD00.’Cl)FtI-’toI—’Mi04I—’1U)Cl)CDCl)0.’<0..C)141It is moved that the Provincial Minister ofFinance be notified with a copy to the localM.L.A.,and a copy to the Minister of Education,voicing in the strongest terms, its opposition tothe proposed Financial Administration Act, which,in its draft form, would negate the democraticbase of locally controlled education, bypassingthe duties, responsibilities and accountability oflocally elected people.It is moved that a press release be preparedconcerning the above matter and that this releaseshould emphasize the main objections stated in theletter to the minister, namely: Ci) theunacceptability of civil service autonomy overlocally—elected people, (ii) the removal ofcollective bargaining from the local level ofcontrol, (iii) the fact that the government willhave the power to neutralize any organizationwhich threatened the government of the day, and(iv) the new Act would give civil servants adegree of power which even our nation’s courtshave denied themselves.(Minutes of Island School Board)School districts also attempted to exploit theposition of the Minister of Education. Interviewees stressedthat the educational priorities and political insensitivityof the Minister of Education adversely affectedintergovernmental relations. This problem appeared to beaddressed openly at school board meetings. School districtsappeared to be generally frustrated with the lack ofattention paid by the Minister of Education to their localconcerns. The following comment is indicative:We find the current Minister of Education to beless knowledgeable about the political realitiesof school districts than his predecessor, butreadier than his predecessor to learn about schooldistrict affairs. The former Minister, however,142was very accessible and responsive to the voice oftrustees even though he appeared to come across asarrogant through the media. When the Ministerstipulated that the community can meet the needsof every group, that is, by sending the mentallyill back to the local community, he is reallymissing the point of delivering services to thehandicapped. Things should not be decentralized tothe extent which they are right now withintegration. The fault lies with the Minister andthe way that the Ministry of Education isorganized. They are too far removed from wherethings are actually happening to know what thepolicy is all about.(Interview with Chairman of the Board,Island School District)The three school districts viewed the integrationpolicy within the fabric of their perceived localresponsibilities. Some school trustees suggested that ifthey did not raise issues about Ministry policy, who would?Along with this orientation was the feeling that theMinistry of Education could not really articulate much ofits policy in practical terms. The handicapped policy, forexample, was perceived as t’a classic example of theMinistry’s inability to provide appropriate guidelines anddetail.” Another comment, expressed brazenly, but in alight—hearted manner, was not uncommon:We don’t put much stock in official policystatements of the Ministry of Education.(Interview with the Superintendentof Schools, Coast School District)At the same time, a senior trustee observed that‘1CDrtTjçtU‘tMc-I-U)CDQ‘1U)CD00U)C)U)CCD0CDU)tYU)c-I-0<CU)(Ci0riU)‘-‘CDCtCt00U)c-I-0.’XU)CDttICDt)U)il0Z,1-1-‘-‘-01CDI-.’•U)00-01CDilCDTCDilCD0U)0CD-IIC0F-CDClO00CDClU)0’.0•.U)c-Ic-I-U)U)Li(I)i—I-c-I-O’tjo’<CDt.OCU)U)’Ci0‘1CtU)I-.’-jU)0CDU)-’C)I—’U)ilOCDilUOCCCDcI—’‘I‘Tc-I-U)‘tI0J(nilrt-CDU)f-’TJU)c-t-0iZWU)(Ci11CD00<ct(DCD(D-’CD)0i-.’-U)c-t?Jctt30‘-tØI-”0tTi-.’0l-’•>010OCDO.’OjCDc-t<0CD1—’0i-tI—’OCDtIWOO-‘•CDZ‘-‘•U)’-<CDOU)CD0il0CDr-I0•tIZCDU)U)-Clc-I--.0ilU)tO0“I-tiU)CD1CDU)(DI—(Ci-rti-’01iiMU)-Oil300U)T0U)c-I-Lic-I-0UCDilCDH-I-”U)CDCDCDCDClCD001U)t-’c-I-Q,CDC1tXji(flCQjCDrlClC‘1ClU)t0iiU)CIct.0CDCDCD0‘C50CDU)0.c-I-c-I-C-’-0U)tOU)rtCDU)CD0U)‘Ic-I-U)c-I-QU)(DF-’CDoU)XU)0rtClClc-I-CtCDCl03c-lF-’-<ZU)U)c-I-Clt-hi-’-CDU)i-tt-,--(I)I-’-ClflU)‘TJU)CDCfll-”<U)CDOZU)U)CDZU)U)00CD00CDct’-”Cli—’0i-.’t‘<—H,U)tQCDC-’•i-’-<Zf-’c-I-U)—Cl0I—a0..IU)Cl0.1tf-.’CU)0IC<=I1U)CDU)0C0tJ’0•U)tOCDc-I-I—’U)c-I-—CDF-’<U)’TJf-nCCDI-,.c-I-Cc-I-U)i—’-CCDci-c-t-U)CDU)I-1thU)U)i-’•JCl00rtU)t-’ttIClU)CDF-’0-’-t-3tO00OjCDCD0OnlU)U)U)’-<Q..Cl<O0CDClU)0I-hj’tj0’-”t-ii-t-’-CDCDi-.’-0C0f-’I-”U)-CDCDCDCl.I.O0Q.iZU)I-ti0i-”t-’.U)c-I-ilU)I-IOnlF-”U)C0LI-’-c-I-c-I-c-I-f1U)‘.C5ID)‘.Ott0U)0ClCDCD13‘t5I-”ctCD0c-I-0DU)0I--’-t5CDF-’-0ClU)1-’-CD11Z(D—c-I-<I—’IlilU)U)11<c-I-1-’U)0rICDLiU)0U)Ct)CnCD(TCDFrJOCDU)CDU)Cli-’-c-I-i—’to0c-I-I-.’-CD0U)CDCDCDUJtI<I.QCCU)c-I-‘-<ci0I—’U).0t-tit.OOCDCU)CD0f-IU)<F—’0’<CDtiCD-’c-tCD00c-I-0CtOQjCDtiIIc-I-(1CDCDCD00.1<CDClilU)OCDilU)0(CiCD00c-cc-I--•-WOO.’U)U)c-I-CU)0.1tOCDI-hU))CDZ<CDU)ZU)fl.U)0’i-<CD0DctCDQftClc-I-QU)CDW.U)Cl)I-’CDCDClt-t,Cl0-i•U)OJUIU)CnU)I-titiI-t,C)CD0,*c-I-CD•0JU)LU)’(I<-00c-tCt0CD0CD‘-lfl.U)c-I--<CDU)U)CDCDWc-cfl.U)‘1Qi‘1Cli—’J‘iU)c-I-C0U)CHCDCDCDCCDtOU)c-I-H-c-I-U))c-I-Ct-Z0CU)0ctTW0CtU)IICDCDI-’-c-I-Cl0rlCDtO(DH.U)H.7’CDI-hCDCDF—’CDCD>cU)U)HU)U)I-I-i0U)CDCDCDc-I-tONP)HCDM,U)H-CDU)itI—c-I-0c-I-I—tit4U)U)I-ItOc-I-F-’-CDc-ICDCD0ClU)I-1’QiU)I-i0CDZc-I-00U)U)U)0.’Ii0.’Cl0F-tiI-II•U)U)(A.)144Visitations from Ministry OfficialsSchool districts in British Columbia were dividedinto six zones by the Ministry to facilitate liaison betweenprovincial and local officials. Senior Ministry officialsvisited districts from time to time, primarily to consultwith the superintendent of schools and other district staff.These meetings were intended for officials only. Theparticipation of school trustees, however, provided anopportunity for expanding the scope of issues.Substitute or alternate issues. Trustees anddistrict officials expressed annoyance that the EducationMinistry always appeared to be in a state of structuralreorganization. Because of perceptions of “questionablepolitical agendas” and constant reorganization of thebureaucracy in Victoria, they concluded that the Ministry ofEducation had an “identity problem.” This perception wasvividly described by one trustee:Last year there was another reorganization of theMinistry of Education. They seem to be foreverorganizing. We invited the person in the Ministrywhom we liaison with, a fairly senior official,down to the district to show him what we aredoing. While at lunch, we asked him what wouldhappen to the state of public education if theMinistry were to suddenly disappear. This officialwas hard—pressed for an answer. He really couldn’tanswer the question adequately. All of usconcluded that, locally, things would go on as ifnothing happened. Even this senior Ministryofficial acknowledged that their role is nebulous.They have quite an identity problem! The tragedy1 45of all this is that others in the Ministry do notsee the reality of the situation.(Interview with Chairman of the Board,Port School District)The perceived need for a healthier climate ofintergovernmental relations extended beyond the Ministry ofEducation and local school districts. Respondents statedthat visiting Ministry officials were apprised of the needfor better coordination among the various ministries of theProvincial Government. Improvements were desired also in therelations between school districts and ministries other thanEducation. These views were expressed mostly in reference tothe integration policy. The capital expenditure policy didnot appear to be as contentious in respect to theseparticular ideals.The state of intergovernmental fiscal arrangementswas long considered by districts to be unsatisfactory. Itappeared to be a major point of discussion with visitingofficials. Intergovernmental financial arrangements directlyaffected district operations. As a result, provincial levelsof funding were deemed to be insufficient in respect to thetwo Ministry policies and other programmes. The followingcomments were characteristic:Nothing will be changed until there is a newfinance formula worked out co-operatively betweenthe Ministry of Education and local schooldistricts. Because metropolitan school districts,like Coast, have an inordinately large share of146handicapped children in relation to otherdistricts, there is a real need for more funding.Furthermore, capital expenditures will be moreof a financial issue in the future as buildingsbecome older and the cost of energy becomeshigher.(Interview with Secretary—Treasurer,Coast School District)The provincial finance formula for educationappeared to overshadow all other issues. Accordingly, thisintergovernmental issue was described as follows by a seniortrustee:Considering that we pay close to one hundred percent of our budget, we are inclined to tell thevisiting officials from the Ministry what we wantto do with our budget. ... We have to protect ourinterests and remind the Ministry of our specialcircumstances related to the planning process.(Interview with Senior Trustee,Port School District)Similarly, a district official, when commenting onthe educational finance formula and visits from Ministryofficials, emphasized that:Right now there is terrific tension between usbecause of the increased tax base of propertieswithin the district. Hence, the integration issuecannot be divorced from finance. The scales havetipped too far. We actually have to send moneyback to the Ministry.(Interview with Secretary-Treasurer,Port School District)The issue of school district expertise also extended147to the capital expenditure policy. Central office officials,for example, were emphatic about the need to lessen thenumber of mandatory affidavits used to attest that Ministryfunds would indeed be spent as stipulated in the schooldistrict’s capital expenditure proposal. Visiting Ministryofficials were told that school districts possessed staffwith appropriate professional credentials to oversee cost-shared expenditures between the province and the district.This conflict was described as having the following basis:The problem comes down to the mechanics of theprocedure. There is simply too much paperworkinvolved. The ministry already knows my feelingsabout it. There are ‘series upon series’ of formsto be filled out. The Ministry requires thedistrict to obtain approval of each of theseseries of forms such as ‘sketch plans’, ‘approvalfor tender’, and ‘approval for bidding’. TheBoard, of course, has to pass motions in eachinstance. There were three or four separateapprovals needed, for example, in the case of onerecent capital expenditure proposal. The board hasto pass four motions for each proposal. I have tomake several trips to our lawyer’s office for eachindividual proposal. In my opinion these trips tothe law office are a waste of time ... They holdthe process up!(Interview with Secretary-Treasurer,Coast School District)A wide range of intergovernmental issues appeared tobe on the agenda of meetings among trustees, local officialsand visiting Ministry personnel. The integration and capitalexpenditure policy tended to be fused with broader issues;such as, local apprehension over the centralization of1 48public education and the need for improvements in cost—sharing of special education programmes generally. Schooldistrict officials and trustees evidently thought thatMinistry officials would report these local concerns to theAssistant Deputy Minister responsible for school programmes,and to the Deputy Minister of Education or the Minister.SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONSummary observations are presented with respect toapplicable research questions. Additionally, usingtheoretical perspectives, certain concluding remarks areprovided and informed speculations advanced to furtherexplain socialization of the conflict as a politicalresponse.Identification of Operational CharacteristicsDid the three school districts socialize conflict?Yes, socialization of the conflict was employed by eachschool district for both policy types. It was used withrelative similarity. Welsh (1973:114), however, observesthat “conflicts may vary in their origins, in the ways inwhich they are handled, in their duration, and in theintensity or commitment that they manifest or generate.”Although there were times when the school districts appearedto particularly emphasize certain instruments for1 49socializing conflict and issues, the districts mostlyappeared to handle conflicts as a matter of routine [seeAppendix 0-1].The two Ministry policies appeared to beovershadowed by and part of larger intergovernmental issues.These “substitute issues”, or what Schattschneider refers toas “displacement of conflicts”, had been contentious onesfor some time. A possible reason for this development issuggested by Gurr (1980:450) who observes that:All political authorities have a limited capacityto deal with issues. This capacity is determinedby the political culture within which theauthorities operate, the types of demands withwhich they must cope, the resources available tomeet these demands, and the nature of thepolitical institutions that process the issues.Socialization of conflict appears to be a form ofconflict management. It has been observed, for example, thatsince the strength of contestants is known well in advance,it is in the interests of weaker parties to enlist outsidersin their cause (Gurr, 1980:450). This mode of conflictmanagement appears applicable to smaller scale as well aslarger scale conflicts. Schattschneider (1960), for example,emphasizes that the seriousness of conflict is determined bythe “scope of its contagion.” This study appears to supportSchattschneider’s observation. Given the tendency ofrespondents to give priority to substitute issues and todiscuss the two Ministry of Education policies in theoC)M,CDi-”CtCtQ03P300F-4‘ti‘-IC)‘tjt-t‘-•‘-“C)1-’0CDU)00H-I—’iCD‘1CD00CU)0P3P3P3P3U)CDU)CtU)0U)Cl-I-hU)F-4ctCU)0‘-1C)CD0U)0I-hH-C)CDP3CDCtU)t-CTiCD00P3(0FlFlCD0F—’I—’CtctriI—’FlCD-CtFlF-U)C)ZCl-‘-1ZCtFlCt<I-’-H-H-iQF—’FlI-h‘-‘CDCDI-’-U)H-P3CtCCT)(0C)C)00CDCDCtH0U)U)P3I—”0CDCtCDH-U)Cl)CtP3ZFl04O:D‘-1I-’U)30.,I-’-II-“Cl)U)•I—’•CD0P30P3I-’-CtP3‘0Ct0U)FlU)I-hçtC)I-h1-’-NCDI—’HCD0I<C)C030)Cl)CDC)Ct0U)CD0FlU)<HCDIZ(ThTiC)0)o‘-‘-CDI-h00CD0)U)03‘-<0‘-133F-40)‘-10-’TiFlI-hF-’•D00)CDCt0U)Cl-Ct-0Cl-CD0-’Ct0I-’C)i—t,C)CtCl-Qj0)HCDFlFlCt0FlN00F-CDctP3P3U)CtFlM00)P3CD03i-”U)U)I—’Cl-HCtCDCtO<F-’rtC)CDZCl-Cl-I-tiC)U)C)0)U)FloP3c-l-C)I-•I-hi-•CtCl-CtHF-’CtCl)CDCCD<C)CD0CD003CD0-‘•3C)CCtCDCtCtQ3iFlCDF—’C)H-CD0CDF—’Flc-tP3H-CDHU)HCtH1HiHCl)(-tCtH‘tJCtZCD0)CI—’U)FlFlC)C)U)Ct04I-h•CD0FlCt03Fl-U)CDF-’Q0FlCDI—’CDCDU)QiCDC)i-’•rtP3(000CD0)FlH-HtO04i-’•C)U)C)H-0-I—’0I-tiU)F-’C)C)0ft—••P3U)0<0)F-’I-hHI-h---Ct0)‘-‘.‘-0030HFli0)CtCD-03—ft‘—‘-(0C)TiF-’0H-—P3P33H-0.,CDC)CD‘DCD)Fl0)CDF-’—1-’-C)F-’Cl-0H-Cl-F—’CD01QjH•:iIXJI-IF-’—ftP3ZU)H-P30—3FlU)0)I-’-03Cl-CDC)tOU)CtCDci-C)C)—0t(0tOCtH-CtFlDCDFltOC)Fl—FlCf-’U)CDHP3•I—’-Cl)CD00)i-’•rt1<ciFlFl003ctCDU)I-ItOC)FlC)H0iP3(0CDZtoFlU)CtP3C)CDrtC)P3H-03-<0CD0)TiI—’U)0)CDI-’-C<H-C)ci-3U)0‘1Cl)H-FlU)Cl-0F-’U)C)bP3C)ft(P3CDU)::)•0Cl-U)FlU)CDCDFlCl-CtOP3(1)P3U)Cl-H-r-FlP30I—’CDU)P3C)FlU)C)U)•H0bHI-’H-0U)P3H-0CDU)rtCP3U)0F-’(0C)U)ci-CU)CDtT030CU)U)rtt3‘-<XCl-Ct00)‘TjCl)()Cl)I—’FlC)Cl-HH-U)I-’CDC)CD03‘-‘-CDCDH-C)C)CDFlH-(I)CDMiHCC)03i03U)FlP3CD)‘-‘•C)C03)U)“Cl-CtP3U)•U)‘rjci-C)P3F-’I-’04-CDCDCt0CtF-’Q304(3)FlCD1JP3iFlH-Cl)‘103Cl-FlFl‘-<Ct0CtP3CDNFlH-FlCHCl-<U)fttoI-ti0-,P3U)U)EH0CtHCDtoU)CDCDCDCl-U)HftHbP3CDCD0(1)Qi0C)FlHftHCl-CI-)U)HCD0<CDU)00C‘z5C)Cl-Cl-Cl-CDFl0-<CDC)03F-’U)(I)CDU)0.,CD‘ICDci-ci-I-IH-ftU)FlI-hP3CD<FlZH0P3I-hC0<I-liHC)03ci-H-CD03P3U)CHCD0CDCDftH-CD—CD0U)3ft(0P3Fl0zC)0Fl)010-,1-1,CD0-,CD0303CDCT)U)CDft—t-hCDI-tiCDCDC)FEATURESOFSOCIALIZATIONOFTHECONFLICTASAPOLITICALRESPONSEINSTRUMENTSFORSOCIALIZINGCONFLICTSUBSTITUTEISSUESINSOCIALIZINGCONFLICTDISTRICTCORRESPONDENCEANDTHEoPROGRAM-RELATEDISSUESPUBLICMEDIP(ieperceivederosionoflocalautonomy;(ieSchoolBoardLetters;localexpertisenotrecognizedenough;SchoolDistrictNewslettersanddesireforexpandedspecialeducationtheLocalNewspaper)programs;desireforassistancewithteacherprofessionaldevelopmentneeds;desireforchanqeinProvincialFinanceFormula)ATTRIBUTESoREGIONALANDPROVINCIALCOALITIONSOF(ieTheBritishColumbiaSchooloCOMMUNICATION-RELATEDISSUESTrustees’Association(B.C.S.T.A.)COALITIONandTheLegislativeAssembly)(iedesireforimprovedcommunicationamongMinistriesofGovernment;lackofstabilityinMinistryofEducationorganizationalstructure;desireforoSCHOOLBOARDMEETINGSimprovedaccesstoProvincialGovernmentMinistries;leadershipofMinisterof(ieReactiontoFormalBriefs;Educationrequiresimprovement;unclearSchoolBoardResolutionsandMinistryofEducationpoliciesandVisitationsfromMinistryOfficials)guidelines;consultationwantedbeforeannouncementofmajorpolicychanges)___________________________________________________________01Figure7FeaturesandAttributesofSocializationoftheConflict1 52The school districts appeared to effectivelysocialize conflict by sharing correspondence addressed tothe Ministry and selected branches of the ProvincialGovernment with other school districts, M.L.A.s and theB.C.S.T.A. In doing so, the school districts hoped to gainadditional support for their cause. Also, by working throughexisting coalitions, perhaps the school districts consideredthat they might be perceived as having a greater base ofstrength. Distribution of a school district’s reaction toformal briefs through newsletters and the public media alsoappeared to effectively publicize the perceived merits of aschool district’s position in respect of Ministry ofEducation policies.As noted, the school districts displaced the twoMinistry of Education policies by introducing other issuesin the course of responding to the Ministry. The twoMinistry policies under study, therefore, were overshadowedby more pervasive intergovernmental issues. These substituteissues were considered to be major impediments to schooldistrict—Ministry transactions. Certain of these substituteissues, such as, the perceived erosion of local autonomy,appeared to be closely related to the local management andcontrol of school district programmes. Other issues, suchas, the perceived need for more communication amongministries of the Provincial Government, appeared to pertainto perceived problems with intergovernmental communicationt35C)C)UDi‘-i-ZlU)ci’0Q‘ciH-U)C)‘-1CtC)I—’P1T’Ct)C)U)CD•C)tI‘ci‘--P1i-’-U)C0CD0F-’DiCDDlDl‘1FtU)<(ThJU)0U)U)DF-Di<P1U)P1P1<-•CCD•00Ft<FtCU)DiU)0CDDlDlCD<CD‘-1C’)0r-çFlH•P1CDFtCiFtI-U)DlZC)C)H-CJ)Ft•I—s•Ft--I-”U)i-’-D0HQ,ctrtFtçtçC)C)C)-FtI-”QjC)HiC)CDCDCD‘-a-C)(TI••IFtFtCC)Dii—i-0TI)U)0.,‘1)‘1Di‘-3CD0I—’H-U)DiFt‘-3DlF—’CD0H-I-’-U)tU)CCD•H-•Ft-i—’C)CDCtQ.,IICDQiU).OU)CDF-’U)U)U)H-0HiCD‘--I—’C)C)FtCFt00U)rtçtCDC)P10H-0H-U)H-H<FtC)I-’-Ii—’‘-<Hi-0P1U)00P1FlU)U)C)i1Fl0C)ID)C)TI)Di‘-‘-H-TI’CDU)Hi•U)DiCFlU)ICtTnP1çtCDC)‘.0CDF—’U)CH-C0FtFt0’10•H-DlFtHi<i-’.‘3CDCD(1)0CDH.0H-HiDiCDTI)FTH-0)Ft0(1)rt0>‘lU)0’U)I—’P100‘—‘-NCciFlP1H-ZTI)‘3-t‘.0FlI—’‘C)CD‘-00’Ft3U)0-Ct)Fl0Dii--’‘DiU)Cl)CDt.0U)Ft10U)0FlH-CD<011U)F-’lU)‘-‘-0CD‘-‘-0P1II—’CDCDtQ-i(TIC)H--C)(P0,U)HiClCDI’-”Fl0-‘•0ClCD‘-‘-0’CDCDCDFtCr)FtU)U)IC)Hi0’Ft1DiDi0’H-P1‘1U)C0CDC)‘tiC)DiP1(PF—’DDiFt‘-‘.CtYhiFl‘0‘H-FtFt(PCDH-00’DiFt0’DiC)tyU)‘.00iC)Di0DiCD0U)0.,)Nrt0.,‘t.30I-’-H-FtU)FtFt00U)t’U)I—,F-’QiCDH-U)FriC)FtH<F—’CDTI),--H-I—’rtC)DiC)ptCDtjDi‘-‘-TI)CtCDCDP1U)C)FtCD‘jCD0U)‘.0‘ci‘DiCDFt‘ci)C‘-10’DiFlDiCDC)CD‘ci0CDP1CD‘.0P1FtFtHiH-FtC)CU)FtU)QaC)CD0CD3’Qi0H-(I)0U)0FtHiU)‘-‘-C)CD0Dif—’0’H-‘.Q<F—’CDFtCD0DiFtF-’0QaDliP1C‘.0Di‘1CDF-’P1CtP1FlCD‘<Fl0HiI—’Di0FtH‘H-0’CDU)CD‘1F—’Ft0F-’rtF—’U)HH-DlC)(I)U)U)(tFtH-CDH-0DiH-0‘<0FtU)U)H-I—’FtFt0’P1U)C)C)P1C)0CDU)U)HHHU)FlCU)0FtClHFtU)CC‘.0FtSC)U)C)Di0C)CP1Hi•DiCDCl)••I—’‘-<c-I-U)C)U)CFtCDP1CCDCDrtDiU)U)H-CD•C0U)‘.0HU)CDF—’‘-3HCD0’CDFtDi-0’Cl)‘.QU)00•U)F-’CDHP1HFlU)F-’C)CD‘rj‘-<CDHFtDiC)P1CtH-0’0’HiDiHTI)3HHFt—0•NH—0CD•H-FtHiIC)FtDi‘-3F—’CDZZF-’CDFtFl‘CDCDH-CD‘.)0’Ft(I)U)5’QC)‘.0<DiCDF—’CDCDFlU)C)HHH-I-”CD‘-4C)CDU)P1CDFtCDFlCDC)‘1CD‘U)0U))DiDi•CD‘-<CD>C‘.0U)FtCD‘CI00FtDiC)C)(I)F-’C)‘.0CD0’‘ci0U)F-’HiFt0CD‘rJ‘rjP1•CDCDFt-3H-0’•P1‘<0DiZ0CDCDH-<DiCDZ0CDCD‘1Ft0.,1—’P1P1C)‘CIDlCD0CDU)P10’CDCDH-TI)DiFt0C‘CIH-0’MiDiFtCl)U)ZH-P1-‘rj,<C)Ftc-I-tiI—’FlFt-U)UIF—’H-H-FlCDCD<H-H‘.0Ft0‘rjFtC)P10CDCDF—’($1H-Q00Ft0HDiTI)‘0HZC)DiITI))1<H-C)c-I-Ft‘TiCD0DiCI—’FtFtFtCD-0FtPJFlTI)TI)‘ZI—’‘J’CDU)0i‘.0Dl0DiF—’CDP1(31Mi0•CDi—’I-’CD‘.0CD-CDCDP1CDI—’0..FlHiI-’-<Q..CDCt0()Cl‘-i-H-U)CtH-ClC)P3C)-‘‘TjC)p—’cnLiCt0H-3C)C)‘-i-0CDtS00‘10CDC)1T3U)Ct0(DCll(I‘T3C)CDP31CtU)(DC)CtCDP.)0Ht--I-’-P3(3)‘1Ct0CtLICD‘1ZU)LI0<CD(1)P3CDI—’CDP3ClCt)0CD‘1H-ClCtCDI—’C)H.tit-ICtU):iC)H-LII-CDC)CD—Cl)0ClCDH-C)CtCtU)U)U)•Cl)CtCl•‘ZClZU)0CD0)CDCDC)tU)CDH-P3C)ti0HiCDClLIdCl••C)U)f-’I-CDH-CDH-HU)H-P.)Hii-3CtCt‘-i-CDU)ClLIU)U)U)H-U)U)(1)P3U)U)•00LIC)Ti0P3CDC)TiCtCt‘-i-ZCtU)U)CtLIH-H-Ct00Hii-C)P3H-LI0ClLI0ClU)CtC)TiI—sCD00Fr3C)HHC)CtCl0CtCDH00•Hi0CDFC3U)C3C)1-’HftHiLIC)Tif—iLI‘TP3CtP3LIClCtClCt0P3i-<CDCDCt-CDCtCl)CtC)H-I-’-CDH-Ct‘<‘ICt‘-ILICli-a-ClCDH-LI0U)TiH-CtP3P3CDH-ClZ<0tOCD5CtCDCD0<CtCtU)Cli—-CDCD3yC)P3LI•LI:3TiH-H.txCti-i-CD0•CtI—’-H-CDP3CDo0•LIH,LIrtClHU)CtF-’F-’iC)‘ri‘-3tOF-’U)Cl)C)HHi0CD10H-I—’‘<<i-’-CtP3P3P3•C)CDIU)II-P3CDCD—U)LICDF-C)P31—’1—’Cl)CtLI1.)TjIH-•CtCtCtP3•CD•0IC)C)tCtU)rtLIU)H-CtP3ClC)‘-33P<0•CDCD0Cti-<CDU)00LICD•CDrti-3U)>LIt-J-P3U)i-iP3T‘IC)P3CtJCDC)CD•U)<I—’HCtZCt‘-<C)CDCDI-I•CtCD‘IU)-H0U)CtCtCtP3P3CDCtP3P3C)C)00CDELIC)P3‘-1i-<‘rici-LItOP3(PP3C)LICDClP.)CtU)U)LI00)CD1C)U)t—ClU)0CD<0H-CDHC)CD-CDCDC)•Cl0H-CDCt‘--I—’U)1U)CtLI0)U)ClCt0(3)H-LI0I-’-CtC)CDH-0CtCDCti-”Hi•ftCDCD0C)I-’-TiCDLIU)Hi0‘ICDLILIU)Lt3U)<C)0LIH-it0Ct0H-t-H-CDr%)Ct•H-P30U)I—’U)I-’-LIH-Hi)U)U)C)I-I—’ClH-CDCtC)Hi0)CtCD•CtH-ClH-0C)ClH-U)H)3H-•0U)0CtH-HiH,I-<C)C)CDCtLtiC)C)HiLt3CDHiP3HiU)HiPJ0U)LI03C)H-:31-tiCDU)Ct0CtCl)f—sF-•Cr.00tOCDLI0i-<H-LIH-F—sH-H-•U)<ClU)LICDC)‘TjCt0CDZC)-3i-3C)H-tTC)C)CDClH-CDClCl3it‘-<•H-003P30)H-H-ci-P3CD0C)LI0C)03I—’•HiU)0Ct)U)•0H-ClHLILI0CDC)H-LI1-tiC)H,IICD0P3H-C)H•CDI—’C)NCDCDCiU)U)ci-‘rjP3I—’LI03ZU)003U)LIU)—‘-<CDU)CDCti-C)TiCl0LICt‘r))Cl)TiLIClC)CD0HC)ClH-CDH•U)CDCDP3P3HU)CtClU)3U)C)H-0C)0t’LICtU)C)C)ClCtCi3Ct•P3CDH-HiCt3’CDLILIU)LI00LI0H•0:3H-LICDP3•Hci-P3:iLIH0CtCt0C)C)CDCt0CtU):3U))LIP3CiC)I—’0U)I—aCDCtCl0Hi0—Cl-‘i-C)CT)CDI—’Ct(311 55The operational characteristics of socialization ofthe conflict for distributive policy differed according totype of school district. Again, this difference was dueprimarily to the use of M.L.A.s as an intergovernmentallinkage by the partisan metropolitan school district(Coast). Additionally, this district appeared to employ thelocal newspaper, and provided copies of correspondenceintended for the Ministry to neighbouring school districtsmore extensively than the other two districts.Appendix 0—4 provides a profile of differencesaccording to the concentration or focus of intergovernmentallinkages, features, and corresponding attributes. Thepartisan metropolitan school district (Coast) appeared todisplay the most concentrated use of operationalcharacteristics for both policy types. This district, forexample, involved the Members of the Legislative Assemblymuch more than the other two districts.Certain general observations of this politicalresponse accrue from the operational characteristics. Theseare summarized in Appendix 0-5. For example, the schooldistricts socialized conflict with respect to the twoMinistry policies through a variety of related issues. Asnoted already, these other issues were not new tointergovernmental relations, but of a pervasive and longstanding order.The use of newsletters and the local press also1 56appeared to be an integral part of public relations. The twolargest districts had full—time public relations officersdevoted to the dissemination of information. These officersappeared to monitor various interest groups within the localcommunity as part of their function. The school districtsmay have had another objective in using local newsletters--to exert direct influence on local taxpayers.The school trustees appeared to exerciseconsiderable leadership in socializing conflict. They issuedinstructions to district staff, for example, to send lettersto neighbouring districts and the B.C.S.T.A. Moreover,interaction during seminars, regional meetings and theAnnual General Meeting (A.G.M.) of the provincial trustees’association appeared to be undertaken mostly by school boardmembers.The school trustees also openly expressed theirthoughts and exercised judgment in respect to the substanceof briefs presented to the school boards. Accordingly, theirreactions, especially board resolutions, were recorded inthe minutes of school board meetings. These minutes werethen conveyed to the Ministry of Education regularly asstipulated in the School Act. Occasionally, the schoolboards instructed district officials to compile specialbriefs for submission to the Ministry. Since the Ministrymonitored the school board minutes, this avenue may haveprovided a consistent means of presenting the school1 57districts’ arguments to the Ministry.ConclusionsThe findings suggest that socialization of conflictwas a positive exercise. As a political response, itappeared to be a routine means of managing dependence.Neither the purpose, nor the process, appeared to bedestructive or vindictive in respect to the Ministry ofEducation. On the contrary, attempts by the school districtsto draw in other districts and the public, in conjunctionwith substitution of issues, indicate that this particularresponse may be helpful for conflict resolution.Political conflict appears well-rooted in democracy.Mitchell and Mitchell (1969:509), for example, note thatsomething so universal as conflict could hardly survive as apolitical and social practice without some advantages oruseful purposes. According to these students of politicalbehaviour, “the question then, is not whether conflict isgood or bad, but which forms have what consequences?” Budge(1970:12), furthermore, observes that conflicts appear toautomatically impose their own limits on divisions in stabledemocracies. Therefore, conflict may be viewed as apolitical process that works and produces results (Mitchelland Mitchell, 1969:509).In socializing conflict, the school districtsappeared to be making use of certain opportunities to gain1 58attention and thereby possibly win support for their cause.The variety of opportunities available also suggests thatresolution of conflicts may take place in different arenasand with the participation of different groups.The sharing of intergovernmental correspondence withMembers of the Legislative Assembly and the British ColumbiaSchool Trustees Association reflects a vertical or “local-provincial” dimension of socializing conflict. On the otherhand, the sharing of correspondence with other localauthorities reflects a horizontal or “inter—local”orientation. Both dimensions suggest that interdependencebetween and among organizations is an important factor.According to Pfeffer and Salancik (1978:67), conflict is notpossible without interdependence, since its absence providesno connection between organizations and hence no basis forconflict.Local government is regarded as being the nexus ofthe intergovernmental system. Glendening and Reeves (1977),for example, note that the local level serves as a point ofconvergence for the horizontal and vertical relationsresulting from long—established patterns of interactions,both conflicting and co—operative, among the “multitude ofgovernments.” Correspondingly, Schattschneider (1975)reminds us that the “outcome of all conflict is determinedby the ‘scope’ of its contagion.” This observation ofSchattschneider’s is now generally recognized as a truism1 59(Glendening and Reeves, 1977). Glendening and Reeves,furthermore, emphasize that the sheer number ofintergovernmental participants and transactions at the locallevel maximizes the potential for problems there.Given these characteristics of intergovernmentalrelations, school districts appear to have the option ofexpanding the scope of conflict or of delimiting it. Thisstudy indicated that school districts chose to expandconflict by introducing or substituting other issues whenappealing to groups, including the Ministry of Education,for support. This political response is not deemed to besynonymous, however, with a “redefinition” of the nature ofthe conflict. Welsh (1973:116) describes conflictdisplacement this way:It involves not actually dealing with a givenconflict, but rather focusing attention on a“substitute” conflict that might be capable ofdraining off energies that had been devoted to theother conflict, and which might also be moreeasily resolved. Not only is it the case thatresources available to deal with importantsocietal conflicts are limited, but the energiesand attentions of the political authorities whomust ultimately deal with these conflicts can bestretched only to a point.As only a finite number of conflicts can attractpublic attention at any one time, Pirages (1976:16) notesthat organizations carefully choose the political issuesthey wish to emphasize. Moreover, Pirages views politicalprocesses as being devoted to the domination and160subordination of many potential conflicts. In this respect,Pirages (1976:17) supports the observations ofSchattschneider (1960) and Welsh (1973) that organizationsare involved in the substitution of more manageable for lessmanageable lines of cleavage.Another conclusion arising from the operationalcharacteristics is that socialization of the conflictinvolves competitive behaviour. Exposing Ministry policiesto critical examination by multiple groups, often in thecontext of broader intergovernmental issues, reflects thiscompetitive orientation. Forums, such as, the LegislativeAssembly, the provincial trustees’ association and the localcommunity, are characterized by competing ideologies fromwhich the school districts apparently hoped to elicitsupport. Most clearly indicative of competition, however,was the fact that school districts worked proactively toreinforce their positions with respect to the Ministry.This conclusion becomes further evident through thedistinction between conflict and competition. Such adistinction is deemed to be useful when discussing politicalconflict (Mack and Snyder, 1957; Pirages, 1976; and Gurr,1980). Building on the work of Mack and Snyder (1957),Pirages (1976:6) states that in political conflict:A clear distinction between competition andconflict cannot easily be made in the real world.Just as competitors in football or basketballsometimes cheat, political competitors “more or161less” follow rules unless they can find ways toeffectively circumvent them. One of the tacitlyunderstood rules of the political game is thatchanging or violating the rules is acceptable aslong as violators don’t get caught and are willingto pay penalties if they do. Thus the politicalcompetition-conflict relationship is bestvisualized as a continuum ranging fromcompetitive-nonviolent— nondestructive behaviourin conformity with rules at one extreme and toconflict-violent—destructive behaviour inviolation of established norms at the other, withmuch of the intervening behaviour being neitherclearly competition nor clearly conflict.Competitive behaviour, therefore, reflects a chosenpolitical approach within a range of possible behaviours.Whether and how politicians in the real world try toreallocate power by managing the scope of conflict areviewed by Schattschneider (1975:15) as important questions.Schattschneider underlines their importance in sheddinglight on “the dynamics of politics”, “on what actuallyhappens in the political process” and “on what can or cannotbe accomplished in the political system.”For Schattschneider (1975:12), the role ofgovernment in modern society is to a considerable extent aquestion of the scale of conflict. He perceives governmentas the greatest single instrument for the socialization ofconflict in a democratic community. “Competitiveness”,according to Schattschneider, is the mechanism for theexpansion of conflict. As a result, Schattschneider(1975:13) concludes that “government thrives on conflict.”Gurr (1980:428) observes that political authorities1 62everywhere are faced with problems of scarcity. Therefore,it seems natural for local authorities such as schooldistricts to compete for scarce resources and positions ofinfluence. Tension, uncertainty and disagreement appear tobe byproducts of this intergovernmental competition. Budge(1970), Pirages (1976) and Gurr (1980), however, concur thatconflict in political systems is conditioned by certainconstraints or “rules of the game.”Schattschneider (1975) also calls for a sense ofproportion. He notes, for example, that at the outset ofevery political conflict the relations of the “belligerents”and the audience are typically unstable. He adds that therelations are impossible to calculate since all quantitiesin the equation are indeterminate until “all of thebystanders” have been committed.Schattschneider (1975:18) emphasizes that thedistinctive quality of political conflicts is that relationsbetween the “players and audience” are not well defined andthere is usually nothing to keep the audience from gettinginto “the game.” His description of political conflict isinstructive (Schattschneider, 1975: 66—68):Political conflict is not like an intercollegiatedebate in which the opponents agree in advance onthe definition of issues. As a matter of fact, thedefinition of alternatives is the supremeinstrument of power; the antagonists can rarelyagree on what the issues are because power isinvolved in the definition.All politics deals with the displacement of163conflicts or efforts to resist the displacement ofconflicts. The substitution of conflicts lookslike an argument about what the argument is allabout, but politicians are not as confused as theyseem to be.Socialization of conflict is susceptible to certainchecks. As already noted, conflicts appear to impose theirown limits upon divisions in stable democracies. Also, therole of the public media in reporting and monitoringpolitical conflicts in whatever forum —— board meetings,B.C.S.T.A., or the Legislative Assembly -- is an importantfactor for keeping conflict in check. Mitchell and Mitchell(1969:506), for example, state that:Not to be overlooked is the important role to beplayed by the press in publicizing theinvestigations and stimulating public outrage atviolations of the rules of the game. The role ofthe press in competitive processes can never beunderestimated; not only does it dramatize thecontest and thus stimulate public interest, but italso provides socialization about what the normsof conduct should be.Elkin (1975:173) reminds us that the management ofdependence by a local authority has as its purpose theprotection or expansion of the local organization’s domain.The organization, notes Elkin, seeks assurance that it willcontinue to perform its current functions, or it seeks toadd to the level of performance or functions, each of theserequiring acquisition of a variety of resources ranging frommaterial ones to prestige.1 64In summary, two conclusions were discerned from thepractice of this political response. Firstly, socializationof the conflict appeared to be a “democratic” means ofconflict resolution. The school districts, for example,capitalized on opportunities to gain the attention of theMinistry, to enlist others in support of local preferencesand to displace possibly “lesser issues” with more intenseones. Secondly, this political response appeared to be apositive form of competition or debate, rather than adestructive exercise. The school districts, for example,used a variety of communication outlets to expose Ministryof Education policies to critical examination and potentialimprovement.Attempts to socialize conflict may also result inthe shifting of the arena of decision—making (Elkin,1975:175). The supraorganizations included in “Regional andProvincial Coalitions” satisfied this function to a limitedextent. Therefore, this study appears to reinforce Elkin’shypothesis that socialization of the conflict also is likelyto be related to “making use of a supraorganization.”165CHAPTER SIXMAKING USE OF A SUPRAORGANIZATIONIn setting up or making use of asupraorganization, the focal organization attemptsto shift the arena of decision to one in which itis more favoured. This may be done by shifting thedecision to an already existing organization inwhich the focal actor and the other organizationare “members”, or working towards setting up suchan arena (Elkin, 1975: 175).Elkin’s definition suggests two possible variants ofthis political response. “Making use of a supraorganization”may entail the “setting up” or the establishment of a newsupraorganization. Alternatively, it may involve the ongoinguse of an already existing supraorganization. This studyrevealed that the three school districts made use ofexisting supraorganizations. They did not attempt toestablish new ones.The supraorganizations identified in the course ofthis study were the Inter-Ministry Children’s Committee, theBritish Columbia School Trustees Association, theLegislative Assembly, the Provincial Cabinet, and ProvincialGovernment Ministries, such as, Human Resources, Health,Attorney-General, and Lands, Parks and Housing. It should benoted that the names used for these Provincial GovernmentMinistries were ones in force at the time of this study.166Using a supraorganization ostensibly resemblescoalition and socialization of the conflict. The datarevealed that these overt political responses wereinterrelated in practice. Making use of a supraorganization,however, may also be viewed as a distinct type of response.Supraorganizations served as a credible, and oftennecessary, “third party”, invited to intervene with respectto issues involving resource allocation because of certainjurisdictional responsibilities. The mandate or jurisdictionof the British Columbia School Trustees Association, forexample, was perceived to include not only therepresentation of school district viewpoints, but also themediation of intergovernmental issues.Supraorganizations have distinct jurisdictionalauthority and responsibilities. The Provincial Cabinet, forexample, considered the feasibility of local proposals inresponse to Ministry of Education policies and distributedfunds accordingly. The Inter—Ministry Children’s Committee,on the other hand, was an intermediary body which coordinated intergovernmental communication pertaining tohandicapped children. Additionally, it was used to influenceProvincial Government agencies of the need to allocateresources to integrated programmes.Repeated inspections of the data and further reviewsof the literature resulted in this formal, expandeddefinition of making use of a supraorganization:167(a) the jurisdiction of the supraorganization is provincialin scope;(b) the supraorganization is one of the following threetypes: (i) inter-ministerial, such as, the cabinet, TreasuryBoard or an inter—ministry committee; (ii) ministerial, suchas, the Ministry of Intergovernmental Relations; or(iii) non—ministerial, such as, the British Columbia SchoolTrustees Association or a court of law;(c) the supraorganization may be regulatory, such as, theLegislative Assembly or non—regulatory, such as, the BritishColumbia School Trustees Association;(d) the supraorganization may be an association with whichgroups within the school district are affiliated and whichmay assist in mediating a resolution to conflicts;(e) the supraorganization assists the school district inachieving certain goals which the school district cannot dobecause of lack of resources.The school districts used supraorganizations torepresent their interests when intervention was warranted,or to obtain approval and resources for proposed projects.Accordingly, the findings are classified in terms of thesetwo functions of supraorganizations: (1) representation andintervention, and (ii) project approval and resourcedistribution. These functions constitute the main featuresof this political response.The use made of supraorganizations is describedaccording to each of these features or functions. Thefindings are further reported according to the scope orextent of use in respect of the jurisdictional authority ofthe particular supraorganization. Supraorganizations usedfor “representation and intervention” purposes will be1 68presented first.REPRESENTATION AND INTERVENTION FUNCTIONSThe Inter—Ministry Children’s CommitteeThe Inter—Ministry Children’s Committee (I.M.C.C.)facilitated information exchange and decision—making amongthe various organizations delivering services to handicappedchildren. The Committee was both inter—ministerial andinter-governmental in nature. It included representativesfrom the Ministries of Education, Health, Human Resourcesand the Attorney—General as well as local school districtofficials. The I.M.C..C. really consisted of three layers ofcommittees operating at the local, regional and provinciallevels respectively.Scope of use. District officials regarded the Inter—Ministry Children’s Committee as an intermediary betweenjunior and senior levels of government. It also functionedas a forum for the discussion of issues pertaining to theeducational integration of handicapped children. Schooldistricts attempted to obtain the support of this committeeprior to the conveyance of local proposals for funding tothe various Ministries of the Provincial Government. Thefunding sought was either “shareable” between the Provinceand the district, or “total provincial support.”169The Inter—Ministry Children’s Committee assisted inthe procurement of specialized personnel who functioned asaides to handicapped children at particular schools. Thecommittee also provided an informational and adjudicativeservice. For example, it assessed the eligibility ofindividual children for placement in appropriatecombinations of educational and rehabilitative programmes.The Provincial Government provided considerableliterature to school districts on the supportive role itenvisaged for the Inter—Ministry Children’s Committee. As aresult, one district’s supervisor of special servicesrecounted that “school districts initially perceived manyadvantages in using it.” The following extract fromProvincial Government literature, provided by this districtofficial, may suggest why:The role of the Inter—Ministry Children’sCommittees is mainly that of coordination andcommunication. They provide a system whereby localworkers can have ready access to information aboutresources of other Ministries in their own regionand in other regions of the Province. They alsoprovide a consistent route for requests forservices of an unusual, interministerial natureand for policy decisions to cover exceptionalcases. Because the I.M.C.C.’s are under thedirection of the deputy ministers, coordination isprovided at all levels of administration.(Inter—Ministry Children’s Committee -—Background Document)District officials also appreciated the following170statement of philosophy in another publication of theProvincial Government:One of the problems facing governments is theirincreasing involvement in the delivery ofservices. To date this involvement has gone on ina piecemeal and fragmented manner as services havebeen expanded and extended into new areas to meetimmediate problems. A consequence of thisevolution has been an interdependence amongservices, so that the impact of programmes in onearea, such as social welfare, may have a directeffect on programmes in another area, such ashealth. Service delivery in all countries iscomplicated by the involvement of multiple layersof government. ... The need and opportunities arehigh for a synthesis and coordination of thevarious functional operations to provide anintegrated delivery of services.(Inter—Ministry Children’s Committee-—Newsletter)Both district officials and school trustees,however, observed that the positive orientations envisagedfor the I.M.C.C. simply had not been translated intopractice. Three years after its inception, school districtswere encountering considerable difficulty with theoperations of the I.M.C.C.One senior trustee referred to the problemsencountered with the Inter—Ministry Children’s Committee as“annoying ..., even baffling.” She described the experienceof her district as follows:We are experiencing distress over specialequipment required for the hearing-impairedprogramme. The Board wrote to the Inter-Ministry171Children’s Committee but did not receive ananswer. The Board then sent letters to theMinistries of Education and Health. My biggestbeef is that we really don’t have access to theInter—Ministry Children’s Committee ..., and thisis supposed to be a joint committee of all the keyMinistries. We needed funds and equipment from theHealth Ministry and thought that theI.M.C.C. would help. The Board was emphatic thatthe funds should not come from the local operatingbudget. How do you think that the board felt whenit was told that the district’s supervisor ofspecial services is a member of the local I.M.C.C.Few people really know how this Inter—MinisterialCommittee operates.(Interview with Senior Trustee,Island School District)The school district’s officials were dubious of whatone respondent referred to as “government rhetoric”. TheInter-Ministry Children’s Committee, moreover, was perceivedto be another unwarranted layer of government. Anothersenior trustee, for example, said:Issues between the Ministry of Education and localschool districts all come down to financial costs,and the arrangements for allocating costs. Cost—sharing doesn’t have to be complicated. TheEducation Ministry, however, sets up intricateInter—Ministerial Committees to hinder rather thanhelp solve the issues. The government bureaucracyis simply awesome. There are committees lookingafter other committees.(Interview with Senior Trustee,Port School District)The school districts, nevertheless, appeared toachieve some success through the Inter—Ministry Children’sCommittee. The dual representation of provincial and localofficials on the regional and local levels of the172I.M.C.C. provided opportunities for frank discussion.Because of provincial and local representation, the twelve“Regional Committees” and the sixty—five “Local Committees”were valued more than the “Provincial Committee” composedexclusively of certain deputy ministers.School districts mostly used the local version ofthe Inter—Ministry Children’s Committee. A prime use isreflected in the following statement:There is a real need for clarification of thepolicy. This includes the specification of variousparts. Because it lacks real substance, we areunsure of just how far to go with the integrationof certain kinds of children. This view is sharedby others on the Inter—Ministry Children’sCommittee, and they let the government know.(Interview with Supervisorof Special Services, Port School District)The Provincial Government, however, did not appearto issue the clarification sought. The school districts,therefore, appeared leery about the effectiveness of theI.M.C.C., as this comment indicates:Do you really want to know the real reason for theI.M.C.C.? ... Each of the three levels of theInter—Ministerial Committee functions as a seriesof holding tanks for contentious problems inspecial education so that the Minister ofEducation can keep his desk clean.(Interview with Supervisor,of Special services, Island School District)School districts expected to make full use of the173various levels of the Inter—Ministry Children’s Committee.Actual use, however, was sporadic. The local level of theInter-Ministry Children’s Committee, however, did functionas an important intergovernmental body for these purposes:(i) to exchange information about special programmes,(ii) to determine the placement of individual handicappedstudents and (iii) to influence provincial authorities ofthe need for special resources. Effective use was restrictedto the local level because of unanticipated problems ofcoordination encountered at the regional and provinciallevels.The British Columbia School Trustees AssociationAs stated previously, the British Columbia SchoolTrustees Association is a privately incorporatedorganization of school boards which endeavours to protectthe interests of its members. Membership in theB.C.S.T.A. is voluntary. During the period of this study,however, all school boards in British Columbia were members.Scope of use. The school districts took advantage ofthe multi—faceted services offered by the B.C.S.T.A. inaddition to the usual opportunities for discussion ofprovincial policy at the B.C.S.T.A. Annual General Meetings.For example, the school districts used the informativepamphlets and brochures produced by B.C.S.T.A. for public174consumption on selected educational topics and issues. Thesematerials were displayed and made available to the publicthrough the district offices. One pamphlet, observed among aseries stationed immediately outside the office of asuperintendent of schools, stated that:The B.C.S.T.A. is the professional organization ofthe school boards of the Province. In this role,it acts as a clearinghouse for matters of commoninterest. Also, it represents the public interestto the Provincial Government as well as tointerested groups and individuals.(B.C.S.T.A. Booklet: Education in B.C.How it Works, 1980)The school districts used the B.C.S.T.A. as a“medium for legislative action”. According toB.C.S.T.A. literature, a priority of the Association was toserve as “a mechanism through which school boards can arriveat a common position,” and influence legislation anddecisions affecting the course of education. One Chairman ofthe Board noted that:Politics is a question of who pays. Financialexpenditures affect most Ministry policies anddistrict operations. Trustees take local action bypassing Board resolutions in response to manyMinistry policies. The B.C.S.T.A. presents briefsto the Government as a follow-up. It also presentsbriefs to the N.D.P. Caucus. Trustees are willingto use any means to assure that the rightbudgetary allocations are in place for programmes.Vigilance is important. B.C.S.T.A. helps keep aneye on how the overall direction of the Governmentaffects school districts.175(Interview with Chairman of the Board,Island School District)A school board chairman, who also functioned as anExecutive member of the B.C.S.T.A., said that school boardswere provided with ample occasions to establish and reviewthe orientation of the Association. This respondent addedthat:Trustees have all sorts of opportunities forinput. Some boards are really active; others tendto hold back. Individual trustees are the realbackbone of the Association. ... Because of theissues, the Government hears from our Executivemembers a great deal.(Interview with Chairman of Board,Coast School District)The school districts appeared to nurture an intimateworking relationship with the B.C.S.T.A. throughrepresentation on the Executive body of the Association.School trustees and the chairmen of two of the three schoolboards in this study either had served as members of theExecutive of the trustees’ association or were currently onthe Provincial Executive. B.C.S.T.A. appeared to havesubstantial input from school districts. One respondent, forexample, commented that:Ministry policies are discussed pretty thoroughlyat the local level. If there is a problem, thedistrict doesn’t hesitate to push ProvincialGovernment matters up to the B.C.S.T.A. forfurther discussion and action.176(Interview with Senior Trustee,Island School District)Immediately after announcement of the integrationpolicy, the school districts urged the regional andprovincial offices of the B.C.S.T.A. to obtain furtherinformation from the Ministry. Subsequently, theB.C.S.T.A. noted the intended role of the I.M.C.C.,cautiously supported it and circulated the following adviceselectively to school districts:Implementation is not expected to be accomplishedimmediately, although there have already been someadvances in planning on an inter—ministerialbasis. Communication between Ministries hasincreased and the problems have been more clearlyidentified. It would be overly simplistic to thinkthat the historically complex network of servicesfor handicapped children could suddenly becomestreamlined.(Selected Notes from B.C.S.T.A. Files)School districts also used the B.C.S.T.A. to assesstrends with respect to the two Ministry policies across theProvince. A senior trustee, for example, observed that:The B.C.S.T.A. provides us with up-to--dateinformation on how other boards are coping withthe integration of handicapped children. It helpsus to make better decisions when we know whatothers are doing. B.C.S.T.A. is a major influenceon school board activity.(Interview with Senior Trustee,Coast School District)177The Association sensitized school districts topotential legal difficulties. It shared Canadian andAmerican judicial decisions on the integration ofhandicapped children and provided legal advice on request. Aschool board chairman described its usefulness as follows:The open-ended nature of the Ministry policyinvites litigation on the part of parents withhandicapped children. We are monitoring events inSouth Cariboo School District. The school boardthere refused to integrate a handicapped pupil andnow the parents have hired legal counsel.Fortunately, the B.C.S.T.A. stepped in and helpedto avert a multi—million dollar lawsuit. If thematter was taken to court, the school board mightnot have a chance. The Ministry, meanwhile, is notdoing much to assure that problems, such as, theSouth Cariboo situation, don?t happen again.(Interview with Chairman of Board,Port School District)In response to problems associated with theintegration of handicapped children, Executive members ofthe B.C.S.T.A. assisted in the drafting of this officialpolicy statement designed to bring relief to schooldistricts:A commitment to school districts from theGovernment is required to safeguard the principleof equal education opportunities for all children.B.C.S.T.A. recommendations on the moral andfinancial issues surrounding this area of concernwould be of great value to school districts and aneeded influence on those responsible forprovincial policies. ... Once the process ofconsultation has been completed, it will hopefullybe possible to consider a more refined statementof policy which will result in government action.178Of course, there is always the possibility thatthe process of consultation, itself, will forcethe Government to recognize the policy vacuum thatexists.(B.C.S.T.A. Pamphlet: Education Rightsfor All Children, 1981)School districts also participated directly in theformulation of B.C.S.T.A. reaction to Ministry financialpolicy, including capital expenditures. As described inChapters Four and Five, these were conveyed to the Ministryannually in the form of B.C.S.T.A. resolutions, such as, thefollowing:The present policy of the Ministry regardingshareable capital equipment makes no provision forthe approval of new equipment that is required asa result of changes in course content, nor doesthe policy provide for acquiring equipmentrequired as a result of changes in technology. Anannual shareable capital equipment allowanceshould be provided as part of a district’s capitalprogram, such funding to be used for the purchaseof new equipment as required for changes inexisting courses.(Resolution by Port School District,Minutes of the Annual General Meeting,B .C. S .T. A.The B.C.S.T.A. assisted in the mediation ofintergovernmental issues pertaining to Ministry of Educationpolicies. A school board chairman summarized the involvementof his particular school district this way:We use the B.C.S.T.A. and its various committees alot. The Association serves as a good medium for1 79dialogue and understanding with the Ministry ofEducation, the Cabinet and other branches of theProvincial Government.(Interview with Chairman of Board,Island School District)The Legislative AssemblyThe three school districts used their local Membersof the Legislative Assembly to draw the ProvincialGovernment’s attention to the purposes and application ofMinistry of Education policies. There were fifty—sevenmembers of the Legislative Assembly in the period covered bythis study. Thirty-one members sat as representatives of thegoverning party, Social Credit. Twenty—six members sat asthe opposition, the New Democratic Party.Scope of use. All three school districts attemptedto employ the services of M.L.A.s. Two districts succeeded.Both were represented by M.L.A.s from the opposition party.The exception, the non—partisan metropolitan schooldistrict, was represented by M.L.A.,s of the governmentparty, one of whom was a cabinet minister.The local teachers’ associations appeared to be thegroups within the school districts most actively involvedwith Members of the Legislative Assembly. The comments ofone association president attest to this fact:180Education of deaf children is not a major problemin this district. Another category of handicapped..., the “spina—bifida” kids are a concern. Theseare children who have no control over theirbowels. The district has two such children andthey are restricted to wheelchairs. In both cases,classroom teachers had to look after them. In oneinstance, the teacher had to transfer out of herprimary classroom because of the problems relatedto providing care. Prior to the transfer, one ofthe M.L.A..s became involved in the case. Standardprocedure is that the Coast Teachers’ Associationrequests the involvement of the M.L.A. Teachersdon’t communicate directly with the Member. Theproblem becomes a matter strictly between theteachers’ association and the M.L.A. The teachers’association really had no choice but to involvethe M.L.A. The association had made repeatedrepresentations to the school board, but theschool board kept replying that it didn’t havefunds.(Interview with the President,Coast Teachers’ Association)Interaction with M.L.A.s, however, was not alwayssuccessful. This comment of a president of another teachers’association may reveal why:We have tried to discuss matters with our M.L.A.,but we don’t have much success in arrangingmeetings with him. He happens to be a cabinetminister and of course a member of the SocialCredit Party. The last thing he wants to hear iscriticism of his government’s policies. ThisM.L.A. makes a point of not speaking to teachersat all. He has been invited around several timesto this district, situated in the riding herepresents or is supposed to represent... butlately he hasn’t even responded to ourinvitations.(Interview with the President,Port Teachers’ Association)Use of ML.A.s is suggestive of coalition behaviour181and socialization of the conflict. The interrelated natureof the overt responses appears to be highlighted in thiscomment:The M.L.A. for the city has discussed educationalmatters with the teachers of the district on twooccasions. I suspect that he has had dealings withtrustees as well. When we invite him to give atalk, he tends to accept our invitation. Ourrelationship with him is cordial and we find ourdiscussions with him useful, especially since heis knowledgeable about finance. He often speaks onthe topic in the House. We feel that we can counton him for help.Interview with the President,Island Teachers’ Association)One school district, the partisan metropolitan type,appeared to have a history of close relationships withM.L.A.s. In this district, the Members of the LegislativeAssembly were used a great deal by groups other than theteachers’ association. Interaction with M.L.A.s included thesuperintendent of schools, the chairman of the board, andother trustees. The Chairman of the Board described thisinteraction at length:School board members have at least one and oftentwo meetings a year with their M.L.A.s. At themoment the district is represented by threeM.L.A.s, all from the New Democratic Party. One ofthe M.L.A.s is a former Minister of Education. Theparty affiliation makes a real difference.Yesterday’s announcement in the Legislature of thecapital expenditure allocations to schooldistricts tells the story. When the EducationCritic accused the Minister of Education ofpartiality to school districts, the Minister of182Education denied that there was any favoritismshown to Social Credit constituencies. ... Membersof the Legislature for this district have alwaysbeen noteworthy, whether on the government side ornot. At one time the Speaker of the House, theMinister of Education, and the Minister ofMunicipal Affairs were all sitting members forCoast School District. At other times there is noCabinet representation at all. You either get itor you don’t. Nowadays it seems that no matter whothe M.L.A.s are, government or opposition, youstill don’t get what you want.(Interview with Chairman of Board,Coast School District)The School districts appear to have informed M.L.A.sof matters related to the integration and capitalexpenditure policies on a regular basis. This closeinteraction may have been responsible for the followingexchange in the Legislative Assembly:M.L.A. (Coast North): A question to the Ministerof Education. The mainstreaming of handicappedchildren has increased the number of children atmedical risk attending school in our province.Such children require medication on a daily basis.There are few, if any, persons attached to ourschools who are qualified under the Medical Act toadminister such medication on a daily basis. Whatsteps has the minister taken to provide medicalpersonnel for this purpose?Minister of Education: Mr. Speaker, I am going totake the question as notice. I assure the memberthat it’s also a matter of concern to me thatteachers are in some districts being required toadminister medication to a degree that goes beyondthe handing out of an aspirin. I share themember’s concern and will respond at more lengthin due course. I thank the member.(Debates of the Legislative Assembly)183M.L.A.s appeared to be ready to intervene on behalfof the school district when requested. Intervention appearedto assist in the resolution of problems related to thecapital expenditure allocation process. The followingexample indicates that the intervention of M.L.A.s was oftenfruitful:In spite of the inflammatory, partisan remarks ofthe Minister, I would like to say a word aboutJames Bennett (Executive Assistant to the Ministerof Education) myself. I had occasion to consultwith him on several problems regarding myconstituents, and I always found him very helpful.I think it says a great deal for him that he wasable to put up with that kind of insufferable egoof the man who occupied the Minister’s chair forthree and a half years....(M.L.A. for Island School District,Debates of the Legislative Assembly)Similarly, the following example of action in theLegislative Assembly describes how one school district madeuse of the services of an M.L.A in respect to localapprehension about further anticipated changes in theelementary special education programme:I have a couple of questions about things thataffect my riding. There’s been a considerableamount of correspondence between the Minister andIsland School District ... In one of the mostrecent letters from the Minister, he refers to areport ... I am wondering just how long thisreport has been ongoing -- or how long they havebeen working on this report? When might we expectto have that report produced, and, of course, willwe see that report?184(M.L.A. for Island School District,Debates of the Legislative Assembly)The school districts made use of Members of theLegislative Assembly as instruments for information.Districts, for example, closely monitored news of events inthe Legislative Assembly. They attempted to use thisinformation to bolster their argument for additionalresources. This activity pertained mostly to the capitalexpenditure policy. It was especially evident wheneverM.L.A.s of the government party released figures on capitalexpenditure grants allocated to school districts in theirparticular regions. For example, a senior trustee recountedthat:The Ministry is very underhanded about the way inwhich it goes about allocating capital expenditurefunds. Our M.L.A. happens to be very vocal in theLegislature and active locally. He is concernedabout his constituents. But because he is a memberof the N.D.P., the district does not obtain asmuch as districts represented by governmentML.A.s. I am sure that the composition of theschool board also affects how the Ministry seesus. The Board is dominated by members of theN.D.P. This affects relations with the Government.No doubt about it. Before the last election, oneof our M.L.A.s was a member of the Social CreditParty and the former mayor. The district receiveda lot more then. The whole island now is viewed associalist and we get a lot less.(Interview with Senior Trustee,Island School District)The school districts compared their financialallotments to other districts. “This comparison was an185annual event”, according to one secretary—treasurer, “wheredistricts checked to see if they received their fair share.”Both officials and school trustees noted that schooldistricts with M.L.A.s who were members of the governmentparty tended to receive more funds than districtsrepresented by M.L.A.s from the opposition party.APPROVAL AND DISTRIBUTION FUNCTIONSThe three school districts also made use ofsupraorganizations such as the Provincial Cabinet andselected Ministries of the Provincial Government. Theseministries were Human Resources, Health, Attorney—General,and Lands, Parks and Housing. Each was perceived to possesscertain kinds of regulatory and distributive authority overresources sought by school districts.The Provincial CabinetThe Cabinet or “Executive Council” of the ProvincialGovernment possessed decision-making authority for theapproval and distribution of certain resources, particularlycapital expenditure funds. It also co—ordinated inter—ministerial policy and planning. School districts recognizedthat the Cabinet alone possessed the delegated legislativeauthority to allocate resources, such as, Crown land andcertain special funds.186Scope of use. The Cabinet was used mostly withrespect to the capital expenditure policy. A Cabinetdecision ultimately was necessary when school districtsapplied for grants of Crown land to be used as buildingsites for educational purposes. Also, Cabinet approval wasrequired for any adjustment in school district boundariesperhaps as a result of changes in bus transportation routesor land acquisition.Certain Cabinet decisions appeared to be of the“housekeeping variety.” One school district, for example,required Cabinet approval for the granting of an easement toa municipality over a school site. Another district requiredCabinet approval for the leasing of school district propertyto the local municipality. These, and other Cabinetdecisions referring to capital expenditure, were affirmedthrough “Orders—in—Council” signed by the Lieutenant-Governor. The secretary—treasurer in one school districtinterpreted the role of Cabinet this way:A number of preliminary steps must be satisfiedbefore matters go to Cabinet. These usuallyinvolve obtaining the approval of the Minister ofEducation and his officials. I advise the board ofan appropriate course of action and they do theirpart. The school board, for example, must firstrequest consideration of the matter by theMinister of Education through a resolution.Afterwards, the Minister of Education may discussthe matter directly with another Cabinet colleagueor Ministry affected by the issue. Finally, theCabinet considers the item along with arecommendation from the Minister of Education foracceptance or rejection.187(Interview with Secretary-Treasurer,Coast School District)School district applications for land were notalways processed routinely. The Chairman of the Board in onedistrict recounted an incident where his district and theMinistry of Health wanted the same property. Immediatelyupon the allocation of the property to the Ministry ofHealth by Cabinet, the school board undertook the followingaction in protest:A motion was made (carried) that the Board send aletter to Premier Bennett, opposing in thestrongest way the action of Mr. Neilson, Ministerof Health, in regards to the allocation of theElbow Lake property and the fact that the Boardwas assured that Cabinet would consider all pointsof view.(Minutes of the Island School Board)School districts mainly used the Cabinet as a meansof obtaining approval neccesitated by statutory regulations.The composition of the Cabinet was a factor. A seniortrustee volunteered this observation:I have sympathy for the Minister of Education inCabinet meetings. Those closer to power inVictoria tell me that other Cabinet Ministers havea tendency to pick on the Education Minister.Several Ministers have more influence. TheMinister of Finance and the Minister ofTransportation and Highways are much morepowerful. They get their way because it seems thatCabinet makes many more decisions on matters likehighways than education. There is a lot of infighting among Cabinet Ministers. The Minister188just isn’t powerful enough among his colleagues.The Minister does his fighting in public withschool districts rather than in the Cabinet whereit really counts.(Interview with Senior Trustee,Island School District)Direct communciation with the Premier and Cabinetwas an option when school districts perceived theirinterests to be at stake. A district official, well—experienced with capital expenditure proposals and on theverge of retirement, provided this description of thevolatility of the capital expenditure process:We apply to the Facilities Division of theMinistry of Education in the usual manner. Schoolbuildings need a new roof from time to time. Oldbuildings require greater maintenanceexpenditures. We are constantly having to upgradethem to meet municipal, and fire safety standards.Changes in school programmes and equipment alsomight require us to make modifications in spaceand building design. ... The Ministry of Educationis not the final authority. Real power is in thehands of the Treasury Board and the Cabinet!Trustees are capable of obtaining meetings withCabinet Ministers other than the Minister ofEducation. Sometimes our capital proposals becomecaught up in the politics practised by members ofthe school board and politicians at the provinciallevel. Political activity, however, has not alwayshelped us. Sometimes it pays to keep politics outof it.(Interview with the Assistant Secretary—Treasurer,Coast School District)The school district officials and trustees alsoappeared to understand the key role played by committees ofCabinet such as Treasury Board and Social Services. TheCDD)00CDJ‘CI0Cl,‘tjc-I-U)--IIMi3CD0)C)iiH00iIi-’-‘(5iQ‘(5CD0U)‘<‘1IU)0)C)‘t3CDF’00U)CDc-I-1.1)I-.c-I-0F’ICDZ0)U)XciCZ‘1‘-t0ciIcn110,0’-300CDS‘100)C)i-•0)itCDf—’0,fit‘i0)C5c-I-00)‘-‘L’J05‘1CDf’iCDU)CDCD‘CI0CI’CDCDF’0’it5‘<0,U)$10’0’0CD‘1Cn0CD•U)ICI)CD‘-3F’‘1Cl)-C)’QiU)10U)HU)0c-I-0CflI-0U)0,iti-’.10c-I-itCDHi0MictiMici0)U)Mi00‘-•‘I(5’)CDit1(l)MiHiU)‘-‘U(l)Li.(5’c-I-U)0‘-<0:iC)’‘iU)trc-I-0ciCDC)flitU)itMii-’-•CD0‘10)‘1it‘150)c-I-rii-’CD‘1c-I-CD)I—’00U)U)U)‘-‘0)5CI’U)<‘.0‘-‘TI0CMiU)0U)0‘-‘•0)CD0c-I-CDCDit‘10‘.0,-‘•C00’itO5‘1it‘10I—’)‘U)50iti-’r-’CDct-Mi0)CD—CDU)—c-I-CD<Cit0)I-h0)0CDc-I-c-I-CD:iI—’03U)0U)0)CDF’itU)0Z‘.<*t-t’CD•Ct-’-CD‘-I‘-‘0‘-i0itCCD)‘CD0CDU)0)•0LJCD0CCD0‘1r-’‘.000)0,c-I-CD0,Mi0)i0’500)••50‘-‘-I—’U)0)1-1ZJci0Z05CD‘U),.QMiI-”XitCD0‘10’0CDC)F’0’C00Cci0U)0)CDMiU)IDitit0)i-’-ii-’•‘-1c-I-50c-I-—‘1it0)CD0)0)itU)0CDU)0)0’U)C‘-“‘ti(1)CDitU)F’U).ititU)0I-’•C)‘10CCitMiCD(DOF’<‘-105C):iU)bCU)I—’C‘-<CD‘-CDi-’•CD‘.00CD-.CDF’CDF’‘-<I-I000)iF’it)i0U)U)0’F’0)fl‘C)it00’CDI—’0-<jCDU)U)CDri0U)Eit0.’U)0))U)CDCD00)0’C)’it‘-0CDU)0Z‘1CU)‘-‘S<itci5‘(3CDMiitI-IU)0)c-I-U)CDitO)itC)’0)0)0)0it‘-‘(I)F’U)(I)001—’riU)itI-”I-’-CD0)‘1Z‘.0XMi0CD0)‘-<r‘-<)‘itU)<I-’.it‘1i.’.ID:-C)(5’‘TI0•CDCD0)00)ID5‘-cz0CD‘(5CD‘CIC)’(10I-’.c-I-I-’-iti-’CDCD00‘-I(0CDit‘-3U)‘1‘C)F’U))I-’.(1)U)F’CD0.’ID)‘it5‘-‘•CDrp)•CD0it00U)U)CD)‘0):ic-I-0(5’-IMiC(1,b-’.CDc-I-CDc-I-r-•CDCD‘.0I-’‘1H0U)CDitU)‘1ri‘1Ct)C•)0U))c-I-CDc-I-Mip.’.Cl)itCD-‘•0)‘rj*)‘CDc-I-U)CC‘tiZ‘‘0)5U)0‘-‘SU)‘1itMi0,ICDc-I-•‘-<S-c-I-‘C)F’itF’F-’()CDQ‘1CDCD0CD‘-‘S0Mi5fl)‘_....‘10Z‘C)CD0C)‘1it(DCit)(0<MiitCDiI-’-<‘1CD‘-‘U)C)—U)U)‘.0ZCDU0)‘1itU)0)•CD)•ID0iCDI—’U)-‘C)F’U)•I-’-C)’CDitF’C0it-.‘-‘(5U)MiI-’0)5F’0N‘-3CD‘-3c-I-0)000‘<0)00)CD0CD)‘0‘-ICD0)riMiZU))‘1F’0’F’0,CDitCD‘-<it1 90there is a great deal of dialogue taking placewith this Ministry. However, we find HumanResources very cumbersome to deal with. ... In asense, we are caught up in a bureaucratic processwith them.(Interview with the Superintendentof Schools, Port School District)Nevertheless, school trustees and central officeofficials appreciated the services offered by the Ministryof Human Resources. One supervisor of Special Services notedthat:The Ministry of Human Resources operates undervery difficult circumstances. We find, however,that when our proposals for funding are welljustified, it comes through with assistance.Justification and documentation are important. Ofcourse, we alert the Ministry of Educationofficials first before sending off our proposalsfor funding to Human Resources. It pays off sincethe Education Ministry often advises us how toframe our proposals for greater acceptability bythe Human Resources Ministry. Without assistancefrom the Ministry of Human Resources, the districtwould have been unable to hire personal attendantsfor handicapped children, who required them forassistance with medication, washrooms and thehandling of classroom materials.(Interview with Supervisorof Special Services, Coast School District)The school districts employed the services of thelocal Inter—Ministry Children’s Committee to assist in the“justification” or screening of certain handicapped studentsunder the “CHANCE” programme. School district personnelappeared to foster close liaison with the designated191Ministry of Human Resources representative on the Inter-Ministry Children’s Committee. This interaction appeared tofacilitate the processing of school district proposals.Ministry of HealthThis Ministry maintained a professional interest inthe rehabilitation of physically and mentally handicappedchildren. School districts availed themselves of healthservices offered by this Ministry through various RegionalMinistry of Health Centres, mainly regional mental healthcentres.Scope of use. The school districts used the Ministryof Health exclusively with respect to the integrationpolicy. The services required were mostly clinical in type.These services appeared to complement other forms ofassistance acquired through local and regional agencies suchas the Inter—Ministry Children’s Committee. The inter-organizational nature of these services appeared to requireadept co—ordination by the school districts.The information supplied by the Ministry of Healthenabled the school districts “to compile a case” for specialfunding from the Ministry of Education and the Ministry ofHuman Resources. The school districts apparently werereluctant to leave the matter solely in the hands of theEducation Ministry. The need for detailed documentation and1 92time constraints, as well as the special circumstances ofindividual students, appeared to compel the districts to actunilaterally.A senior trustee related that the Health Ministryassisted in resolving the following predicament:A group of parents in the school district who weredemanding speech therapists for their childrenbecame quite a pressure group. The Ministry ofHealth took notice and finally provided the meansfor hiring a therapist. The Health Ministry looksat our proposals seriously, since they know thatwe have quite a ‘special education empire’ here.Our special education people are very adept atdiscussing financial matters.(Interview with Senior Trustee,Island School District)District officials confided that reorganization ofthe Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Healthappeared to interfere with the processing of applicationsfor special education funding. These unanticipated eventswere intervening factors which may have been partiallyresponsible for delays encountered at the local Inter-Ministry Children’s Committee level. In turn, these factorsmay have been responsible for the school districts’ choosingto communicate directly with the Ministry of Health inVictoria. The resulting interaction involved “the programmepeople” at the Ministry of Health and the supervisor ofspecial services in each school district. The following typeof problem, told by one supervisor of special services,QjflU)0)CDICD00ctII....CDcrt‘ti<1jC)c‘i‘-iCDCDoi-•)CDC)ZIU)U)C)C)(D‘rJçi<0—OZO0.U)ct0H-I-U)rtrt‘--CDIiiI-hi-Ifr,CD(DZ0(D30CDH(DHrtrtt7H.‘-“0(DctQ.<C)a)C40MiUi‘-Cl)ct‘ZU)U)U)H-U)11H-I-0CD0)0)‘10‘CD(DCflU)rIH-.H-flD1H-Q,rtU)0)CDH-H-I-h(D0)P3U)çH.Q0jrtZH-HCDCDU)rtU)C)<(DO)0-,U)0‘tIH-H-rtH-CDU)C<ZC-jH-U)HQjQjCt0P)CDC)CDdMiP3a.Qd-P)(DU)’-’-‘1(1I—-,rU)H-I—’CDF—1CD.CDP3H-H-CflrtCflWHCDP3rt)H-P3,-‘-P)tP3U)I-C)F-’0JH-r1-rtO‘10)C)C)ct1U)0P3I—’3(D)0U)ctCDLZJC)I-i-’-rti-’-etCDH-U,Ii0)‘-0O0‘-‘-0..C)CDC)CCDCDCl)rtrtC)’OZMittH-rtM’<0fl(DJCt)0..Cl)‘1rt0<tJC)0C(DQiC7IH-P30(t)H-CD•U)‘1‘1H-rtW<U)i-’1I1rt-U)rtU)C)0H-C)Cf)CDP)ctCDrt0tI:.U)0I-liZrt-CDCDCflZ<P)U)1I-hCrtCDCD.0)Z‘.QU)’tI0CDCD<0rtctCDP3CDH-CD00..I—CD-c-tI-C0JCDcCDI-’U)Zrt‘-1U)<<H-C)‘1‘lOMi’-’•Cl)H-CD)U)CDrt(DP)C‘CDCDCD0..CD‘—<OP)OOct’-’C)0(1P3CDCD1)tYH-U)CDU)‘1IIU)H-rtP1ct’rjP)P3rtl-hH-P3CD-‘<U)C)‘t30)c-tiCDl—’U)0CDCD’-<o’tj’t3CDCflU)t-0P3CD‘1H-‘10)0U)‘tIH--<‘TjU)CD0P)rtC)XC)-tCDt00)0U)CDCtH-rt1U)CYCDC3’0CDI-liZHrt-i-’-c-tH-.Qçt0..rtc’tjZCDZI0.OCDCDP)C)(DZC)rt0ZC)CDZCDP)’1LQCDP)rtP)I—’U)H-•P)OrtH—H-CU)rrCi)CDC)tYrC)-h’-’-P30C)ZP)‘-<U)0I-Cl)‘0)C)ZH-i--’P)-rt-C)-’’-hP3rtCD—’0rti—h0)—CD‘C,CDP3CDZCD0JZCDU)Z0JZCU)c‘1‘1‘C,0‘ICDI-’U)OcQ..U)0rU)00.,CD0ZCDZZ‘-<H-CD0CDO..I—’CP)‘tIH-ZrtCDC)Z-LO‘Zjrtt30)I—’Q..U)0Zrrt0ZH-ctCDC)U)IIH-‘ctI-CDQH-CDCDOOM,L.QZQJtZP)rtToo’0ZCDCDctc-ti.QCD’-<cti.QMiLOCDH-rtrtrtCDI-hCl‘-0H-H-P)0c•CDi-HU)ZZ-CD(DClI-CI-hIIU)11CtU)‘CiH-0..0)Q..WC)P3CtLOCD’-<ZCDCDH-0)CtU)0)0CtCDct’tjrtZC)’r3CDSH-U)t-’U)P3OZOIIC)ct‘-10’-<tfl0’tIP3P3H-•-CtM,0..i-’•‘-<H•H-•CDCDCtI-’CDI-’H-“r0H-,1-IU)CDU)CD00tYC)ZP3rIOH-U)ZCDL’iZI-ICt0)0ZCDCtCtrt-U)P3ZP)CD0JP3U)CDU)F-H-.0i-ICDCDOiOI-’ZZC<0CD1CDi-iZ0)ZCP3U)U)tT‘10CDCDP3C)CDi--hCDCDP3X”CD(V0)ZH-Zi-’-CD(DMiI-hP3rtOP)Cl‘1C)0..CD0’0..C)U)I-rtZ0U)P)H-ill..ctC,CflI-hHrt0..‘riH-CDCt‘H<H-QjCtCDH-CDH-CDp3riCtU)0Cl)C)Z‘IH-ZCDP3H-C)Z10CD--’Ct0LQ••U)Ct0)C-t‘<U)P)LQ’1rtZZ-’CDrCDZZZC0ICDU)‘tJl‘-CH-H-H-0)U)Zi-3bC)Ct10ZI-’CtC))I—’0)CDCDU)I—’‘<()194result, the school districts attempted to extend the scopeof this Ministry’s mandate.Scope of use. One school district appeared to make aconcerted attempt to include juvenile offenders under theintegration policy of the Ministry of Education. Thedistrict was experiencing an unusually high number ofstudents who were troublesome in schools. Teachers wereinsisting that the board take remedial action.Certain juvenile offenders, for example, were beingaccompanied to and from school by adult aides under thedirection of the Ministry of the Attorney—General. Thesestudents appeared to be have severe behavioural problems.District officials, therefore, attempted to have the dutiesof these adult aides extended to include classroom hours. Anoffical provided this rationale:Some behaviourally-impaired students require‘keepers’ to help them settle down. Ideally theyshould be with the kids all the time, inside theclassroom and outside, on eight hour shifts. Theseaides should be paid through the Attorney-General’s Ministry, or the Ministry of HumanResources. We know that funding is availablethrough special programmes such as S.W.A.P.(Secondary Work Activity Program). Some projectsare receiving funding in the areas of drug abuseand alcohol rehabilitation. The district isendeavouring to obtain funding also.(Interview with the Assistant Superintendent,Port School District)School trustees concurred with district officials1 95and teaching staff that “young offenders” should qualify as“exceptional students.” Trustees, therefore, instructeddistrict personnel to investigate the possibility of fundingand manpower assistance from the Ministry of the Attorney-General. Pursuit of the matter involved discussions with theSpecial Services Division of the Ministry of Education, theMinistry of Human Resources and the Ministry of Education.This particular initiative appeared to be undertakenunilaterally; that is, without the support of the BritishColumbia School Trustees Association or Members of theLegislative Assembly.Ministry of Lands, Parks and HousingThis Ministry was used exclusively with respect tothe capital expenditure policy. It administered theallocation of Crown land to school districts for educationalpurposes. No cost-sharing was involved, as the Crown landwas normally provided free of charge. The Ministry of Lands,Parks and Housing undertook the processing of a schooldistrict’s application in conjunction with other provincialauthorities.Scope of use. One school district was compelled tointeract with the Ministry of Lands, Parks and Housingbecause of an unanticipated increase in potential students.Plans for the development of several subdivisions of single196family dwellings were proceeding rapidly through the localMunicipal Advisory Planning Committee. This course of eventsstimulated the school district to initiate discussions withthe regional office of the Ministry of Lands, Parks andHousing in respect to possible school sites. During thesediscussions, the school district passed the following Boardresolution:A motion was made (carried) that the Board addressa letter to the Minister of Education registeringits interest in the property and advising theMinistry that the Board is taking the initiativein discussing the matter with other agencies.(Minutes of Island School Board)Use of the Ministry of Lands, Parks and Housingappeared to precede communication with the EducationMinistry and the Cabinet. The Ministry of Transportation andHighways also became involved, since this particularMinistry owned part of the land desired by the schooldistrict. The school district, however, elected first to usegovernment agencies other than the Ministry of Education forobtaining Crown Land.SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONSummary observations are presented with respect toapplicable research questions. Additionally, usingtheoretical perspectives, certain concluding remarks are1 97provided and speculation advanced to further explain the useof supraorganizations as a political response.Identification of Operational CharacteristicsDid the three school districts usesupraorganizations? Yes, they were employed by each districtfor both policy types. Although there were certainexceptions, the number and kinds of supraorganizations usedwere generally similar [see Appendix P-li.Certain supraorganizations may be considered to be“superior” to school districts in some respects. Forexample, they control and dispense certain resources crucialto district operations. Milstein (1976:83) notes that“relevant environmental organizations” can be grouped intothree sets: those superior in the line of authority, thosesubordinate in the line of authority and those outside theline of authority. School districts, as subordinateorganizations, must comply with the statutory authorityaccorded to supraorganizations “superior in the line ofauthority”; such as, the Cabinet and various Ministries ofthe Provincial Government.Sergiovanni, Burlingame, Combs and Thurston(1980:149) observe that while authority has shifted inrecent years toward the senior level of government, localschool districts still retain sufficient discretion todramatically shape educational programmes. The three school1 98districts used “organizations outside of the line ofauthority,” such as, the British Columbia School TrusteesAssociation and Opposition Party M.L.A.s, to influenceprovincial authorities, and to assist in the formulation ofconditions for local compliance.The data indicated that school districts usedsupraorganizations as a necessary means of adapting toenvironmental demands. Hanson (1979:162), for example, notesthat an organization, as well as the web of organizationsinterlocking with it, must acquire enough stability topromote an equilibrium which permits planned and predictablepatterns and exchanges to take place. Supraorganizationsprovided support. The three school districts attempted toavail themselves of the opportunities afforded bysupraorganizations to assure an equilibrium in the provisionof local services.Operational CharacteristicsThe operational characteristics basically consist oftwo features: supraorganizations were used forrepresentation and intervention, and supraorganizations wererequired for project approval and the distribution orallocation of resources. The attributes and examples ofintergovernmental linkages associated with these featuresconstitute the operational characteristics of making use ofa supraorganization as a political response. A simplified199classification is outlined in Figure 8.The School districts used supraorganizations torepresent local interests to the Provincial Government. Fromtime to time, they also intervened at the request of localauthorities to assist in the resolution of intergovernmentalissues. Three supraorganizations were used in theserespects: the Inter—Ministry Children’s Committee, theBritish Columbia School Trustees Association, and theLegislative Assembly. Use of the Inter—Ministry Children’sCommittee was much more limited in scope than use of theother two supraorganizations.Moreover, the processing and ultimate approval ofplanned district projects also necessitated the use of othersupraorganizations. These were “superior in the line ofauthority”, and distinct branches of the ProvincialGovernment. These supraorganizations possessed the requisitestatutory authority to finalize school district plans. Sincedistrict programmes affected a number of Ministries,supraorganizations also coordinated district applicationsfor resources at the provincial level. Thesesupraorganizations were the Cabinet, Ministry of HumanResources, Ministry of Health, Ministry of the AttorneyGeneral, and the Ministry of Lands, Parks and Housing. TheCabinet and the Ministry of Lands, Parks and Housingappeared to be mainly used in respect to the capitalexpenditure policy.FEATURESOFMAKINGUSEOFASUPRAORGANIZATIONASAPOLITICALRESPONSEATTRIBUTESOFMAKINGUSEOFASUPRA—ORGANIZATIONREPRESENTATIONANDINTERVENTIONFUNCTIONSoTHEINTER-MINISTRYCHILDREN’SCOMMI TTEE(ieinformationalandadjudicativeservice;limitedassistancewithintergovernmentalcommunication)oTHEBRITISHCOLUMBIASCHOOLTRUSTEESASSOCIATION(iemonitoredcontentiouscasesinschooldistricts;providedaccesstolegalopinions;mediatedissues)oTHELEGISLATIVEASSEMBLY(ieprimarilyOppositionPartyM.L.A.s;partyaffiliationofBoardisimportantfactor)APPROVALANDDISTRIBUTIONFUNCTIONSoTHEPROVINCIALCATIINET(ieCrownland,appealbody,)oTHEMINISTRYOFHUMANRESOURCES(iefundingforspecialaides)oTHEMINISTRYOFHEALTH(iefundingforspecialequipment)oTHEMINISTRYOFTHEATTORNEYGENERAL(iefundingforspecialaides)oTHEMINISTRYOFLANDS,PARKS&HOUSING(ieCrownlandapplications,alsowithMinistryofTransportation&Highways)Figure8FeaturesandAttributesofMakingUseofaSupraorganizationt’3 cD201The findings indicated also that somesupraorganizations were used to influence otherorganizations “superior in the line of authority.” Forexample, the districts tried to use supraorganizations ofthe Provincial Government such as the Ministry of Lands,Parks and Housing, and the Cabinet to influence the Ministryof Education. Correspondingly, the Ministry of Education wasused by school districts to influence other Ministries,especially Human Resources. There appeared to be a networkof supraorganizations.Use of supraorganizations suggests that theoperational characteristics of this political response werehighly interrelated in practice. The variables of policy andschool district type serve as a further basis for discussingoperational characteristics.Regulatory policy characteristics. The operationalcharacteristics of using a supraorganization for theintegration policy are presented according to schooldistrict type in Appendix P-2. The predominant linkages orcharacteristic actions were as follows: the initiation ofspecial programmes for selected types of handicappedchildren in school districts, clarification sought ofMinistry of Education policy through M.L.A.s and theB.C.S.T.A., and the procurement of special aides through theHuman Resources Ministry.202Distributive policy characteristics. The operationalcharacteristics of using a supraorganization for the capitalexpenditure policy are presented in Appendix P—3. Thepredominant linkages or characteristic actions were asfollows: local board resolutions forwarded to the Ministrythrough B.C.S.T.A., the monitoring of Cabinet financialallocations pertaining to local capital projects, and theinitiation of local district proposals through ProvincialGovernment agencies, such as, the Ministry of Lands, Parksand Housing, prior to consultation with the EducationMinistry.Comparison of Operational CharacteristicsDid operational characteristics differ? Yes,differences in kind and number were discerned with respectto individual policy types and between policy types.Operational characteristics for the integrationpolicy differed according to school district type. The mostobvious difference occurred in respect of the partisanmetropolitan school district (Coast). This district usedMembers of the Legislative Assembly as an intergovernmentallinkage in a more concentrated and proactive manner forregulatory policy than did the other districts.Operational characteristics for distributive policyalso differed according to school district. This differencewas due primarily to the concentrated use of B.C.S.T.A. and203the Ministry of Lands, Parks and Housing by the non-partisanand non-metropolitan school district (Island).Appendix P—4 provides a profile of differencesaccording to the concentration or focus of intergovernmentallinkages with respect to features and correspondingattributes. The partisan metropolitan school district(Coast) displayed the most concentrated use of operationalcharacteristics for regulatory policy. Concentration of usewith respect to distributive policy was displayed most bythe non—partisan and non—metropolitan school district(Island).Certain general observations accrue from theoperational characteristics. These observations aresummarized in Appendix P-5. For example, all three schooldistricts used the local Inter—Ministry Children’sCommittee. Use of the Regional I.M.C.C. was less evident.The effectiveness of M.L.A.s appeared to be associated withtheir role as members of the Opposition Party in theLegislature. The Cabinet, on the other hand, was perceivedto be the chief agency for allocation, the central means ofcoordinating other supraorganizations of the ProvincialGovernment, and the prime target for appeals by schooldistricts as a result of Ministerial actions.After identifying the supraorganizations used by theschool districts, it was noticed that there appeared to be astatutory basis for using supraorganizations. The statutory204basis underlining the use of B.C.S.T.A. and M.L.A.s, forexample, has already been outlined in Appendix N.The operational characteristics of using asupraorganization and associated observations, moreover,serve as a basis for certain conclusions and relatedspeculation.ConclusionsThe findings suggest two general conclusions aboutthe use of supraorganizations as a political response.Firstly, the three school districts appeared to be dependentupon a network of supraorganizations. Use of this networkappeared to be already well established prior to thepromulgation of the two policies.Supraorganizations in the network were few