Leading Public Education Through Governance Pressure

"Well, do you know what a trustee is? Do you know what a trustee does? … Nobody knows what we do. We have to spend more time showing people what we do." (Sherri Moore, Thames Valley District School Board (TVDSB) Trustee, October 2025)

Why Trustees Matter

When Sherri Moore asks people whether they know what a school board trustee does, she is usually met with puzzled expressions. Despite overseeing billions of dollars in public education spending, hiring the Director of Education, approving budgets, setting strategic priorities, and representing communities across Ontario, school board trustees remain among the least understood elected officials in Canadian politics. That lack of public awareness has become increasingly significant as provincial governments question the necessity of locally elected trustees, centralize decision-making, and portray school boards as inefficient or unnecessary layers of governance.

For Moore, these debates are about far more than administrative efficiency. They raise fundamental questions about democratic accountability, local representation, and who should have a voice in shaping public education. Throughout our interview, Moore returns repeatedly to the idea that trustees exist to ensure public education remains accountable to the communities it serves. Her leadership illustrates the continued relevance of trusteeship in navigating increasingly complex educational systems, demonstrating how service-oriented, evidence-informed, and equity-driven governance can sustain democratic accountability, community trust, and student wellbeing amid growing pressures to centralize educational authority.

Governing Through Local Democracy

School board trustees occupy a unique position within Ontario's education system. Unlike principals or directors of education, they do not manage schools directly. Instead, trustees provide democratic oversight by hiring and evaluating the Director of Education, approving policies and budgets, and ensuring that educational priorities reflect the needs of their communities rather than solely the priorities of the provincial government.

As Moore explains,

You as a community member get to elect a person to sit on the school board whose responsibility is to manage a single employee, which is the Director of Education. That ensures that your Director of Education … is accountable to the community, not just accountable to the Ministry of Education, who isn't centered in the local community and the different geographical experiences and the socioeconomic experiences across the entire province. It only makes sense that those decisions stay in your community.

This distinction is central to Moore's understanding of governance. Trustees are not simply advisors or ceremonial representatives; they are the mechanism through which local communities exercise democratic oversight over one of Canada's largest public institutions.

The school board allows that sort of connection to your community that overlaps into politics, and … you can make a difference in how things happen… regardless of how much experience you have going into it, you certainly do come out of it with a lot of experience in leadership and governance.

Educational governance scholars make a similar argument. Katina Pollock (2023) argues that meaningful public education depends upon citizens having opportunities to participate in decision-making. Local trustees provide that democratic connection, ensuring that public education remains accountable not only to provincial ministries but also to the families and communities schools are intended to serve.

Governing Under Pressure

Moore's defence of trusteeship has become increasingly urgent as Ontario has moved toward greater provincial oversight of school boards. During our interview, she described the extraordinary circumstances facing the Thames Valley District School Board while it operated under provincial supervision.

The Thames Valley District School Board is currently under supervision. It's quite a hostile environment for us with the province right now. The Minister of Education is currently working to pass Bill 33, which looks like that's going to be a reality as of Monday. … [T]he Ministry of Education, the province, wants the power to be able to take over a school board at any time [instead of needing to prove financial mismanagement] … They took us over, and instead of working with trustees to solve the problems that are happening at the board, they've taken away the honorarium of Trustees. We are not meeting anymore. We're not allowed to communicate with the public. Our files have been removed. Our email access has been removed. All that appears very punitive and doesn't make a lot of sense to all of us. There hasn't been a lot of conversation about it. It's just been, this is what we're doing, and since then, it's happened with three or four other boards, and it's clear that this is serious. It is impacting how your local democracy will operate.

For Moore, the issue extends beyond any individual dispute with the province. She argues that reducing the role of elected trustees weakens democratic governance itself by limiting opportunities for local communities to participate in educational decision-making. She highlighted the importance of separating the problems at TVDSB with the way supervision is being managed, noting that when supervision has occurred with various boards in the past, the trustees were never removed from their roles. Regardless of whether supervision was required or not in this case, she states that the removal of elected officials is unprecedented and she finds if very alarming.

As she observes,

Just because you agree with the outcome doesn't mean that the process isn't problematic, and the process is really problematic.

This distinction is significant. Democratic governance depends not only on policy outcomes but also on transparent and accountable decision-making processes. Moore's leadership therefore focuses as much on defending the integrity of democratic institutions as on advancing particular educational policies.

Trusteeship as Public Service

Throughout our conversation, Moore consistently describes trusteeship as an act of public service rather than political authority. She rejects the common perception that trustees seek office for prestige or financial reward, emphasizing instead the considerable personal commitment required by the role.

I have yet to meet a trustee who's doing it for the money… We're doing it because we care… [during supervision, some local trustees are] putting on town halls… we're having virtual meetings… we've got a website set up… we are doing this out of pocket because we are scared about what is going to happen if we don't fight back…

Her understanding of leadership reflects a broader tradition of public service in which elected office is grounded in responsibility to others rather than personal ambition. Leadership is measured through accessibility, listening, responsiveness, and sustained engagement with community concerns.

As Linda Steel of the London Catholic School Board describes it,

Trustees are supposed to operate at a high level and not get into the operations of the school board… our biggest things are setting policy… setting the budget… but what we do most of the time is advocate for our communities (Steel, October 2025).

Moore's commitment to service is also informed by lived experience. Years of advocating for her own children within the Thames Valley District School Board gave her firsthand knowledge of special education, alternative programming, transportation, and the everyday realities families navigate within public education. Rather than distancing herself from those experiences, she draws upon them to inform governance decisions that remain attentive to the diverse needs of students and parents.

Governing Through Evidence

Service alone, however, is not sufficient. Moore repeatedly emphasizes that effective governance requires careful attention to evidence, policy, and accountability.

If you look at the pie chart of where all the money goes for school boards, it is almost exclusively in paying the people who teach and clean and support our students. And you know, the other money is just not enough. We can take away [all the financial decisions approved by trustees], and it's not going to fix [the board’s structural deficit]. If the government will not provide enough money to educate each student, it doesn't matter what we do. We can't make something out of nothing.

Her background in higher education governance shapes a leadership style grounded in asking difficult questions, examining evidence, and evaluating whether policy reforms achieve their stated objectives. Rather than accepting change simply because it originates from government, Moore insists that educational policies should ultimately be judged by whether they improve student achievement and well-being.

Research on educational leadership supports this approach. Kenneth Leithwood (2021) argues that effective educational leadership requires adapting governance to changing local conditions while maintaining a clear focus on student outcomes. Similarly, research commissioned by the Canadian School Boards Association concludes that strong elected governance contributes positively to student achievement by strengthening accountability and community responsiveness (Overgaard 2019).

Governing for Students

Throughout the interview, Moore consistently returns to the experiences of students themselves. Questions of governance, budgets, and policy matter because they shape students' daily lives – and their futures.

Her longstanding work in special education advocacy, disability organizations, and equity initiatives has reinforced the importance of creating schools where every student feels safe, supported, and included. Whether discussing mental health supports, protections against discrimination, or inclusive educational programming, Moore understands governance as creating the conditions under which students can flourish.

We have parent involvement committees. And if you talk to anybody who's on a school council or home and school association…, they're not able to make much of an impact. They provide advice which can be taken or ignored, whereas when the trustees speak, they have to listen.

This perspective challenges assumptions that trustees operate too far removed from classrooms to influence student wellbeing. Moore instead demonstrates that governance decisions establish the policies, resources, and priorities that ultimately shape students' educational experiences.

Trusteeship as a Pathway to Political Leadership

Moore argues that weakening school board governance has consequences extending well beyond education policy. Historically, trusteeship has served as one of Canada's most important entry points into elected office, providing practical experience in governance, budgeting, public accountability, and community leadership. For many women, it has also offered an accessible first step into political life.

Reflecting on that history, Moore points to a long list of political leaders who began as school trustees:

If you look at historically in Canada… Kathleen Wynne… a former trustee… Marit Stiles… was a trustee… Olivia Chow… Trustee, Peggy [Sattler]… Corinne Rahman… we have many MPPs and MPs [who were trustees first]… and it certainly feels like [the Minister of Education’s threat to eliminate the role of trustees altogether] will wipe out some opportunities for women…

The list extends even further. Canada's first female Prime Minister, Kim Campbell, also began her political career as a school trustee. Far from being a minor elected office, trusteeship has long served as a training ground where future political leaders develop the skills and experience needed to govern.

Yet Moore is less interested in celebrating prominent political careers than in encouraging the next generation to see themselves as potential leaders. Reflecting on her own reluctance to enter politics, she offers a message she now shares with students:

When I go to speak to students, elementary students or high school students, the one thing I say is don't … think that it's a different kind of person that runs for office. If you care about your community and you want to represent your community's best interests, run for office, whether it's school board or municipal government or MPP, whatever it is; there's nothing that's stopping you from being the person who can run and can make a difference.

For Moore, defending trusteeship is therefore about more than preserving one level of government. It is about ensuring that democratic institutions continue to provide opportunities for ordinary citizens — particularly women — to discover their capacity for public leadership. Weakening trusteeship risks narrowing not only democratic participation today, but also the diversity and experience of tomorrow's political leaders.

Conclusion

When Sherri Moore asks people whether they know what a trustee does, she is really asking a much larger question about democratic governance itself.

Her leadership reminds us that trustees are far more than administrative overseers. They are elected representatives who ensure that public education remains accountable to the communities it serves. Through service-oriented leadership, evidence-informed decision-making, and an unwavering commitment to equity and public participation, Moore demonstrates that trusteeship continues to play a vital role in sustaining democratic governance within Ontario's education system.

At a time when educational authority is becoming increasingly centralized, Moore's leadership offers a compelling reminder that effective public institutions depend not only upon efficient administration but also upon meaningful democratic representation. Trustees remain the vital link between provincial policy, local communities, and the everyday experiences of students and families. In defending that role, Moore is ultimately defending the democratic foundations of public education itself.

Yet Moore's vision extends beyond preserving one elected office. It is ultimately an invitation to participate in democracy itself. As fellow trustee Linda Steel reminds us, "It's so important that people are out there advocating and running for office for the right reasons." Moore echoes that call with a note of optimism despite the challenges she has described throughout the interview: "The more wonderful people step up and get in, the less ugly it will be. But if we all walk away because it's ugly, it ain't gonna get prettier." Their exchange captures the central lesson of Moore's leadership. Democracy is sustained not by perfect institutions, but by ordinary people who continue to step forward, serve their communities, and believe that public life is worth improving.