Could a Kentucky school council assign individual teachers to classes, or did the principal make those assignments?

Plain-English summary

In 1993, Kentucky's Attorney General drew a line between a school council's policy power and a principal's administrative work. The council could decide how instructional and noninstructional staff time should be used, including rules about class loads, planning periods and additional duties. The principal then implemented that policy by assigning particular employees to students, classes and duties. The council could not use its policy authority to “name names” for those assignments.

The AG relied on the school-based decision-making statute's instruction that the principal implement council policy and serve as the school's primary administrator and instructional leader. The opinion also noted that individual assignments may depend on teacher performance information available to the principal.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1993. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Historical summary

School councils

At the time, the council could adopt general policies governing the assignment of all instructional and noninstructional staff time. The AG described that as a broad managerial role, but said the statute did not require or authorize the council to decide each employee's specific assignment.

Principals

The principal's role was to implement the council's staff-time policy and administer the school day to day. That included assigning individual staff members to particular classes and students. The AG identified teacher evaluations as one possible source of performance information for those decisions.

Teachers and other school staff

The opinion placed the general rules about staff time with the school council and the assignment of named employees with the principal. It did not decide any particular employee's schedule or assignment.

Common questions

Could a Kentucky school council choose which teacher taught a particular class?

The AG said no in 1993. It read the council's power as authority to set assignment policy, with the principal making individual assignments under that policy.

Who decided how many classes teachers would teach or how planning periods would be used?

The opinion treated those as examples of general staff-time policies the council could adopt. The principal would administer the policies for particular staff members.

Why did the AG place named staff assignments with the principal?

The opinion read KRS 160.345 as making the principal the implementer of council policy and the school's primary administrator. It also noted that assigning a teacher to particular students and classes may depend on performance and evaluation information available to the principal.

Background and statutory framework

The Kentucky Department of Education asked whether KRS 160.345(2)(j) let a school council set only general policy about staff time or also make assignments for named individuals. The AG chose the first interpretation. It applied the ordinary meaning of “policy,” cited KRS 446.080(4), and distinguished broad rules of conduct from day-to-day administration. Under its reading of KRS 160.345(2)(c) and (j), the council made the policy and the principal implemented it.

Citations and references

• KRS 160.345(2)(j): school-council policy on staff time and principal implementation.
• KRS 160.345(2)(c): principal's administrative and instructional role.
• KRS 446.080(4) and Green v. Moore, Ky., 135 S.W.2d 682 (1939): ordinary-meaning approach to statutory interpretation.
• State College Education Association v. Pennsylvania Labor Rel. Bd., 306 A.2d 404, 412 (Penn. 1973): description of policy as rules of conduct.
• KRS 156.101 and 704 KAR 3:345: teacher evaluation provisions mentioned in connection with individual assignments.

Source

• Landing page: https://www.ag.ky.gov/Resources/Opinions/Opinions/OAG93-055.htm

Original opinion text

OAG 93-55

July 15, 1993

Hon. Kevin Noland

General Counsel

Office of Legal Services

Kentucky Department of Education

Capital Plaza Tower

Frankfort, KY 40601

Dear Mr. Noland:

As the General Counsel for the Department of Education, you have requested an Attorney General's Opinion to interpret the following provision of KRS 160.345(2)(j):

The school council shall adopt a policy to be implemented by the principal in the following additional areas:

1. . . .

2. Assignment of all instructional and non-instructional staff time . . . .

In your opinion request letter you state there is a lack of clarity and consensus as to the extent of the school council's authority relative to assignment of staff time. You state that one interpretation of this statute is this provision authorizes the school council to set policy relative to the use of staff time during the school day, such as the number of classes teachers will teach, use of planning periods, and policies relative to assignment of additional duties, but not authority to make assignments as to specific individuals. Under this interpretation, the school council sets the policy to be implemented and administered by the principal who assigns specific individual staff.

You state that another interpretation is that this statutory provision authorizes the school council to not only include in its policy general assignment policies, but also to make assignments as to individual staff, i.e., "name names."

It is the opinion of the Attorney General that your first interpretation is correct and that school councils have authority to set policy regarding the assignment of all instructional and non-instructional staff time and the principal is authorized to administer the policy and to make assignments as to individual staff members. Our opinion is based on KRS 160.345, the School-Based Decision Making statute. Specifically, the SBDM statute grants the principal the responsibility to implement school council policies. KRS 160.345(2)(j). This statute clearly provides that the school council is the policy-making arm of the school and the principal shall be the "primary administrator" and the "instructional leader" of the school. KRS 160.345(2)(c).

In interpreting the meaning of the "policy" making power granted to the school council we are guided by the rule of statutory construction that unless there is language in the statute plainly indicating a contrary interpretation, the usual and ordinary meaning of the words will be utilized. KRS 446.080(4). Green v. Moore, Ky., 135 S.W.2d 682 (1939).

Policy matters are generally thought of as "rules of conduct." State College Education Association v. Pennsylvania Labor Rel. Bd., 306 A.2d 404, 412 (Penn. 1973). Policy matters involve managing the affairs of a business and making decisions that determine the direction that the business or operation shall pursue. Id. Thus, the school council is vested with the broader managerial role of determining policy in the area of staff assignments. The school council's duties do not require that the council determine the specific assignments for all staff members. Rather, the statute mandates that the principal must implement the staff assignment policy adopted by the council. KRS 160.345(2)(j).

The distinction between the school council's responsibility to set policy and the principal's duty to administer the policy is legally sound especially in the area of assignment of staff members. Decisions to assign specific teachers to particular students and classes are based on several factors including the performance and effectiveness of the staff. This information may be contained in the evaluations of the teacher and available to the school principal. KRS 156.101; 704 KAR 3:345.

In summary, it is the duty of the principal to handle the day-to-day administration of the school and to follow the policies adopted by the school council. We believe that this division of power between the policy-making and the administrative branches of the school is conducive to the efficient operation of our schools and is legally consistent with the Kentucky Education Reform Act.

Sincerely yours,

CHRIS GORMAN

ATTORNEY GENERAL

Lynne Schroering

Assistant Attorney General