Overcoming Misinformation and Disinformation During a School Bond Election: A Case Study

Background: When it comes to clear guidance or research on what steps school district leaders can take to educate their voters in an era of misinformation and disinformation, there is little available. Most recent research on misinformation and disinformation is focused on health and political topics resulting in a lack of scholarly and practitioner-oriented knowledgebases concerning district leaders' best practices. Purpose: The purpose of this study was twofold: 1) to examine the steps taken by district level leaders to overcome misinformation and disinformation campaigns within the community during a bond referendum, and 2) to determine best practices for district-level leaders to communicate effectively with district stakeholders. Three questions guided my research: What are the sources and nature of non-district provided information made available in the community?; What specific actions, if any, did district leaders take to combat misinformation and disinformation?; and What best practices do district leaders recommend for combatting misinformation and disinformation through formal information channels? Method: I used a qualitative case-study approach to answer these questions as they relate to two 2019 bond referendum experiences in the case-study district drawing upon methods including but not limited to document analysis and interviews. I answered my second and third research questions using first-hand accounts of leaders during this time. I analyzed digital and print artifacts along with the interviews to identify the frequency of variables chosen from the Truth Decay framework. Results: Through my research, I learned district leaders took many actions to combat misinformation and disinformation during the bond referendums with ‘decentralize communication,’ ‘less is more,’ ‘if you’re not first, you’re last,’ and ‘utilize all resources’ emerging as themes. District leaders shared lessons learned with the themes ‘be authentic,’ ‘speak with a unified voice,’ ‘make personal connections, and ‘create structure’ emerging. I also provide suggestions for enhanced consideration of educational entities in the Truth Decay framework. Conclusion: There will always be disagreement, contention, and voices longing to be heard and validated. Among all the lessons learned, making personal connections is one of the most resounding in this case study.

Name thesis:degree_name

Doctor of Education

Level thesis:degree_level

Doctoral

Discipline thesis:degree_discipline

Professional Leadership, Education

Grantor

University of Houston

Year dc:date.issued

2024

Author dc:creator

• Blakelock, Sarah

Advisor dc:contributor.advisor

• Davis, Bradley

Committee members dc:contributor.committeemember

• Butcher, Keith
• Klussmann, Duncan
• Medford, Bethany

• misinformation
• disinformation
• bond referendum
• bond election
• public school
• communication

Language dc:language.iso

en

Handle dc:identifier.uri

https://hdl.handle.net/10657/17707

OAI identifier oai:identifier

oai:uh-ir.tdl.org:10657/17707