This paper examines the political behavior of local school boards in terms of two models of political governance. The first model discussed is the "sacred vs. secular" model that distinguishes between "sacred" governing bodies that reach consensus in private and generally support the sociocultural status quo and "secular" bodies that make policy decisions in public and generally support sociocultural change. Also discussed is the "elite vs. arena" model that distinguishes between "elite" politicians who consider themselves guardians of the public and typically make policy decisions in private, based on their personal views, and "arena" politicians, who consider themselves representatives of the public and typically make policy decisions in public, based on public debate. The author argues that most American boards are sacred and elite and that they express normlessness and anxiety when forced to behave in secular-arena fashion. He also concludes that the public correctly perceives its lack of influence on school policy and desires to participate more in educational policy-making. (JG)