Dorothy and Dora have raised a topic for discussion.
First, the Board has increased the number and the quality of their questions to staff. They are still a long way from the sort of vigorous inquiry and critical reasoning that they should aspire to, but they have gotten better.
Second, the Board has also gotten better at insisting on answers to their questions. Again, not where they should be, but definitely improving.
Third, the staff has not shown any evidence of getting better at answering the Board's questions. They continue to provide mushy answers or no answers or the over-used "I don't have that data. I'll have to get back to you with that."
Fourth, in the event of a promise of an answer later there is often no timeline set for the answer and there is a lot of doubt about whether the answer is ever actually provided. Some times we know that it isn't. The Board has not been diligent about following up on these promises of future answers. Even if the answer does come later, it means that a question asked in public is answered in private. The public impression is that the question was never answered. It certainly wasn't answered publicly.
Finally, there is the weird dynamic in which it is regarded as inappropriate for the Board to publicly express any dissatisfaction with the staff or the superintendent. This creates the impression that the Board isn't doing their job of oversight. Think of the Board's dismissal of the superintendent. It appears to have been over a single incident, but the superintendent's effort to shape the Board's information about Pottergate was only the final straw that caused her dismissal. It creates a misleading impression of the Board and how they work.