In a district the place priorities always shift, state funding formulation fall brief, and good concepts die between idea and motion, there’s at all times one thing — or somebody — in charge for challenges in Seattle Public Faculties.
Whereas many points want consideration, the underlying issue is a college board that hasn’t persistently understood or fulfilled its position. For decades, confusion concerning the board’s position and lack of accountability has broken public belief and compromised scholar outcomes.
This isn’t because of an absence of concepts or good intentions, and it’s not for lack of steering. Skilled requirements from the Washington State School Directors’ Association, analysis just like the Iowa Lighthouse Inquiry and finest practices from the National School Boards Association all say the identical factor: Efficient boards lead with readability, consistency and goal. The college administrators’ group and different organizations additionally present coaching and sources. These sources all agree that how the board develops and behaves as a physique determines whether or not the general public’s priorities are acknowledged, the district is responsive and whether or not there’s progress for college kids.
Not like a metropolis council or legislature, faculty boards maintain each legislative and govt authority. They set insurance policies that set up the imaginative and prescient, targets, and necessities for the district (governance) and rent and oversee a superintendent to hold them out (administration). When boards lose sight of those tasks, they turn into ineffective, reacting to short-term crises as a substitute of driving significant change. That is very true in massive city districts like Seattle, the place leadership turnover is high and neighborhood pressures usually battle.
Debates about faculty consolidation, gifted training, alternative applications, security, enrollment, entry to companies, alternative hole, and finances deficits aren’t new. However except the board units clear course in coverage and ensures accountability by monitoring progress, the district will proceed to lurch from one emergency to a different, irritating households, burning out educators and failing our college students.
Previous boards have tried to maneuver ahead. Within the final 30 years, a number of exterior critiques of SPS have urged the district to undertake a policy-based governance construction with built-in accountability. In 2021, the board adopted the Scholar Outcomes Centered Governance framework to enhance its work. However by 2023, progress had stalled. An assessment by Moss Adams introduced in December 2024 revealed why: Whereas the board had adopted SOFG, the central workplace didn’t observe with agreed-upon administrative adjustments. Reasonably than insist on progress, the board has reverted to previous habits. That hole between board course and implementation has left households, educators and board members understandably pissed off.
The SOFG mannequin, like Coverage Governance and comparable fashions, is a device to assist boards focus, self-evaluate and align with finest practices. However a device just isn’t an answer. Change will solely come from a board that persistently understands and commits to its position as a governing physique. That features avoiding interfering with employees tasks and as a substitute holding our chief govt, the superintendent, accountable for managing the district in keeping with contract, coverage and legislation.
When college students, employees and households elevate issues, they deserve decision. Most points ought to be addressed by employees by way of programs aligned to board coverage. The board’s job is to make sure these programs exist and are efficient. If coverage isn’t adopted, the board should maintain the superintendent accountable. If coverage is unclear, the board should revise it.
Upcoming board elections, a superintendent search and strategic plan growth supply an opportunity to reset. Whether or not this turns into a turning level or one other chapter in a rudderless trajectory relies on what sort of board we decide to being.
No particular person board member, superintendent, guide or framework will “repair” Seattle Public Faculties. What can, over time, is a board that is aware of its job, acts accordingly and holds the system accountable. We haven’t misplaced our means; the trail is true in entrance of us. We simply want the collective will and self-discipline to observe it.
The way forward for Seattle Public Faculties relies on a board that is aware of what it’s right here to do — and really does it.
If you want to share your ideas, please submit a Letter to the Editor of not more than 200 phrases to be thought-about for publication in our Opinion part. Ship to: letters@seattletimes.com
