In a district the place priorities continually shift, state funding formulation fall quick, and good concepts die between idea and motion, there’s at all times one thing — or somebody — accountable for challenges in Seattle Public Faculties.
Whereas many points want consideration, the underlying issue is a faculty 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 as a consequence of an absence of concepts or good intentions, and it’s not for lack of steerage. Skilled requirements from the Washington State School Directors’ Association, analysis just like the Iowa Lighthouse Inquiry and greatest practices from the National School Boards Association all say the identical factor: Efficient boards lead with readability, consistency and objective. The varsity 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.
In contrast to a metropolis council or legislature, college boards maintain each legislative and govt authority. They set insurance policies that set up the imaginative and prescient, objectives, 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 grow to be ineffective, reacting to short-term crises as an alternative of driving significant change. That is very true in giant city districts like Seattle, the place leadership turnover is high and group pressures usually battle.
Debates about college consolidation, gifted schooling, alternative packages, security, enrollment, entry to providers, alternative hole, and price range deficits usually are not new. However until the board units clear route 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 Pupil Outcomes Targeted Governance framework to enhance its work. However by 2023, progress had stalled. An assessment by Moss Adams offered in December 2024 revealed why: Whereas the board had adopted SOFG, the central workplace didn’t comply with with agreed-upon administrative modifications. Fairly than insist on progress, the board has reverted to previous habits. That hole between board route and implementation has left households, educators and board members understandably annoyed.
The SOFG mannequin, like Coverage Governance and related fashions, is a instrument to assist boards focus, self-evaluate and align with greatest practices. However a instrument will not be 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 an alternative holding our chief govt, the superintendent, chargeable for managing the district consistent with contract, coverage and regulation.
When college students, employees and households elevate considerations, they deserve decision. Most points must be addressed by employees by means 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 is dependent upon what sort of board we decide to being.
No particular person board member, superintendent, advisor 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 approach; the trail is correct in entrance of us. We simply want the collective will and self-discipline to comply with it.
The way forward for Seattle Public Faculties is dependent upon a board that is aware of what it’s right here to do — and truly 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
