Favoritism in Seattle Schools

First let me state that I know it must be a very hard job to be a principal. Technically, the principal is supposed to be the academic leader for the school. (That very much fits in with Student Outcome Focused Governance. )However, the reality is that principals have to juggle budgets, personnel issues, discipline issues, parent issues, etc. We all know from experience at home  - that parents juggle to manage a home, a job, and children - that not everyone is great at all things. 

But in my long time watching Seattle Schools I have seen examples of one not-so-good thing and one bad thing around the issue of principals. 

The not-so-good thing is principal autonomy. As I have stated previously, the superintendent who took over when John Stanford died, Joe Olchefske, had this idea of "tight/loose." This is basically, if a principal's school is doing most well, the district loosens their grip and those principals have more autonomy. If your school is not showing improvement, the district is going to be watching more closely. 

But since that time, it feels like principals get appointments that don't match their skills, only sometimes do school communities get to at least give input on the principal selection, and, even with Executive Directors, many principals really go off the rails. 

There is the truth that each school community is different so you don't want the dreaded "cookie-cutter schools." However, when principal are allowed to just strike out on their own, it becomes hard to gauge one school against another. And the district has to have an apples to apples way to judge schools beyond test scores. 

Between the teachers union and the principals organization (PASS), it feels like teachers and principals are well-protected, much to the dismay of parents. I'm sure that those EDs DO know about issues at schools but either lack the power to do anything because of contracts OR know how hard it would be to replace a principal so they look the other way.  It is apparent to me that some EDs just act with a don't ask, don't tell mentality which serves no one.

The bad issue is favoritism by principals to some staffers/teachers. 

Look, we have ALL seen this in our working lives. There are staff that probably better at their jobs and the boss likes that. However, more often than not, it's because of a personal relationship between boss and staffer. I'm pretty sure that this happens in most schools. 

Those relationships sometimes feed bad behavior on the part of the favored staffer. The principal looks the other way even if he/she/they get reports or have seen bad behavior themselves. Favored staffers feel empowered when principals know of their bad behavior and do nothing. The rest of the employees go along to get along, fearing that relationship.

My impression is that teachers and other staffers generally keep their mouths shut because they do not feel safe in reporting what they see. That's especially sad when it includes bad behavior against a student.  

Let's look at some examples, starting with the recent lawsuit filed against the district.

As an anonymous former SPS person wrote to me about the lawsuit over treatment of pregnant or new moms:

What never happens in SPS is that the person responsible is ever held accountable. We need to know the schools where these violations occurred and then the executive director(s) and HR chief Sarah Pritchett should be put on administrative leave while a full investigation takes place. This would show that SPS takes the allegations very seriously.

As you may recall, the Seattle Times reported that SPS has NO policy on pregnant teachers. Can anyone say that this makes any sense at all when it is part of the landscape for any entity or business that employs women? And, that no one in HR - from Noel Treat (who is a lawyer), to Brent Jones, to now Sarah Pritchett never noticed this lack of policy? 

As I frequently say about lawsuits against SPS, I hope this lawsuit goes to court. I would like all this dirty laundry publicly aired (which is exactly what SPS does NOT want). Because then we would know if any HR head ever did ask about this lack of policy to a higher up? Did any HR head ever warn Legal and the superintendent that it was folly to not have a policy? That would be interesting to know. Of course, when you hire people who are NOT HR experts, then it becomes dicey.

And, what were the principals told to do about these employees? Did the lack of a policy allow EDs to tell principals, "Hey, do what you think is best for your schools?"

Here's another example which is the revelation that not one but two former Garfield basketball coaches had, over a period of years, sexually assaulted a female student. If you read the Seattle Times reporting, it appears not a SINGLE adult at the school noticed a thing. For years. 

How can that be? These guys - Walter Junior Jones and Marvin Wayne Hall - do not appear that bright as to never have made a mistake publicly. Also, I would guess that some of the athletes on the teams may have seen something but had no mechanism to report it safely. (There's another policy that may need to be written - how to help students who think something is wrong in a class or on a team to report it.)

 

Honestly, it feels like other adults were looking the other way. I have to say Mr. Jones and Mr. Hall sure seemed to operate with impunity. 

 

As part of my public disclosure request around this story, I did ask for a number of interviews and one was with the principal at the time, Ted Howard. He is now the Accountability guy for the district, which if you know his time at Garfield High, is a bit of an irony, given how many issues like this that came up. Still waiting for that interview.

 

However, I recently got one more batch from that request. It was a single email.

That email consists of texts between Marvin Hall and the girl. I assume it's the girl because it is FERPA redacted and sent to me as part of my request. (If it was someone other than the girl, Legal would not have sent it.)

 

It's a back-and-forth between the girl and Hall, with her urging him to ditch a meeting to come have sex with her. He kind of demurs but continues the text chain. He did try to change his name as did she (change his name from her end) but it didn't work. It appears there was video sent but that is not part of the actual disclosure. Mr. Hall included what I assume is meant to be a sexy photo but thankfully,  it was not a nude. 

That text chain was the content of that email sent from the head of Athletics, Tara Davis, to the Executive Director of Athletics, Patrick McCarty. It is dated August 9, 2022. The story didn't come out until nearly two years later.

 

Here's what role they played in this via the KUOW story by Ann Dornfeld:

When Patrick McCarthy, executive director of athletics for Seattle Public Schools, received a report in 2022 from his second-in-command, Tara Davis, of Hall’s alleged sexual abuse of a student, he told a district investigator that “he did not report the allegations because he told Ms. Davis to make sure to report the allegations to HR.”

Instead, when the investigator interviewed Davis, she reported that after she sent the allegations and evidence to McCarthy, he was the one who forwarded it to the district’s human resources department. The investigator found that neither Davis nor McCarthy escalated the allegations to human resources.

From my point of view, those two people should have been fired when this came out. You cannot read these texts and NOT realize what is happening. The good question would be, "Okay, you didn't go to HR. What DID you do to stop this?" 

 

Appalling. 

Several readers here as well as parents in the Times' stories complained about Anitra Jones when she was the principal at Rainier View Elementary, saying that she had favorites and she used her power over those not in favor. From the Times:

Jones added negative comments to the three employees’ evaluations. 

This apparently after they disagreed with her on school issues. 

SPS says she was reassigned to Rainier Beach High School. If she IS there, it's under the radar because she does not appear in the staff roster anywhere. It's been a couple of months since that announcement was made.

If a principal is able to sow such discord at a school among staff and parents, why would that person be protected? 

I circle back to my statement about the principal being the academic leader of a school;when these things are happening at schools, it adds a layer of tension that inhibits good teaching. 

A good principal would know that.