Seattle Schools Community Forum

Seattle Public Schools, as an institution, has a lot of issues around the scope of authority. There's a world of confusion about what a teacher can decide independently and what are the limits of that authority. What can a principal decide and what is the scope of a principal's authority? What falls inside and outside the limits of a BLT's authority? What decisions does an Executive Director of Schools have the authority to make? What about District Staff? Do they have any authority? Surely there are some decisions that are up to the Superintendent and some that are up to the Board, but what are they? The simple answer is that Board Policy and the Superintendent Procedures provide all of the answers to these questions. There is a clear answer in these governing documents that defines the scope of authority for each person. Granted, a lot of the policies and procedures are so poorly written that they are neither actionable nor enforceable. The real answer, however, i...

In a recent thread about the culture of lawlessness, I wrote a comment that said, in part: "In the end, though, it will still come down to someone in the District leadership insisting on compliance with the law, regulations, policy, and the District's stated values. All it takes is one person." But what would it really take to foster a culture of compliance to replace the culture of lawlessness? Could just one Board member do anything? Would it require a Board majority? What would they have to do?

As was reported and discussed, Seattle Public Schools recently settled a sexual harassment suit for $249,999. This situation provides a number of examples of the District's dysfunctional culture of lawlessness. Shall we count them? The staff attempted to keep the settlement from the Board. The staff attempted to keep the settlement from the public. Rather than being held accountable for the failure at the heart of this litigation, the principal in the case was promoted - twice. No one has been or ever will be held accountable for this failure. No one has been or ever will be held accountable for trying to cover up the failure. No one has been or ever will be held accountable for trying to keep the settlement from the board or the public. This settlement will not lead to any improvements or changes in the way the District handles these sorts of complaints. No lessons were learned. The District enacted a crisis response plan for exactly this sort of public relations di...

Dr. Nyland, at the Alliance for Education's State of the District address, announced his intention to launch a 100-day Communications Initiative . At first, little was known about his intentions. Dr. Nyland himself couldn't name any of the initiative's goals, other than improving the District's responsiveness to families and principals. He believed that the root problem was that people would get a question but they not only didn't know the answer, but didn't know who to call for the answer and so they would simply not answer the question. His plan was to assemble lists of the answers to the most frequently asked questions and posting that information on the district's web site. He would also create lists of staff to contact in various departments who would be ready to answer questions about their department. The goal is to get the person with the question in contact with the person with the answer. Dr. Nyland noted that he, himself, didn't know whom to c...

Board Director Sharon Peaslee said, about superintendent Dr. Nyland: " We need his steady, clearheaded and highly skilled leadership to stabilize the district and fix what’s broken. " So what, exactly, is broken and how, exactly, can Dr. Nyland fix it? Yes, this is going to be a total rant - I suggest those looking for news just skip to the next post.

Something's missing and we all know what it is. It's the unfulfilled commitment I have been requesting for over ten years. It's the hole at the heart of the district's dysfunction. It is the emptiness at the root of the complaints and protests about the Garfield rape case. It is what was absent from Director Peaslee's understanding of the protests and it was omitted from Dr. Nyland's letter. The District staff does not comply with procedure, policy, regulation, or law and they do so without consequence. No matter if the violation is trivial or tragic, they are not only neglected, not only forgiven, but even defended. A sea of outrage rose up against Director Peaslee's tonedeaf remarks at the Board meeting. We were shocked by her misunderstanding of the protests. They were not calls to hold the boy accountable for his actions but a call to hold the district staff accountable for their actions (and inactions). How was it possible for Director Peaslee to ...

I'm sorry to report that the Critical Incident Response Plan referenced in Dr. Nyland's letter to the community is total bunk. It is, at best, a PR plan. It is designed to respond to potential sources of bad press. It basically calls for district officials to gather information, comply with policies, procedures, regulations and laws, and to inform stakeholders. I can't believe that executives at that level of responsibility have to be specifically directed to do these things. Worse, I have no confidence that these written directions to do these things will result in the actual fulfillment of these duties. The only thing that the superintendent needs to do is require compliance with procedure, policy, regulation and law, and to hold staff accountable with meaningful consequences if they violate the rules. That would fix the problem.

Over and over again we see that the problem is not inadequate policies or procedures but the absence of any enforcement and the absence of any accountability for those who violate the policies and procedures. And who has the job of enforcing policy and holding staff accountable? The Board.

The School Board has a new form letter response: " Thank you for contacting the School Board Office. Please be assured that we take the issue of sexual assault seriously and are continuing to work with all parties involved -- including state and federal agencies and the family -- to address the concerns that have been raised and ensure that the appropriate legal process is followed. The family has filed complaints with several oversight agencies, and we trust that resolution of those actions will be fair and equitable.   Kind Regards ," The Board wants us to be assured that they take the issue of sexual assault seriously? Really? Telling us that they care about it isn't convincing at all. They need to show us. Here are seven things that the Board can - and should - do to assure us that they take the issue of sexual assault seriously.

Seattle Public Schools has an interesting job posting. Here is a Facebook post about it: Here is a link to the actual job posting. I particularly like the part about "two-way conversation (not just top-down messaging)"

I've been through a lot of changes in my personal and professional life in the past year or so. Actually, I'm still in a sort of transition period, but that period and those changes will be complete in April. Among other things, I'll be moving away from Seattle, which has been my home since 1987. For the past several months I have been splitting my time between Seattle and Charlottesville, Virginia. I'm in Charlottesville now, as a matter of fact. In April I will leave Seattle and make C'ville my new home. I think it will be a little inappropriate for me to comment on Seattle Public Schools when I'm no longer a Seattle resident, so I won't be writing many blog posts after the move. No promises that I'll quit entirely, but I'm pretty sure that I won't be able to make the committee meetings anymore. I have been writing about Seattle Public Schools for over a decade. I have probably averaged a couple thousand words a day over that period. It sur...

From SPS history: South Africa's first black president, Nelson Mandela, visited Seattle and toured Madrona Elementary School almost 14 years to this date on Dec. 8, 1999.  Madrona  is now a K-8 school. What a lucky group of students on that day. At Board retreat today, a very different tone and feel.  Still the same kind of talk and team-building but not the same vibe.  A major theme is being collegial, being respectful of everyone's time and changing the public talk about the district. So refreshing to hear: - Facilities' Flip Herndon say one is his major goals is cutting down the maintenance backlog.  (You know me and that backlog so Friday, I'm in love.) - President Peaslee expressing the desire to get rid of the drumbeat of a "dysfunctional" Board and going around the table and asking Board members what committee they would like to serve on. -   Both new directors said that they would like to see if the committee meetings could ...

I have never asked the school district to do anything that they didn't promise to do. The fact that I have to ask them to do things so often is a testament to how rarely they do what they promise they will do. We hear - all the time - about how there is a division of authority with the Board focusing exclusively on policy and governance work while the administration and management decisions are delegated to the superintendent. If that were true, then the school assignment decisions should never have been subjected to a Board vote. Drawing attendance area boundaries is clearly an administrative or management decision - not a policy decision - and should have been delegated to the superintendent. Policy 3130 is nearly all that the Board should have to say about student assignment. One mistake leads to others. Putting it before the Board for a vote made it a political decision. The more political the decision, the less it is based on data and reason, the more it is influence...

I attended the Growth Boundaries meeting hosted by Director McLaren this morning and two themes stood out. One came from the District and the other from the community. The District's theme was mystery. There is simply no telling who would make the decisions about schools and buildings, no clue about how they would make these decisions, no sense of what data or criteria would be the basis for the decisions, or even when the decisions would be made. Nevertheless we got a very strong message about what the decision would be: K-5 STEM placed at Schmitz Park in 2016. This is the pre-ordained choice, despite the fact that this is probably the worst option of them all. The theme from the community was primarily frustration. That frustration was directed a bit at the mystery - the decisions are made by a secret committee using a secret process and secret criteria - but mostly at the trainwreck of a decision.

With the blazing headline , " Will election be a solution to Seattle School Board turmoil ?", the Times lights into the current Board.  Some of what is said is pretty face value, that some Board members "don't trust top district staff."  Actually, that's not what any Board member said in the survey.  (I can go back but I don't remember that said.) What I believe was said is that staff felt the Board didn't always trust them.  And who can blame the Board given how many issues of trust have come up?  The Board's job IS oversight and yes, watching over the shoulders of top staff until the Board has regained its confidence. Again, you have earn trust. It is also stated that the Board is "supposed to stick to policy and oversight."  And that oversight does include accountability so yes, they must be sure their policies are enforced.  As well, the definition of what the Board is to do is in the RCW which is widely interpreted in board...

In the Comments of the blog post on the C.A.S. M.O.U. decision (or was it the M.I.C. K.E.Y. decision?) I wrote this paragraph: "Seattle Public Schools suffers from a culture of lawlessness. No one enforces the rules (whether they be superintendent procedures, board policies, state law or federal law), so no one bothers to follow them. Typically, no one even bothers to check them before making decisions - decisions which often violate the rules. This culture of lawlessness pervades the District and not only makes all kinds of abuses possible but actually encourages them." That little blurb there really rang true for a lot of folks. So much so that I reckon it deserves a little discussion of its own.

I write and speak about Seattle Public Schools with some authority and credibility due to my long history, experience, and observation of the district. I know what I know and people believe what I write because I have been around and watching closely for over eleven years. But given the rapid and near total turnover of personnel, I don't really know the current players all that well. Given the lack of any kind of institutional continuity, I can't be sure of the procedures. And given those two factors, we should all seriously question the relevance of any history. My expertise is dangerously close to obsolete.

I know that my zeal for the Program Placement policy, C56.00, exceeds that of just about anyone else. I suspect that my enthusiasm for it is a curiosity for a lot of folks. It seems like a small and ineffective policy. Even if the policy were followed, what difference would it make? The policy still leaves all of the authority with the superintendent, so what difference would transparency make? It think it makes a big difference. I think that the policy represents the change that we want to see in Seattle Public Schools. I think the continued violation of the policy reveals the failure of the superintendent and the Board to live up to the ideals they espouse.

Interim Superintendent Enfield has spoken explicitly about bringing about a culture change in Seattle Public Schools. She has done more than talk about it; she has taken action as well. We can congratulate her for the steps she has taken, but it is hard not to notice the long way she needs to go. It is even harder to ignore the steps that she has refused to take. The Board is VERY pleased with the change they have seen and even MORE pleased with the changes that have been promised. This reflects the gullibility of the Board. When will they learn to withhold their gratitude until after the action instead of giving it upon the promise of the action?

Everyone who reads this blog is familiar with my penchant for inventing stories. I'm not in the district staff meetings when decisions are made. I don't have a source who reports to me about what happens in those meetings. I just hear the (often surprising) results. From the outcome I reverse engineer the story of how this result came about. Some of my favorite blog posts have been these inventions of narrative that are both plausible and fit the facts. I don't know if they are true, but they earn credibility because they work. They do explain the apparently inexplicable.