Too many people think they could fix Seattle's schools

The mayor, the council, the business community: Does anybody think about holding off on offering their great ideas? And what about some word of thanks for jobs often well done?

Susan Enfield, Highline School District Superintendent and former Seattle Public Schools Interim Superintendent.

Seattle Public Schools

Susan Enfield, Highline School District Superintendent and former Seattle Public Schools Interim Superintendent.

Seattle School Board

Seattle Public Schools

Seattle School Board

Perhaps you've noticed the way our virtues can flip over and become vices? Pushed too hard, our single-mindedly good qualities reveal another often less-benign side.

A strong work ethic, for example, can become a one-dimensional life with nothing to it but work. Or being responsible, a good thing, can result in never being able to say “no.” Even a virtue like compassion can morph into being indulgent and unintentionally supporting harmful behaviors.

I find myself wondering if something like this may be true in relation to public education and, in particular, the Seattle Public Schools. The laudable virtue here would be involvement or engagement, as in, “Get involved, make a difference.”

But there is a downside. Call it, “Too many cooks in the kitchen.” Or too much anxiety in the system.

I know this is heretical but I sometimes wonder if the Seattle schools might benefit from a bit less public involvement and diminished levels of scrutiny? Yes, in light of the most recent managerial failures, that may seem completely nuts. Bear with me.

It may be a reflection on the circles I travel in, but often the conversation at a social dinner, in the neighborhood, or at civic settings turns to some version of “What’s wrong with the Seattle schools?” or “What needs to be done about the Seattle School District?” Or, “How can the Seattle schools be fixed?”

People are interested — that’s great. Parents and other family members have a very personal and surely legitimate concern for their children. But I also notice that there are a lot of other cooks crowding into this kitchen: local political leaders like the mayor and members of City Council, business leaders and corporations, social activists of various stripes and sympathies, philanthropists and charitable foundations, educational theorists and reformers, media, and labor unions. While we are fond of quips like "The more the merrier" and "two heads are better than one," it is not always the case that getting more people involved automatically makes for better outcomes.

Yet education seems to be a field where everyone is an expert and many people, if not everyone, have a plan, a proposal, an idea, or a solution. Yes, interest and involvement is good and schools are a common, and critical, community asset. And yet, there are some downsides to what is truly a virtue. Here are three.

Too many cooks in the kitchen makes leadership of Seattle Public Schools not just extremely challenging, but maybe impossible. A superintendent and others in school leadership roles are under constant, intense scrutiny and pressure. She or he works in an environment where there is little room for making a mistake.

Some would say, “Well, that just comes with the territory.” Yes, but leaders, if they are to be effective, do need partners who want them to be successful, who are willing to let them grow, and who are able to forgive an occasional misstep or poorly chosen word. While leaders need to build and earn trust from their partners and constituents, real trust is not, “I’m with you as long as you support my cause or agenda, and repeat mantra-like the precise words I want to hear.”

In recent years, the Seattle School District has not found it easy to attact a wide or strong pool of candidates for the position of superintendent. As a community, at this juncture with an acting superintendent and a new search pending, we might ask, perhaps led by the School Board, what it means to be good partners with our educational leaders. If debating the qualities of a good leadership is important, so too is reflecting on what good “followership” looks like.

A second downside of too many cooks in the kitchen is a constant stream of hot ideas from elsewhere: innovations, the latest programs, current enthusiasms, and an infusion of the newest techniques that have worked somewhere else. To some extent the district is itself complicit in this problem, perhaps embracing too many shifts too rapidly. And again, there’s certainly a place for new ideas and learning from others. But to be successful most innovations need time and careful implementation. When they follow one another too rapidly, nothing grows roots. There’s a kind of desperate quality these days to all the quick-fixes and overnight solutions, the casting about here and there. It taxes an already-overtaxed school system to try to assimilate and incorporate a steady steam of fixes, innovations, and someone’s great ideas.

The third downside of too many cooks in the educational kitchen is demoralization and a loss of confidence for the actual kitchen staff, i.e. the administrators, principals, and teachers who have given their lives to education. Am I saying, “Just butt out and leave it to the experts”? No, that’s not going to happen, nor should it. I am, however, saying to bring a little humility to the table with your interest and ideas. Don’t assume you have the answer. I am also saying that in many Seattle schools there is very high quality education going on. In some cases that education is superior to costly private schools. Don’t undermine it with cheap shots and broad-brush criticism.

If the community is to exhibit greater trust, the School District also needs to merit and earn this trust by being clear about its core mission and staying focused, by listening with interest and respect to parents, and by showing itself managerially competent.

But human organizations and institutions don’t get “fixed.” They aren’t automobile engines or leaky faucets. Human organizations get improved. They can be made better and they should be. But they aren’t going to be made perfect. They aren’t going to be fixed. So let’s aim high and work hard. Let’s cut others some slack, and remember to say “thank you” often.


Topics: K-12 Education

About the Author

Anthony B. (Tony) Robinson is President of Seattle-based Congregational Leadership Northwest. He speaks and writes, nationally and internationally, on religious life and leadership. He is the author of 10 books. Crosscut readers may particularly enjoy Common Grace (Sasquatch Books). His blog, "What's Tony Thinking?", is at his website, www.anthonybrobinson.com.

Like what you just read? Support high quality local journalism. Become a member of Crosscut today!

Comments:

Posted Thu, Apr 21, 6:38 a.m. Inappropriate

Interesting. I am one commenter who used the word "fix" and regretted it after posting, although it wasn't in regards to the public school system, but what comes before. In those crucial first 5 years. I stand by my sentiments about the life-changing importance of early childhood learning and nurturing, but wish I had taken the time to find an appropriate word.

You ask that the public forgive leadership's occasional misstep or poorly chosen word. Can we do the same for the "followership"? In the interest of inclusiveness and humility?

I do know something about getting people eager and excited about learning, but I am not an educator or an expert in education and I can't fathom how someone teaches in a school where 84 languages are spoken. It seems an impossible task, yet that is often the reality in today's public school system. What I hear most often from teachers about the challenges of teaching are the social problems brought into the classroom by students. I believe we have the resources and expertise to address those problems.

I have to agree with your article, in general. Let them teach.

KarenLee

Posted Thu, Apr 21, 8:26 a.m. Inappropriate

Your second point is one that I have noticed in other contexts. I've taken part in the so-called "Math Wars", the debate over which textbooks should be used for math classes. To summarize in one sentence, the debate is whether we should use books that emphasize concepts and intuition, or whether we should use books that emphasize algorithms and drill.

I have my views about how math should be taught, but I also recognize that success or failure depends less on the method and more on how it is implemented. But the debate is so charged with overheated emotion and an exaggerated sense of crisis that school boards shift textbooks periodically according to a change in the political winds or the latest fad. The result is that teachers have insufficient time to adapt to the current system, giving the impression that it doesn't work.

In 1888, when the Englishman James Bryce published his observations of American society, he too found that Americans are ready to present their solution on just about any problem. Today amateur transportation engineers know better than WSDOT what should be done with the viaduct replacement, and amateur economists confidently second-guess the Treasury Department and Federal Reserve.

Posted Thu, Apr 21, 10:08 a.m. Inappropriate

"...who are able to forgive an occasional misstep or poorly chosen word. While leaders need to build and earn trust from their partners and constituents, real trust is not, “I’m with you as long as you support my cause or agenda, and repeat mantra-like the precise words I want to hear.”

This quote has two important parts. The first is the word "occasional." As a long-time district watcher, I wish it was only occasional. But audit after audit, there are bad findings. We have a revolving door of upper management. We have a Board who has consistently rubber-stamped the Superintendent's wishes.

I have high hopes for Dr. Enfield and I find her a breath of fresh air. It's up to her to balance the many voices from the community but the key is "balance" and not to favor one group over others as Dr. Goodloe-Johnson did.

But the second part is also true; Dr. Enfield cannot make everyone happy and frankly, it's not her job to do so. But she has to manage the district well or all the great initiatives in the world won't matter. She will probably have to say "no" more than she says "yes." She can certainly say, "This is my best judgment" and proceed based on all the data and facts before her.

If Dr. Goodloe-Johnson had had any real measurable success, then whether or not people liked her leadership style really wouldn't have mattered. If she had been getting the job done in a competent manner, we all would have had to accept it. But she didn't.

I absolutely support the notion that we should allow principals and teachers to do their work without one more edict from Central Office.

I talked with Dr. Enfield and told her I hoped she would come forth with more new initiatives when we already need to cut back on the so-called Strategic Plan because of the lack of resources. I told her I wanted her to succeed because if she succeeds, our district will succeed.

westello

Posted Mon, Apr 25, 8:41 p.m. Inappropriate

Mr. Robinson, I hope you start with yourself and butt out of Seattle Public Schools. Your voice has not been helpful, informative, or constructive.

coolpapa

Login or register to add your voice to the conversation.

Join Crosscut now!
Subscribe to our Newsletter

Follow Us »