I believe there is a fundamental problem with the organizational structure and management philosophy of the Seattle Schools. The schools seem to want to put almost complete autonomy and authority to the schools and their leaders, the principals. This has several flaws.
1. The average tenure of principals, particularly in difficult schools, is too short to allow them to accomplish anything. Changing principals every two to three years, with local autonomy leads to chaos. This system will only work if there is continuity for at least 4 years, and with that there can be accountability.
2. The schools are not islands of themselves. They are part of a system. Several K-5 feed one Middle school. With choice, many middle schools feed each high school. K-12 is not thirteen single years, but a 13-year process. There needs to be some common process as a function of time between schools.
3. The mobility of children in Seattle, particularly those in poverty, means they see many K-5’s and many middle schools. Unless these programs are closely coordinated, this is very hard on those children who move.
4. There are not 100 outstanding leaders for principals in an organization of this size. Your system will work with continuity and outstanding leaders. That isn’t real life.
Based upon the above, the allocation of authority and freedom of action of the individual schools must be constrained, with more authority in the central office. A serious study needs to be done to define this interface, moving authority to the school only where appropriate. Clearly one of those areas is the right of the principal to choose his or her team and reject those who can not or will not work with the school leadership team.