More than four in ten of Seattle’s most reliable voters have a negative view of the way that Seattle Public Schools are being run, while fewer than three in ten have a positive view and nearly a third aren’t sure, a citywide survey recently conducted for the Northwest Progressive Institute has found.
41% of six hundred and fifty-one February 2023 special election voters interviewed by Change Research for NPI last month said they somewhat or strongly disapproved of the way the Seattle Public Schools are currently being run. 28% said they somewhat or strongly approved, and 31% were not sure.
Seattle Public Schools is governed by a seven-member board that currently consists of Liza Rankin, Lisa Rivera Smith, Chandra N. Hampson, Vivian Song Maritz, Michelle Sarju, Leslie S. Harris, and Brandon K. Hersey, and an administration headed by Superintendent Brent Jones, who was recently hired.

2023 Seattle School Board members, including the student representatives (Photo: Seattle Public Schools)
Respondents were also asked to rate the board members’ job performance as part of a separate question. Not a single one received a net positive rating.
Most voters indicated they didn’t have enough information to share an opinion concerning the job performances of each of the boardmembers, which reflects the lack of coverage Seattle Public Schools gets compared to Seattle City Hall.
Of the seven, respondents seemed to have the most familiarity with Rankin, but only by a little bit. The “not sure” responses for each boardmember were all between seventy and eighty percent, with less than a quarter of the sample expressing approval or disapproval when asked to rate.
As mentioned, however, more voters had an opinion on how the district was being run in general. We did ask a follow-up question of those expressing disapproval to ascertain why they’re unhappy. Let’s review the toplines again and then delve into the reasons why special election voters aren’t happy with Seattle Public Schools.
QUESTION: Do you approve or disapprove of the way the Seattle Public Schools are currently being run?
ANSWERS:
- Approve: 28%
- Strongly approve: 2%
- Somewhat approve: 26%
- Disapprove: 41%
- Somewhat disapprove: 25%
- Strongly disapprove: 16%
- Not sure: 31%
FOLLOW-UP QUESTION (ASKED OF VOTERS WHO SAID THEY DISAPPROVED): What are the reasons you disapprove of the way Seattle Public Schools are currently being run? Check all that apply.
- Unresponsive district leadership: 50%
- Large class sizes: 43%
- Lack of attention to student mental health needs: 43%
- Concerns about student safety on campus: 42%
- Low student test scores: 41%
- Focus on racial equity/Critical Race Theory: 35%
- Problems with delivery of special education services: 31%
- Changes to advanced learning programs: 30%
- Duration of remote learning in 2020–21: 28%
- Lack of focus on racial equity: 17%
- Something else (please specify): 28%
And here are the ratings for the boardmembers:
QUESTION: Please indicate whether you approve or disapprove of the following local elected officials’ job performance.
ANSWERS:
- Seattle Public Schools Boardmember Liza Rankin
- Approve: 10%
- Disapprove: 16%
- Not sure: 73%
- Seattle Public Schools Boardmember Lisa Rivera Smith
- Approve: 8%
- Disapprove: 15%
- Not sure: 77%
- Seattle Public Schools Boardmember Chandra N. Hampson
- Approve: 8%
- Disapprove: 16%
- Not sure: 76%
- Seattle Public Schools Boardmember Vivian Song Maritz
- Approve: 9%
- Disapprove: 14%
- Not sure: 77%
- Seattle Public Schools Boardmember Michelle Sarju
- Approve: 9%
- Disapprove: 14%
- Not sure: 77%
- Seattle Public Schools Boardmember Leslie S. Harris
- Approve: 9%
- Disapprove: 13%
- Not sure: 78%
- Seattle Public Schools Boardmember Brandon K. Hersey
- Approve: 8%
- Disapprove: 14%
- Not sure: 77%
Our survey of 651 likely February 2023 special election voters in Seattle, Washington was in the field from Thursday, January 26th, through Monday, January 30th, 2023. All respondents participated online. The poll was conducted for the Northwest Progressive Institute by Change Research and has a modeled margin of error of 4.2% at the 95% confidence interval.
An outright majority of fifty percent of the subsample of disapproving respondents cited “unresponsive district leadership” as the top reason why they are not happy with how Seattle Public Schools are being run. That’s a serious indictment of the leadership of Dr. Brent Jones, top district officials, and the seven-member board.
In addition to the follow-up question above, we gave respondents an opportunity to tell us in their own words what feedback they’d give to the board if they had the chance. Our second follow-up question to disapproving voters was, “If you could sit down with the Seattle Public Schools superintendent and board, what feedback would you give them? What concerns would you share?”
We saw many areas of agreement across the open-ended responses.
“As an educator, the Seattle school board is a joke,” one respondent told us. “They said they would not allow Brent Jones to apply for the permanent superintendent position yet a year later they just [hand] it to him. Superintendent Jones then went on to hire his friends for high ranking salaries positions even though many of those employees were known to not be good.”
“Focus on the problems in the classrooms and buildings today,” said another. “Lawsuits about mental health of the students seems like a headline grabber to me rather than the important work of the board. Special education has been ignored for too long. It’s embarrassing.”
“Get back to basics,” was the message of yet another respondent. “You need to focus on the core mission — educating students. All the rest is noise. Trim the bloated bureaucracy significantly. Put resources in the classrooms. Get the community involved more in the education of the future generations.”
“Make the central office efficient. Push resources and people to schools,” agreed a different respondent. “More open lines of communication.”
“The district is craven. It is so afraid of criticism by certain groups that it will suspend staff and administrators on any pretext.”
“Need for more accountability in contracting — bus service contractor decision is ridiculous (to reward contractor when overbilling and not delivering contracted service). Just an example,” said a fourth respondent.
“We need to focus more on engagement and safety and less on test scores,” said a fifth respondent. “Students are no longer being held accountable for disruptive behaviors and little learning is happening in most schools. We need to engage students where the passions are and include more recess and authentic play time as this is where SEL growth actually occurs. With this growth will come improved behavior and more better learning outcomes overall.”
Even among voters who approve (we asked them their own open-ended follow-up question, which was, “You indicated you approve of the way Seattle Public Schools are currently being run. Why did you give this answer?”) we saw some unhappiness expressed with district leadership.
“I believe we have excellent teachers and good intentions for our kids,” said a respondent who said they approved of the way that the schools were being run. “However I only somewhat approve because I think that the district is too focused on immediate needs and not long-term needs. For instance, why did the strike/discussions need to go all the way to September?”
“I somewhat approve,” echoed another. “I think the district is top-heavy in administrators at JSCEE [John Stanford Center for Educational Excellence]. They also are not as supportive of educators as they could be.”
“My children attended SPS. I generally liked their teachers, who were engaged, caring and helpful. I don’t much care for the central office,” said still another.
These are just a sample of the more than three hundred comments we received.
For our team, the primary takeaway from the responses to our SPS questions is that a lot of voters — even a percentage of those who say they approve of how the schools are being run — are dissatisfied with the district’s governance and administration. The district has gone through a lot of superintendents in the past few decades, but long-running problems have persisted.
In our view, the district needs more than just a new superintendent. It needs transformative leadership that can catalyze a change in the district’s culture.
The district needs and deserves administrators who demonstrate through their actions that they care just as much about the city’s students, educators, and support staff as Seattleites do. It needs a culture that is rooted in the values that Seattleites share, like empathy, openness, and mutual responsibility.
The school board has the power to hire and fire the superintendent, who in turn has the power to hire and fire senior staff. A strong and effective board seems like a necessary prerequisite to having a strong and effective superintendent, and in turn, senior staff who are committed to being accountable to Seattle school communities rather than defaulting to aloof, top-down governance.
Electing such a board will require grassroots organizing and the development of more infrastructure to enable voters to follow what’s going on at Seattle Public Schools. It’s evident that existing media coverage of SPS is insufficient.
That needs to change. Hopefully, local publications like The Urbanist, Publicola, The Stranger, and the South Seattle Emerald will answer the call, step up to the plate, and address the critical need for more SPS coverage in the coming years.
Thursday, February 9th, 2023
A plurality of special election voters in Seattle disapprove of how their schools are being run
More than four in ten of Seattle’s most reliable voters have a negative view of the way that Seattle Public Schools are being run, while fewer than three in ten have a positive view and nearly a third aren’t sure, a citywide survey recently conducted for the Northwest Progressive Institute has found.
41% of six hundred and fifty-one February 2023 special election voters interviewed by Change Research for NPI last month said they somewhat or strongly disapproved of the way the Seattle Public Schools are currently being run. 28% said they somewhat or strongly approved, and 31% were not sure.
Seattle Public Schools is governed by a seven-member board that currently consists of Liza Rankin, Lisa Rivera Smith, Chandra N. Hampson, Vivian Song Maritz, Michelle Sarju, Leslie S. Harris, and Brandon K. Hersey, and an administration headed by Superintendent Brent Jones, who was recently hired.
2023 Seattle School Board members, including the student representatives (Photo: Seattle Public Schools)
Respondents were also asked to rate the board members’ job performance as part of a separate question. Not a single one received a net positive rating.
Most voters indicated they didn’t have enough information to share an opinion concerning the job performances of each of the boardmembers, which reflects the lack of coverage Seattle Public Schools gets compared to Seattle City Hall.
Of the seven, respondents seemed to have the most familiarity with Rankin, but only by a little bit. The “not sure” responses for each boardmember were all between seventy and eighty percent, with less than a quarter of the sample expressing approval or disapproval when asked to rate.
As mentioned, however, more voters had an opinion on how the district was being run in general. We did ask a follow-up question of those expressing disapproval to ascertain why they’re unhappy. Let’s review the toplines again and then delve into the reasons why special election voters aren’t happy with Seattle Public Schools.
And here are the ratings for the boardmembers:
Our survey of 651 likely February 2023 special election voters in Seattle, Washington was in the field from Thursday, January 26th, through Monday, January 30th, 2023. All respondents participated online. The poll was conducted for the Northwest Progressive Institute by Change Research and has a modeled margin of error of 4.2% at the 95% confidence interval.
An outright majority of fifty percent of the subsample of disapproving respondents cited “unresponsive district leadership” as the top reason why they are not happy with how Seattle Public Schools are being run. That’s a serious indictment of the leadership of Dr. Brent Jones, top district officials, and the seven-member board.
In addition to the follow-up question above, we gave respondents an opportunity to tell us in their own words what feedback they’d give to the board if they had the chance. Our second follow-up question to disapproving voters was, “If you could sit down with the Seattle Public Schools superintendent and board, what feedback would you give them? What concerns would you share?”
We saw many areas of agreement across the open-ended responses.
“As an educator, the Seattle school board is a joke,” one respondent told us. “They said they would not allow Brent Jones to apply for the permanent superintendent position yet a year later they just [hand] it to him. Superintendent Jones then went on to hire his friends for high ranking salaries positions even though many of those employees were known to not be good.”
“Focus on the problems in the classrooms and buildings today,” said another. “Lawsuits about mental health of the students seems like a headline grabber to me rather than the important work of the board. Special education has been ignored for too long. It’s embarrassing.”
“Get back to basics,” was the message of yet another respondent. “You need to focus on the core mission — educating students. All the rest is noise. Trim the bloated bureaucracy significantly. Put resources in the classrooms. Get the community involved more in the education of the future generations.”
“Make the central office efficient. Push resources and people to schools,” agreed a different respondent. “More open lines of communication.”
“The district is craven. It is so afraid of criticism by certain groups that it will suspend staff and administrators on any pretext.”
“Need for more accountability in contracting — bus service contractor decision is ridiculous (to reward contractor when overbilling and not delivering contracted service). Just an example,” said a fourth respondent.
“We need to focus more on engagement and safety and less on test scores,” said a fifth respondent. “Students are no longer being held accountable for disruptive behaviors and little learning is happening in most schools. We need to engage students where the passions are and include more recess and authentic play time as this is where SEL growth actually occurs. With this growth will come improved behavior and more better learning outcomes overall.”
Even among voters who approve (we asked them their own open-ended follow-up question, which was, “You indicated you approve of the way Seattle Public Schools are currently being run. Why did you give this answer?”) we saw some unhappiness expressed with district leadership.
“I believe we have excellent teachers and good intentions for our kids,” said a respondent who said they approved of the way that the schools were being run. “However I only somewhat approve because I think that the district is too focused on immediate needs and not long-term needs. For instance, why did the strike/discussions need to go all the way to September?”
“I somewhat approve,” echoed another. “I think the district is top-heavy in administrators at JSCEE [John Stanford Center for Educational Excellence]. They also are not as supportive of educators as they could be.”
“My children attended SPS. I generally liked their teachers, who were engaged, caring and helpful. I don’t much care for the central office,” said still another.
These are just a sample of the more than three hundred comments we received.
For our team, the primary takeaway from the responses to our SPS questions is that a lot of voters — even a percentage of those who say they approve of how the schools are being run — are dissatisfied with the district’s governance and administration. The district has gone through a lot of superintendents in the past few decades, but long-running problems have persisted.
In our view, the district needs more than just a new superintendent. It needs transformative leadership that can catalyze a change in the district’s culture.
The district needs and deserves administrators who demonstrate through their actions that they care just as much about the city’s students, educators, and support staff as Seattleites do. It needs a culture that is rooted in the values that Seattleites share, like empathy, openness, and mutual responsibility.
The school board has the power to hire and fire the superintendent, who in turn has the power to hire and fire senior staff. A strong and effective board seems like a necessary prerequisite to having a strong and effective superintendent, and in turn, senior staff who are committed to being accountable to Seattle school communities rather than defaulting to aloof, top-down governance.
Electing such a board will require grassroots organizing and the development of more infrastructure to enable voters to follow what’s going on at Seattle Public Schools. It’s evident that existing media coverage of SPS is insufficient.
That needs to change. Hopefully, local publications like The Urbanist, Publicola, The Stranger, and the South Seattle Emerald will answer the call, step up to the plate, and address the critical need for more SPS coverage in the coming years.
# Written by Andrew Villeneuve :: 2:30 PM
Categories: Education, Policy Topics
Tags: Curriculum, Research Poll Findings, School Funding, WA-Schools
Comments and pings are currently closed.