Take back our schools!
Demand Better Governance of Seattle Public Schools
See Our Recommendations for the August Primary
Demand Better Governance of Seattle Public Schools
THE SEATTLE TIMES - MAY 16, 2025
After 34 years of writing about education, I’m pretty convinced that everyone who volunteers their time to help run public schools starts out wanting to do right by kids, even if those good intentions sometimes go off the rails.
That is especially true in Seattle...
As a parent, you want your child to have a safe, enriching, and high-quality education. You assume the school board and district leaders have a process to make decisions to reach that goal on behalf of all students. Yet in recent years, Seattle has seen the District and School Board make decisions that don’t make sense and don’t represent the best interests of our children.
Consider these recent examples in SPS:
Inconsistent policies and a lack of clear action on school safety have left parents and students feeling unprotected.
The failed proposal for school closures was formulated without input from parents or teachers and ignored proven data.
The erosion of Advanced Learning and Highly Capable (HC) programs and services, despite a constitutional mandate to deliver these services.
In the last several years, misguided enrollment practices have caused thousands of families to be turned away from their preferred neighborhood and option schools.
When decisions don’t make sense, it is often the way decisions are made that is at fault. If you’ve ever felt like your voice doesn’t matter in district decisions or that the board isn’t listening, the School Board’s current governance model is likely why.¹¹
Governance is how a group of people makes decisions and holds each other accountable. Businesses, nonprofits, and public institutions often set up a clear process so everyone knows how decisions will be made and who’s responsible for making them. A shared approach helps keep decisions consistent, transparent, and focused on the community’s goals.
Critical issues such as school safety, staffing shortages, class sizes, transportation, and curriculum choices (e.g., advanced learning, STEM, dual language, option schools) are treated as secondary, and SPS School Board members cite SOFG as the reason they avoid addressing them.
SPS School Board members are encouraged to leave critical decisions up to the superintendent and staff, avoiding oversight. For example:
The Board eliminated its Finance Committee soon after adopting SOFG, amid major budget deficits.⁹
The Board has not delved into concerns raised about potential conflicts of interest among District leadership, stating that according to SOFG it is considered staff work.
Engagement sessions, public testimony at board meetings, and “office hours” with board members have decreased in line with the SPS School Board’s adoption of SOFG. Consequently, the Board has been criticized for insufficient engagement with parents and teachers,¹² tending towards “inform” or “ignore” rather than “involve” or “collaborate” according to the Spectrum of Community Engagement.⁶
SPS spends an undisclosed amount of money on consultants to implement SOFG¹⁵ while the District faces a $100M+ budget deficit.
Student Outcomes Focused Governance (SOFG) is a model that the Seattle School Board adopted in 2021 to set goals and make decisions for the district.¹¹
SOFG is a trademarked, third-party model based on Policy Governance, which was created in the 1970s.
Boards applying SOFG adopt up to five SMART goals focused on student outcomes, often based on standardized test scores.¹⁰
Goals adopted by boards are often aspirational — up to a 42-point increase in Seattle¹⁰ — and unlikely to be met, setting the school board and superintendent up for failure.
There has been a reported culture of indoctrination and shaming at SOFG conferences and trainings.⁷
SOFG is leading SPS down a failing path. Our students deserve better. Seattle families deserve a school board that listens to them, prioritizes holistic student success, and makes decisions with transparency and accountability. If we want better schools for our children, we must demand better governance.
Learn how SOFG differs from other models used by school boards to make decisions that prioritize transparency, accountability, and community involvement.
Listen for SOFG terms such as “goals and guardrails,” “student outcomes,” and “adult behaviors.”⁴
Email or call your school board representatives and ask them to adopt a better way of making decisions. Urge them to prioritize real community engagement and student-centered policies beyond test scores.
Election coming up? Consider running¹³ and vote with SOFG in mind.
Connect with organizations working to hold the school board accountable like All Together For Seattle Schools.
Join an advocacy group at your school, or create one.
Collaborate with other advocacy groups to amplify efforts.
Attend public meetings and voice concerns about how the board’s failed decision-making impacts your child’s education.
Demand transparency from the board about how decisions are being made and who is influencing them.
Request public records to find out how much SPS is spending on SOFG-related training, consultants, and implementation.
Demand transparency about why this money isn’t being invested in classrooms, student support services, or teacher salaries.
View and add Public Records Requests (PRRs) at SPS by the Numbers, a community-made public archive.¹⁵
Help raise awareness by writing letters to state lawmakers, speaking with local media, writing op-eds, or sharing your concerns on social media.
SOFG was created in 2014 by Airick Leonard West with the Council of the Great City Schools (CGCS).⁴
In 2016, West changed his name to AJ Crabill⁸ and started working for the Texas Education Agency (TEA) as Deputy Commissioner of Education for Governance. Crabill’s work at TEA included Lead Coach of Lone Star Governance (LSG), an iteration of SOFG.³
Crabill is a self-professed “Student Outcomes Evangelist” who aims to "transition ... the nation's 14,000 school boards” to SOFG-style models.³ Crabill has created iterations of SOFG at the state level in Texas, Nevada and North Dakota.
Crabill's current roles include Director of Governance at CGCS and SXSW EDU advisory council member. He is also a self-published author.
Many SOFG-led districts are under threat of school closures, including Fort Worth, TX; San Francisco, CA; Columbus, OH; San Antonio, TX; and Aurora, CO.
In 2023, TEA took over the Houston Independent School District5 and made drastic changes strongly opposed by parents, including implementing an educator evaluation system, removing librarians, and surveilling classrooms for disruptive students 24/7 via Zoom.¹⁴
The North Dakota legislature "funded the goal to train all 168 North Dakota school boards" in their iteration of SOFG called Be Legendary.²
Despite being introduced and implemented in school boards across the country, its effectiveness remains unproven.¹
Student Outcomes Focused Governance, in Seattle – Rainy Day Recess Podcast (previously Seattle Hall Pass), Season 2, Episode 4, September 18, 2024
Seattle’s School Board Should Move Away from SOFG – Robert Cruickshank, Opinion in The Stranger, July 3, 2023
AJ Crabill Framework: Unproven, Unaccountable, Undemocratic – SF Education Alliance, June 20, 2023
A Critique of Student Outcomes Focused Governance – Uriah Ward, School Board Member of St. Paul Public Schools, MN, October 21, 2024
The 31% No One Talks About: A living reference on district staffing and the structural budget problem in Seattle Public Schools – Albert J. Wong, April 28, 2025