The Titanic has a new captain!

There is absolutely no point in the School Board spending more than 5 minutes searching for a new superintendent, since none of them are "permanent" and none of them have been even minimally efficient. Just keeping appointing the next in line after the interim leaves; it won't make any difference.

@4
Exactly.
Well-paid clowns.

We couldn't take their Kings and now they've retaliated and taken our SPS Chief.

Do they really need a Superintendent at all? Seems like a waste of time and money.

@5 - the School Board gets about $4600....a year for their service. Some even turn it down. They are NOT overpaid or clowns.

Do we need a superintendent? Probably but what Seattle Schools needs less of is administrators at headquarters and more resources in our schools. They give out raises to top administrators like candy while schools have to struggle to keep a school secretary.

@9, the "overpaid clowns" comment referred to the superintendents, not the Board. However, many of them have proven to be underpaid clowns.

The unregistered commenter, Naah, that would be crazy talk at 7 and 12, is making a common error, mistaking equity with equality. The commenter is also trying - though not very effectively - to misinform the community.

The funding formula for schools, the Weighted Staffing Standards (WSS), is the same for every school. They each get funded to provide all of the basic support and administrative staffing that any school needs. Larger schools get funding for additional support and administrative staff because they have more students.

The WSS is also the formula for funding teaching staff. Again, each school gets funded through the same formula to provide enough teachers for the students at the school.

Finally, the WSS provides additional funding based on the number of disabled students (Special Education), English Language Learners, and students living in poverty, as these students have additional needs that require additional resources.

Schools with high concentrations of students living in poverty, or English Language Learners, or students with IEPs (Special Education), will, of course, will have higher funding per student, but, as anyone can see, funding per student is a meaningless statistic. Every school (except six) gets funded the same way and would get the same funding if they had the same set of students. Every school get the exact same funding per student and the same funding per ELL student, per Special Education student, and per Free or Reduced Price Lunch student. They are all funded the same, but the funding is calibrated to the students' needs. That's equitable, even if it isn't equal.

Six high schools that are funded through a different formula because their structure is so different from other schools that the basic allocation of support and administrative staffing isn't thought to be appropriate for them. If you're looking for inequity in funding, this is the only place to look for it.

To substitute equality for equity is a sort of rhetorical sleight of hand, but it is a clumsy one and the people who are trying it should be ashamed of themselves. Not only for trying to mislead the public, but for doing such a crap job of it.

You really have to wonder why we can't keep a superintendent. As it was Banda was the only candidate willing to take the job and he decided to get out after just one year. The other candidates dropped out of the race.

The district is way to big.