A Leader Willing to Question the System They're Leading
A Superintendent Willing to Question the System He's Leading
Seattle's new superintendent is openly acknowledging the problems within public education, and I find his approach to leadership both unusual and encouraging.
I recently came across a letter from Seattle Public Schools Superintendent Ben Shuldiner that I found incredibly refreshing. It isn't often that I read something from a person in such an important position of authority who seems willing to question the very institution he's been hired to lead.
His October 25, 2026 letter discusses the possibility of merging schools in Seattle, which is understandably a sensitive subject for families. But what interested me most wasn't the proposed mergers themselves. It was the way he talked about the district's history, the problems he has observed, and the culture that has allowed some of those problems to continue.
Seattle Public Schools had more than 94,000 students in 1964, compared with fewer than 50,000 today. There are certainly many reasons for that decline, including demographic changes and families moving elsewhere or choosing different educational options. What surprised me was that Shuldiner didn't use those outside factors as an excuse to avoid examining the district's own responsibility.
He openly discussed years of inconsistent leadership, poor communication, changing priorities, and decisions that sometimes seemed disconnected from what families actually wanted. He described an organization where programs were introduced and later abandoned, where parents struggled to get clear answers, and where people trying to donate, volunteer, or otherwise support their schools sometimes encountered unnecessary obstacles.
I found that last point particularly interesting because I have experienced versions of it myself.
Schools are constantly asking parents to get involved, volunteer, raise money, and help improve the educational experience for children. Yet sometimes when a parent brings a new idea, asks questions about an existing policy, or offers to help with something outside the usual activities, the response can feel surprisingly resistant.
I've wondered why organizations that depend so heavily on community involvement can sometimes make it so difficult for people who genuinely want to contribute.
It takes a certain amount of humility for a superintendent to acknowledge that the institution itself may be creating those barriers.
Another part of his letter that stood out to me was his description of visiting schools and seeing how different the educational experience can be depending on where a child happens to attend. Some schools have wonderful facilities, established teaching teams, and enrichment opportunities, while others struggle with inadequate buildings, teachers covering multiple grade levels, and limited resources.
These differences aren't necessarily a reflection of how hard teachers are working. A talented, dedicated teacher can still be placed in a situation where the structure of the school makes the job unnecessarily difficult.
I appreciated that Shuldiner seemed interested in examining those underlying conditions rather than expecting individual teachers and families to compensate for them.
His proposed solution involves the possibility of consolidating some schools, and I certainly don't know enough about Seattle's individual neighborhoods or programs to say whether those decisions are right. Closing a neighborhood school can be enormously disruptive. Families build relationships around their schools, children develop a sense of belonging, and the convenience of a nearby campus can make a significant difference in daily life.
But I do appreciate that he is willing to have the difficult conversation rather than continuing with a system simply because that's the way it has always operated.
What I find particularly promising is how he describes the process for making those decisions. Rather than announcing a finished proposal and giving families a short opportunity to respond, he has begun speaking with principals, plans to involve staff and families, and intends to hold broader community discussions before bringing recommendations to the school board.
He says that some of the initial ideas have already changed because of conversations with principals, and he expects additional changes as more people participate.
I think that distinction is really important.
There is a difference between asking for feedback because the process requires it and genuinely being willing to let that feedback influence the outcome. I've encountered situations where participation seemed to mean presenting a concern to a group that had already made up its mind. It can be incredibly discouraging, particularly when you've spent time researching a problem and are offering to help address it.
I would love to see more leaders who view participation as an opportunity to learn something they might not already know.
Shuldiner also makes some practical commitments to families affected by potential school closures, including adjustments to enrollment timelines and priorities for students who may need to transfer. He acknowledges the limits of what he can promise, which I find more reassuring than broad statements that everything will work out.
Of course, a thoughtful letter is only the beginning. Making meaningful changes within a large public institution is much more difficult than explaining what needs to happen. Families will ultimately judge him by the decisions he makes, how he responds when people disagree, and whether the promised opportunities for participation actually influence the results.
Still, I find his approach worth paying attention to.
Before coming to Seattle in February 2026, Shuldiner served as superintendent of the Lansing School District in Michigan. Seattle Public Schools reports that during his leadership, graduation rates, attendance, enrollment, and the district's financial position improved significantly. I would be interested in learning more about how those improvements happened and how much can be attributed to the changes he introduced.
I often wonder how someone with genuinely different ideas manages to reach a position of authority within an established institution. It seems like so many organizations naturally reward people who understand the existing culture, follow familiar procedures, and avoid making others uncomfortable. Those qualities can certainly provide stability, but they can also make it difficult to question practices that no longer serve their original purpose.
Someone who thinks differently, challenges established assumptions, or points out uncomfortable problems may not always be the easiest person to work with. Yet those may be precisely the qualities an organization needs when it has spent years struggling with the same issues.
I don't know enough about Shuldiner yet to conclude that he will be successful, but I appreciate the willingness to openly acknowledge problems that other leaders might prefer not to discuss.
I also appreciate that he appears to understand that public schools belong to the communities they serve. Parents, teachers, students, and volunteers aren't simply people who need to be informed about decisions made somewhere above them. They have experiences and perspectives that can help school leaders understand what is actually happening.
I think we sometimes underestimate how much good could come from simply making it easier for people to contribute their ideas and then genuinely considering what they have to say.
Not every suggestion will be practical, and leaders still have to make difficult decisions. But when someone raises a thoughtful concern or offers to help solve a problem, I would hope that the first response is curiosity rather than defensiveness.
I'll be interested to see what happens in Seattle over the coming months, especially whether Shuldiner follows through on his commitment to listen and adjust the plans based on what he learns from the community.
It is encouraging to see a superintendent willing to discuss the possibility that some of the problems in public education come from the system itself, rather than simply placing responsibility on teachers, parents, or students.
I hope his approach encourages other school leaders to examine their own organizations with the same willingness to ask difficult questions. I think there is enormous potential for improvement when the people in charge are secure enough in their leadership to acknowledge that something isn't working and open enough to recognize that the best ideas may come from someone outside their usual circle.
That's the kind of leadership I'd love to see more of in education.
Source: Ben Shuldiner, Seattle Public Schools Superintendent's Newsletter, October 25, 2026.
https://app.smore.com/n/ht7fy9
Seattle Public Schools — Superintendent's Newsletter Archive
https://www.seattleschools.org/news/superintendents-newsletter/
This article reflects my interpretation of the superintendent's public letter and the questions it raises about institutional culture, educational leadership, and community participation. The proposed school mergers and their potential effects remain subjects of public discussion.
