When the Seattle School Board fired superintendent Maria Goodloe-Johnson last month with uncharacteristic speed, Susan Enfield was a big part of the reason why. Goodloe-Johnson hired the articulate Enfield, a former high school teacher with a Ph.D. from Harvard’s urban superintendents program, to be the district’s chief academic officer in 2009.
Enfield has impressed education leaders with a reorganization of the management of schools into more accountable geographic zones and her deep understanding of district issues. In the midst of an embarrassing contracting scandal, the board turned to Enfield, appointing her superintendent through June of next year. If she succeeds, Enfield may get the $225,000-a-year job permanently. But the pressure is on. Before the ink on Enfield’s 15-month contract was dry, the blogosphere was questioning whether she had the experience to fix the financial oversight problems that proved Goodloe-Johnson’s undoing and to shield kids from the impacts of a $35 million budget deficit.
In her first week at the top, Enfield filled her old job and those of chief operations officer and financial officer with qualified interim appointments and launched national searches for permanent replacements.
Now the 47,000 children in the state’s largest school district are counting on her to deliver on the promises of the new student assignment plan and a groundbreaking teacher’s union contract. One in four district third-graders are still failing state reading standards, and many students in southeast Seattle schools fare far worse. Seattle’s Child caught up with the 42-year-old Enfield in her SODO office, which is lined with a campy collection of bright yellow rubber ducks – a reminder, she said, to keep “my focus on kids.”
SC: What accomplishments are you most proud of during your 18 months as the district’s chief academic officer?
ENFIELD: Moving the district into five geographic zones. When I came, we had one elementary school director, one middle school director and one high school director. We were not able to provide principals with the on-the-ground support they needed because this is a big city, and the directors were just running all over the place. So we focused the role on to a more geographically manageable span and reframed the job itself. The executive directors are now out at schools 60-70 percent of the time. We didn’t have that level of connection between the central office and the schools when I arrived. Parents say, “Tell me what is different at my school this year,” and I can point to the executive director of their region and say that this person is out in your school on a weekly basis, working with your principal to make improvements.
SC: The school district is at a juncture right now where it is essential to instill confidence in the district’s financial management and at the same time to move forward with ongoing reform. What are your priorities for next 15 months?
ENFIELD: Clearly there is an urgent need to do a deep dive on the operations and financial side of the organization to ensure that the proper internal controls are in place. And also to make sure that the way we are doing business here is really putting schools first. In next 30 days (I am going to be) out in the community, meeting with families, teachers and community groups. My sense is that there are a lot of people who want to be heard and they want to be heard by me. Next week, we will publicize my 30-day plan, the strategies I have to responding to what I hear, so people can see clearly how I am prioritizing my time.
Another huge priority is working with staff because of budget cuts and reductions in force. I need to be taking care of the people within the organization, as well, during what is a really, really tough time.
SC: The $35 million being cut this year from the SPS budget is going to be felt by kids in schools with bigger classes and fewer teachers. Some critics say too little has been cut from the central office. Should the administrative cuts be deeper?
ENFIELD: Our goal was to keep the cuts as far from classrooms as possible, but there was no way, given the severity and magnitude of these cuts, that it was not going to affect kids somehow; so you are right, it will impact the classroom. We are currently proposing a reduction of force at the central office of roughly 95 individuals, which is significant and will impact our day-to-day operations here. We may need to revisit this next fall if we see that those cuts are having an undue impact on our schools.
SC: Parents have been watching the implementation the neighborhood student assignment plan very carefully. This year, for the first time, families were guaranteed a spot at their neighborhood school. The old choice system lacked predictability, but it did offer parents in neighborhoods with poor performing schools a chance at a better education for their children. Now those families are stuck with failing schools, particularly in South Seattle. What are you doing for those children?
ENFIELD: We have a strategy for working with southeast schools, in particular, that we will be rolling out in the next month or so that will really focus on principal quality and teaching quality. I am looking at the whole region, and seeing what needs to be done on a school-by-school basis. I want families to know that I take very seriously the concerns they have about schools that are underperforming.
SC: In September, the district and the teacher unions agreed on a groundbreaking contract that calls for evaluating teachers based on how much their students are learning each year. Is implementation of the evaluation system on track? Are principals getting the training they need to fairly determine if teachers should be rated as unsatisfactory or innovative?
ENFIELD: It is on track. When we talk about our contract and the evaluation system, I think it is really important that we talk about it not just as a way of evaluating teachers, but supporting teachers in their professional growth. Since the beginning of the year, we have made the evaluation system the focus our regional principals’ meetings. Principals have come together and shared their observations, calibrating with one another (their ideas about) how do you describe innovative practice versus basic practice.
SC: In a few weeks, elementary schools across this district will be learning that they are losing some of their best and brightest teachers, because they don’t have long experience in the SPS system. The new contract does nothing to address this. Should there be a state law to eliminate layoffs solely based on seniority?
ENFIELD: It would be a mistake to assume that just because you are a newer or younger teacher that you are necessarily more effective than a seasoned veteran teacher. So what I would rather see is a focus on making sure that (teachers) have what they need to be successful in our system. If they are not the right fit in our system, then they don’t stay in our system. To me really it is less about old and new, and more about just focusing on making sure we have the best that we can.
SC: Describe your perfect school.
ENFIELD: My ideal school would be a place where every student is known, challenged and cared for. I don’t just mean known by name, though that is good place to start, but known for what their strengths and areas of improvement are. Challenged to do even more than they thought they could. And cared for – that they come to school and feel that the adults in that building truly care that they are there and are working on their behalf.
This interview has been edited and condensed for readability.
