‘Where’s the action?’ Seattle Schools superintendent pledges to streamline handling of sexual misconduct cases 10%

By Sami West0%

4/10/2026, 4:00:39 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 22 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Optimism Bias, and Self-Serving Bias, with Availability Heuristic as the most egregious example at 15.8% saturation with 94 hits. Analysis detected 648 faulty-reasoning hits from 596 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 26.2% and a BS Rank of 10% (19,886 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 90.90% of the article peer group.

The new leader of Seattle Public Schools said he wants to improve how the district responds when teachers are accused of sexual abuse or harassment. 
Since arriving in Seattle in February, Superintendent Ben Shuldiner said he’s seen “renewed vigor” in the district’s human resources department, which is currently looking into a backlog of old cases. 
“If you came up to my office, you would actually see stacks of data around investigations that have happened over the last couple of years and me really pushing to say, ‘Where are we with this? 
What’s going on?’” 
Shuldiner said in a recent interview with KUOW’s “Adults in the Room” podcast. 
The seven-part podcast revisits decades-old sexual misconduct allegations against Tom Hudson, a beloved biology teacher at Garfield High School, and examines the district’s teacher accountability system. 
Not all of the cases Shuldiner and the HR department are reviewing today involve sexual abuse or harassment, he said. 
But over the last two months, he said it’s become clear the district lacks solid “systems and structures” to handle these matters in an effective, timely manner that protects children first and foremost. 
“We’re trying to really look at every single person that’s under investigation. 
Some people are still on leave for two years,” Shuldiner said. 
“Like, where's the action? 
Either find something or don’t, you’ve got to move forward. 
And I think that’s indicative of what you’re seeing from your lens  is a slowness, an inaction, maybe an obfuscation.” 
Shuldiner said it’s also important for accused teachers to have due process. 
“Everybody is given the right to plead their case,” Shuldiner said. 
“Each case is different. 
If we believe that people are innocent until proven guilty, we need to make sure that we’re going in with positive intent to see that.” 
To improve accountability when it comes to sexual misconduct, Shuldiner said the district must define terms like “sexual abuse” and “grooming” through clear policy. 
While the district has a policy expressly prohibiting the sexual harassment of students, Shuldiner said he wasn’t aware of any district policies that explicitly address sexual abuse or grooming. 
Neither terms have legal definitions, and grooming is not considered illegal in Washington state. 
Nineteen states have passed laws that define grooming as “the process of manipulating a child to gain their trust and sexually abuse them,” according to Enough Abuse, a child advocacy organization. 
Of those states, 17 have criminalized grooming a minor for sexual abuse as a felony. 
Washington has done neither. 
As part of ongoing efforts to reorganize the district’s Central Office, Shuldiner said he also wants to create a “Department of Student and Family Support.” 
“One of the reasons why I think the district hasn’t done as good a job as it should around stuff like this is where would you go? 
Who are you going to talk to? 
Who are the people that you trust if something bad is happening?” 
he said. 
“I’m not even sure as the superintendent that I know who I would call.” 
Shuldiner said he hopes the reorganization  and the creation of the department  is finished by this summer or the start of the 2026-27 school year. 
First he’d establish a “mental health and wellness” division, then definitions for offenses like grooming, sexual harassment, and sexual assault. 
Shuldiner said he also wants to reevaluate the training and professional development the district offers on those topics. 
Listen to more of Shuldiner's interview with "Adults in the Room" in the latest episode, "Bad Apples." 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 3.5%Sami West: 1.2%KUOW: 2.6%Confirmation Bias3.5%This article: 0.0%Sami West: 0.8%KUOW: 1.3%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 15.8%Sami West: 3.9%KUOW: 3.4%Availability Heuristic15.8%This article: 0.0%Sami West: 1.2%KUOW: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Sami West: 1.1%KUOW: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sami West: 1.2%KUOW: 1.4%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 2.5%Sami West: 6.6%KUOW: 7.4%Framing Effect2.5%This article: 0.0%Sami West: 0.5%KUOW: 1.0%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Sami West: 0.7%KUOW: 1.0%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sami West: 0.1%KUOW: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 9.6%Sami West: 3.0%KUOW: 3.8%Optimism Bias9.6%This article: 1.7%Sami West: 1.9%KUOW: 1.8%Pessimism Bias1.7%This article: 11.6%Sami West: 7.1%KUOW: 8.0%Negativity Bias11.6%This article: 8.7%Sami West: 2.5%KUOW: 2.0%Self-Serving Bias8.7%This article: 0.0%Sami West: 0.7%KUOW: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Sami West: 0.0%KUOW: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sami West: 0.8%KUOW: 2.0%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sami West: 0.2%KUOW: 0.5%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 4.4%Sami West: 2.6%KUOW: 2.7%Halo Effect4.4%This article: 0.0%Sami West: 0.1%KUOW: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sami West: 0.0%KUOW: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 5.5%Sami West: 1.3%KUOW: 1.1%Recency Bias5.5%This article: 0.0%Sami West: 0.2%KUOW: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sami West: 0.0%KUOW: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sami West: 0.4%KUOW: 0.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Sami West: 0.2%KUOW: 0.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 7.4%Sami West: 2.9%KUOW: 4.3%Appeal to Authority7.4%This article: 2.3%Sami West: 1.8%KUOW: 1.4%False Dilemma2.3%This article: 3.4%Sami West: 0.3%KUOW: 0.9%Slippery Slope3.4%This article: 0.0%Sami West: 0.1%KUOW: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 6.7%Sami West: 3.7%KUOW: 4.1%Hasty Generalization6.7%This article: 1.2%Sami West: 0.4%KUOW: 0.3%Red Herring1.2%This article: 0.0%Sami West: 0.8%KUOW: 0.8%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 2.0%Sami West: 7.4%KUOW: 6.1%Appeal to Emotion2.0%This article: 4.2%Sami West: 1.0%KUOW: 0.8%Begging the Question4.2%This article: 4.5%Sami West: 2.0%KUOW: 2.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)4.5%This article: 0.0%Sami West: 0.3%KUOW: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Sami West: 0.4%KUOW: 0.3%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Sami West: 0.3%KUOW: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Sami West: 0.1%KUOW: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Sami West: 3.3%KUOW: 3.3%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Sami West: 0.0%KUOW: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 2.5%Sami West: 1.4%KUOW: 1.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)2.5%This article: 0.0%Sami West: 0.0%KUOW: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Sami West: 0.1%KUOW: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 3.5%Sami West: 0.1%KUOW: 0.1%Personal Incredulity3.5%This article: 0.0%Sami West: 0.1%KUOW: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Sami West: 0.0%KUOW: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Sami West: 0.5%KUOW: 1.0%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.7%Sami West: 0.7%KUOW: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection0.7%This article: 0.0%Sami West: 2.0%KUOW: 3.2%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 4.2%Sami West: 2.5%KUOW: 1.5%Indoctrination4.2%This article: 0.0%Sami West: 0.5%KUOW: 1.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sami West: 0.2%KUOW: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 2.9%Sami West: 0.5%KUOW: 1.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…2.9%

596 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers80%attributed speech117writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageBen Shuldiner • 30 words • 0.0% coverageBen Shuldiner • 36 words • 0.0% coverageBen Shuldiner • 3 words • 0.0% coverageKUOW • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageBen Shuldiner • 20 words • 0.0% coverageBen Shuldiner • 33 words • 0.0% coverageBen Shuldiner • 12 words • 0.0% coverageBen Shuldiner • 11 words • 0.0% coverageBen Shuldiner • 4 words • 100.0% coverageBen Shuldiner • 10 words • 0.0% coverageBen Shuldiner • 21 words • 0.0% coverageBen Shuldiner • 12 words • 0.0% coverageBen Shuldiner • 11 words • 0.0% coverageBen Shuldiner • 4 words • 0.0% coverageBen Shuldiner • 25 words • 100.0% coverageBen Shuldiner • 24 words • 0.0% coverageBen Shuldiner • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageEnough Abuse • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageBen Shuldiner • 25 words • 0.0% coverageBen Shuldiner • 27 words • 0.0% coverageBen Shuldiner • 7 words • 0.0% coverageBen Shuldiner • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageBen Shuldiner • 14 words • 0.0% coverageBen Shuldiner • 27 words • 0.0% coverageBen Shuldiner • 20 words • 0.0% coverageBen Shuldiner • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Ben Shuldiner

76%flagged-word coverage
435 attributed words91% of attributed speech74% writer coverage
0%7.5%15.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -14.5 ptsWriter: 14.5%Ben Shuldiner: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination+5.7 ptsWriter: 0.0%Ben Shuldiner: 5.7%5.7%Quote-first Misdirection+0.9 ptsWriter: 0.0%Ben Shuldiner: 0.9%0.9%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.