Surprising no one, voters will pick between Republican Attorney General Rob McKenna and former Democratic Congressman Jay Inslee in the Nov. 6 general election.
McKenna received 42.9 percent of the vote as of 9 p.m. Tuesday. Inslee pulled in 46.7 percent of the vote. The top two finishers in each race, regardless of party, will advance to the November election.
In the early results for the rest of the statewide races:
Lt. Governor
Current Lt. Gov. Brad Owen, a Democrat, held a dominant lead with 49 percent of the votes. The race to face him remained tight between Republicans Bill Finkbeiner (25 percent) and Glenn Anderson (18 percent).
Secretary of State
Republican Kim Wyman raced out to the front with 39.1 percent in early returns. The fight to face her remained close between Democrats Greg Nickels (16.1 percent) Kathleen Drew (21.5 percent) and Jim Kastama, (13.8 percent).
Attorney General
The race appears likely to be a showdown between Democrat Bob Ferguson (52.2 percent) and Republican Reagan Dunn (38.3 percent).
State Treasurer
As the only candidate, Jim McIntire enjoyed a cakewalk with 100 percent of the vote.
State Auditor
Republican James Watkins enjoyed a comfortable lead with 45.2 percent of the vote. Democrats Craig Pridemore (20.3 percent) and Troy Kelley (24.1 percent) fought for the No. 2 spot.
Superintendent of Public Instruction
Incumbent Randy I. Dorn held a dominant lead with 54.3 of the vote in the nonpartisan seat. Ronald Higgins (15.5 percent) and James Bauckman (14.6 percent) fought for a distant second.
But Dorn, by the time the final primary vote is tallied, could end up in the general election unopposed. The Superintendent of Public Instruction, along with judicial races are not affected by the "top two" guideline. So simply finishing the primary with 50 percent plus one vote effectively wins the seat.
Commissioner of Public Lands
Democrat Peter Goldmark held a sizeable lead with 51.7 percent of the votes. He is likely to face Republican Clint Didier, who had 40.6 percent.
Insurance Commissioner
Democrat Mike Kreidler has pulled in 54.7 percent of the vote in the initial returns. Republicans John R. Adams (22.6 percent) and Scott Reilly (17.8 percent) fought for the right to face Kreidler in November.
More money, and there has been plenty of it, does not equal a better education system. If that were the case, our education would be getting better and better every year. Let's face it... the rules which govern the education system have been driven more by teacher demands rather than student needs. Any system which protects under-performing employees will have under-performing employees. We need to pay good teacher more, and drive the below-average out. See any impediments to that plan?
Gates' report was based on a comprehensive study and he has no ax to grind. His recommendations will ring true if you read them with an open mind. But generally, doesn't it make sense to expose more kids to the best teachers rather than each teacher having the same number of pupils? If your only solution is to blame the people who want to stop the ever increasing amount we pay per pupil, you won't fix anything. We need innovation, common sense, and the freedom to do what is right for the students. If that means we need a new kind of relationship with the teachers, let's get to work on that.
Is it possible that the current relationship between the teachers and the admin is that teachers negotiate wages and number of classroom hours and the administration says in return the teachers have to take whatever conditions admin presents to them?
Re: Gates Yes, he supports a form of charter schools as does a majority of the country. Americans like competition and frankly, I think it would be good for teachers as well. I can't believe he has a "profit motive" since he is in the process of giving his money away as quickly as he can find worthy causes.
I wholeheartedly agree that parents are largely responsible for the problem. Many send their kids to school and expect that the school is exclusively responsible for educational success. No support at home, no enforcement of studying, reading, or home work requirements, blame the teacher for not pushing slackers hard enough, etc.
School actually starts on September 4th in Renton. Thanks.
I wasn't using code words when I mentioned under performing teachers. To be as clear as possible, part of the problem is that bad teachers are protected by the system and the price for that is a general distrust of the profession. It has to clean up it's act in this regard so that it doesn't become the scapegoat for the larger problems. I think that charter schools are potentially part of the solution for several of the reasons which we agree are the problem: 1) "challenging/disruptive" students not allowed to negatively impact the entire class 2) Parental involvement can be enforced as a condition of attendance Some other benefits that you may not agree with: 3) Good teachers paid well 4) Poor teachers eliminated from the classroom I think there is a point of agreement that we need to take an honest look at the problems and come up with solutions and measurements that are focused on the primary objective.
Alabama has one of the lowest student/teacher ratios and their students' performance is... at the low end of the spectrum. Incidentally, we already tax the wealthiest to help fund our schools while the poor contribute virtually nothing. Our tax code is already very progressive. If you want to go the way of New Jersey, you'll find that soon there aren't enough wealthy still living in the state. Besides, I think that even those at the low end of the income range should pay something. Might part of the problem be that parents who contribute little feel that education is 'free'? Sometimes having a little skin in the game helps to keep people to appreciate the cost/value of education. I fear we have strayed from the basic point that, regardless of revenue, there needs to be a bold approach to fix the problems you described. That is the primary challenge that the administration must address.
Out of the 10 or so teachers that I have known well enough to evaluate, 5 were excellent, 3 were acceptable, and 2 needed to find other work. The problem is, how are the poorest 20% handled? I'm afraid that in most districts those teachers will remain and they will get the same pay as the excellent 50%. I worked in a public safety union myself for 20 years and I found it extremely frustrating that I worked adjacent to sub par employees who made the same as I did. Some were fired, most got their jobs back. It was harmful to our profession since the collective professionalism was diluted. After leaving the "union fold" I was heartened to find that my work was appreciated and monetarily rewarded based on my individual efforts and achievements. My 'conversation' with Gerard has reminded me that our education 'problem' should not be blamed on the teachers. It requires more thoughtful analysis and focused action.
I wonder if your distaste for charter schools is because you feel that it draws resources from the pool that could be used to improve the public system. While I appreciate your passion for wanting to improve public education, your ability to do that effectively may be limited by the barriers you described. Personally, I see the landscape changing and possibly bifurcating into; 1) Charter schools for those willing to invest more time and money and abide by their requirements 2)Public schools for those with special needs and challenges or who prefer the public path. If this comes to pass, there will be fewer students in the public system, but they will be the most challenging. As a teacher, the choice might be 1)Higher pay, better performing students (and parents), private contract instead of union contract or 2) Existing public system with a concentration of special needs and challenged students If administrators agree that the current system is challenged, they could mitigate some of the problems by offering some of those choices within the existing public system.
Incidentally, I wasn't suggesting that what I described was a 'solution,' but rather it was a prediction about the likely direction. You earlier described that a significant barrier to excellence in the classroom was the mix of healthy, well adjusted, able students and developmentally challenged, ill prepared, disruptive students. Necessarily, with this situation, the pace of education is slowed. The alternative is to recognize that and provide the best environment. For a variety of reasons, that is not accomplished in the public system... that's the primary reason that people choose charter schools or home schooling. If you have options, you pick the best for your child that you can afford. You seem to have a certain hostility to wealthy people. The fact is, despite the many loopholes they enjoy, the wealthy are paying the lion's share of the bills in this country. Wealth is not something to be scorned, it's to what most people aspire.
http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB10000872396390443659204577575001746476494-lMyQjAxMTAyMDEwMDAxODA3Wj.html?mod=wsj_valetleft_email
I'm not sure why I didn't remember this during the discussion with Gerard, but this platform could be leveraged to help level the playing field for students. All could have access to the same high quality education at a fraction of the cost of 'live' teaching. The tremendous savings could be used to tutor those who needed more help using a combination of traditional teaching and customized on-line lessons.