On Thursday, Sept. 26, the 2024 Office of Public Instruction superintendent debate was held in the Edmonds Center for the Arts in Edmonds, where rival candidates Chris Reykdal and David Olson discussed problems and solutions in Washington’s school districts.

Opening statements began around 7:00 p.m., starting with the incumbent state superintendent, Reykdal. He explained his past in the education field, emphasizing the time and effort he put into the Washington school system.

“This is the most beautiful and powerful thing we do in the state of Washington; is deliver for over a million children public education that opens up doors for them,” Reykdal said.

The 11-year Peninsula school board member, David Olson, was then allowed to make his statement and explained his concerns with the school system, such as the public school district’s plummeting academic scores and student mental health. 

“I had no choice but to step up and challenge my opponent,” Olson said. “Washington public school systems are failing students, parents, and teachers. I’m running because your kids, grandkids, and our teachers deserve better.”

The first question, aimed at Reykdal, scrutinized his budget plan, which asked for nearly three billion dollars over the next two years.

“We submitted a budget that we think makes a huge difference for students with disabilities and transportation shortfalls, supports educators, and paraeducators,” Reykdal said. “…We’re going to continue to advocate because we have the research, the data, and the understanding to know what closes gaps and helps kids.”

Reykdal further clarified that although he believes the legislatures would pass his budget, he is still prepared to take legal action if it fails, as basic education requires the additional funding. Following Reykdal, Olson also addressed concerns with basic education funding.

“The state does not meet its constitutional duty to fund basic ed[ucation] and specifically, special ed[ucation] and transportation, [which is] really hurting our schools,” Olson said.

Olson referenced the 2012 Supreme Court case of McCleary v. State of Washington, which required the state to fully fund K-12 public schools. However, through disagreement in legislation and salary negotiations, Washington did not reach compliance until 2018.

“What happened with the McCleary decision 12 years ago?” Olson said. “They did it in a vacuum, and they did not collaborate with school superintendents, school boards, or CFOs, and if I get elected, I’m going to make sure that we bring the stakeholders together, but [do it] right this time.”

Shifting to struggling school districts, the moderators delved into budget cuts, school closures, and the possible dissolution of school districts. The question focused on if the state should work harder to prevent these scenarios.

“The most active situation [Washington] takes is to fully fund basic education,” Reykdal said. “And in all those cases, those districts have seen an enormous erosion of their buying power due to inflation.”

Reykdal explained that although paying for highly qualified educators is worth it, the salaries still erode heavily at the allotment given to the school system.

“We’re now a billion dollars behind where we were in 2019, adjusted for inflation,” Reykdal said. “That’s why I argue with all of us in a respectful way; our first job is to come together as Democrats, Republicans, nonpartisans, lean into public ed[ucation], challenge our legislation, and meet their constitutional duty.”

Olson gave his opinion on the matter, expressing that the state needs more proactive leadership, especially with crucial funds being mishandled due to negligence and incognizance.

“The Office of Elementary Secondary Education found that OSPI, during that same time, did not provide proper oversight on how the COVID-19 money was spent,” Olson said. “So two years into COVID-19, almost $2 billion had not been allocated out across the state to schools that, in my opinion, could really use that.”

The debate moved toward the 21 Seattle public schools facing shutdown and how the candidates would manage that as superintendent.

“I recently spoke to some parents and community members in the Seattle school district,” Olson said. “One of the things they’re mostly complaining about is a lack of transparency from their superintendent and their school board.”

Reykdal explained how things need to be fixed so that schools can continue to provide for their students. 

“We should step in and help; that’s what part of advocacy is,” Reykdal said. “I think the Seattle school district is going to manage as critically as it can, but there’s a fundamental lack of funding in basic education that has caused this.”

On the ballot this November is the capital gains tax, which sends hundreds of millions of dollars to education each year and has a chance of being repealed, according to the moderators. The question focuses on how the state will address the repeal and a solution for districts that lose money.

“If it does fail, we will go right to the legislature and say, we will need that money out of the existing capital budget,” Reykdal said.

Olson also had critiques of the Washington legislature, pointing out that he doesn’t support or oppose capital gains and would rather fund schooling with other taxing.

“The state legislature has not been very good at keeping its promises,” Olson said. “Years ago, they had a lottery. They said the lottery revenue would go to fund education, and that’s not happening today.”

Special education has never been fully funded by Washington’s legislatures, even though it is mandated, according to the moderators. Olson explained that the superintendent has enough control to meet up with leaders of the state legislature to fix this issue of underfunding.

“The state needs to meet its constitutional duty to fund our most vulnerable students, because they are the ones […] being left behind,” Olson said. “…Our children are the future of this state, and they need to step up.”

Reykdal stated that special education funding has gone up since he has been superintendent. A follow-up question was then asked about what can be done to support students with special needs to truly help them succeed.

“We’ve also said you need to change inclusion as practices and train educators,” Reykdal said. “More students with disabilities should get more of their learning time with their peers in a general ed[ucation] setting and not in isolation.”

Reykdal has been criticized for the lack of progress made towards Washington students’ college readiness and was asked why he should be given a third term. He responded, saying he was thankful for the criticism, but that Washington’s state testing is standardized towards university admission instead of determining which students need additional support.

“The test is one measure of system direction,” Reykdal said. “It does not measure each child, and that has been a failure of this testing regime.”

The discussion pivoted to Olson, who was asked what he would first change if elected into office. 

“I want to give more local control to the school districts,” Olson said. “Right now, I don’t believe they’re getting enough opportunity to make local decisions based on what their communities need. I also want to give more local control to the teachers, since they know how to run their classrooms.”

Fourth and eighth grade math and reading scores have declined nationwide, according to the National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP). Both Reykdal and Olson were asked for the cause of the decline as well as what they would do to reverse it.

“We are working on a comprehensive set of learning standard changes that really doubles down on the idea that kids need to get back to the old school reading of text and less screen time,” Reykdal said. 

He explained that the decline could have been caused by increased use of smartphones, but says students are already getting back on track. Olson was then asked a question that was more specific to the pandemic era learning loss and how he would help. 

“If you look at these school districts and you see there’s this disparity, this widening achievement gap between students of color and students with disabilities, we have to make sure that we’re directing additional resources into those schools to help lift up those struggling students,” Olson said.

Moderators stressed that having the best teachers helps all students succeed. Both candidates were asked to answer how they will make sure they incorporate teachers from all backgrounds to match the diversity of the student population. Reykdal started by saying how they have already been improving diversity among teachers within Washington school districts, as well as retaining them.

“Today, almost 30% of our new teachers are teachers of color,” Reykdal said. “That isn’t by accident, [instead by] intentional recruitment, and a huge thank you to our higher institutions. We’ve also created innovative ways to become teachers. A lot of paraeducators that are very diverse and multilingual; they’re such a rich source of talent in our communities.”

Olson explained that when he was in Central Washington to talk with the Latino community, he found they were having issues with communications because not enough teachers knew Spanish. 

“As far as diversity networking [goes], making sure that we have teachers that can speak Spanish, how about we give incentives for the teachers that don’t speak Spanish, don’t learn Spanish, or incentivize teachers that do speak Spanish to transfer into that school district, to help those schools so that the Latino speaking students aren’t pushed in one school or one classroom with only one teacher that speaks Spanish,” Olson said. “I agree that we need to make sure teachers reflect the students.”

A common critique of schools is the omission of enough subjects focused on life skills like financial literacy or investing. Such classes can help prepare students for higher education as well as teach them basic skills to help with adult life. Both candidates were then asked whether this should be a bigger topic to focus on and, if so, how they would embed it into schools. 

“They give them these life scenarios, so they have to work through that,” Olson said. “I’d like to see all school districts do something like that, so that kids graduate with a basic understanding of how to budget.”

Reykdal explained that there are already classes that have certain life skills within the course and that it shouldn’t be required; it should be up to the student whether or not they decide to take the class.

“We consume too much of a student’s high school credits with mandates and requirements, mostly from the State Board of Education,” Reykdal said. “…We’ve embedded financial literacy as an option for kids. We take a beating for it if we don’t have a context for it.” 

In January, The Parents Bill of Rights was passed by state legislatures, but recently, parts regarding student mental and medical health records were struck down. Reykdal answered first on how he felt about the bill and if he would repeal or amend it. 

“We’re building right now with technical support for our districts to really double down on parents rights where they have a right,” Reykdal said. “We’re making sure that the courts clarify where students have a privacy protection, that we ought not step over the rights of students.” 

Both candidates addressed the Parents Bill of Rights and want to continue supporting it.

“They want to be actively involved in their kids’ and their lives, no matter what it is, whether it’s academics, gender, or psych; whatever it might be, parents want to be involved in those decisions,” Olson said.

A follow-up question was then asked about whether or not parents should have a say in the curriculum their kids are being taught. 

“A curriculum is established by local school boards, and lesson plans are delivered by teachers, and at that level, parents need enormous amounts of context, support, and invitation, and good school boards invite them into those curriculum decisions; that is a local decision,” Reykdal said.

School board meetings provide parents with the opportunity to go and express their feelings about things being taught within schools and more. 

“We have our entire curriculum online so parents can go and see what the children are going to be learning more than 30 days in advance,” Olson said. “So if there’s something they want to opt their kids out of, they can choose to do so.”

Earlier this year, a law was passed that aims to make it harder to challenge books within school libraries. Both candidates had to answer if they supported the measure or not. Olson claimed that he does not support banning books, as the individual can make the choice of whether or not they will decide to read a book.

“If you start doing that, it sets a very negative precedent,” Olson said. “I think the librarian is responsible for that, and the community shouldn’t step in.”

Reykdal states that he does not support banning books at the state-wide level but has encompassed ways for parents to challenge books that they feel should not be accessible to their children. 

“There are processes for parents if they want to challenge a library book and question the age appropriateness of it, but that is something that’s very sacred in our state,” Reykdal said. “This office, despite some groups who want us to be banning books, should always stand for local control on this issue and never, ever banning those materials in the state-wide level.”

The state phone ban plans to have phones restricted in classrooms by 2025, and while some schools have already taken the lead on this, some parents fear of not having access to their children during an emergency. The questions asked candidates about their overall thoughts of cell phones in the school setting. 

“Not that many are doing pouches, but it can work,” Reykdal said. “A lot of the policies is that it has to be in your backpack and it can’t be seen, and that way it is accessible if necessary, but it needs to be off and in the backpack.”

Both candidates agree with the fact that cellphones need to be off and away because they are distracting, especially during emergencies. 

“In an emergency, I would argue that you do not want students on their phone talking if there’s a shooter in the school; God forbid, they need to be listening to the teacher to execute their evacuation, whatever emergency procedures are,” Olson said.

Lockdowns and shelter in place orders have been a common procedure for schools around the country, so having school resource officers is an important part of keeping a school safe. Though some schools in Washington have limited access to these resources, the question targets how to make schools safer and the role being played as superintendent.

“I absolutely support school resource officers,” Olson said. “Our school district, a year ago, passed a safety-security technology levy so that we could add additional cameras and security in our schools, but we also hired armed school safety officers and former police officers that are in plain clothes, patrolling the halls.”

Reykdal explained that they have threat assessment systems that help protect students that have the risk of hurting themselves and/or other people.

“It’s not just about school resource officers, but that may be part of the solution,” Reykdal said. “…It is also a whole lot about student mental health and support; it’s a combination of things.” 

19% of Washington students have reported being bullied within their school. The next question asked what tools and resources the two candidates would provide to counter this issue. Reykdal started off by talking about how social-emotional learning is embedded within schools to help students be able to address when something is not okay and to stand up for themselves and others.

“I think every great challenge we’ve ever faced is a combination of some regulatory work, imperative teaching,” Reykdal said. “…You’re identifying resources for them, and you’re teaching them the skills to interact with each other and ask for help.” 

Olson explained how in his school district, they have student representatives that help articulate students’ perspectives within a school to people from the board. He mentioned that you have to work with students in the school and not just the adults for this reason. 

“The school student reps come to our board, and they give us really honest feedback on what’s going on in our schools,” Olson said. “Very honest feedback, and we act on that.”

Both candidates were asked how they would help schools provide students with mental health support and how that would be balanced with financial realities. Olson states that teachers are overwhelmed by inclusionary practices that allow students with disabilities to be in the general education setting.

“Teachers are not trained to provide social, emotional support for those students other than caring about them,” Olson said.

Reykdal explained that they had made direct investments in aiding schools with psychologists and resources for mental health.

“We built regional mental health networks in all nine regions of our state,” Reykdal said. 

27% of Washington students have reported that they cannot afford breakfast or lunch at school, though free and reduced breakfast and lunch programs can be deemed controversial among taxpayers, according to the moderators. Olson explained that students cannot function without proper nutrition and stressed the fact that students need to eat.

“We try to take the stigma off of it in our school district so no one knows if they’re on free reduced lunch,” Olson said. “We don’t ask them to show any ID. I think it’s super critical that we make sure that no kid goes hungry during the day at school.”

Reykdal mentioned that lately food inflation has been tough and that free and reduced meals for students in need is a big help for families with low income. 

“Focus on kids, focus on learning, make it a whole child support, where we generally share the cost of that between the federal government and state government, and understand that for some families, it’s a massive boost of their survivability,” Reykdal said.

For the final question of the debate, Reykdal and Olson were asked what success policies they have seen within school districts across Washington. Reykdal stressed the fact that students in elementary school should have the opportunity to learn a second language.

“We have 50,000 kids for the policy that we’ve initiated to get them dual language learning,” Reykdal said. “They’re learning to be bilingual from the age they start school.” 

Olson talked about how he has had great success with his goal of getting 100% of students to be able to read by the third grade.

“We created a literacy task force,” Olson said. “We went around the state, brought in experts to develop science of learning, so we actually knew how we were teaching and not just trying to teach, and we’ve had great success, so that’s why we’d like to see literacy expanded across the state.” 

Concluding the debate, both candidates were given a final 60 seconds to make statements, starting off with Olson. 

“As superintendent, I will focus on student success, encourage parent involvement to improve learning and lower absentee rates, fully fund paraeducators, work to expand CTE programs, and ensure the state is meeting its constitutional duty to fully fund education,” Olson said.

Reykdal talked about all the things as superintendent that he has been working on, like increasing test scores and graduation rates.

“We are a state that’s been doing wonderful things, but we’ve got a lot of work to do post-pandemic,” Reykdal said. “We have to be honest about our weaknesses and our strengths.”

The debate marked a crucial point in both campaigns as the election date of Nov. 5 draws closer and impacts on undecided voters matter more than ever.