With four school-age kids, my wife Wendy and I struggle everyday with the realities of the good, bad and ugly of public education in Seattle. Like all parents we’re often thrilled and frustrated with our kids’ education at the same time. As a legislator tackling education reform, I find the theoretical policy issues are at times disconnected from the classroom.

The challenges in Seattle are well known: Only 17 percent of our graduates are fully prepared for college; our dropout rate is shocking; we have among the nation’s highest percentage of private-school attendance; the lack of academic rigor is frustrating to parents; and capacity is a major issue throughout the city.

As a public-school parent in Seattle (Salmon Bay and John Hay) and a legislator on the budget-writing House Education Appropriations Committee in Olympia, I believe it’s time to tackle education reform in Washington. The challenge we face today is not merely about money, teachers or bureaucracy, it’s about all of that and much more.

Students, teachers, parents, administrators, school staff and taxpayers can all point to different shortcomings that need redress; and rightly so. Public education receives more state funds than any other category of state spending, so strapped taxpayers certainly must demand quality performance of this huge institution.

Moreover, our state’s constitution calls education “the paramount duty of the state,” highlighting our legal commitment while underscoring our moral obligation.

It is humiliating to acknowledge that Washington ranks 42nd in the nation in funding of education. It’s time to build a 21st century public education system that meets the needs of our children. We must increase funding with strong accountability of the natural institutional bureaucracy—teachers, principals, administrators—for improved academic performance of our kids in the classroom.

After a great deal of study, I decided to co-sponsor landmark education legislation, House Bill 1410, that would introduce the most sweeping systemic changes to the state’s education system since the 1970s. It is a bold, exciting attempt at building a better system through the strategic infusion of more resources, accountability, rigor and clarity. But, of course, it is only another step toward improving our schools.

Today, the state sends dollars to school districts based upon a complex, convoluted, old patchwork of formulas that is unfair and inefficient at best. This legislation’s provisions stem from the idea of a hypothetical “model school” that can help streamline the complex bureaucratic funding system we’ve unwisely built over the past decades.

The bill assigns specific service and staffing levels to the model school. This would ensure consistency and adequacy in determining funding levels for districts. But the legislation also allows for key flexibility in administration on the local level.

Within this new funding framework are impressive changes to the age-old teacher compensation system. Parents know the truth of what research shows: Teaching quality—backed by strong principals with accountability and authority—is the single most important element of student success. We can reward great teachers by measuring results of kids’ academic performance in a thoughtful and fair manner.

Today, our policy of paying teachers based upon advanced degrees and seniority measures an ‘input’ instead of an ‘output’. We must renew our emphasis on rewarding true classroom achievement and teaching effectiveness. This bill would boost starting salaries to make them more competitive, but it will also institute hands-on teacher mentoring programs and ongoing performance-based peer evaluations to reward our great teachers.

Beyond individual teachers, under a new accountability system, struggling schools would be designated as priority for intensive hands-on assistance. They would be placed on a friendly but serious academic watch, with a binding performance agreement if no improvement is made. It’s important that we recognize schools facing challenges while at the same time we demand results for additional financial assistance.

Adequate funding, teacher quality and academic accountability are three of the biggest facets of our reform proposal. The proposal for systems change is not universally loved, and some stakeholder groups are outright opposed to the reform because they feel it provides accountability without additional resources. I understand that. But the journey of a thousand miles begins with a step.

As a legislator I care a lot about moving this bold proposal forward. As a parent, I care even more.

Reuven Carlyle (D-Ballard, Queen Anne, Fremont, Magnolia) represents the 36th Legislative District in the Washington State House of Representatives.