They teach to the WASL and that is it since all their funding is based on test scores.
I'm assuming this is Washington's standardized test, similar to our MAP (Missouri Assessment Program). If that's the case, then no, not all their funding is based on one test. For us, MAP scores are only one way to get funding: there are also grants, both publicly and privately funded; property taxes, which also fund police and fire districts as well as other services which vary by location; contributions from the parents (especially with field trips or club activities); and fundraisers such as bake sales or concessions at athletic events. Some districts get very creative and come up with entirely new ways to get funding.
Besides, these state assessments are (in theory) designed to test whether the students are learning essential skills. I have no problem with this theory, nor do most teachers; heck, we formally and informally assess our students' learning all the time! What we dispute is whether the assessments, which are usually written by test-writing companies like McGraw-Hill or ACT, are better evaluative tools than the assessments of classroom teachers.
I can actually teach subjects that are...gasp...useful.
More useful than, say, reading, writing, arithmetic, algebra, American history, world history, music, art, drama, P.E., psychology, geography, foreign languages, journalism, speech, debate, biology, chemistry, physics--shall I go on? Yes, all of these and more are taught at my high school alone, with a faculty of about 20 teachers serving about 150 students.