School Assessments

0 Comments | Insight on the News, Dec 20, 1999 | by Valerie Richardson

Voters in Colorado have tied school funding to grades -- the first attempt by taxpayers to hold districts accountable for the performance of students by withholding budget increases.

For 17 years, school officials in Jefferson County, Colo., have begged, cajoled and pleaded with the voters to pass a property-tax increase to no avail until recently. On Nov. 2, the county's notoriously tightfisted electorate barely approved a $45 million annual property-tax increase for schools, but with a caveat -- the district doesn't get the last $20 million unless it raises reading and math scores by 25 percent in five years.

The sprawling 90,000-student district -- the biggest in Colorado and site of Columbine High School -- thus becomes the first in the nation to do what schools have resisted for years: link funding to student performance. "It's pretty landmark," says Jefferson County schools spokesman Rick Kaufman. "It's a leap of faith for the community."

Even with the achievement tie-in -- or "performance guarantee," as it's called -- the measure came very close to defeat. Voters approved the initiative, Measure 3A, by just 50.6 percent. A similar measure in Colorado Springs was beaten back by 61 percent. Education watchers predict other cash-strapped districts will follow Jefferson County's lead as they try to squeeze funding from an electorate that increasingly demands more than promises from its public schools.

"When school districts are out there asking for tax increases, they can't say, `We'll do more of the same,'" says Denver-based political analyst Floyd Ciruli. "The have to become increasingly oriented toward achievement and grades, and that's happening nationwide with the standards movement."

Under the five-year Jefferson County plan, the district receives a $25 million annual increase to its $455 million budget. If scores improve by 7.5 percent on the Colorado School Assessment Program exams in the 2001-02 school year, the district receives $31 million; if scores rise by 15 percent over the baseline the following year, the district gets $37 million; if they improve by 25 percent in 2003-04, it gets $45 million. Students in grades 3, 4, 5, 7 and 8 take the exams.

Even fans of the idea admit that it won't be easy to meet those expectations. According to Kaufman, the district plans to sink more than half the funding increase into instruction, with schools given options on how to invest their dollars. "Schools will have specific choices for improving student achievement," he says. "Some will put it toward lowering class sizes, some toward improving student literacy."

In an interesting twist, the local teachers union, which traditionally has opposed linking funding to performance, campaigned for the measure's passage. "We're happy they got the money they were looking for," says Deborah Fallin, spokeswoman for the Colorado Education Association.

"They were so strapped for funding ... so when voters said, `We want to see results,' that's what they did. Now we'll see if they can accomplish it."

Meanwhile, conservatives complain that the measure puts too much money up front, with too little going toward performance bonuses. "At first blush, it seems like a wonderful idea," says Jon Caldara, president of the Independence Institute, a free-market think tank in Golden, Colo. "The problem is, before you start the plan, you're giving Jefferson County a $75 million tax increase to do nothing. Other school districts would be foolish not to follow suit, because it's a no-lose scenario. It looks like a performance-based tax increase, but even if test scores fall through the floor, they still have this massive tax increase."

Caldara also argues that the best way to ensure school performance would be through a voucher program. "That's the ultimate linking of achievement to funding," he says.

Competitive enterprises: Voters in Colorado have put the pressure on teachers by linking increase in school funding to higher test scores.