It took 26 educators, administrators, parents, school board members and other education-minded folks 150 hours of extensive study into the state’s system for grading schools — including interviewing school and district leaders, teachers and families — to come to a conclusion: It’s time for an overhaul.
The task force — specifically created to evaluate and improve Colorado’s education accountability system — released its final report last week. In short, the report found that the state’s system for evaluating, rating and supporting K-12 schools and districts falls short in many areas.
The new report makes recommendations on how the state can better address inequities that lead to gaps in student outcomes, ensure all students have fair access to resources, and help parents understand how schools are preparing their children for the future.
“I am excited about the recommendations this group of diverse stakeholders included in the report,” said Wendy Birhanzel, superintendent of Harrison 2 school district and chair of the task force. “The goal is to create an accountability system that allows all students to demonstrate success in their path beyond high school.”
The recommendations, which will be presented to the State Board of Education Wednesday, were approved unanimously.
How does Colorado’s school and district “report card” generally work now?
It measures performance using several measures: standardized test scores, graduation and dropout rates, and for high schools, college enrollment rates. Then it rates those schools and districts. If they land in one of the two lowest-performing levels, they get placed on the state’s watch list. That gets them support from state officials. If they don’t improve after five consecutive years, the state board can intervene — take over or shut down a school.
Two years ago, a legislative audit committee released a report calling Colorado’s accountability system “reasonable” and “working as designed.” But many critics argued that was precisely the point. It isn’t designed to achieve the objectives school leaders want, which is to equitably prepare students for the 21st century. That audit also didn’t directly answer the question of whether the system is biased against schools with high numbers of students living in poverty.
In 2023, state lawmakers passed legislation creating the 26-member task force.
How did the task force do its work and what did it find?
First, it dug into inequities plaguing the system. That included things like the inability for some schools and districts to hire math teachers, the absence of special education teachers, and little to no access to tutoring programs or grant writers.
Then it examined the accountability system’s challenges, those included but were not limited to:
- Test scores play a major role in a school’s report card but parents are allowed to opt their children out
- Assessments aren’t aligned for students whose first language isn’t English
- Data is difficult for people to find and understand
- Uneven implementation of plans and strategies across school districts
- Limited tools for helping struggling districts and schools.
- And more additional challenges
For years, some school leaders have expressed frustration that the “report card” is misleading, inaccurate and ignores the profound influence of poverty on test scores. Colorado has seen large achievement gaps either not change or get larger since testing began.
Even the audit done two years ago noted what decades of national research has found. High-poverty schools and districts report lower test scores overall. The same is true for the smaller numbers of students living in poverty in high performing districts. But those schools and districts get high ratings because the test results of wealthier students mask the results of other students.
Data issues and diversity
The task force also found that certain students are counted multiple times, which disproportionately impacts some schools’ ratings. For example, a minority student who speaks a language other than English, has a disability and lives in poverty is counted multiple times. It recommended adjusting how student performance is measured across diverse groups.
It found that testing data is often unreliable in many of Colorado’s 178 school districts. They’re too small to produce accurate results.
In addition, Colorado is also one of only 11 states that allow students to opt out of standardized tests.
“When opt-outs reduce student participation in statewide testing, it can be more difficult to gauge what's working and where supports may be needed,” said State Board of Education chair Rebecca McClellan. She was co-chair of the task force. “Our recommendations reflect the importance of participation.”
What recommendations did it make?
It developed 30 recommendations for policy makers to consider in these areas:
Refine how the system rates schools and districts. It calls for adjusting the report cards to better reflect the achievement of diverse students and smaller schools. This would allow officials to understand how historically underserved students are performing in small rural schools.
Enhance metrics for academic growth — how much progress a group of students make compared to peers, achievement and post-secondary readiness. It recommends adding new measures that include industry credentials and opportunities for earning college credit.
Modernize assessments such as making them in more languages other than English and Spanish. And making more adjustments for multi-language learners and students with disabilities. It also recommends quicker results to help teachers and parents. Right now, students take the test in April and results don’t come until the next school year. It recommends clarifying how schools can encourage or not discourage test participation.
Improve data reporting and sharing for parents, educators and policy-makers. It proposes one statewide dashboard that offers clear, easy-to-understand data and ratings.
Strengthen the process of how schools get support by identifying schools early for intervention rather than waiting for five consecutive testing cycles.
The task force suggests areas for further study such as exploring the best way to assess students with disabilities and leveraging artificial intelligence in state assessments.
McClellan noted the collaborative spirit that defined the task force’s work.
“I share their hope that these recommendations will support the continued focus on advancing academic equity, growth and achievement for every student in Colorado.”
