Benchmarks: Meeting the Challenge in Arizona 's Public Schools

Introduction

“A strong and effective system of education is one fundamental way to strengthen our economy and raise living standards 1 ,” remarked Alan Greenspan in September, 2003. In his testimony before Congress, September 21, 2000, Mr. Greenspan wrote, “(W)ith the conceptual demands on our workers continuing to rise, substantial further progress needs to be made in raising the analytic competency of our graduating high-school seniors… Addressing this issue is crucial for the future of our nation.…(W)e must…strive to increase math and science achievement so that our students can take advantage of the considerable opportunities that will exist in tomorrow's labor market. In that way, we can realize the potential of technological change for bringing substantial and lasting benefits to our economy2.”

To flourish, businesses in our New Economy need an educated, highly-skilled workforce. States compete in attracting these productive businesses to improve their standard of living but in making location decisions, these businesses often consider the quality of the public school system. Not only do they wish to have a readily available skilled workforce to draw from, but in order to compete for the best workers, they must be able to offer such workers a respectable standard of living, which includes a good public school system for their children.

How are Arizona 's public schools doing?

Two influential national studies of public education have recently been released: “Measuring Up: 2000” from the Center for Public Policy and Higher Education, and Education Week's “Quality Counts 2004.”

Arizona ranks 49th in educational spending per child according to Education Week's Quality Counts 2004 , showing little improvement since the state was profiled in 2001. Per pupil spending increased from $4,879 (1999-00) to $5,278 in 2000-01, 72% of the national average of $7,376, according to the National Center for Educational Statistics (see table <per pupil expenditure>). This increase helped earn the state a D for “Resources: adequacy” on its Quality Counts 2004 report card, an improvement over the F assigned in the last three reports. Using the NCES per pupil expenditures adjusted for regional spending differences, top ranking New Jersey spent $9,762, with 25 states spending more than the US average. Arizona 's adjusted per pupil spending was $5,319 (placing the state 49th ).

Also contributing to the higher grade was the passage of Proposition 301 in November 2000 instituting a 0.6% increase in the state sales tax, 88% of which was dedicated to funding K-12 education. These funds are now flowing to districts and are being used to increase both per pupil spending and teacher salaries.

Although still below the national average ($38,510 vs. the US avg. $44,367), teacher salaries have indeed improved with Arizona moving from 40th (1999-00) to 32nd (unadjusted) in the 2002 American Federation of Teachers Teacher Salary Survey (see table <teacher salaries>).

Nevertheless, the state's Quality Counts grade for “Improving Teacher Quality" (which considers education and certification requirements for teachers) slipped from D to D- and 49th place. In her recent State of the State address, Governor Napolitano promised to devote $250,000 to establishing the Arizona Master Teachers program to assist teachers financially in obtaining training for master teacher status. According to Quality Counts, Arizona does not financially support any ongoing professional development for teachers, including any form of mentoring. Furthermore, Arizona is one of only 19 states that do not require beginning high school teachers to hold a major or minor in the subject they will teach in order to be licensed. Only 52% of Arizona's secondary teachers majored in the core subjects they teach, compared to the US average of 64% and the high of 86% in Minnesota, dropping the state into 48th place.

Aiding education in the past two years was a 2% increase in state aid required by Prop. 301 and the passage of Prop. 300, a measure designed to protect revenue generated by the sale of state school trust lands so that funds directly benefit classrooms. However, lawmakers borrowed more than $300 million from a fund earmarked for school construction projects and instituted a program that would instead allow the state to spread the cost of the new schools over 20 years. Also, voters defeated Prop. 201, a measure that would have devoted a portion of Indian gaming revenues to education programs (See Quality Counts 2003: Arizona and Quality Counts 2004: Arizona).

How are Arizona's students doing?

In the 2002 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 25% of Arizona's 8th grade students scored at or above proficiency in reading, below the dismal US average of 30%, and placing the state 42nd. Top ranking Massachusetts had 43% of its 8th graders at or above proficiency. Thirty-three states scored 30% or better, with 18 states below the US average. Arizona 8 th graders did worse in math, with only 21% at or above proficiency compared to a national average of 27%. This placed the state 40th with 31 states above the US average, and 19 below. Minnesota was in first place with a high of 44%.

In the biennial study by the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education "Measuring Up: 2002," Arizona placed 50th in the nation with only 73% of 18-24 year olds holding high school certificates, down from 77% and 48th in 2000 (see table <high school certificate>). Maine had 95% of its young people receiving certificates, with nineteen states boasting at or above 90%, and only Arizona and Nevada falling below 80%. Arizona showed no improvement in the percentage of students enrolling in college immediately after high school, ranking 47th with 28%. The proportion of Arizona's young adults, ages 18-24, enrolling in college is 26%, slipping from 27% in 2000, and placing Arizona in 45th place. Forty-nine percent of Arizona 's first-time, full-time students complete a bachelor's degree in 6 years, ranking Arizona 29th (44% finish within 5 years) (see table <higher ed degree awards>). Twenty-six percent of Arizona adults hold bachelor's degrees or higher, placing the state 29th (see table <Adults with bachelor's deg +>).

Much of the data used in the preceding studies is from the Current Population Survey conducted jointly by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) and the US Census Bureau, as well as from surveys conducted by the National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES). The most exhaustive survey of the population is the decennial US Census, most recently completed in 2000. According to the 2000 Census, 69% of Arizona's 18 to 24 year olds held high school certificates (compared to the US average of 75%), and 24% of Arizona adults 25 and older held a bachelor's degree or higher (US average is 24%).

The high school drop-out rate is often cited as a measure of the effectiveness of the public school system. According to the 2000 Census, 15% of Arziona's 16 to 19 year olds were not attending school and had not completed a degree. The study Kid's Count 2003 derives a drop out rate of 17% from the 1989–2001 Current Population Surveys done by the BLS.

In an Arizona Center for Public Policy (ACPP) paper, Understanding Before Action: An explanation of Arizona Public School Dropout Rates, David Garcia notes that this dropout rate generated by national surveys may be useful in profiling the workforce, but may not necessarily be a good indicator of the success of the school system. He remarks that data profiling schools is also collected at the state level by state departments of education. While states have the opportunity to collect and verify more detailed data than the national studies, there is at present a lack of consistency in the way different departments of education define and report the data making cross-state comparisons using this data difficult or invalid. However, such data, if collected rigorously and routinely, can indicate trends over time within the state and give a good indication of performance. Standardizing data collection between states could potentially yield more detailed and useful information than national surveys.

In other sections of its Quality Counts report card, for "School Climate" (which considers class size, school size, absenteeism, parent involvement, charter schools), Arizona's grade improved considerably from D- to B- and 10 th place among the states. This was attributed to statewide open-enrollment and a strong charter school law as well as a high number of middle- and high-school students attending small schools. The state improved to a C- and 33 rd place from a D+ in "Resource Equity" (differences in per student spending among districts, equalization efforts); and increased to a B and 18 th place from a C+ in "Standards and Accountability" (clear standards, accurate assessment, school accountability).

End Notes

1 Greenspan, Alan. “ Remarks by Chairman Alan Greenspan at the 33rd Annual Legislative Conference of the Congressional Black Caucus, Washington , D.C. ” September 26, 2003.

2 Greenspan, Alan. “The economic importance of improving math-science education.”
Presented before the Committee on Education and the Workforce, U.S. House of Representatives. September 21, 2000

For more information, please contact us.