SACRAMENTO, CA - When the California Department of Education recently released the results of the 2003 state tests, Gov. Davis quickly slapped his own back. With scores generally up, Davis boasted that his administration’s investment in public education was paying off. Yet, the budget deal that Davis just signed contains bad decisions that threaten the baby-steps of achievement progress made by California students.

Although test scores increased incrementally on the California Standards Test, the state’s key exam which is aligned with state academic content standards, the overall picture remains troubling. In English/language arts, every grade tested failed to reach the 40 percent mark of students scoring at or above the proficient level. Even if one focuses on the upward trend in scores, the rise may, unfortunately, stall out.

The state’s instructional materials program is designed to help local school districts acquire new textbooks aligned with the state standards, which were adopted in the late 1990s. Since students are taking state tests aligned with the standards, students’ textbooks should also be aligned with the standards. If students are forced to use older books not aligned with the standards, then they’re not as likely to learn the things on which they’ll be tested. Evidence of the importance of standards-aligned textbooks can be seen in the results of the state’s high-school exit exam.

A state-sanctioned report found that new standards-aligned textbooks were critical for the implementation of the standards in the classroom. In surveying teachers the report concluded, “there was a clear relationship between how recently the textbook was adopted and the likelihood that the course would be rated as having very great alignment [with the standards].” The report found that in 288 high-school courses that had adopted textbooks in 2002-03, 67 percent were greatly aligned with the standards. However, in the 489 courses that had adopted textbooks before 1999, only 37 percent were greatly aligned with the standards. The effect on test passage was eye opening.
 
For example, on the English portion of the high-school exit exam, 100 percent of the schools in the survey which had high levels of standards coverage had passage rates of 75 percent or higher. In contrast, only 59 percent of schools that had lower standards coverage had passing rates of 75 percent or higher. However, despite this evidence that standards-aligned textbooks are crucial for improved achievement, the Davis-signed budget slashes the instructional materials program.

In 2002-03, $400 million was allocated to instructional materials. The new 2003-04 budget allots only $175 million. In contrast, most of the state’s approximately 80 special-purpose education programs were protected from cuts despite the fact that virtually all have no record of success in improving student performance. For instance, the massive class-size-reduction program, which costs nearly $2 billion a year and which research has shown to have little impact on student achievement, was untouched.

California is making the wrong decisions about where to spend its scarce education resources. The State Legislative Analyst’s Office correctly observes that how education dollars are spent is as important as how much is spent. Rather than channeling funding into programs that actually improve student achievement, Gov. Davis and lawmakers waste money on ineffective programs supported by powerful special interests. If there was ever proof of the dysfunction in Sacramento, this is it.

Lance Izumi is a Senior Fellow in California Studies at the California-based Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy. He can be reached via email at lizumi@pacificresearch.org.