To Whom It May Concern,

 

You are receiving this email because you are a thought leader or a journalist who has demonstrated interest in Colorado k-12 education. This message has been sent to all Colorado legislators, the Governor, Commissioner of Education, and leaders of nonprofit k-12 advocacy groups.  

 

Please review the following and make it part of the conversation for how to improve public education in Colorado.  

 

---

Seize the Days

The average student in Colorado attends school 150 days a year, compared to the national norm of 180 (pewresearch.org), and that 30-day difference compounds year over year. By 6th grade, Colorado kids have experienced a full year of school less than peers in other states, and by 12th grade, a full two years less. Yet, we are dismayed and disappointed when we read the 2024 state assessment results showing only 34 percent of Colorado students met expectations in math, and 44 percent met expectations in reading (cpr.org). Part-time education usually produces partial results.  

 

In January 2025, two independent Adequacy Studies commissioned by state lawmakers concluded that at current funding levels we should expect mediocrity from Colorado public schools. I take some editorial liberty with my summary, but the reports conclude that for Colorado public schools to get the results we want, we must correct chronic underfunding to the tune of $3.5B to $4.1B annually. This comes as no surprise considering we have known for years we spend about $2,500 less per pupil than the national average. “You get what you pay for”, as the adage goes.  

 

Now we have two independent reports quantifying the total cost to provide adequate education to our children, ensure they can compete in a global economy, and ensure a high quality of life for all Colorado citizens into the future.  

 

The question we now face is, “what do we do with this data?”.

 

My fear is we do nothing. That would provide voters another example of governmental waste when the legislature orders studies to quell K-12 advocates, while resisting the changes called for in those studies because they are fiscally and maybe more importantly politically challenging. 

 

I’m up for the challenge. My hope is we have the fortitude to enact meaningful improvements to our K-12 system based on this new research combined with common sense. There have been rumors of an interim committee to address the results of the adequacy studies and I hope that becomes reality. 

 

According to the Pew Research Center (pewresearch.org), Colorado has one of the lowest standards in the nation for required student contact days at 160.  The Colorado Department of Education even offers a resource to help districts drop below that minimum expectation (cde.state.co.us). Per CDE, 70% of Colorado’s school districts have implemented reduced academic calendars with fewer than 160 student contact days.  

 

Across the United States, 180 is the typical minimum number of student contact days (ecs.org). Top performing education systems in the world require 190-193, as in Finland and Singapore respectively (ncee.org). Yet 70% of Colorado schools have requested waivers to drop below the 160-day minimum. 

 

For years I have been an ardent and vocal opponent of the 4-day school week, not because a 5-day week is inherently better, but because the 4-day schedule is usually part of a reduced academic calendar offering fewer than 160 student contact days. If teachers have less time with students, odds are they learn less.

 

I understand why many districts have adopted this solution. It has been one of the only mechanisms available for districts to compete for teachers in a shrinking pool of highly qualified applicants. I don’t blame them for reaching for the only tool left in the box, which is to justify lower pay for fewer days at work.  

 

But less time with students is not the recipe for better student achievement. And when most of the state has adopted the 4-day school week it no longer serves as a recruiting incentive.  

 

Give our students and teachers adequate time on task and they will do amazing things. Don’t over complicate the situation with more grants, elaborate accountability measures, or convoluted finance formulas.  

 

The adequacy studies showed we can’t expect better student achievement for the price we pay in the current funding model. So how do we align our academic expectations and school funding? Give students and teachers more time to teach and learn the content.  

 

Reverse the trend in Colorado, which has been a race to the bottom in terms of the number of student contact days. Give districts the option and incentive to provide 180 student contact days and fund each additional day at a per pupil, per diem rate (or PPOR/PDR). This is not a rate presently calculated or utilized by the state, but it’s easy to calculate.  

 

 

By example, a district with 170 student contact days, and $11,800 in per pupil operating revenue has a PPOR/PDR of $69 ($11,800 PPOR/170 days). Add 10 student contact days to achieve 180 at a cost of $69 PPOR/PDR, and the additional revenue to the district would be $690 per student (10 more days x $69 PPOR/PDR). That’s a 5.8% increase in revenue that would go almost entirely to certified teachers and support staff. That represents a meaningful boost in pay for positions that districts find increasingly difficult to staff. District level administrators wouldn’t be included in that increase since most of them already work a year-round contract.

 

For a district with fewer than 160 student contact days (most of the state) the boost in revenue would be more significant. A district with 150 student contact days and PPOR of $11,800 would have a PPOR/PDR of $79. Add 30 student contact days to achieve 180, at $79 PPOR/PDR, and the additional revenue to the district would be $2,370 per student. That’s a 20% increase in revenue for a district that likely has the hardest time finding highly qualified staff. That could put them on competitive footing with other districts and states.  

 

180 student contact days becomes a funded maximum at the PPOR/PDR, and districts could add as many days as they want, at a pace that is reasonable. Add two or three per year and know that the funding will follow. This allows for a gradual ramp up in the total cost of the investment, which is more manageable to the state budget.  

           

The added days are funded in addition to annual per pupil funding and calculated utilizing the already established constitutional funding formula.

 

The main obstacle to improving school funding has been the Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR). Passed in 1992, TABOR has kept K-12 funding tethered to a funding model that is inadequate. Colorado voters have made attempts to correct this by passing Amendment 23 (2000), repealing the Gallagher Amendment (2020), and even passing a new School Finance Formula (HB24-1448) in 2024, but none of these have or will provide relief of the magnitude called for in the Adequacy Studies.  

 

TABOR has flaws and the reality of K-12 education in Colorado is a prime example. We have anchored school funding to an inadequate model and our kids and our future deserve better.  

 

This proposal gives Colorado voters a logical way to support schools that are willing and able to give students more time in the classroom.

 

TABOR need not be the third rail of Colorado politics that it has become. In 2005 we passed Referendum C to allow the state to retain and spend all revenue collected above the TABOR cap for five fiscal years. This shows that TABOR doesn’t have to be an obstacle if voters are presented with a commonsense option. 

 

Passage of this concept doesn’t require districts to make a change, but it gives them a choice. Local school boards retain the right to set their academic calendars as they see fit, even staying below 160 days or offering 4-day weeks if that works best for their community. Local control, a paramount value in Colorado, is maintained. This measure simply incentivizes districts to provide students with the number of contact days necessary to receive an adequate education and funds them accordingly, which would have a direct and positive impact on the mediocrity identified in the adequacy studies.

 

Student contact hours, as defined in CRS 22-32 109, would need to be amended at a proportionate rate if days are added. Different hourly minimums exist for different levels (secondary, elementary, and kindergarten) so for the sake of simplicity I’ll use secondary school requirements as an example. 1,080 hours and 160 student contact days are current statutory minimums, which calculate to 6.75 hours of instruction per day. If a district with 160 days added 20 to reach 180, at 6.75 hours per day, a new hourly minimum for that district would be 1,215 hours. 

 

It’s difficult to estimate the cost of this proposal since school boards may or may not choose to increase student contact days. The Colorado Association of School Boards or CDE could reach out to districts with a brief survey to see what they might do if provided with this option. That would make available all the data necessary to estimate the cost of this plan.  

 

While the Colorado economy is healthy, TABOR reserves could be accessed to fund additional days. If the option was widely adopted, other revenue sources would need to be identified and that would be something for the governor and legislature to resolve and put to Colorado voters. I believe our state would support a ballot measure that gives students more time to learn.  

 

The primary benefits of this proposal are far-reaching and directly impact educational quality. By providing financial incentives to increase student contact days, schools can enhance student achievement through two key mechanisms: increased time on task and reduced summer learning loss. Additionally, the proposal would enable schools to offer better compensation for teachers and support staff, addressing critical staffing challenges. Higher competitive compensation would attract and retain high-quality educators to our state.   

 

The secondary benefits extend beyond the classroom and into the broader community. Businesses that employ parents of school-aged children would see increased productivity and boost Colorado's economy since their employees would spend less time managing childcare during shortened school weeks and long summers. Furthermore, families would benefit from reduced expenses for daycare and summer care programs, as students spend more time in school during the academic year.

 

In response to the two recent adequacy studies revealing a $3.5B -$4.1B annual funding shortfall for Colorado schools, I propose a commonsense solution to turn around Colorado K-12 funding. Incentivize districts to increase student contact days from the current average of 150 by implementing a per-pupil, per-diem funding supplement. This approach would boost teacher pay, improve student achievement, and maintain local control while correcting Colorado's chronic underfunding of k-12 education. 

 

This concept is far from a panacea, rather a mechanism to reinvest in Colorado K-12 schools to provide adequate time on task. We still need to reduce our reliance on grants, deploy a nationwide campaign to recruit high-quality educators to Colorado, and bridge the massive gaps between urban and rural staffing. This plan is simply a commonsense start. Seize the days.