Colorado school board elections, 2015

Colorado's 2015 elections State ballot measures • School boards • Municipal • Candidate ballot access

2016 → ← 2014

2015 School Board Elections

School Board Elections by State

Alabama • Alaska • Arizona • Arkansas • California • Colorado • Connecticut • Delaware • Florida • Georgia • Hawaii • Idaho • Illinois • Indiana • Iowa • Kansas • Kentucky • Louisiana • Maine • Maryland • Massachusetts • Michigan • Minnesota • Mississippi • Missouri • Montana • Nebraska • Nevada • New Hampshire • New Jersey • New Mexico • New York • North Carolina • North Dakota • Ohio • Oklahoma • Oregon • Pennsylvania • Rhode Island • South Carolina • South Dakota • Tennessee • Texas • Utah • Vermont • Virginia • Washington • West Virginia • Wisconsin • Wyoming

Elections Information

Election dates • 2015 elections • Candidate filing dates • Finance reporting • Poll opening and closing times

A total of 21 Colorado school districts among America's largest school districts by enrollment held elections for 65 seats on November 3, 2015.

Here are several quick facts about Colorado's school board elections in 2015:

• The largest school district by enrollment with an election in 2015 was Jeffco Public Schools with 85,542 K-12 students.
• The smallest school district by enrollment with an election in 2015 was Widefield School District 3 with 9,297 K-12 students.
• School District 27J and Poudre School District tied for the most seats on the ballot in 2015 with five seats up for election in both districts.
• Seven districts tied for the fewest seats on the ballot in 2015 with two seats up for election in each district.

The districts listed below served 663,315 K-12 students during the 2012-2013 school year, according to the National Center for Education Statistics.^[1] Click on the district names for more information on the district and its school board elections.

2015 Colorado School Board Elections
District	Date	Seats up for election	Total board seats	Student enrollment
Academy School District 20	11/3/2015	2	5	23,973
Adams 12 Five Star Schools	11/3/2015	4	5	43,268
Adams County School District 50	11/3/2015	3	5	10,069
Aurora Public Schools	11/3/2015	3	7	39,835
Boulder Valley School District	11/3/2015	4	7	30,041
Cherry Creek School District	11/3/2015	3	5	53,422
Colorado Springs School District 11	11/3/2015	4	7	29,032
Denver Public Schools	11/3/2015	3	7	83,377
Douglas County School District	11/3/2015	3	7	64,657
Falcon School District 49	11/3/2015	2	5	15,478
Greeley-Evans School District 6	11/3/2015	3	7	19,821
Harrison School District Two	11/3/2015	2	5	10,775
Jeffco Public Schools	11/3/2015	2	5	85,542
Littleton Public Schools	11/3/2015	2	5	15,754
Mesa County Valley School District 51	11/3/2015	2	5	21,746
Poudre School District	11/3/2015	5	7	27,909
Pueblo City Schools	11/3/2015	3	5	17,711
School District 27J	11/3/2015	5	7	16,184
St. Vrain Valley School District	11/3/2015	4	7	29,382
Thompson School District	11/3/2015	4	7	16,042
Widefield School District 3	11/3/2015	2	5	9,297

Trends in Colorado school board elections[edit]

See also: School boards in session: 2015 in brief

The 2015 school board elections in Colorado's largest school districts attracted a higher average number of candidates per seat on the ballot compared to the average number of candidates who ran per seat in school board elections across the United States in 2015. Colorado's elections also had a smaller percentage of seats go unopposed compared to the elections across the country. Newcomers fared better in Colorado's elections than in elections held nationwide. They won 53.85 percent of seats on the ballot in Colorado, compared to the 40.77 percent of school board seats they won in the United States as a whole.

The following sections analyze competitiveness and incumbency advantage in Colorado's school board elections. These districts did not utilize primary or runoff elections. Winners only had to receive a plurality, or relative majority, of votes to secure a seat. All of the school board elections held in the state in 2015 were nonpartisan.

Details of the data discussed here can be found in the table below.

Competitiveness[edit]

In 2015, an average of 1.77 candidates ran per seat on the ballot in Colorado's largest school districts. That same year an average of 1.72 candidates ran per seat in elections held in the largest school districts nationwide. A total of 30.77 percent of seats on the ballot in Colorado's school board elections were unopposed, which was slightly lower than the 35.97 percent of seats that were unopposed in the country as a whole.

Incumbency advantage[edit]

See also: School board incumbency analysis: 2015 in brief

A total of 83.33 percent of incumbents who ran for re-election in Colorado in 2015 won additional terms. Thirty-six of the 65 incumbents whose terms were up for election ran to retain their seats, and 30 of them won. Thirteen of those winners ran unopposed; the other 17 defeated challengers to keep their seats.

Nationwide, 82.66 percent of school board incumbents kept their seats, and 40.45 percent of them ran unopposed. The map below details the success rates for incumbents who ran in the 2015 school board elections that were held in the largest school districts by enrollment in the United States.

The map above details the success rates of incumbent who ran to retain their school board seats in the largest school districts in each state. States depicted in gray did not hold school board elections.

Data table[edit]

The table below displays the statistics for school board elections in Colorado's largest school districts in 2015.

Colorado school board elections, 2015
Year	Total	Incumbents
Seats up	Candidates	Candidates/ seat	Unopposed seats	% unopposed	% seats won by newcomers	Sought re-election	Unopposed	Retained	% retained
2015	65	115	1.77	20	30.77%	53.85%	36	13	30	83.33%

Spotlight districts[edit]

Jeffco Public Schools elections[edit]

Jeffco Public Schools got an entirely new board in November 2015, which had never before happened in the district.^[2][3] The district held a general election and a recall election on November 3, 2015, and between the two, all five board of education seats were on the ballot.

Recall election[edit]

See also: Jeffco Public Schools recall, Colorado (2015)

A recall election for three of Jeffco Public Schools' five board members was on the ballot on November 3, 2015. A general election for the other two board members was also on the ballot. The recall targeted Julie Williams, Ken Witt and John Newkirk, the former majority bloc on the board.^[4] All three members were successfully recalled.^[5]

District 3 candidate Ali Lasell and District 4 candidate Amanda Stevens came out in support of the recall. They ran as a slate with three candidates who sought to oust the targeted board members. Brad Rupert ran for Williams' seat, Susan Harmon ran to unseat Newkirk, and Ron Mitchell sought Witt's seat.^[6] Rupert, Harmon and Mitchell, all members of the "Clean Slate," were elected to replace the recalled board members.^[5]

Kim Johnson and Tori Merritts, who ran against Lasell and Stevens in District 3 and 4, respectively, did not support the recall. Johnson said the recall “increases the level of influence of special interest groups in politics.”^[6]

Ballotpedia's Senior Elections Analyst, Brittany Clingen, recaps the results of the historic Jeffco Public Schools elections and recall elections.

A group called Jeffco United for Action filed the petitions against Williams, Witt, and Newkirk in the summer of 2015. All three members said they had no intentions of resigning from the board.^[7] Jeffco United for Action filed more than double the number of signatures needed to put the recall on the ballot. "Everybody's really worried about the direction that JeffCo Schools is headed in and this is their answer to helping stop that change that isn't good change," said campaign organizer Lynea Hansen.^[8]

Jeffco United for Action accused the three board members of attempting to censor AP U.S. history classes, pushing out over 700 district educators due to their new policies, wasting "millions of taxpayer dollars," violating open meeting laws, limiting public input at board meetings, bullying students and parents, and releasing private student information without consent.^[9] In response, all three board members highlighted what they saw as positive changes they had helped bring about in the district, including raising teacher salaries, making union negotiations transparent, providing free full-day kindergarten to families in need, and bringing greater equality in how the district funded its schools.^[10]

General election[edit]

See also: What was at stake in the Jeffco Public Schools general election?

Two seats on the Jeffco Public Schools Board of Education were up for general election on November 3, 2015. Neither incumbent filed to run for another term, which guaranteed two newcomers would join the board. Candidates Kim Johnson and Ali Lasell ran for the District 3 seat. The District 4 race featured candidates Tori Merritts and Amanda Stevens.^[11] Lasell and Stevens, both members of the "Clean Slate," were elected to the seats.^[12]

The general election candidates all weighed in on the recall election. Lasell and Stevens came out in support of the recall. They ran with a slate of candidates seeking to oust the targeted board members in the recall election. Johnson and Merritts said they did not support the recall.^[6]

Colorado Springs School District 11[edit]

Judge orders candidate on ballot[edit]

See also: What was at stake in the 2015 Colorado Springs School District 11 election?

On September 10, 2015, Colorado 4th Judicial District Judge Timothy J. Schutz ordered the Colorado Springs School District 11 to add Karla Heard-Price to the general election ballot. Heard-Price met the deadline for filing her signatures and her acceptance of nomination to the school district on August 28, 2015, but her notice of intent and affidavit of qualification forms were submitted on September 3, 2015. Consequently, the school district argued Heard-Price had missed the deadline and proceeded to deny her candidacy.^[13]

Referring to the missed deadline, Heard-Price explained,

“	The paperwork that was missing was not attached to the petition packet, so it was my understanding that what was in my packet was what needed to be turned in. There was an error in the process, but I take responsibility for what was overlooked.[14]	”
—Karla Heard-Price (2015)[15]

Meanwhile and without Heard-Price's knowledge, district voters Kathryn Price (no relation) and Steve Durham challenged the district's decision in court. Durham, who thought the district's decision was unfair, stated, "We didn't have any other alternative to get her on the ballot than file the lawsuit."^[15] Soon after Durham and Price filed, Judge Schutz sided with Heard-Price and ordered her name placed on the ballot. He explained that she showed compliance with the law by submitting her petition signatures and acceptance of nomination on time. On September 11, 2015, the district submitted an amended ballot listing Heard-Price as a candidate.^[13]

Denver Public Schools[edit]

Sales tax to increase college affordability[edit]

See also: What was at stake in the 2015 Denver Public Schools election?

On November 3, 2015, when Denver residents cast their vote for the Denver Public Schools board race, they also weighed in on whether to increase sales taxes to provide college scholarships through a College Affordability Fund.^[16] The initiative proposes that a tax of 0.08 percent be added to the current 7.65 percent, increasing the total tax to 7.73 percent. According to Denver Mayor Michael Hancock, the initiative is “an opportunity for us as a city to say we believe in our future, we believe in our need to develop our workforce, and we believe in the importance of making sure you can pursue your dreams in higher education or a certificate program.”^[17] Those who oppose the tax, such as 70-year Denver resident Irma Zamora, do not think it is the city's responsibility to provide funds for college education. Zamora raised the question: “If this measure passes, what precedent does it set for Denver to duplicate other state-funded activities? An idea to do something new is not a valid reason to increase taxes.” ^[16] The tax is estimated to add $10 million a year to the College Affordability Fund and would expire in 10 years.^[18]

Lack of minority teachers[edit]

A Chalkbeat report pointed out the lack of minority teachers who work and remain in the Denver Public Schools district.^[19] Several reasons were listed why the problem exists:

“	Professionals of color have more, often better-paying options open to them than they did four decades ago. Schools and school districts are riddled with “unconscious bias” that make them feel like inhospitable places for minority teachers to work. Relatively few black and Latino students enroll in schools of education, and even fewer graduate. In Denver, black teachers are fired at a slightly higher rate than teachers of other racial and ethnic groups. [14]	”
—Chalkbeat Colorado[19]

To bring in more minority teachers, DPS has set up programs such as the “Mile High Showcase”, a project which brought minority candidates to Denver, aiming to convince them to teach in district schools. The program was mostly a success with 14 of the 18 candidates accepting teaching jobs. The focus has turned to retaining these and other minority teachers in the district.

School District 27J[edit]

Ballot issue may help fix overcrowding problem[edit]

See also: What was at stake in the 2015 School District 27J election?

Sharing the ballot with the School District 27J school board elections is Ballot Issue 3C, which would raise district taxes by $26.3 million annually. The funds would be directed to building new schools so that the overcrowded ones could be relieved of their beyond-capacity enrollment. According to one news source, a high school in District 27J is so overcrowded that students have to go without a lunch period.^[20] The same source stated that the school also instituted a split daily schedule, keeping juniors and seniors at school until 5:10 p.m.^[20] The ballot issue expresses a plan to build a new high school, middle school and two elementary schools, as well as provide funds for the maintenance and added security measures of already existing schools in the district.

Falcon School District 49[edit]

Voters decide whether to implement by-district representation[edit]

See also: What was at stake in the 2015 Falcon School District 49 election?

Sharing the ballot with the November 3, 2015, Falcon School District 49 school board elections was a question that would change the structure of the Falcon 49 school board from members elected at-large to by district.^[21] According to the district's page, "Under the Plan, only eligible electors who reside within the boundaries of a director district will be permitted to cast a vote for a candidate running in an election to represent that particular director district."^[21] The length of member terms and the number of members on the board would remain unchanged.

Survey responses[edit]

See also: Ballotpedia's school board candidate survey

Five of the 115 candidates running for a school board seat in Colorado's largest school districts in the 2015 elections responded to Ballotpedia's school board candidate survey. The following sections display their answers to questions about top priorities and education issues.

Top priorities[edit]

When asked what his top priorities would be if elected, Jessy Briton Hamilton, challenger for a seat on the Adams 12 Five Star Board of Education, stated:

“	We have to address equity in our schools. We will never achieve the other goals we have set before us (closing the opportunity gap, moving our emerging bilingual students forward, or getting beyond mere proficiency to mastery of standards) if we do not begin to have serious conversations about equity. Every parent, community leader, and district employee should be invited to dialogue. There are professional facilitators at Colorado universities who are specially trained to lead these conversations. It would be a wise investment for the board to look into deepening our district’s commitment to equity. We face significant budget challenges. Our facilities in the southern part of the district are older, many have pressing maintenance needs, and some should be renovated or replaced altogether. Teachers in Adams 12 do not always have the resources educators in more affluent school districts take for granted. This is unacceptable. We have to think outside the box, and we cannot be afraid to ask for help. The financial challenges facing our district are much bigger than anything five school board directors can tackle on their own. With that reality in mind, I have tirelessly built relationships with city council members, county commissioners, and state legislators over the course of the last year. Each of them has expressed to me a willingness to collaborate with Adams 12 to find ways to get the resources we need. Some council members mentioned specific programs (sports and extracurricular activities) that we might provide for students at a shared cost. Help exists. We need to begin asking. Our neighborhoods are only as strong as our schools. People in some relatively high places understand that, and they’re willing to be a part of the solution. Likewise, we need to involve our nonprofit and business communities. We are all in it together.[14]	”
—Jessy Briton Hamilton, 2015[22]

Stephanie James, challenger for a seat on the Adams 12 Five Star Board of Education, stated the following as her top priorities:

“	I think the answer to this question really depends on who we ask. In conversations with the Superintendent, certainly the budget and literacy improvement weigh in heavily. When I speak with parents in the more northern part of the district, an important issue is classroom crowding and cuts to middle school sports. Last week, I visited with parents from the very southern part of the district, and they had concerns about all day kindergarten programs and after school care. I think the bottom line is we could reduce class sizes, build more schools, reinstate MS sports, bring full day kindergarten to all schools– if we had unlimited funds to do so. Unfortunately, we do not have these funds. I think we are naive if we believe that the state will be able to increase education funding to such a level so we could provide these services. Until more funding become available, I think we have to elect leaders that can think more creatively. As I suggested previously, could we partner with local universities to bring in education students willing to set up after school learning groups for literacy (and math, social studies-whatever the need is for that school), especially on the early release Wednesdays. These students can gain valuable experience and our children could receive some help for free. I would also encourage continued partnerships with groups such as the United Way and Americorps. I would also suggest that we try to partner with local cities to make some of our facilities more available for community use. For example, perhaps we can open up more of our schools for recreation basketball and dedicate the funds generated to try and bring back some of the middle school sports. I was told by one PTO representative that her school wanted to use a very visible fence line to put up a banner for a local restaurant to help them generate revenue, but that the process to get permission for this was just too complicated. There has to be a way we could simplify such processes for these schools. We definitely need to do a better job of communicating the reasons for any new bond proposal, and really work to understand why the last bond did not pass. Although I think passing a bond would be one of the best ways to build new schools and improve the infrastructure of others, I would encourage the district to evaluate other options as well, such as applying for a BEST grant (Building Excellent Schools Today) through the state. This program uses revenue from a variety of sources to fund a competitive grant system for capital construction and improvement.[14]	”
—Stephanie James (2015)[23]

When asked what her top priorities would be if elected, Kim Johnson, challenger for a seat on the Jeffco Board of Education, stated:

“	We must change the tone of the discussion about our schools. We can allow disagreement and still work together to make our schools the best they can be. We can treat educators like the professionals they are and set expectations everyone can agree on. We can include all community stakeholders in a meaningful, respectful dialog that doesn’t boil down to “which side are you on” as if that defines the totality of any person’s opinion about our schools. Jeffco must raise the level of respect that the board table. Reasonable people can disagree, engage in respective conversation, find common ground, and come to common sense solutions.[14]	”
—Kim Johnson (2015)[24]

Ali Lasell, winner of a seat on the Jeffco Board of Education, had the following top priorities:

“	If elected, my top priority will always be student success. 1. For students to be successful we need a great teacher in every classroom. We need to stop the exodus of great teachers and leaders in Jefferson County. We can do this by earning the trust and respect of our teachers and leaders again. We earn this by collaborating with them; listening to their voice- engaging them in the process once again. 2. We need to be diligent and thoughtful with our tax dollars to ensure accountability and transparency to all stakeholders. Strong fiscal management requires thoughtful ling range planning and collaboration. 3. We must make a fiscally responsible plan to accommodate the growth in NW Arvada and West Lakewood. 4. We must earn the respect and trust of ALL stakeholders in Jeffco. There has been a great division among communities the past two years and we need to work together, work hard to mend those divisions and move forward.[14]	”
—Ali Lasell (2015)[25]

The top priorities of Amanda Stevens, winner of a seat on the Jeffco Board of Education, were:

“	My top priority will always be the success of all Jeffco students--to see them thrive as whole, whole-hearted learners, earners, and citizens. The most critical priority to be addressed is adequate funding, as Colorado is a sad $2,700 below the national average every year for every child. My platform is a three-pronged approach to refocusing school board leadership on nonpartisan service to all students and our community rather than polarizing agendas: 1. Excellence (assess and improve students' academic learning, enrichment opportunities, and safety & connection, while rebuilding Jeffco as the destination district for passionate, professional educators who want long-term, sustainable careers) 2. Transparency (terminate the school board lawyer's position, develop a school board email retention policy, and reinvigorate pathways for listening to the community like the Citizens' Budget Academy, representative committee membership, community survey input, and a functional feedback loop between school accountability teams and the district) 3. Cooperation (respectful engagement with all stakeholders through purposeful listening, aiming for consensus & compromise in students' best interests; ongoing Interest Based Bargaining that centers decisions on student success; healthy debate and dialogue among leaders and community members even and especially when disagreement exists). None of this work can happen in isolation because each piece is interdependent, and it must be won anew every year for every child we serve.[14]	”
—Amanda Stevens (2015)[26]

Ranking the issues[edit]

The candidates were asked to rank the following issues by importance in the school district, with 1 being the most important and 7 being the least important. This table displays the candidates' average rankings as well as the highest and lowest rankings for each issue.

Issue importance ranking
Issues	Average ranking	Highest ranking	Lowest ranking
Expanding arts education	5.20	2	7
Expanding career-technical education	3.60	1	6
Balancing or maintaining the district's budget	2.40	1	6
Improving college readiness	3.60	1	5
Closing the achievement gap	2.40	2	4
Improving education for special needs students	4.00	3	5
Expanding school choice options	6.80	6	7

Positions on the issues[edit]

The candidates were asked an additional 10 short answer and multiple choice questions regarding significant issues in education. Links to those responses can be found below.

• Jessy Briton Hamilton survey responses
• Stephanie James survey responses
• Kim Johnsonsurvey responses
• Ali Lasell survey responses
• Amanda Stevens survey responses

State profile[edit]

Demographic data for Colorado
	Colorado	U.S.
Total population:	5,448,819	316,515,021
Land area (sq mi):	103,642	3,531,905
Race and ethnicity**
White:	84.2%	73.6%
Black/African American:	4%	12.6%
Asian:	2.9%	5.1%
Native American:	0.9%	0.8%
Pacific Islander:	0.1%	0.2%
Two or more:	3.5%	3%
Hispanic/Latino:	21.1%	17.1%
Education
High school graduation rate:	90.7%	86.7%
College graduation rate:	38.1%	29.8%
Income
Median household income:	$60,629	$53,889
Persons below poverty level:	13.5%	11.3%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, "American Community Survey" (5-year estimates 2010-2015) Click here for more information on the 2020 census and here for more on its impact on the redistricting process in Colorado. **Note: Percentages for race and ethnicity may add up to more than 100 percent because respondents may report more than one race and the Hispanic/Latino ethnicity may be selected in conjunction with any race. Read more about race and ethnicity in the census here.

Presidential voting pattern[edit]

See also: Presidential voting trends in Colorado

Colorado voted for the Democratic candidate in four out of the six presidential elections between 2000 and 2020.

Pivot Counties (2016)

Ballotpedia identified 206 counties that voted for Donald Trump (R) in 2016 after voting for Barack Obama (D) in 2008 and 2012. Collectively, Trump won these Pivot Counties by more than 580,000 votes. Of these 206 counties, four are located in Colorado, accounting for 1.94 percent of the total pivot counties.^[27]

Pivot Counties (2020)

In 2020, Ballotpedia re-examined the 206 Pivot Counties to view their voting patterns following that year's presidential election. Ballotpedia defined those won by Trump won as Retained Pivot Counties and those won by Joe Biden (D) as Boomerang Pivot Counties. Nationwide, there were 181 Retained Pivot Counties and 25 Boomerang Pivot Counties. Colorado had three Retained Pivot Counties and one Boomerang Pivot County, accounting for 1.66 and 4.00 percent of all Retained and Boomerang Pivot Counties, respectively.

More Colorado coverage on Ballotpedia

• Elections in Colorado
• United States congressional delegations from Colorado
• Public policy in Colorado
• Endorsers in Colorado
• Colorado fact checks
• More...

Academic performance[edit]

See also: Public education in Colorado

Education terms
For more information on education policy terms, see this article.
School board elections portal Glossary of education terms School choice on the ballot Education on the ballot

NAEP scores[edit]

See also: NAEP scores by state

The National Center for Education Statistics provides state-by-state data on student achievement levels in mathematics and reading in the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). The chart below presents the percentage of fourth and eighth grade students that scored at or above proficient in reading and math during the 2012-2013 school year. Compared to three neighboring states (New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming), Colorado's fourth and eighth grade students fared the best in both mathematics and reading in the 2012-2013 school year.^[28]

Percent of students scoring at or above proficient, 2012-2013
	Math - Grade 4	Math - Grade 8	Reading - Grade 4	Reading - Grade 8
Colorado	50%	42%	41%	40%
New Mexico	31%	23%	21%	22%
Utah	44%	36%	37%	39%
Wyoming	48%	38%	37%	38%
U.S. averages	41%	34%	34%	34%
Source: United States Department of Education, ED Data Express, "State Tables," accessed May 13, 2014

Graduation, ACT and SAT scores[edit]

See also: Graduation rates by groups in state and ACT and SAT scores in the U.S.

The following table shows the graduation rates and average composite ACT and SAT scores for Colorado and surrounding states during the 2012-2013 school year. All statements made in this section refer to that school year.^[28][29][30]

In the United States, public schools reported graduation rates that averaged to about 81.4 percent. About 54 percent of all students in the country took the ACT, while 50 percent reported taking the SAT. The average national composite scores for those tests were 20.9 out of a possible 36 for the ACT and 1,498 out of a possible 2,400 for the SAT.^[31]

Colorado schools reported a graduation rate of 76.9 percent.

In Colorado, more students took the ACT than the SAT. The students taking the ACT scored an average of 20.4.

Comparison table for graduation rates and test scores, 2012-2013
State	Graduation rate, 2013		Average ACT composite, 2013		Average SAT composite, 2013
	Percent	Quintile ranking**	Score	Participation rate	Score	Participation rate
Colorado	76.9%	Fourth	20.4	100%	1,721	14%
New Mexico	70.3%	Fifth	19.9	70%	1,626	12%
Utah	83%	Third	20.7	100%	1,684	6%
Wyoming	77%	Fourth	19.8	100%	1,757	4%
United States	81.4%		20.9	54%	1498	50%
**Graduation rates for states in the first quintile ranked in the top 20 percent nationally. Similarly, graduation rates for states in the fifth quintile ranked in the bottom 20 percent nationally. Sources: United States Department of Education, "ED Data Express," accessed May 28, 2015 ACT.org, "2013 ACT National and State Scores," accessed May 28, 2015 The Commonwealth Foundation, "SAT scores by state, 2013," accessed May 28, 2015

Dropout rate[edit]

See also: Public high school dropout rates by state for a full comparison of dropout rates by group in all states

The high school event dropout rate indicates the proportion of students who were enrolled at some time during the school year and were expected to be enrolled in grades 9–12 in the following school year but were not enrolled by October 1 of the following school year. Students who have graduated, transferred to another school, died, moved to another country, or who are out of school due to illness are not considered dropouts. The average public high school event dropout rate for the United States remained constant at 3.3 percent for both school year 2010–11 and school year 2011–12. The event dropout rate for Colorado was higher than the national average at 5.1 percent in the 2010-2011 school year, and 4.9 percent in the 2011-2012 school year.^[32]

See also[edit]

Colorado	School Boards	News and Analysis
Public education in Colorado List of school districts in Colorado	School board elections, 2015 List of school board elections in 2015 Candidate filing deadlines, 2015 Campaign finance deadlines, 2015	Incumbency no guarantee of success in Nov. 3 school board elections (November 6, 2015) What happened in Nov.'s top board elections? (November 4, 2015)

Footnotes[edit]

v • e Colorado school districts List of school districts in Colorado • School board elections in Colorado Colorado Department of Education • Public education in Colorado