View/Open - Drake University

isdainf~1lly shrugged off what lhcy haw as "yet another attempt" 10 maae life difficult for
jral Iowa school districts citing "eight man football'' and other adaptations small districts had
been making fol years.
Feu had any difficulty with accountability as such. Whether the intentions came from
desire to maintain Iowa's reputation as a national leader in student achievement or as a
:\polwe to a perceived decline in standardized test scores, educators understood the elevated
priority that education holds for most Iowans. One small school superintendent viewed the
mandates as a legislative response to "the changing realities of the work place." Others saw
t+e mandates as an effort to "improve the quality of education for students, to increase student
chievement, and to encourage teachers to look more closely at student progress." So for
most participants requirements on the school district to insure that schools were performing at
desired le\,el were understandable.
Concerns about the economy and a suspected fear that legislators believed "small
\chool\ arcn't a\ efficien~" alro had an impact on policy makers as they debated the merits of
liF 1272. nccordin_r 113 qe\.eral participants. Many participants believed small school districts
in p;~rticular \hould fear the motivations of the state level policy makers. These participants
hclis\.cd rh;lt the \\.or\enin~g Ionla economy and the higher costs of rural education mi, ~ht be an
impetus for leri\lntors to mandate small districts into requirements that ~~ould he drfficult for
oislators don't think
them to adhere to. Echoins the financial aspect. others offered that "le,
they can :Ifford the number of districts in the state of Iow~." and were simpl!' E!'ing to
gunr;lntce th;a taxpayers afere gettins their money's ~ onh.
*s~l,c!, urant to squeeze u.;," said a school teacher. He continued. "Can make
1110rc llOOps for lllelll iO jUIllp [llr~~:h 10 the point small ~cho@ls will jllst rive up and