For Immediate Release:
January 9, 2025
In Case You Missed It: Growing Opposition to Wisconsin’s Lowered Test Score Standards
Delafield, Wis. – In case you missed it, opposition to Wisconsin’s recently lowered test score standards is growing, with legislators and Gov. Tony Evers harshly criticizing the move. Speaker Robin Vos recently expressed interest in prioritizing legislation to address the changes to standards.
The Institute for Reforming Government released an extensive report detailing how, when, and why DPI lowered the bar for kids. IRG’s Quinton Klabon recently commented on how those lowered expectations affect students and what the process should have looked like.
WHY IT MATTERS: State Superintendent of Public Instruction Jill Underly recently lowered Wisconsin’s test score standards, making it impossible to compare students to before the pandemic or understand if they are really learning. Even Gov. Evers is criticizing the decision to lower standards, saying the process was a “mistake.”
Read more here, watch here, or find excerpts below:
Gov. Evers critical of DPI lowering test standards, ‘surprised’ by decision
Emilee Fannon
January 6, 2025
Months after the Department of Public Instruction (DPI) implemented a new controversial tool to measure students’ academic performance, Governor Tony Evers is now describing the decision as a “mistake.”
During a press conference with reporters meant to look ahead at 2025, Evers was critical of a DPI decision to change the testing cut scores that categorize how students did on Wisconsin’s Forward Exam and the national ACT standardized test.
Evers maintained there should have been more input from more people ahead of time.
“I think there should have been some information and dialogue happening with all sorts of people before that decision was made,” Evers said. “The mistake was there wasn’t enough conversation with stakeholders, parents ahead of time.”
…
DPI officials have defended the new benchmarks, saying they align more directly with the state’s Forward Exam and teaching standards. Underly noted other states, such as Oklahoma and New York, have recently lowered their testing benchmarks.
However, the Institute for Reforming Government, a conservative think tank, points to changes for the benchmarks on ACT testing.
The changes adopted last year mean students who score a 19 on the exam are considered to be meeting expectations. That standard was formerly labeled as “proficient,” but the DPI also softened the language with changing the cut scores, replacing terms like “basic” and “below basic” with “approaching expectations” and “developing.”
“[The ACT] passing standard basically went from a 21 to a 19,” Klabon said. “That is the definition of lowering standards.”
The ACT, itself considers a 19 at the low end of its “average score range,” which includes scores between 17 and 24. According to a 2011 primer put together by the Portage School District, a 19 on the ACT would’ve been lower than the minimum score required for admission to every UW System school.
…
Klabon, meanwhile, joined Evers in saying the DPI should have gotten input from more people than teachers when changing the cut scores. DPI primers on the changes said 90 educators were involved in changing the benchmarks for the Forward Exam, while 26 educators had a hand in changing the ACT cut scores.
“I think any process to set standards for Wisconsin test scores should have included national experts on testing, on standards,” Klabon said.
It’s why critics, including Evers, have argued the adjustments as they were implemented make it nearly impossible to measure students’ academic performance.
Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) called the new testing standards “preposterous” and said his caucus will introduce legislation to address it in the coming weeks.
“We want to pass legislation to guarantee the standards are the same and you don’t get to jigger them every time you want to run for reelection,” Vos said.
…
###
The Institute for Reforming Government is a non-profit 501(c)3 organization that seeks to simplify government at every level by offering policy solutions to thought leaders in American government in the areas of tax reform, government inefficiency, and burdensome regulations.