A teacher and students in a classroom. (Klaus Vedfelt | Getty Images)

An audit announced this week of changes in recent state testing standards is the latest reaction of Republican lawmakers to changes the Department of Public Instruction (DPI) approved last year in the names and cut scores for achievement levels. It also comes as state Superintendent Jill Underly campaigns for reelection facing a challenger criticizing DPI for “lowering” state standards.

Co-Chairs of Wisconsin Legislative Joint Audit Committee Sen. Eric Wimberger (R-Oconto) and Rep. Robert Wittke (R-Caledonia) announced the audit Tuesday of DPI’s decision to update terms describing achievement levels and revise the cut scores used to measure student achievement. 

Underly and DPI have repeatedly defended the changes as part of the agency’s regular process to ensure standards are kept current. Assembly Republicans passed a bill last week that would reverse the changes, requiring  the state to reinstate standards set in the 2019-20 school year and tie changes to the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). NAEP is a nationwide assessment meant to provide representative data about student achievement. 

Wimberger and Wittke noted in a statement that the recent NAEP results found that 31% of fourth grade students were at or above proficient in reading. Under the new state testing standards, Wisconsin had a proficiency rate of 48% in English/Language Arts and 49% in math. The legislators accused Underly of trying to hide the state’s literacy challenges.

The “unilateral changes to cover up DPI’s failing is absolutely unacceptable, and this audit will help us uncover exactly how and why these reporting standards were changed to stop future manipulation,” the lawmakers said.

According to the Legislative Audit Bureau, the audit could look at several topics related to the changes, including DPI’s written policies and procedures for developing the state’s annual school report card and for updating assessment cut scores. Other topics include, whether the current policies comply with statutory and administrative rule requirements, the way the agency gets input from educators and parents when developing changes, and how the process used for the recent changes versus previous years, State Auditor Joe Chrisman wrote in a memo to Wimberger and Wittke.

Deputy Superintendent Tom McCarthy said in a statement that the audit was for political purposes, noting the upcoming state superintendent election.

“Our approach has been transparent. If the Legislature were genuinely interested in this issue, and had listened to our testimony just a few weeks ago, they would understand that updating cut scores is a standard procedure whenever updates are made to our rigorous state standards,” McCarthy said. 

During a hearing on the bill to reverse the changes, McCarthy and other DPI representatives laid out the process the agency used, including a survey and consulting education experts to discuss potential changes and come up with recommendations. 

In his statement, McCarthy reiterated that the updates were recommended by experts and that  NAEP is a “national benchmarking tool” not a state accountability tool. The test is typically taken by only  a few thousand students in the state to develop a representative pool.

“It does not measure Wisconsin academic standards, which are used by teachers to deliver instruction. Comparing the two is like trying to use a thermometer to measure the length of a two-by-four — it makes no sense,” McCarthy said. “Especially since it seems NAEP is under attack by the White House, including canceling a major NAEP assessment and firing analytic staff.”

The Trump administration recently put NAEP Chief Peggy Carr on administrative leave. The Department of Education also recently canceled the NAEP Long-Term Trend exam, which measures the math and reading skills for 17-year-olds. 

McCarthy said DPI learned about the audit from a press release that “falsely states that the DPI didn’t support literacy reform.”

“Let’s be clear: we supported and still support literacy reform. The legislature, on the other hand, is still holding back nearly all of the $50 million meant to help kids learn to read. Instead of funding the solutions, they’re trying to manufacture controversy,” McCarthy said. “This newly announced ‘audit’ is not a desire to truly learn, but to lay a political hit on a state elected official in the middle of a campaign.”

State testing standards have become a central issue in the April 1 election for state superintendent as Underly’s challenger, Brittany Kinser, who is backed by Republicans, has said she is running on a platform of “restoring high standards.” 

State grants audit

Lawmakers also announced that they plan to launch an audit into the administration of state grants, which they say is meant to help examine whether there is waste, fraud and abuse in the state.

According to the LAB, the audit could look into the policies an agency has for administering grants, whether agencies are compliant with state statute and administrative rules in implementing grants, the amount of grants awarded in recent years and outcomes from those awards.

The audit request comes as lawmakers are starting the process of writing the next two-year state budget. 

Wimberger and Wittke said that given the budget it is “prudent” to look at how much is being spent on grants. 

“In the last budget, the state issued more than $44 billion in grant assistance funding. Evaluating these programs for wasteful, fraudulent, or abusive spending means we can identify and cut the fat of big government, making Wisconsin’s state government more accountable for our hardworking taxpayers,” the lawmakers said. 

A public hearing on the proposed audits is scheduled for Tuesday. 

State Rep. Amanda Nedweski (R-Pleasant Prairie) testifies on Tuesday, Feb. 11, in favor of legislation to require state employees to work in the office five days a week starting July 1. (Screenshot/WisEye)

State employees who worked in the office before the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020 would have to return to working in person starting July 1 under a proposed bill that went before a state Senate committee Tuesday.

“The pandemic is now over and has been for quite a while,” said State Rep. Amanda Nedweski (R-Pleasant Prairie), testifying at a public hearing on SB-27 in the Senate Committee on Licensing, Regulatory Reform, State and Federal Affairs. “Yet a high volume of state duties that required in-person execution prior to 2020 are still being performed in locations outside of the state offices in which they were long housed prior to the pandemic.”

Sen. Cory Tomczyk (R-Mosinee), the bill’s Senate author, cited decisions by major U.S. employers to return to at least partial in-office schedules. “Returning to work in person makes sense and forces accountability,” Tomczyk said.

Nedweski and Tomczyk were the only witnesses to testify at Tuesday’s hearing. There is not an Assembly companion bill, but Nedweski is the lead Assembly co-sponsor of the Senate legislation. She also chairs the Assembly’s new Committee on Government Operations, Accountability, and Transparency.

Republican state lawmakers have been pushing for state employees to end remote work for most of the last four years.

Meanwhile, the Department of Administration (DOA) and the administration of Gov. Tony Evers have been moving forward with a plan, Vision 2030, to reduce the state’s real estate footprint.

No administration representatives testified at Tuesday’s hearing. But in a memo to reporters Tuesday afternoon, Evers’ communications director, Britt Cudaback, said Vision 2030 is based on moving to a “modern and hybrid work environment” mixing remote and in-office work “in order to continue to be a competitive employer and bolster our efforts to recruit, train, and retain workers statewide.”

If SB-27 is enacted, she said, returning to in-office-only work would require more private leases for office space or reopening buildings that are to be closed and sold, or both. The administration has projected savings of more than $7 million in occupancy costs and more than $540 million in deferred maintenance costs.

Reversing those plans “would neither be pragmatic nor fiscally prudent,” Cudaback said.

At the hearing, Nedweski emphasized that the bill’s intent is not simply to bar all remote work, but she argued that the state hasn’t systematically evaluated its impact.

“We don’t have a handle on what’s going on,” she said. “So the idea would be, everybody, please come back and let’s figure out what the best situation is.”

Two years ago the Legislature’s Joint Audit Committee commissioned the Legislative Audit Bureau to review remote work and space allocation in state government. The resulting report said the state lacked comprehensive data on the extent of remote work and recommended more detailed monitoring and documentation of remote work agreements and practices.

Democrats on the five-member Senate committee balked at the legislation, calling it inflexible and a potential deterrent to the state’s ability to hire.

Sen. Tim Carpenter (D-Milwaukee) noted with remote work more state employees have been able to work from counties across Wisconsin, not just in its two largest cities. “If those people are going to have to keep their jobs and be in the office, which I assume would be Madison, are they going to be forced to give up their jobs?” he asked.

Nedweski and Tomczyk said that employees who were hired to work remotely or had employment agreements allowing remote work before the pandemic would not be required to return to an office five days a week.

But Sen. Chris Larson (D-Milwaukee), said the legislation’s wording appeared to be more narrowly written. “I am worried about this being wildly inflexible, and you’re talking about a level of flexibility that is not contained within the bill,” he said.

Nedweski said she “would be more than happy” to add language “that underscores that we already have DOA policy in place to allow for flexibility.”

Larson replied that the bill “would be a law that would override the policy.”

In an email message, Nedweski’s office staff member Tami Rongstad told the Wisconsin Examiner that there would be an amendment to exempt the University of Wisconsin Hospitals and Clinics from the bill “and clarify that the requirement to return to onsite work would not apply to duties that were performed off-site prior to March 1, 2020.”

Rongstad said Nedweski “was open to considering adding clarifying language to the bill related to future telework options for state employees beyond the July 1, 2025, return to in-person work date,” based on existing terms for remote work in the state human resources handbook.