Indiana has long been embroiled in controversy and conflict over its high-stakes testing system. Business leaders, parents, educators, and politicians have been at odds with each other, resulting in power struggles, scandals, and high-profile resignations. Last year, after a mishap with test scores, the people of Indiana revolted, leading the state legislature to impose a moratorium on statewide testing. The uncertainty, confusion, and anger surrounding the future of the ISTEP exam have now spilled over into the current election cycle.
The candidates running for governor and state superintendent are now engaged in a debate over whether to lessen the significance of test scores on student grades, teacher evaluations, and district score cards, or to completely replace the exam with a new one. This would make it Indiana’s third standardized test in as many years. Despite education being a lower-tier topic on the national stage in this election year, testing remains a top concern for many in Indiana.
This was evident at Lawrence North High School where the Democratic nominee for governor, John Gregg, and his Republican opponent, Lt. Gov. Eric Holcomb, faced off in a debate in front of high school students from across the state. When given the opportunity to ask any question they wanted, the majority of students in the auditorium were in agreement on one thing: "Do you have a plan to replace the ISTEP?"
On the same day, the local superintendents and school board members of Indiana gathered for lunch and directed their questions at the two candidates for state schools chief, incumbent Glenda Ritz and Republican challenger Jennifer McCormick.
Jennifer McCormick, the Republican candidate, who is seeking the position of Indiana schools superintendent, expressed her belief that the test should not be the sole determinant of everything. She believes that testing has a purpose, and if used properly, it can improve the skills of students and teachers. On the other hand, Glenda Ritz, the Democratic incumbent, took a harder stance, stating that testing has disrupted the classroom at the expense of teaching and learning.
Indiana is not alone in experiencing political turmoil over assessments. Across the country, over 600 bills were proposed in statehouses to regulate the amount and type of standardized testing conducted in schools. Lawmakers in Colorado and New York reversed their policies after numerous parents opted their children out of exams in previous years. In Arizona, legislators are considering allowing districts to choose their own exams, potentially violating federal mandates.
State politicians can no longer shift the blame to the federal government and hide behind the concept of local control. They now have more authority, granted by the Every Student Succeeds Act, to determine how students, teachers, and schools are graded. Few places have seen assessments become as heavily politicized as Indiana. The state, known for its conservative values, incorporated test scores into teachers’ evaluations and based its entire accountability system on exam results. Students enrolled in failing schools were offered vouchers to transfer to private or charter schools. However, this ambitious accountability system faced challenges. In 2013, Indiana abandoned the Common Core State Standards and withdrew from a federally funded consortium for developing aligned tests. New standards were hastily implemented, and CTB McGraw-Hill was hired to write and administer a new test, a process that was criticized as messy and chaotic.
The controversy surrounding the testing system in Indiana reached its pinnacle when Florida’s education Commissioner, Tony Bennett, resigned after it was revealed that, during his time as the superintendent of Indiana, he had altered the scores of a struggling charter school that had received significant funding from a major GOP donor.
Overall, the education system in Indiana is under attack, and the future of high-stakes testing is uncertain. The debates and discussions during this election cycle will undoubtedly shape the direction that Indiana takes in terms of education assessments.
Rex Bell, the candidate representing the Libertarian party, expressed his opinion that the state government should completely cease its involvement in testing. He emphasized the importance of returning control to the parents, teachers, and the school board. Both candidates running for the position of superintendent share a similar stance on the matter. They propose abandoning the A-F grading system and instead adopting a more comprehensive approach that takes into account multiple indicators.
McCormick, one of the superintendent candidates, argued that a single letter grade should not be the sole determinant of a school’s performance. Ritz, who has faced criticism for her poor communication with superintendents and her department’s handling of the exams, assured local officials that she would soon present her own plan to address the testing issue. Ritz believes that educators have the ability to assess a child’s performance on a test without the need for the state to spend excessive amounts of money.
Local superintendents involved in the assessment committee expressed their frustration with the lack of progress made in their meetings. They believe that the voices of the few educators present are not being heard. They also fear that if the committee does not come up with a solution before the next legislative session, the state will revert back to the outdated exam system.
During a recent session in Indianapolis dedicated to the state’s assessment and accountability program, superintendents expressed their discontent with the lack of progress in selecting a new exam. They highlighted the impact this delay was having on their ability to assess students’ academic standing and make decisions such as grade promotions. As the session came to a close, the frustrated superintendents discussed their options. In the back of the room, one superintendent proposed the idea of simply not taking the exam at all.