Indiana students to face 2 new tests next 2 years

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Major changes in the state's education policies will have Indiana students taking new, different standardized tests in each of the next two academic years, officials said Monday.

The first ISTEP test is being created by contractor CTB/McGraw-Hill for use during the upcoming school year. Federal education officials have said that test would have to be given this year in order for the state to maintain its waiver from the No Child Left Behind law.

The state will also seek a contractor to design a new test for the 2015-16 school year, state officials told members of an education roundtable that includes teachers unions and charter school operators Monday.

Gov. Mike Pence, speaking at the first of two back-to-back education meetings Monday afternoon, said teachers and parents should understand that the first test is only temporary and will be replaced once work developing the second test is complete.

"We'll be ready with the revised ISTEP at the end of this coming school year, and what we're talking about here, ultimately, is to go forward with a new test," Pence said Monday, during a meeting of the state's Education Roundtable.

The new tests come as part of the state's exit from the national Common Core education standards, a move Pence signed into law in the spring.

The tests are also a response to the state's efforts to keep its federal waiver. U.S. Department of Education officials placed Indiana on watch in the spring after a review found problems with its monitoring of low-performing schools. If the state loses its waiver, it could lose control over a portion of the roughly $200 million in federal "Title I" funds it receives each year.

The state had been set to continue using the current ISTEP tests through the upcoming year, but starting the new test this fall was one of the federal requirements put in place for keeping the waiver.

Monday's back-to-back meetings continued much of the political tension that has marked the dual-reign over education by Democratic Schools Superintendent Glenda Ritz and Pence, a Republican. Pence and Ritz disagreed on the latter's proposal to add reading requirements into whatever new tests are created, sparking a spirited but civil debate at the roundtable.

But discussions at the State Board of Education, which has been home to some of the most visceral political fights in the state, took on a combative tone almost immediately after that meeting started.

The fighting recalled battles between Ritz and the Republican-appointed board, including Ritz's walkout last year and her failed lawsuit against the other board members. An internal email from the Pence administration, at the time, discussed options for limiting Ritz's power. But Pence later said that was never considered seriously.

Much of the recent flare-ups between board members and Ritz have focused on whether the state will maintain its No Child waiver.

Board member Dan Elsener, Marian University president and a close ally of former School Superintendent Tony Bennett, questioned Ritz's ability to submit a complete application to the federal government on time. Oliver complained that Ritz's staff has not been giving board members complete information about the waiver.

But Ritz assured the group a complete submission would be made to the federal government by next Monday's due date.


  • Grrrh
    " Pence and Ritz disagreed on the latter's proposal to add reading requirements into whatever new tests are created " ....because reading isn't that important, is it?!!!.....
  • RE: Absolute Nuts
    You are absolutely correct. Why tech them common sense, work ethics, and life lessons? You ought to see how ridiculous it is teaching an 18 year old man how to read a tape measure. Simple man stuff.
  • Absolute nuts.
    Why teach from books?? They should just prepare for tests all year. Then wonder why the zombie kids don't do well after they're out of the school systems. Oh yeah, more value for your tax money................

    Post a comment to this story

    We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
    You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
    Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
    No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
    We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

    Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

    Sponsored by

    facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
    Subscribe to IBJ
    1. I am not by any means judging whether this is a good or bad project. It's pretty simple, the developers are not showing a hardship or need for this economic incentive. It is a vacant field, the easiest for development, and the developer already has the money to invest $26 million for construction. If they can afford that, they can afford to pay property taxes just like the rest of the residents do. As well, an average of $15/hour is an absolute joke in terms of economic development. Get in high paying jobs and maybe there's a different story. But that's the problem with this ask, it is speculative and users are just not known.

    2. Shouldn't this be a museum

    3. I don't have a problem with higher taxes, since it is obvious that our city is not adequately funded. And Ballard doesn't want to admit it, but he has increased taxes indirectly by 1) selling assets and spending the money, 2) letting now private entities increase user fees which were previously capped, 3) by spending reserves, and 4) by heavy dependence on TIFs. At the end, these are all indirect tax increases since someone will eventually have to pay for them. It's mathematics. You put property tax caps ("tax cut"), but you don't cut expenditures (justifiably so), so you increase taxes indirectly.

    4. Marijuana is the safest natural drug grown. Addiction is never physical. Marijuana health benefits are far more reaching then synthesized drugs. Abbott, Lilly, and the thousands of others create poisons and label them as medication. There is no current manufactured drug on the market that does not pose immediate and long term threat to the human anatomy. Certainly the potency of marijuana has increased by hybrids and growing techniques. However, Alcohol has been proven to destroy more families, relationships, cause more deaths and injuries in addition to the damage done to the body. Many confrontations such as domestic violence and other crimes can be attributed to alcohol. The criminal activities and injustices that surround marijuana exists because it is illegal in much of the world. If legalized throughout the world you would see a dramatic decrease in such activities and a savings to many countries for legal prosecutions, incarceration etc in regards to marijuana. It indeed can create wealth for the government by collecting taxes, creating jobs, etc.... I personally do not partake. I do hope it is legalized throughout the world.

    5. Build the resevoir. If built this will provide jobs and a reason to visit Anderson. The city needs to do something to differentiate itself from other cities in the area. Kudos to people with vision that are backing this project.