The Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (DPI) has recently undergone a significant overhaul of the Wisconsin Forward Exam’s performance benchmarks and terminology, igniting a debate among educators, politicians, and parents across the state.

DPI, under the leadership of State Superintendent Dr. Jill Underly, revised the standards for English Language Arts (ELA) and Mathematics on the Forward Exam. These changes, effective from the 2023-2024 school year, were purportedly to align the exam with updated academic standards and to provide a more accurate reflection of student performance.

The new benchmarks have stirred controversy primarily because they disrupt the continuity of performance data over time. Critics argue that these alterations make it impossible to compare this year’s results with previous years, potentially masking declines in educational outcomes. The terminology shift from ‘Proficient,’ ‘Basic,’ and ‘Below Basic’ to ‘Advanced,’ ‘Meeting,’ ‘Approaching,’ and ‘Developing’ has also been contentious, with some viewing it as an attempt to soften the perception of student performance.

On Monday, Dairyland Sentinel filed an Open Records Request with the State of Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction seeking information regarding the controversy.

Here is the content of our Records Request:


Brian Fraley, Publisher
Dairyland Sentinel
3215 Golf Road #129
Delafield, WI 53018

January 21, 2025

Jill Underly and the Official Custodian of Records for the Department
State of Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction
201 West Washington, Avenue
Madison, WI 53703

Dear Superintendent Underly:

Under the Wisconsin Open Records Law, §§19.31 to 19.39 I am requesting an opportunity to inspect or obtain copies of public records that relate to the panel of “nearly 100 experts from across the state” who recommended the updated achievement benchmarks for the forward exam, as per your statement of early today as reported by Corrinne Hess of Wisconsin Public Radio.

Specifically:

1) Who were these experts? How are they chosen? Please provide documentation, including invitations and relevant discussions regarding the geographic and ideological diversity. Please also provide any communication with anyone in your department regarding the vetting of these experts including correspondence with any groups or individuals consulted regarding the composition of this group.

2) When and where did they meet? Please provide agendas, minutes and any Zoom or other recording of the meetings.

3) Were any of the 100 experts asked to sign a non disclosure agreement or similar document that would shield the public from information regarding the discussions? Please provide any relevant emails and other documents given to the advisory group, including any Non Disclosure contracts or discussions regarding any such agreements.

4) Please provide a complete timeline of this consultation process and include an itemized listing of any state expenditures including staff time and equipment purchases, meeting space rental, food, travel, lodging or other accommodations.

If there are any fees for searching or copying these records, please inform me if the cost will exceed $1. However, I would also like to request a waiver of all fees in that the disclosure of the requested information is in the public interest and will contribute significantly to the public’s understanding of the changes in terminology and cut scores. I intend on publishing your response at DairylandSentinel.com. This information is being sought in the public interest and the data will not be used for commercial purposes.

I would request a response in writing, within the 5 days described by law, if you intend to deny this request. Also, if you expect a significant delay in fulfilling this request, please contact me with information about when I might expect copies or the ability to inspect the requested records.

If you deny any or all of this request, please cite each specific exemption you feel justifies the refusal to release the information and notify me of the appeal procedures available to me under the law.

Thank you for considering my request.

Sincerely,

Brian Fraley
info @ DairylandSentinel.com
(262) 204-705XX


Underly’s moves on the Forward Exam brought about swift backlash from policy makers. Republican legislators, including Assembly Leader Robin Vos, have criticized the changes, suggesting they could be an effort to “dumb down” educational standards. Governor Tony Evers, a Democrat, has also expressed concerns, noting there was insufficient communication with parents prior to implementing these changes.

The Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty (WILL), a conservative think tank, has labeled the new benchmarks as rendering Forward Exam scores “useless” for assessing long-term educational trends, especially since the exam’s scores were previously benchmarked against the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). This break in continuity could, according to WILL, obscure the state’s educational performance relative to national standards, particularly in light of high educational spending and low proficiency outcomes criticized in the past.

Dr. Underly has defended the process, emphasizing the involvement of educators statewide in setting these new standards. However, with legislative proposals in circulation to revert to the previous benchmarks, the debate over the Forward Exam’s utility and accuracy continues to unfold.

We want to know what those experts think!

We will keep you updated as this story develops.

1.21.25