Walters’ plan to overhaul Oklahoma’s assessment system will just lead to more ‘misguided testing’

You can’t know what you don’t measure, and you can’t accurately track progress if the tool keeps changing.

Yet, Oklahoma leaders at the Education Department want to change testing requirements again and are proposing using tools that are not designed to measure whether students have mastered the state content standards.

Oklahoma state Superintendent Ryan Walters announced plans earlier this month to eliminate end-of-year standards-based assessments in grades 3–8 for reading and math. The plan, which requires the U.S. Department of Education to waive federal law, proposes replacing Oklahoma’s custom-built single statewide test administered every spring with a variety of district-procured instructional tests administered multiple times a year.

Walters is billing this move as “giving power” back to school districts, but in reality, it’s just more misguided testing.

It’s also an attempt to obscure declining student achievement under the guise of district flexibility.

The Nation’s Report Card shows Oklahoma students saw severe declines in achievement across the board in 2024. Eighth grade students scored at an all-time low in reading and math. Fourth grade students scored at an all-time low in reading and nearly as bad in math. They scored worse than their 2005 peers.

But that’s not the only issue with this plan.

I’m concerned that instead of testing just once, students will be subjected to high-stakes testing three times during the year, reducing valuable instructional time and causing disruption.

Current state tests are designed with input from Oklahoma educators and aligned to state content standards that are developed by Oklahomans. Selecting an alternate product eliminates local educator involvement and oversight.

In addition, accurate comparisons between districts goes out the window. With districts choosing different tests measuring whether students have mastered the standards, it becomes extremely difficult to know if students have been fairly tested on their mastery.

Walters’ plan also puts an additional burden on local districts. Districts will have to pay for their new tests. They’ll be responsible for working directly with the testing vendor to procure and pay, manage administration logistics, train staff, score their assessment and report results to parents and the state Department of Education.

Student transfers will disrupt a district’s ability to measure performance and growth. That information will be impossible to understand if a student transfers to a school with different tests and expectations.

Despite the concerns about instructional assessments, they are an important part of teaching and learning when used appropriately.

The annual standards-based state assessment serves as the high-level, external check on local practices for improving student outcomes. The rigorous expectations and administration of the state assessment are imperative to keep the promise of equity.

State assessment results provide objective, comparable information on performance for state leaders to make decisions on resource allocation, support, and policy.

Instructional assessments — or benchmarks as described in Walters’ plan — play a different but important role: guiding day-to-day instruction and helping teachers support learning. While invaluable for helping students improve, these tools cannot replace the high-level check that state assessments provide. Together, state and instructional assessments form a complete system for both supporting and evaluating student success.

Annual standards-based state assessments test what academic standards a student learned. Instructional assessments test how well they are learning the foundational skills and what support is needed before the school year ends.

Rather than tinkering with the tools that measure student outcomes, I believe Oklahoma students would be better served if officials focused on improving student outcomes with impactful early literacy and math policy.

Simply changing the measurement tools won’t produce better outcomes.

Students don’t need new tests. They need continued, consistent academic support that helps them meet and exceed expectations in the classroom and beyond.

Lowering expectations or replacing tests is not going to help students achieve that goal. Only the hard work of committed educators and supportive policymakers can do that.