Two states are making moves that could upend the two-decade-old, No Child Left Behind-era model of once-a-year, standardized state exams to show whether students are meeting standards.
In its place, Oklahoma and Texas—through different paths—could become the latest states to shift to exams given multiple times throughout the school year, with the idea that such tests offer educators and families more timely data on student performance. But Oklahoma’s proposed model, in particular, would drastically undercut accountability requirements that ensure students are learning, opponents argue.
The moves come as the U.S. Department of Education invites states to request flexibility from certain federal mandates as part of the Trump administration’s pledge to “return education to the states.”
Education Secretary Linda McMahon has broad authority under the nation’s main school accountability law, the Every Student Succeeds Act, to waive many state requirements. And states seem keen to take her up on her invitation to use it, with at least three already jumping at the opportunity.
Oklahoma is one of them, and it’s not yet clear if Texas will follow suit.
The waiver Oklahoma is requesting proposes not only a switch to testing students multiple times a year—a model known as through-year testing that states including Florida and Montana already use—but also doing away with the requirement that states use a standardized test that receives federal approval through a peer review process.
Under the proposed waiver, Oklahoma wouldn’t have to follow federal requirements essential for reliable, uniform, school-by-school data on student performance, said Anne Hyslop, director of policy development at All4Ed, a nonprofit seeking to advance educational equity.
“That piece has only emerged in the last year or so, and particularly been advanced by the U.S. Department of Education saying, ‘Hey, we’re interested in waivers. Tell us what you want us to waive,’” Hyslop said.
Oklahoma and Texas could represent new frontier in state testing
Over two decades ago, the No Child Left Behind Act introduced the requirement that states administer annual, statewide assessments in math and reading for students in grades 3-8 and one year in high school, with the goal of all students reaching proficiency in the two subjects by 2014.
No Child Left Behind’s 2015 replacement, the Every Student Succeeds Act, relaxed many of those accountability requirements, but retained annual testing.
Oklahoma’s state superintendent, Ryan Walters, now argues that isn’t enough flexibility, and is asking the federal government for permission to no longer use end-of-year, summative assessments for students. Instead, under the state’s waiver request that it plans to submit to the Trump administration, the state would broaden its use of alternative assessments that don’t have to be federally reviewed and approved, a system it calls “restrictive, outdated, and effectively monopolistic.”
If the Trump administration gave its blessing, it could radically shift how state testing looks for students.
Some school accountability experts say the proposal doesn’t show how the change would improve student achievement, which is a requirement for waiver requests. The state’s education department had set an Sept. 8 deadline for public comments on the proposal.
In early August, Walters announced districts this school year would be allowed to use “approved benchmark assessments” in place of the current, end-of-year standardized math and English tests.
But a federal Education Department spokesperson told StateImpact Oklahoma days later that the state’s waiver request was “nowhere near” a done deal and that it needed to incorporate public comments into its request.
Meanwhile in Texas, the state would also move to a through-year model, testing students three times during the school year in an effort to provide real-time feedback for educators and parents on students’ classroom attainment, under a bill state lawmakers sent to Gov. Greg Abbott last week.
Proponents say the new model would reduce the stress on students and educators from a one-time, high-stakes test, and free up instruction time devoted to testing and preparation. But the state’s teachers’ union said in a statement the new model would be “worse than what we have now.”
Texas would allow districts to pick the first two tests they administer through the year.
But to adhere to federal regulations without seeking a waiver, the state’s education department would have to develop a final assessment for statewide use and submit it for federal peer review, showing it is aligned with state standards, measures the depth and breadth of content schools teach, and has accommodations and accessibility features for English learners and students with disabilities.
The potential hurdles to developing such a test could tee the state up to request a waiver, too, said Hyslop, who served in the Education Department during the Obama administration and played a role in authoring the Every Student Succeeds Act.
Texas only has so much latitude under current federal requirements to depart from the current testing model without the education secretary’s approval. Without a waiver, the state would need to rely entirely on the third and final assessment to meet federal requirements.
“Would they ask for a waiver as broad as Oklahoma’s, or would they be more targeted in their waiver request? Or would they say, ‘actually, the statewide, end-of-year assessment, that Texas is building, is going to stand alone and that meets federal requirements?” she said.
Spokespeople for Texas’s state education agency and the federal Education Department did not respond to requests for comment.
Education Department’s decision in Oklahoma ‘will be a signal’ for other states
The through-year testing model itself that Oklahoma and Texas would shift to is not new, with Florida and Montana now relying on it.
Montana, in 2023, secured a waiver from federal officials to pilot its system with some districts. It has since rolled that system out statewide, testing students three times a year, allowing districts to administer the tests when they choose within eight-week windows, and providing results to teachers and parents within a week so the assessments are “meaningful” and “actionable,” said Susie Hedalen, the state superintendent.
It’s been challenging, and the state has been training teachers to shift to a fundamentally different system and dispel misunderstandings about administering “testlets.”
The state has also worked to fix the assessments’ length without sacrificing their reliability, Hedalen said.
It was “very detailed and an incredible lift” to go through the waiver process, said Hedalen, who was elected last year after serving as a district superintendent.
“It was a lot of work, but the [federal] department is—especially now—more and more interested in these innovative flexibilities and allowing for more waivers,” she said. “In speaking with my colleagues, a lot of states are putting in waivers to take advantage of the flexibilities that we are now offered by the current administration, and are very grateful for.”
States usually prioritize local control and letting districts determine the scope of their curriculum. With through-year testing, it can be challenging to administer tests to coincide with when teachers are teaching specific skills to ensure they accurately reflect student knowledge, said Chris Domaleski, associate director of the Center for Assessment, which helps state leaders design assessments.
There was interest in through-year testing before the pandemic, he said, and it’s now returning. But concerns remain about testing students too much. He likened it to shortening a two-hour flight to multiple flights lasting an hour and 45 minutes total.
“It doesn’t really give a lot of your day back, because there’s so many of these ancillary activities that go on around that—you’ve got to get the airport, you’ve got to park, you’ve got to travel to the destination after you land, and all those kinds of things,” he said. “So it’s really adding flights. Even if those flights are shorter duration, each one is uniquely disruptive. ... You do see that the overall footprint of the assessments on the school calendar can become more disruptive.”
There’s a difference between Montana’s through-year testing effort and what Oklahoma and Texas are proposing, Hyslop said.
Montana uses the same assessments, which were submitted to the federal government for peer review, for all students across the state, whereas Oklahoma is proposing to let districts choose their own tests that don’t have federal approval, and Texas is proposing to let districts choose their own test for two out of three administrations.
Oklahoma, and possibly Texas, are “guinea pigs” for charting a new course, Hyslop said.
If the federal Education Department approves the broad Oklahoma request and doesn’t require that it do the amount of work Montana did to refine its model, others could follow, she said.
“Once you grant a certain type of flexibility to one state, it’s quite difficult to say no,” she said. “How these requests are treated, I think, will be a signal for other states. I’m sure they are watching.”
