Missouri lawmaker seeks to remove focus on statewide standardized testing for accreditation
Sen. Jill Carter, a Republican from Granby, has presented legislation on school accreditation three years in a row to a Missouri Senate committee (Annelise Hanshaw/Missouri Independent).
A bill that seeks to take school accreditation power away from the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education and decrease focus on statewide standardized testing was debated Tuesday by a state Senate committee.
State Sen. Jill Carter, a Republican from Granby, filed the legislation for the third time. It passed the Senate's education committee the past two years with support from public education advocates. In 2023, the bill was briefly debated by the full Senate but did not come to a vote.
'This is a bill that would help restore local control over education, rather than empowering central planning by DESE,' Carter told the Senate Education Committee Tuesday morning. 'Local school boards should regain control over curriculum, policies and decision-making.'
Her proposal would remove a statewide standardized test as a measure for school accreditation. Similar tests would only remain to fulfill federal mandates. To measure student growth, schools would have to institute a test that measures knowledge throughout the academic year.
These types of assessments are already in use in classrooms today.
The legislation also pivots the requirement to report school performance from the state education department to the districts and charter schools.
The state would also no longer be the sole accreditation entity for Missouri districts. While the education department would be allowed to create a classification system, the state would also have at least two national accreditation agencies that districts would choose between.
Carter said the issue of the state's oversight of schools was what led her to testify in the State Capitol years ago after her district implemented curriculum aligning with state standards but she thought was harmful.
'We have built a system of compliance for our schools, not one of freedom and flexibility,' Carter said.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Public testimony was exclusively in favor of the bill.
Walter Hayes, a parent and grandfather from Carter's district, said he liked the idea of giving local school boards control.
'School boards and the parents in the local communities, I think they have the best interest of those children in mind,' he said. 'What we need to do is be more concerned about the education of our children than institutions like the Department of Education.'
Otto Fajen, lobbyist for teachers' union Missouri National Education Association, said the Missouri Assessment Program became harmful under the federal No Child Left Behind Act passed in 2001. The federal law, which has since been replaced, put a focus on standardized tests and holding schools accountable for students' scores.
The federal government no longer requires statewide testing to be linked to accreditation.
Fajen said unlinking the statewide test with school classification would be 'liberating for the school systems to be able to move forward in the way that really meets the students' needs.'
Jennifer Black Cone, a former educator and self-described 'survivor of school testing,' said the standardized test from the state requires teachers to 'jump through hoops.'
'Tests that come from sources other than a local school district and are not authentic will not provide the results that will assist in better educating our students,' she said.
The committee did not take action on the bill Tuesday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Sending money to family in foreign countries may be taxed more
Jun. 9—Families hoping to send money to loved ones in other countries may be hit with additional fees from a tax and spending bill proposed by the Trump administration that would slap a 3.5% tax on remittances sent by anyone who is not a U.S. citizen. The "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" passed through the House in May and is now being debated by the Senate. The budget bill has several proposed tax changes, which include taxing money sent from an estimated 40 million non-US citizens — including green card holders, temporary workers and undocumented immigrants — to family and friends in other countries. The bill had a 5% tax but was reduced to 3.5%. The bill is another way the Trump administration is hoping to dissuade immigrants, both documented and undocumented, from coming into the country and moving money out of the U.S. economy. Republicans believe the bill would increase the average take-home pay of U.S. citizens, while Democrats believe the bill and increased taxes are "a transfer of wealth from the working class to the rich," said Daniel Garcia, spokesperson for the Democratic Party of New Mexico. What is a remittance? Remittances refer to sending money from one person to another and is typically done between family members from one country to another. A person living and working in the U.S. would send money to family members typically living in a developing country, where this money is a source of income that contributes to the country's gross domestic product (GDP). Payments are typically sent using an electronic payment service or a money transfer app. Banks, credit unions and money transfer services charge a fee for processing remittances, and fees average 10%, according to the International Monetary Fund. Cryptocurrency exchanges are not as heavily regulated and can be a way to avoid additional taxes and surcharges. "Taxing remittances would amount to a form of double taxation, since migrants already pay taxes in the country where they work," Esteban Moctezuma Barragán, Mexican Ambassador, wrote in a statement. "Imposing a tax on these transfers would disproportionately affect those with the least, without accounting for their ability to pay," Barragán added. However, some believe the 3.5% tax fee would give financial support to public services and is the most "pro-worker, pro-family and pro-American legislation we've seen in decades," said Amy Barela, chairwoman of the Republican Party of New Mexico. "Let's be clear, this measure is not about targeting individuals," she wrote in a statement to the Journal. "It's about ensuring the 3.5% fee, although modest, would also have a very meaningful impact in helping offset costs associated with public services, border security, and community infrastructure — relieving some of the financial pressure on hardworking New Mexicans who continue to bear the burden of an imbalanced system." Crucial source of revenue Mexico is the second-largest receiver of personally wired money behind India, according to the Center for Strategic and International Studies. In 2024, Latin America received $160.9 billion, with the U.S. accounting for 96.6% of all remittances to Mexico. They also make up 20-30% of GDP in countries like El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti and Honduras. "Remittance is a very important source of revenue in our government," said Patricia Pinzón, consul of Mexico. "This would affect Mexican families and the economy in general, but I would say the basic needs of Mexican families is the most worrying thing." However, "whatever happens in one economy will affect the other," said Pinzón. "Our economies are so interrelated that everything that happens here has a consequence in Mexico," she said. "Mexicans will not stop sending money; they'll just look for alternative ways to send it." Mexican migrant workers sent 16.7% of their labor income back to their families, and more than 80% of the income remains in the U.S. economy. The average amount of remittance sent to Mexico is roughly $350 every one to two months, which "could seem like nothing for the U.S., but it's money that a whole family lives on and covers their basics in Mexico," Pinzón said.
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
GOP scores win as Legislature repeals health care for undocumented adults
GOP scores win as Legislature repeals health care for undocumented adults originally appeared on Bring Me The News. Minnesota lawmakers voted Monday to strip MinnesotaCare health insurance from undocumented adults. The measure, which was the most controversial of the legislative session, passed both the House and Senate after leaders reached a budget agreement to avoid a government shutdown. In the evenly-divided House, DFL caucus leader Melissa Hortman was the only Democratic lawmaker to vote for the bill's passage. In the DFL-controlled Senate, Majority Leader Erin Murphy, Sen. Ann Rest, DFL-New Hope and others joined Republicans in voting for the bill. "I cannot vote to shut down our state, I just can't," Rest said in brief remarks on the Senate floor. "I made an agreement, I gave my word," Murphy said shortly before the vote. "I will vote for this. And it's among the most painful votes I've ever taken." The move rolls back a 2023 legislative accomplishment for Democrats, handing a major win to GOP lawmakers who refused a series of offers from DFL leaders and continued to leverage the threat of a government shutdown to get the bill across the finish line. Around 17,000 undocumented adults are currently enrolled in MinnesotaCare, which offers state-subsidized health care plans for low income people who pay premiums in exchange for coverage. The move is expected to save the state $56.9 million in the 2026-27 biennium. Opponents of the bill decried the measure as shameful and several Democratic lawmakers have said the change will cause some undocumented immigrants to die as serious health issues go undetected or untreated. Democrats have also claimed fiscal responsibility is not the motive of the GOP, as the change could drive costs associated with emergency hospital care. This story was originally reported by Bring Me The News on Jun 9, 2025, where it first appeared.
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
As Ohio budget process continues, educators, parents push for school funding
COLUMBUS, Ohio (WCMH) — State lawmakers are working on the budget and the Ohio House and Senate disagree on public school funding. The House version of the state budget was criticized by school districts and the Ohio Education Association. The Senate's version would increase the total amount of money going to public schools, but some said it still isn't enough. Ohio State announces every student will use AI in class Despite the changes, local education leaders said they are still disappointed in the Senate's version. 'For us, bottom line is that public schools in Ohio are still shortchanged by the funding formula as being proposed by the Senate,' Scott DiMauro, president of the Ohio Education Association, said. The Fair School Funding Plan was created in 2021 to make sure public schools get enough money. DiMauro said the Senate's version includes the Fair School Funding Plan but does not update cost information based on inflation. 'If you have schools that are just short-funded, it means an increase in class sizes. It could mean a reduction in course offerings, cuts in other kinds of services. That's not good for kids,' DiMauro said. Westerville City Schools Treasurer Nicole Marshall said the state currently pays for 38% of the cost of public education while property taxpayers cover the rest. Marshall said it should be a 50-50 split. Dispensary reacts to Ohio marijuana limit changes 'I would venture to guess that our state share will continue to drop over the biennium under the Senate's proposal, which would mean that our community would be asked to pick up more of the share of the cost to educate students in our district,' Marshall said. With the Fair School Funding Plan not fully implemented in the Senate's version of the budget, Marshall said districts across Ohio are not able to adequately prepare for the future. 'We need to be able to understand what we'll have available so that we know what students, what services and programs will be able to offer to our students in the future,' Marshall said. Ryan Wynia, a parent of three students at Big Walnut Local School District, said he has been going to some of the hearings on the state budget. He said he is worried about how the Senate version could impact not only his kids, but students across Ohio. Parents of fallen Morrow County deputy speak out as suspect awaits new court date 'As a parent, I'm very frustrated. We've been waiting for the fair school funding plan to be funded,' Wynia said. 'The biggest fear that I have is kids not having what they need to make their way for the future.' DiMauro, Marshall and Wynia all said they are optimistic that the Senate's version of the state budget could change and improve before it is passed by the end of June. They all said they believe legislators will listen. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
