Indiana brings back A-F grades, but exactly how schools will be measured undecided
Schools across Indiana will start seeing A-F letter grades again in 2026, thanks to a law signed by Gov. Mike Braun after the practice was suspended for seven years.
House Bill 1498 requires the state board of education to approve a new methodology for school performance by the end of this year and then assign schools A-F grades based on that new methodology.
The final vote on the bill in the House fell mostly along party lines with a 65-25 vote.
The bill also includes some specifics that the methodology must be based upon metrics listed in the Indiana Department of Education's Graduates Prepared to Succeed (GPS) dashboard, including proficiency rates for IREAD and ILEARN and the attainment of diploma seals.
However, the bill also allows the state board of education to include whatever other factors they deem necessary in the methodology.
The state must hand out letter grades for all schools across the state, including private schools, no later than Dec. 31, 2026. Schools would not get a letter grade for the 2024-25 year.
Indiana stopped handing out letter grades in 2018 as the state was attempting to revamp the grading methodology to accommodate the new ILEARN test. Then, grades were delayed even further due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Indiana Secretary of Education Katie Jenner said during the House Education committee hearing on HB 1498 that previously she had advocated moving away from a single letter grade for schools, but admitted parents had come to her asking for an easier way to understand how schools are doing.
More School news: ACLU sues Gov. Mike Braun after law eliminates Indiana University trustee elections
She said parents found the many metrics listed on the Indiana GPS dashboard to be confusing and wanted an easier way to gauge a school's success.
The bill also allows the IDOE to consider eliminating high school diploma waivers altogether, which allow qualifying students to be exempt from certain graduation requirements under the state's 'graduation pathways.'
Jenner said that since the state's overall waiver usage has been going down steadily in recent years, she doesn't see the need to make drastic changes to that right now.
'Our data is going in the right direction there, and I think we have to ensure we're working with schools, parents and families so we're never pulling the rug out too early,' Jenner said during the House Education Committee meeting in January.
Some Democratic lawmakers said during committee hearings on the bill that they think using a single letter grade is too simplistic for something as complex as how a school is working for its students.
Rep. Ed Delaney, D-Indianapolis, suggested that rather than a letter grade, schools instead be shown as either needing state intervention or not. His amendment to include that failed to pass.
Sen. Fady Qaddoura, D-Indianapolis, said during the Senate committee hearing on the bill that he hopes the metrics for grading include more than just testing scores, which could unfairly punish predominantly low-income schools compared to wealthier schools.
Erin Geddes, who sends her three kids to Warren Township schools, told IndyStar she's worried the letter grades will just further divide wealthy districts from the lower-income ones.
More changes coming: Once a school board member, Gov. Braun signs law making school board elections partisan
'These grades do nothing to highlight excellent teachers and administrative staff who are doing everything they can with what resources, support, or home life their students come from,' Geddes said.
Instead, Geddes thinks the state should be asking families how they would grade their schools.
'Ask us parents because we're the experts on our own kids, and that way it isn't a collective punishment on our own schools, which we chose for our kids,' Geddes said.
Other parents like Jennifer Goetz, who has three children at Avon Community schools and was a former teacher at a Chicago public school, believe the letter grades will reinforce the wrong things.
She's worried the grades will further pressure schools to only teach students how to pass tests, instead of making sure they learn the skills they need to be strong in reading and math in the future.
'That's what I saw when I was teaching in Chicago, just the pressure to meet the grades and not necessarily ensure authentic learning was happening,' Goetz told IndyStar.
However, getting back to delivering a letter grade for every public and private school in Indiana is something that lawmakers and the state department have been wanting since the state's newest standardized test, ILEARN, was implemented.
Republican lawmakers supporting the bill said letter grades are an important aspect of holding schools responsible for student success.
"School accountability is really important and this is a giant step in that direction," said Sen. Spencer Deery, R-West Lafayette, during floor discussion on the bill.
During the January state board of education meeting, Jenner gave a presentation on a tentative framework of what the state's accountability model for grade schools could be based on.
During that meeting, she explained that the current grading model for grades 3-8 is primarily focused on state assessments and academic growth. For high school grades, it was based on state assessments and other indicators like college and career readiness and graduation rates.
Keep up with school news: Sign up for Study Hall, IndyStar's free weekly education newsletter.
Some of the changes Jenner then proposed for grading third grade included literacy rates, something already required under HB 1498, but also student attendance improvements.
For grades 4-8, Jenner proposed attendance metrics as well as growth in ILEARN math and ELA, as well as advanced coursework.
For the high school grades, Jenner suggested that attendance metrics, advanced coursework, attainment of diploma seals, work-based learning and earning credentials of value be included in the grading metrics.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Hill
40 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump's Medicaid and SNAP red tape will devastate millions of Americans
Extending President Trump's 2017 tax cuts is a centerpiece of what the president calls his 'big, beautiful' spending bill that was passed late last month by House Republicans by a single vote. Now it is the Senate's turn to weigh in, but that chamber's narrow Republican majority needs to take a hard look at the facts before pressing the yay button. Trump's legislation may truly be enormous, but it is far from pretty — it stigmatizes the wrong people, slashes the wrong programs and will hurt far more Americans than it helps. For starters, those tax cuts will disproportionately go to the wealthy while adding trillions to the deficit. Meanwhile, the punitive work requirements and layers of paperwork for Medicaid and SNAP (formerly food stamps) recipients are still visible beneath the flimsy camouflage of reducing welfare fraud. Academic research, including my own, shows that the vast majority of Americans who are working, are disabled or are providing caregiving already meet these requirements for state and federal aid. Even the independent Congressional Budget Office reports that work requirements for Medicaid and SNAP do not accomplish their stated goal of increasing employment. Millions of Americans rely on Medicaid and SNAP, essential programs that have lasting benefits beyond health care and healthy eating. In 2023, nearly 83 million children and adults — 24 percent of Americans — relied on Medicaid. Medicaid supports care from the cradle to the grave: Medicaid pays for more than 4 in 10 births in the U.S., and is the largest funder of long-term care, supporting the long-term services and supports needed by almost 6 million Americans in 2021. In 2023, SNAP provided food assistance to an average of 42 million Americans each month. SNAP is important across the age spectrum, too: Nearly half of all children in the U.S. participate in SNAP before their 20th birthday, and more than 4 million seniors 60 or older receive SNAP. The CBO estimates that if the Senate passes the bill in its current form, nearly 15 million Americans will lose their health coverage by 2034 because of Medicaid work requirements and other cuts. The reconciliation bill includes the largest SNAP cut in history. It will eliminate food benefits for more than 3 million adults (about 1 million adults over 55) and roughly 1 million children each month. Still, that doesn't keep Republicans from continually trying to portray recipients as lazy cheaters who need to lace up their boots and get back to the factory. They've been making the same mistake for years. Arkansas in 2018 and Georgia in 2023 implemented Medicaid work requirements. Those moves merely caused thousands to lose insurance coverage, had no effect on employment and did not protect these states from fraud. In Arkansas, they were halted after one year. The punitive requirements in the House Republicans' bill will not only fail to force millions of people into low-paying jobs, but they will also increase Americans' medical debt, creating a further, unnecessary strain on our economy and health care system. If Republicans really think that work requirements and paperwork reduce fraud, they are wrong. Medicaid fraud, for example, is relatively rare and more often committed by health care providers, not beneficiaries. Further, these work requirements will bury Americans in mounds of paperwork and cost millions to administer. Instead, they should try to limit the sophisticated tax evasion strategies used by the top 1 percent, which are rarely detected but very expensive for the country. If Trump's complaisant members of Congress really wanted to increase employment, expansions in public preschool and child care would be much more effective and economical. It's somewhat ironic that an administration that supposedly is taking a chainsaw to the federal bureaucracy is moving to wrap ordinary Americans in red tape. But the reality is the Trump administration seeks to break down barriers for millionaires, while building them up around the rest of us. Taryn Morrissey is a professor and chair of American University's Department of Public Administration and Policy, and associate dean of research at the School of Public Affairs.


Washington Post
2 hours ago
- Washington Post
Senate GOP plan would sell millions of acres of Western public land
Senate Republicans have proposed selling off up to 3.3 million acres of federally owned land in 11 Western states, according to a draft legislative text offered as part of their spending and tax cut bill, prompting an outcry from conservationists and Democratic lawmakers. According to a budget blueprint released Wednesday evening by the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, the federal government would be required to sell off between 2.2 and 3.3 million acres of land owned by the Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Forest Service over the next five years. The proposal stipulates that the sold land will have to be used to develop housing or 'community development needs,' which it said could be defined by the secretaries of the Interior or Agriculture departments. The 11 states that would be affected by the proposal are Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), who chairs the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, said in a statement Wednesday that the draft legislative text would turn 'federal liabilities into taxpayer value, while making housing more affordable for hardworking American families.' Current law allows BLM to sell off land in some instances, such as in a specific ring around Las Vegas, at a discount if it's developed for affordable housing. But the push to scale up these land sales has spurred pushback from not just Democratic lawmakers and environmentalists but also some House Republicans, who managed to block a similar provision from being included last month in the House's tax and spending bill. Democrats and several conservation groups sharply criticized the Senate blueprint, warning that it could deprive future generations of public access to public land and suggesting much of the land sold might not be used for affordable housing. Sen. Martin Heinrich (New Mexico), the panel's top Democrat, accused Republicans of 'taking up a sledgehammer' in a 'fire sale' of public lands, in a statement Wednesday. 'We all lose access to public lands forever, jeopardizing our local economies and who we are as a nation.' In a statement, the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership said it opposed the proposed forced sale, arguing that the budget reconciliation bill was not the right process for public-land sales of this scale. 'The Senate proposal sets an arbitrary acreage target and calls for the disposal of up to six times more land than was proposed in early versions of the House budget reconciliation bill,' said Joel Pedersen, the group's president and CEO. 'If passed, sportsmen and women would lose access to large tracts of public land.' If enacted into law, the draft text would require the Bureau of Land Management and Forest Service to sell between 0.5 and 0.75 percent of the 438 million acres of land that they own collectively. It does not include the sale of land with existing grazing rights, along with federally protected lands such as national parks, monuments and wildlife refuges. The committee projected that the land sales would generate between $5 billion and $10 billion of income between fiscal years 2025 and 2034, citing an analysis by the Congressional Budget Office.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Political fights put spotlight on leader of Washington's largest public employee union
Mike Yestramski, president of the Washington Federation of State Employees, could not get a meeting with Gov. Bob Ferguson so he "called" during a March protest in the governor's office. (Photo by Jacquelyn Jimenez Romero) Mike Yestramski has enjoyed a low profile through much of his six years leading Washington state's largest public sector union. Not anymore. His very public clashes with the governor during a contentious 2025 legislative session put a political spotlight on the president of the Washington Federation of State Employees. The union represents 54,000 state government, higher education and public service workers. Ferguson and Democratic state senators — longtime union allies — wanted to furlough workers and make them pay more for health care coverage. They also called for curtailing programs and closing Rainier School, a rehabilitation center in Pierce County for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities, moves certain to trigger layoffs. Yestramski and legions of fellow union members turned out in force to oppose these moves. Clad in the union's green t-shirts, they rallied on the Capitol steps, demonstrated at the governor's office and patrolled the hallways outside the House and Senate chambers to pigeonhole lawmakers through the final hours of session. The muscular, pony-tailed labor leader was ubiquitous, rebellious and, in the end, victorious in some of the most pitched political battles of the session. And he didn't hold back with rhetorical slights against the new governor, calling Ferguson a 'pseudo Democrat' at rallies and 'Ratfink Robbie Ferguson' on Facebook. The swipes further brightened the exposure of the union's demands. Yestramski said in a recent interview in the union's Olympia headquarters that he prefers 'adult conversations' to resolve differences, though he realizes what occurred in the legislative session 'may have painted a slightly different impression.' But the gravity of the situation demanded a strong retort, he said. 'I generally believe that collaboration tends to be more successful than aggression,' he said. 'But that takes all of the parties involved to do that.' Yestramski, 45, was elected to a two-year term as federation president in 2019. Then 39, Yestramski said he was reportedly the federation's youngest ever president. Yestramski was reelected in 2021 and 2023. He plans to seek a fourth term this fall. He started his public service career as a homeless outreach social worker in Baltimore. He came to Washington in 2013, taking a job as a psychiatric social worker at Western State Hospital. An active union member, Yestramski said he pursued the leadership post because he was 'just getting really sick of seeing my friends and co-workers getting beat up, really, really bad.' 'People ended up in ICUs. People lost digits,' he said. Jobs at the hospital can still be dangerous, but Yestramski credited CEO Charlie Southerland for working collaboratively with the union to come up with solutions to bolster worker safety. The following interview was lightly edited for clarity and length. Have you had a chance to chat with or meet face-to-face with the governor? I have not. You've called him a few names. How do you feel about him now? While his rhetoric during the session I didn't love, he did ultimately sign the budget that funds our contracts and did not contain furloughs. As far as what he actually did, he didn't harm us, which was the fear based on statements that were coming out. For that, I'm thankful. You did say you felt scammed and that workers were lied to because Ferguson's proposals didn't align with his pledges to labor leaders in the 2024 campaign. Do you think WFSE members now feel they can trust him to have their backs? As a social worker — this is going to be related, I promise — the therapeutic school that I was brought up in was behaviorism. One of its basic tenets is, 'I don't really care what your motivations are, as long as you do the right thing.' To that end, whether it was genuinely in his heart or whether it was due to the political pressure of our members, whatever reason it was that got that outcome, the outcome is what was important. As far as our members trusting him, obviously, folks are going to be a little bit hesitant. This isn't just the governor. This is any elected official where we have to continue to make it known that we're paying attention, that we'll show up and that we have expectations of our elected officials. When we do that in large enough crowds, they listen and they do the right thing. In the end, did Ferguson do the right thing enough to secure the union's backing for reelection? That's three-and-a-half years away. In sports terms, there's going to be a lot more game film to review by the time that decision comes up. Enough time for a reconciliation? As far as he and I, personally, I can't say. My door is always open, even if it's to say I don't like you, right? I don't care if it's me. I believe the narrative got a little bit into a personal thing between me and Bob. I need to know that there are people in the governor's office that he will listen to, who can make sure that our main issues are being heard and addressed. Do you feel that way today? I feel that now more than I did two months ago. Would I like to have a better relationship with the governor? I don't want to be in a feud with our governor. You're probably not going to call him a 'ratfink' again. Probably not.