Chairman Erickson opened the hearing on SB 458.

Jason Long, Revisor, Office of the Revisor of Statutes, gave an overview of the bill. (Attachment 1)

Proponent:

Mike O'Neal, on behalf of Kansas Policy Institute, stated this bill would amend the current school district accreditation system statute and its requirement that the State Board of Education (SBOE) provide for statewide assessments in the core academic areas. It would direct the SBOE to use the performance levels and cut scores determined by the SBOE for 2024. This bill is about honesty, accountability, and the integrity of our state assessments. The Committee was reminded that the SBOE's role in accreditation, curriculum development and student assessments is purely by virtue of legislative delegation. (Attachment 2)

Discussion followed.

Opponent:

Jim Karleskint, United School Administrators, said by statute, state assessments and cut scores have historically been set based on extensive review by educator panels, psychometric research, and alignment with current academic standards. Kansas introduced revised assessment instruments in 2025, which required new performance level descriptors and new cut scores to align the test with current standards and expectations of student achievement. Kansas educators have worked to ensure their proficiency standards align with national measures such as the National Assessment of Educational Progress and college readiness indicators. Educational assessment systems should be responsive to research, feedback, and student learning trends.(Attachment 3)

Shannon Kimball, Government Relations Specialist, Kansas Association of School Boards, stated the Kansas assessment is not an abstract policy tool. It is a statewide measure that should provide consistent, comparable information about how well students are mastering the Kansas academic learning standards. Assessment results must accurately measure what students know and can do and be clearly interpretable. This bill would require the use of performance levels and cut scores that are not aligned to the current version of the Kansas assessment. Applying outdated cut scores to a redesigned assessment produces results that do not accurately reflect student performance. Test scores would be incorrectly categorized, not because student learning changed, but because the scoring system does not match the test the students took.(Attachment 4)

Mary Sinclair, PhD, Advocacy Team on behalf of Vikki Mullins, President, Kansas PTA, said this mandate to revert to previous cut scores would invalidate the Kansas assessments and put the state at risk of losing federal funding for public education. Some relevant issues include multiple definitions of proficient, two levels below proficiency, actual data validity check, aspirational goals, seven year cycle, and vertical alignment.  (Attachment 5)

Opponent Written:

Dr. Tiffany Anderson, Superintendent and Jim Edwards, Lobbyist, Topeka Public Schools, USD 501 (Attachment 6)

Dr. David Fernkopf, Executive Director, Kansas National Education Association (Attachment 7)

Cathy Hopkins and Beryl New, Legislative Liaisons, Kansas State Board of Education(Attachment 8)

Discussion followed.

Chairman Erickson closed the hearing on SB 458 and adjourned the meeting at 2:27 p.m.