Skip to content
Bills from the 2015–16 session

Assembly Bill 1

A school review system, providing an exemption from emergency rule procedures, providing an exemption from rule-making procedures, granting rule-making authority, and making an appropriation. (FE)

Stopped in committee

It had a but no committee vote, so it never came up for a vote. To try again, a lawmaker would have to start a new bill.

  1. Introduced, passed

    Jan 7, 2015

  2. Committee, stopped here

    Stopped here. It had a hearing but no committee vote.

  3. Assembly vote, not reached

  4. Senate vote, not reached

  5. Governor, not reached

  6. Law, not reached

Latest entry in the official record, Apr 13, 2016: “Failed to pass pursuant to ⁠”

It sat with the Assembly Committee on Education.

Read the bill

Following saves it on this device. New actions show on your Following page. You can also get updates in a feed reader.

What it would have done

Summary by the , the Legislature's nonpartisan drafting office. It's their wording, not ours.

Current law: school and school district accountability Current law directs the Department of Public Instruction (DPI) to annually publish a school and school district accountability report that includes the following information about each school and school district, derived from data gathered in the previous school year:

1. Multiple measures to determine a school's performance or a school district's improvement, including pupil achievement and growth in reading and mathematics;

Read the full summary

measures of college and career readiness; and gaps in pupil achievement and graduation rates categorized by various factors.

2. An index system to identify a school's level of performance and to annually place each school into one of five performance categories.

Current law requires DPI to prepare school accountability reports for independent charter schools and private schools participating in a parental choice program (PCP) one year after the independent charter school or PCP school begins using a student information system for the standardized collection of student data.

Current law requires independent charter schools and PCP schools to begin using a student information system in the 2015-16 school year.

Current law: Low-performing school districts and schools; state superintendent interventions Current law provides that if the state superintendent of public instruction determines that a school is in need of improvement for five consecutive school years or that a school district is in need of improvement for four consecutive school years, the state superintendent may direct the school board to, after seeking input from school district staff, do one or more of the following in the school or school district:

1. Implement a new curriculum.

2. Implement a new instructional design, including expanded school hours, additional pupil supports and services, and individual learning plans for pupils.

3. Implement professional development programs focused on improving pupil academic achievement.

4. Make personnel changes.

5. Adopt accountability measures to monitor the school district's finances or to monitor other interventions directed by the state superintendent.

Current law also authorizes the state superintendent to withhold state aid from any school district that fails to comply to the state superintendent's satisfaction with any of the above directives.

This bill repeals these provisions.

Academic review system This bill replaces the school and school district accountability system with an academic review system, to be created by the Academic Review Board (ARB), by rule, within 24 months after the effective date of the bill and to be implemented by DPI beginning in the 2017-18 school year. The academic review system will be applicable to public schools, independent charter schools, and private schools participating in a PCP.

Responsibilities of the Academic Review Board In addition to requiring the ARB to establish the academic review system, the bill gives the ARB the authority to establish an independent charter school or initiate a contract with an individual or group to operate an independent charter school. The bill also gives the ARB a number of responsibilities, including the following:

1. Annually review the review reports issued for schools subject to sanctions and determine whether any such school has made measurable progress towards the goals established by the school.

2. Develop the following by rule:

a. Incentives to be given to exceptional schools.

b. Incentives to be given to schools with a significant population of children at risk or of pupils receiving curriculum modifications or other alternative educational programming.

c. Consequences to be borne by failing schools.

d. Methods for evaluating and improving the collection of data from schools and developing and modifying when appropriate the criteria used to grade schools.

e. The qualifying score for each letter grade assigned by the state superintendent.

3. Develop alternative improvement plans to be implemented by schools subject to Step I sanctions, as discussed below.

4. Approve three of the alternative tests determined, as discussed below, by University of Wisconsin-Madison Value-Added Research Center (VARC) to be appropriate for statistical comparison with examinations adopted or approved by the state superintendent of public instruction (state superintendent).

Beginning in 2017 and in each odd-numbered year thereafter, the ARB must submit a report with certain recommendations to DPI, provide a copy to the appropriate standing committees of the legislature, and be prepared to make a presentation about its recommendations to a hearing or joint hearing of the legislature.

Pupil assessments Current law requires public schools, including independent charter schools, and private schools participating in a PCP to administer examinations adopted or approved by the state superintendent in the 4th, 8th, 9th, 10th, and 11th grades.

This bill authorizes a public school, including an independent charter school, and a private school participating in a PCP to administer a test approved by the ARB in lieu of the examinations adopted or approved by the state superintendent. If the school elects to administer an alternative test, the school must cover the costs of the test and of administering the test.

Annual review of schools The bill directs DPI to annually determine a school's performance in the following areas:

1. Pupil achievement in reading and mathematics.

2. Growth in pupil achievement in reading and mathematics, calculated using a value-added methodology.

3. Gap closure in growth in pupil achievement in reading and mathematics and, when available, in graduation rates.

4. Rates of attendance or of high school graduation.

DPI must determine the appropriate weight to be given each of the performance measures used to determine the letter grade assigned to a school. DPI must also determine each school's performance following a review of certain data from the preceding school year and must issue a review report for each school on which DPI assigns a letter grade to the school based upon that data. The bill directs DPI to determine the appropriate weight to be given to each measure reported for each school, and directs the ARB to determine the qualifying score for each letter grade by rule. The bill requires DPI to impose sanctions upon a school that receives a letter grade of "D" or "F" on the third review report of three consecutive review reports.

The bill specifies the information that DPI may use to measure the school's performance in each of the above areas. Generally, schools submit the information through the student information system. The student information includes scores on reading and mathematics examinations administered to pupils attending the school; the disability status, grade level, race or ethnicity, English-language proficiency, and economic status of pupils taking the examinations; and information about the number of pupils who graduate from high school and the number of years within which the pupils obtain a diploma.

For a private school participating in a PCP, the bill directs DPI to use for each performance area only the information that pertains to pupils attending the private school under the PCP unless the private school also submits data about pupils who are not attending the private school under the PCP. DPI may assign two letter grades to PCP schools if the PCP schools submit data about pupils who are not attending the private school under a PCP. The first grade must be derived only from pupils attending the school under the PCP, and the second grade must be derived from all pupils attending the private school. If two grades are reported, DPI may impose sanctions upon a private school based only on the grade derived solely from pupils attending the private school under a PCP.

The bill provides that if DPI determines there is insufficient data about a school to grade its performance, or that a grade would be inappropriate because the mission of the school is to serve predominantly or exclusively children at risk, pupils with a disability, or pupils who have other special needs, DPI must issue a report card but must grade the school as "satisfactory" or "needs improvement."

Sanctions for schools receiving a "d" or "f" The bill requires the state superintendent to increase the severity of sanctions imposed upon schools that receive failing grades in two steps: Steps I and II. The sanctions imposed upon public schools, including independent charter schools, differ in some respects from the sanctions imposed upon private schools participating in a PCP.

Down Down /2015/related/proposals/ab1 true proposaltext /2015/related/proposals/ab1 proposaltext/2015/REG/AB1 proposaltext/2015/REG/AB1 section true Menu » 2015 » Related Documents » Proposal Text » AB1: Bill Text × Details for PDF view Link (Permanent link) Bookmark this location View toggle Go to top of document Search in this chapter Search in this section Search in this agency Search in this chapter group Search in this chapter Search in this section Cross references for section Acts affecting this section References to this 1970 Statutes Annotations Appellate Court Citations Administrative Code Index Reference lines Clear highlighting $(document).ready(function () {

$('[data-toggle=tooltip]').tooltip({ container: 'body' });

Who's behind it

32 lawmakers are its ⁠. All 32 are Republicans.

See all 32 names

Authors (32)

What it would cost

State agencies filed a . Each opens as a PDF from the Legislature.

Versions and amendments

Every text the Legislature printed for this bill, including proposed changes. Each opens on the Legislature's site.

What happened

  1. Apr 13, 2016

    The session ended, and the bill died with it.

  2. Jan 27, 2015

    A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.

  3. Jan 14, 2015

    The committee held a public hearing.

  4. Jan 7, 2015

    Sent to the Assembly Committee on Education.

  5. Jan 7, 2015

    Introduced in the Assembly.

See the official record, word for word
  1. Jan 7, 2015 · Assembly

    Introduced by Representatives Thiesfeldt, Vos, Steineke, Rodriguez, Knodl, Nygren, Petryk, Schraa, Macco, A. Ott, Kleefisch, Gannon, Mursau, Weatherston, Rohrkaste, Czaja, Swearingen, Krug, Loudenbeck, VanderMeer, Ballweg, E. Brooks, T. Larson, R. Brooks, Kooyenga, Knudson, Kulp, Jarchow, Spiros, Kitchens, Kerkman and Edming

  2. Jan 7, 2015 · Assembly

    Read first time and referred to Committee on Education

  3. Jan 14, 2015 · Assembly

    Public hearing held

  4. Jan 27, 2015 · Assembly

    Fiscal estimate received

  5. Jan 27, 2015 · Assembly

    Fiscal estimate received

  6. Mar 10, 2015 · Assembly

    Assembly Substitute Amendment 1 offered by Representative Thiesfeldt

  7. Apr 13, 2016 · Assembly

    Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1

Terms on this page

Committee

A small group of lawmakers that looks at a bill first. Most bills never leave committee.

More in the glossary

Public hearing

A meeting where anyone can speak to a committee about a bill, or send written comments.

More in the glossary

Senate Joint Resolution 1

The session's calendar. Any bill not passed by its last voting day dies.

Official term: Failed to pass pursuant to SJR 1. More in the glossary

Legislative Reference Bureau

The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.

Official term: LRB analysis. More in the glossary

Author

A lawmaker who formally puts a bill forward. The text itself is drafted by the Legislative Reference Bureau.

Official term: Author, coauthor. More in the glossary

Cost estimate

A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.

Official term: Fiscal estimate. More in the glossary

From the Wisconsin Legislature's official record, checked Sep 15, 2026. See the source

Committee

A small group of lawmakers that looks at a bill first. Most bills never leave committee.

Public hearing

A meeting where anyone can speak to a committee about a bill, or send written comments.

Senate Joint Resolution 1

The session's calendar. Any bill not passed by its last voting day dies.

Official term: Failed to pass pursuant to SJR 1

Legislative Reference Bureau

The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.

Official term: LRB analysis

Author

A lawmaker who formally puts a bill forward. The text itself is drafted by the Legislative Reference Bureau.

Official term: Author, coauthor

Cost estimate

A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.

Official term: Fiscal estimate