Republican lawmakers are advancing a bill to restore the ACT requirement as the "predominant" factor in admission to the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Rep. Dave Murphy, R-Hortonville, told The Daily Cardinal he co-authored the bill because he wants to see “more objective criteria” in admissions decisions.
The University of Wisconsin System has been test-optional since the COVID-19 pandemic. The test-optional policy expires after the 2026-27 school year, but Murphy said the University of Wisconsin System could “very well reinstate it” after extending it three times since 2020.
“They’ve done that a number of times, so I have no idea that they’re going to end that policy,” Murphy said. “The bill is about making it happen for sure.”
The bill wouldn’t affect those applying through the guaranteed admission program, which secures admission to UW-Madison for applicants in the top 5% of their high school class.
Democratic lawmakers on the Committee on Colleges and Universities said they were concerned for students who may need to retake the ACT and could not easily access a testing center at a Feb. 5 public hearing. This particularly affects rural students, whose testing centers may be hours away if they are in northern or western Wisconsin.
Rep. Alex Joers, D-Waunakee, told the Cardinal he worries this bill might deter high school students from applying to college at all if standardized test scores become the largest factor in admissions decisions. He added that many students also cannot afford to retake the ACT or hire a tutor, something he experienced first-hand.
“I was in that situation,” Joers said. “I didn't have a whole lot of extra funds to be able to put forward... and fortunately, this bill wasn’t law.”
To retake the ACT with the English, math and reading sections costs $68. To add on the writing section is an additional $25 and the science another $4. Joers said these financial and access barriers are “roadblocks in front of students that are just trying to do their best to get into college.”
The bill also says no “partisan tests or any tests based upon race, religion, national origin of U.S. citizens or sex shall ever be allowed” in regards to the student admissions.
Murphy pointed to the 2023 U.S. Supreme Court ruling against affirmative action, which barred universities from using race as a factor when admitting or denying students, and a constitutional amendment Wisconsin Republicans approved which would ban DEI initiatives in "government entities,” including the UW System.
Murphy said this bill would do a lot of what the constitutional amendment would already do.
Rep. Jodi Emerson, D-Eau Claire, told the Cardinal that UW-Madison has “great professional folks” working in admissions and said the process should be left up to them.
“We need to continue to leave it in their hands,” Emerson said. “It’s not up to the legislature to micromanage how kids get in.”
She added that she appreciates admissions officers taking a holistic view of applicants, rather than focusing “predominantly” on one factor, such as the ACT, like the bill proposes. She said she would rather admit students who have “overcome some odds” rather than a perfect ACT score.
“I want people who overcome adversity,” Emerson said. “I would hope that our universities are looking at this holistic person when they're deciding who to admit.”
Emerson and Joers were also uneasy with how fast the bill is moving in the legislature. It was introduced on Feb. 3 and read to the Committee on Colleges and Universities that same day. A public hearing was held just two days later.
“This bill moved unusually fast for having been drafted last week,” Joers said. “When a bill like that moves at that speed, there are errors made.”
In the public hearing on Feb. 5, 4legislators expressed bipartisan concern for the use of the word “predominantly” in the bill text, which multiple committee members said was ambiguous and vague.
“The bill says that standardized test scores should be used ‘predominantly,’” Emerson said. “Well, what does that mean?”
Emerson and Joers both raised this concern again at a hearing on Feb. 10, but there is still no definition in statute of the word “predominantly.” Both lawmakers worry about the consequences of this wording and the motives of this bill.
“I just have the feeling that this bill is really meant to land one of the campuses in a courtroom at some point.” Emerson said. The bill is on the assembly calendar for Feb. 12.
