Lawmakers split as committee considers adding Classical Learning Test and a 'success sequence' curriculum

The House Committee on Education heard hours of testimony on Senate Bill 88, which would require Indiana public colleges and universities that accept the SAT or ACT to accept the Classical Learning Test (CLT) as an alternative and add a short statement about the "success sequence" to citizenship instruction.

Senator Byrne, the bill’s sponsor (speaker 11), said SB 88 "gives students more opportunity, recognizing academic rigor" and that the CLT is designed for curricula emphasizing classical texts. He argued the CLT offers longer reading passages and a different approach to assessing reasoning and writing.

Major national testing organizations and public education advocates urged caution. Jonathan Lackland, director of state government relations at ACT (speaker 25), urged the committee to require independent validation before giving the CLT the same statutory status as the ACT and SAT, saying “high stakes tests must be based on scientific principles of measurement.” He noted concerns about CLT concordance methodology, sample sizes, and the lack of independent replication.

Terry Whitney of the College Board (speaker 26) warned lawmakers that the CLT has not published the broad, multi‑institution evidence needed to show predictive validity across diverse student populations and cautioned that misaligned concordances can distort graduation rates and accountability. "CLT is not proven to meet the standards required for consequential decisions such as admissions or scholarship awards," Whitney said.

Proponents — including classical and homeschool advocates and some charter leaders — said the CLT better matches classical curricula, increases testing options for homeschool students and those in classical charters, and can provide a longitudinal record for students who take CLT exams beginning in early grades. Kylene Varner (speaker 21) of the Indiana Association of Home Educators said CLT testing can restore access to scholarship‑qualifying assessments for students who have otherwise lost access to PSAT/AP in a digital testing era.

Committee members pressed authors and witnesses on three issues: whether CLT has independent, peer‑reviewed research demonstrating predictive validity comparable to decades of evidence for ACT/SAT; whether CLT’s content coverage (particularly higher‑level math) aligns with college expectations; and whether online proctoring and security practices are robust enough for high‑stakes uses. Several members suggested a middle path: allow CLT access without enshrining it for high‑stakes scholarship/ accountability until additional independent validation is public.

On the "success sequence" — a three‑part concept (graduate high school, work full time, delay childbearing until marriage) — testimony mixed practical and ethical concerns. Proponents argued the sequence is a simple, research‑backed teaching point that can reduce poverty risk and that a curriculum exists for schools to use. Opponents worried the language was vague, could be interpreted as promoting a particular moral view, and that existing code already requires many of these elements.

What happens next

Senator Byrne said further witnesses will appear and the committee will continue deliberations; he asked the committee to consider the CLT component alongside additional implementation safeguards. The hearing produced extensive record testimony both supporting and opposing statutory recognition of the CLT.

Sources and provenance

This article draws on the sponsor’s opening, stakeholder testimony from ACT (Jonathan Lackland), College Board (Terry Whitney), home‑school/classical advocates (Kylene Varner, Kristen Bizon), public school association testimony (Joel Hand, Terry Spradlin), and sponsor/author closing remarks: topic intro SEG 2162; major testimony and debate SEG 2162–SEG 4471.

Quotes used in the article are drawn from the hearing transcript and mapped to the speaker list in this packet.