# WorkKeys Substitution for ACT Creates Lower Proficiency Standards
States allowing WorkKeys to substitute for ACT proficiency scores are effectively lowering academic benchmarks rather than redefining success, according to recent analysis. WorkKeys, a career readiness assessment developed by ACT Inc., measures applied skills in reading, math, and locating information. The test targets workforce readiness rather than college preparation.
The shift raises questions about what "proficient" means in state accountability systems. When WorkKeys scores can count toward proficiency metrics that previously required ACT performance, schools meet accountability targets with students demonstrating lower achievement levels. The two assessments measure different skill sets and difficulty levels, yet states treating them as equivalent artificially inflate proficiency rates.
This matters because proficiency designations drive school ratings, teacher evaluations, and funding decisions. A school appearing proficient under a lowered bar may still have students unprepared for college or careers. Parents and policymakers using proficiency data to assess school quality receive misleading information.
WorkKeys has genuine value for career-focused pathways. The assessment aligns with workforce needs and serves students pursuing technical training or immediate employment. However, substituting it for college-readiness measures conflates two different educational goals. Students scoring proficient on WorkKeys may lack the academic skills necessary for four-year colleges or competitive careers requiring advanced coursework.
States implementing this substitution typically cite workforce alignment and reducing testing burden. These goals merit consideration. Yet the solution cannot involve obscuring achievement gaps. Schools should offer both assessments to different student populations based on actual career and education plans, not use WorkKeys as a backdoor method to improve accountability numbers.
The path forward requires clarity. States should separate career-readiness proficiency from college-readiness proficiency in accountability systems. Students pursuing dual pathways should take both assessments. Proficiency standards should remain consistent within categories,