The Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction has faced increased scrutiny following a CapTimes report that revealed over 200 sexual misconduct and grooming allegations have been placed against Wisconsin teachers since 2018. These allegations were not revealed to the public.
CapTimes found more than 80 cases since 2018 in which teachers accused of sexual misconduct and grooming accepted an offer to voluntarily forfeit their licensure to avoid further investigation under DPI.
In a letter demanding a public correction, Wisconsin State Superintendent Jill Underly said the report omits the contextual information that the option to forfeit a license exists to protect students from retraumatization that may occur during an investigation.
Wisconsin State Sen. Jesse James, R-Thorp, who also works as a law enforcement officer in Cadott, said this is not an adequate approach to sexual misconduct or grooming allegations made against a teacher.
James said, in his opinion, not pursuing an investigation of teacher sexual misconduct when allegations are filed is a means for DPI to avoid another black mark in terms of Wisconsin teachers and who DPI elects to license.
“Details need to be open, honest and transparent to prevent any type of liability moving forward,” James said. “We don’t want history to repeat itself — we just need to hold people accountable.”
Prior to CapTimes’ report, the public-facing database that tracks the status of every Wisconsin teacher’s licensing standing — including if they are under investigation or have had their license revoked — was available, according to DPI director of communications Chris Bucher.
The database, available through DPI’s Educator Licensing Online portal, has been criticized as archaic and ineffective in presenting the information it contains, according to Bucher.
ELO users must search for a specific individual by their first and last name or file number rather than being able to access a comprehensive list or spreadsheet of all Wisconsin teachers, Bucher said.
This report and the subsequent scrutiny and feedback have caused DPI to make changes to the accessibility and presentation of the information available on ELO, Bucher said.
“Now, you’ll see the name of someone and see what their license status is, if it was revoked or surrendered,” Bucher said. “There’s also another column in [the page] where our intention is to add these revocation orders.”
Bucher said DPI’s intention with the site renovation is to address all the feedback they have been receiving over the past few weeks.
There are hurdles to doing so, though, in terms of redaction for student protection and digitizing extensive paper trails, Bucher said.
DPI is committed to investigating every allegation of sexual misconduct perpetrated by a teacher as thoroughly as possible and treating every allegation with gravity, Bucher said.
As a state department, DPI licensing investigators have scant resources and limited access to necessary information without individuals involved volunteering it themselves, Bucher said.
“[DPI] rely on law enforcement a lot during our investigations for criminal complaints, for interviews, for documentation, because we don’t have the subpoena power that law enforcement does,” Bucher said.
If a DPI investigation is shut down due to the accused’s teacher surrendering of their license, or they can’t determine that the accused’s behavior can be legally defined as immoral conduct, law enforcement can still continue a separate criminal investigation, Bucher said.
The CapTimes report also found that out of 461 teachers investigated for sexual misconduct or grooming of a student by DPI since 2018, 207 kept their credentials and are currently working with children.
Licensing investigators for DPI have found evidence of grooming behaviors in multiple investigations into Wisconsin teachers, according to the report.
There is currently no legal definition of grooming in Wisconsin, leaving DPI investigations with a strict definition of immoral conduct to adhere to when revoking licenses, according to Bucher.
“We remove people from the classroom who engage in grooming behavior … and we push it up to the line of our authority,” Bucher said. “We are in support of a criminal definition because it would offer much-needed clarity and help improve our investigations.”
James said he and Rep. Amanda Nedweski, R-Pleasant Prairie, began the process of drafting legislation defining and criminalizing grooming back in August, following Florida’s introduction of grooming legislation.
Following an event raising awareness around sextortion he attended, James said he worked with the Wisconsin Department of Justice, Internet Crimes Against Children taskforce and the Chippewa Falls Police Department to draft said legislation.
“This could be the most comprehensive, detailed grooming language in our nation,” James said. “It gives our district attorneys the prosecutorial language to where they could prosecute the best case to get a conviction.”
The statute would classify the crime of grooming as a standalone felony and would apply to any adult perpetuating grooming behaviors and not just teachers, James said.
The catch-all nature of the legislation addresses grooming at a comprehensive and systemic level, going past concerns that are specific to DPI jurisdiction and educators, James said.
“Law enforcement … have made it clear during that [Government, Operations, Accountability and Transparency committee] hearing that grooming is not just a K-12 schools issue,” Bucher said. “This is a societal issue. So really, it’s not just schools who should be left alone to solve this.”
