(The Center Square) – Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction Superintendent Jill Underly continued her attacks of an investigation of her department’s handling of sexual misconduct allegations related to teachers this week, saying “that headline was completely false” regarding a series of stories from the Capital Times.
She went on to tell Channel 3000’s ‘For the Record’ that she felt the series of stories that led to hearings, new proposed legislation and an audit was unfair.
“Our job is to investigate any allegations of misconduct with teachers,” Underly said. “That’s our job.”
Underly previously demanded a correction on the story from The Capital Times but never specified anything that was inaccurate in the stories, which depicted the way that the department handles investigations and the lack of transparency on teacher license investigations after sexual misconduct allegations.
Underly’s interview led Capital Times Editor Mark Treinen to speak out again about the accuracy of the stories. He previously told The Center Square that he stands by the reporting.
“Underly claims the information was readily available to the public, but it took @danielle_duclos months of work to get public records and make sure she understood them,” Treinen wrote on social media. “The Department of Public Instruction’s own staff didn’t have sufficient tracking to be able to easily produce a full accounting of all these cases.”
The headline she calls false was: “200 teacher sexual misconduct, grooming cases shielded from public.” Underly claims the information was readily available to the public, but it took @danielle_duclos months of work to get public records and make sure she understood them.— Mark Treinen (@MarkTreinen) December 30, 2025
DPI later said that it launched a new online database related to teacher licenses in response to the investigation.
“As for her continued demand for a ‘correction,’ Dr. Underly has not identified a single inaccurate fact in the reporting,” Treinen wrote. “I get that she doesn’t like the scrutiny and doesn’t agree with the headline, but we continue to stand by its accuracy.”
