Holliston committee hears feasibility study for AB high‑school schedule; delays vote after teachers and parents raise concerns

The Holliston School Committee on Feb. 13 reviewed a feasibility presentation on a proposed “AB” high‑school schedule that would run classes every other day and allow many courses to meet across the full school year, but the committee declined to vote and asked for additional community input.

A feasibility presentation by Mr. Lewis showed the district’s current daily minutes could be rearranged so classes run yearlong on alternating A and B days. ‘‘To answer the question about feasibility of year‑long courses: yes,’’ Lewis told the committee, demonstrating sample timetables and how AP and laboratory courses could be scheduled across terms.

Why it matters: Teachers and parents urged caution. Speakers during public comment said a move to AB scheduling would change how students receive instruction, require significant curriculum and room‑sharing adjustments in science, art and technical classrooms, and carry costs the district has not fully priced.

Long‑time Holliston High School chemistry teacher Amanda Rivera told the committee the change is “quite a significant change” for teachers and students and that the feasibility study did not consult departments about curriculum impacts, classroom logistics or costs. Rivera said AP courses could lose about 20 class meetings before exams under the proposed structure and warned that labs and multi‑day projects would be difficult to run if multiple sections met concurrently. She offered a departmental estimate of $52,514 in additional supplies for science and textbooks, not including storage or mobile classroom costs.

Other public commenters echoed concerns about academic rigor, equity and transparency. Former school committee member and career high‑school math teacher Amanda Bigelow urged the committee not to “de‑level” eighth‑grade math in order to preserve access to advanced curricular tracks for students who cannot pay for outside tutoring. Parent Jamie Catone and teacher Tracy Clecker also urged the district to slow the timeline and include more teacher, student and family input.

The administration said the AB presentation was requested for information and that the schedule is technically implementable with existing staffing by rearranging times. Dr. Jordan (administrator) noted that the district can design schedules that allow some core classes, such as math, to meet more frequently when needed. District staff acknowledged costs associated with running more classes concurrently — materials, textbooks and possible storage — and said those will need detailed estimates.

The committee did not vote on a schedule at the meeting. Members said they want more time to solicit feedback and to let the schedule subcommittee continue work; several members indicated they expect further discussion before any formal vote. Committee members asked the administration to return with clarifications on timing for registration, how many students could be affected in year one, and concrete cost estimates and intervention plans to avoid widening achievement gaps.

What’s next: The committee asked staff to collect more input from teachers, students and families and to provide more detailed modeling before the committee considers a vote at a future meeting.

","sections":{"lede":"The Holliston School Committee on Feb. 13 reviewed a feasibility presentation on a proposed AB high‑school schedule but delayed any vote after teachers and parents flagged curriculum, space and cost concerns.","nut_graf":"Administrators presented sample schedules and said AB is technically feasible using existing staffing, but public speakers and committee members requested more department‑level analysis of curricular continuity, lab logistics and budget impacts before the committee takes action.","ending":"The committee asked staff to gather further input and return with cost estimates, student impact modeling and a plan for interventions before scheduling a formal vote."},