School committee considers temporary graduation pathway for some class of 2025 students who lack MCAS competency

Northbridge Public Schools officials on Jan. 28 presented a temporary graduation pathway for students in the class of 2025 who had not earned an MCAS competency determination by December 2024, saying the change would apply to roughly four to five seniors and would be added to the program of studies and the high school handbook.

The proposal would allow affected students to earn a competency determination by satisfactorily completing specified coursework with a grade of 60% or better, or by successfully completing summer school with a 70% or better. The coursework named by staff includes Algebra 1 (or Algebra 2 for students placed in Algebra 2 in ninth grade), Geometry, English 1, English 2, and Biology or Physics — courses aligned to the topics assessed on the 10th-grade MCAS exam.

Staff described the change as a short-term response to a compressed timeline and evolving state guidance. “We have 5 students that this applies to for the class of 2025,” a staff member said, noting the district gathered draft policies from other Massachusetts districts and met with regional colleagues the day before the meeting. The staff member said the district intends to notify parents and publish the change promptly.

Why it matters: the state’s assessment policy and the Secretary of Education’s ongoing work on future assessments leave districts short of firm long-term guidance, and the committee’s temporary approach would ensure seniors who narrowly missed MCAS competency can graduate without an extended delay.

Committee members pressed staff on next steps and oversight. The committee president asked whether the state had set a deadline for the district to submit or post a policy; the staff member replied, “They’re not asking us to give them this yet,” but added the district must notify parents and post the rule and that it hoped to have handbook language in place before the start of the next school year. Staff also said they would like to finalize a plan before the end of the current school year if possible.

Members raised alternatives to the proposed minimum-grade approach. One committee member questioned whether regular course grades — which may include tests, papers and projects — are a reliable demonstration of standardized proficiency. Staff and other members suggested developing common, standards-based benchmarks across departments (for example, end-of-quarter benchmarks) or shared midterms and finals so course grades more closely reflect comparable mastery across classrooms. A speaker suggested using a series of quarterly benchmarks with an averaged score as another possible competency measure.

Staff said they planned further work: district administrators (named in discussion as Scott and Aaron) will meet with department chairs in March to consider beefing up the proposal and to gather more examples from districts with similar enrollments and demographics. The staff member emphasized a desire to keep standards “reasonable but rigorous,” and to avoid setting a low bar while still providing an on-time graduation path for the small group of affected students.

No formal policy vote on the proposed language occurred on Jan. 28; the committee discussed adding the temporary language to the program of studies and the high school appendix of the handbook for the current year and scheduled follow-up work in March.

Next steps: staff will meet with department chairs and return with refined options in March; the committee expects to post any interim language and notify families promptly.