Assistant Superintendent Gina Flanagan and Chief of Data and Research Dr. Hogue presented the Newton Public Schools’ 2025 MCAS and common‑assessment review on Nov. 17, saying the data will guide a multi‑year curriculum alignment and professional‑learning effort.

Flanagan and Hogue told the school committee that overall performance is “steady or improving” in many subject areas but that the district sees important variation across grades and student groups. Dr. Hogue highlighted a clear attendance link: “As the number of absences increases, the average scaled score decreases,” and he noted that students with 18 or more absences averaged below the state cut score of 500.

The presentation broke the results into strands. In ELA, grades 3–8 showed slight gains from last year while grade 10 fell from 83% to 77% meeting or exceeding expectations. Writing remains the lowest‑performing ELA strand for grades 3–8 (students earned 48% of available writing points, down from 51% last year), though tenth‑grade writing performance improved to 68% of points from 60% the prior year. In math, grades 3–8 showed a modest upward trend; domain analysis found functions strongest (77% correct) and expressions/equations weakest (62%). Science scores improved notably in grades 5 and 8, which district staff attributed in part to the OpenSciEd curriculum rollout.

Flanagan summarized the district’s response: expand common assessments, align curriculum (a five‑year review cycle), pilot and scale vetted materials, and target professional learning for teachers. “If students experience a consistent, high quality writing and literacy program supported by skilled teachers and aligned curriculum, then they will become competent, capable communicators,” Flanagan said, describing the district’s theory of action.

Committee members pressed for context and concrete next steps. Mayor Fuller urged that the presentation emphasize the persistent gaps affecting low‑income students, students with disabilities, English learners and Black and Hispanic students, saying those gaps “have to be some of the key takeaways.” Board members asked for comparative statewide data, subgroup breakdowns, and evidence that the district’s interventions—particularly MTSS and targeted interventionists—produce measurable gains. Dr. Flanagan said comparison tables and subgroup analyses are included in the full report and that principals and school improvement plans already set subgroup targets to be monitored quarterly.

Several members raised implementation concerns. Some asked whether the district is pushing change too quickly for staff capacity; district leaders said professional development is phased and staggered, pilots are teacher‑driven, and course corrections are made from teacher feedback. On assessment use, staff emphasized multiple data sources (MCAS, STAR benchmark, unit/common assessments) to inform instruction rather than reliance on a single test.

On labor and staffing, Michael Zilles, president of the Newton Teachers Association, used public comment earlier in the meeting to call for prompt restoration of kindergarten aides, citing an arbitrator’s ruling and a Superior Court decision; the committee and staff did not take formal action during the meeting on that grievance.

The committee concluded the MCAS discussion with direction to staff to provide further disaggregated comparisons, describe expected timelines for MTSS expansion, and bring implementation milestones back to the committee. The district said it will continue using the strategic plan and school improvement goals to track subgroup progress and will return with more detailed analyses in follow‑up reports.