Weston board reviews five grade-configuration models as facilities planning continues
Summary
Superintendent Erica Forte presented five academically viable grade-configuration models and warned of tradeoffs—noting the current K–2/3–5/6–8/9–12 model remains balanced. Board members pressed about fifth-grade placement and implementation risks, and the board set Feb. 23 for a SLAM facilities report.
Superintendent Erica Forte told the Weston Board of Education on Feb. 2 that five alternative grade-configuration models are academically viable but each carries tradeoffs that affect transitions, staffing and equity. "Strong academic outcomes are driven first and foremost by instructional quality, coherence, and consistency, not by configuration alone," Forte said during a 90-minute presentation of Models A–E.
Forte said the analysis prioritized instructional and developmental considerations over cost, and it used an Oct. 1, 2025 enrollment snapshot to estimate school sizes under each model. Model A (PreK–4, 5–8, 9–12) reduces transitions and expands staffing flexibility but would require intentional supports to introduce fifth graders to a middle-school environment. Model B (PreK–1, 2–5, 6–8, 9–12) preserves a traditional 6–8 middle-school band while increasing early-grade transitions. Model C isolates early childhood (PreK–K) but risks a one-year kindergarten handoff. Model D (PreK–2, 3–6, 7–8) creates a strong upper-elementary band but fragments the middle grades. Model E proposes a magnet 6–8 program that offers innovation but is complex to implement.
Forte highlighted a funding and access constraint for a magnet option: "Only 75% of students who currently reside in Weston would be able to attend the magnet school because magnet school funding requires the other 25% of enrolled students to come from outside of district in an effort to reduce economic and, racial isolation." She added that to reach higher new-construction reimbursement levels the district might have to build an entire school solely for the magnet program, increasing cost and implementation risk.
Board members pressed on the practical implications for fifth grade and middle-school structures. Forte recommended keeping grades 5–6 in a dyad model with teaming in grades 7–8 if a 5–8 school is adopted, arguing the dyad helps students transition developmentally. Principals and assistant principals told the board that dyads provide more personalization while teaming supports teacher specialization and interdisciplinary work.
Board members emphasized that the presentation is informational and said no decisions will be made until the district receives a SLAM report on the middle-school facility on Feb. 23. The chair said March is the earliest the board would begin substantive deliberations if facilities needs make reconfiguration necessary.
The meeting closed with a reminder that any change will require careful planning to preserve instructional coherence, staffing capacity, and student supports.
Next procedural steps: SLAM will present at the Feb. 23 facilities meeting; the board expects to integrate that report with this instructional analysis before deciding whether to pursue building or configuration changes.
