Mendon‑Upton committee moves toward adopting Amplify ELA after multi‑month review

The Mendon‑Upton Regional School District school committee received a recommendation to adopt Amplify as its pre‑K through eighth‑grade English‑language arts curriculum following an extended review and an eight‑week field test.

District presenters told the committee that more than 30 educators participated in a review beginning in November 2024 and narrowed five highly rated resources to two through desk review and field testing. "They came back together after collecting feedback from students and other colleagues, and they made a unanimous decision from pre k through 8 ... to adopt ... Amplify," a presenter said. Staff cited the program's vertical alignment, daily embedded writing, phonics and phonemic‑awareness emphasis in early grades, and scaffolds for diverse learners as reasons for the recommendation.

Several teachers who worked on pilots joined remotely. Maria DeRusa, identified as the district instructional coach, told the committee the program demonstrated strong K–5 vertical alignment. Michelle, an early‑childhood educator, said the resource supports phonemic awareness and early writing; Erica Hahn, a Clough fourth‑grade Spanish immersion teacher, described the Camino's Spanish materials as aligned with English lessons and conducive to team planning. Brianna Zlowski, the district reading specialist and Title I coordinator, said the program fills gaps in foundational literacy instruction.

Staff presented a proposed six‑year purchase strategy intended to lower long‑term costs: buy consumables for one year only and finance the remainder. The presenters provided a FY27 line referenced to the plan: $1,170,995.33, which district staff said reflects roughly one‑third of the six‑year package plus year‑one consumables. Presenters also estimated a potential annual operating exposure of up to about $76,000 if every consumable were used, but said they expect that figure to fall substantially in practice.

Committee members pressed staff on shipping and handling, which staff listed as a material line item. One member questioned whether the quoted shipping cost was realistic and said, "The shipping cost is more than the cost of materials." Members asked staff to negotiate with the vendor before bringing the item back for final approval; staff agreed to seek reduced shipping charges and return with updated pricing and financing options.

The committee did not vote to approve a contract at the meeting. Staff said they will present refined cost breakdowns and financing scenarios, and bring the purchase forward for committee approval once negotiations are complete.