Tri-district committees form Calendar Review Subcommittee to explore aligning school calendars

Sudbury, Lincoln and Lincoln-Sudbury school committees voted unanimously at a special Tri-District meeting April 9 to create a Tri-District Calendar Review Subcommittee to explore aligning school calendars across the three districts.

The committees’ chairs opened the hybrid meeting at 7 p.m. and noted that, because the session was hybrid, all votes would be taken by roll call. The committees discussed attendance data and scheduling constraints — including MCAS, district-specific midterms and finals, and student mobility tied to Hanscom Air Force Base transfers — as factors that complicate full alignment.

Superintendent Brad Crozier reported that Sudbury Public Schools averages roughly 120 student absences per day in the period examined, while Lincoln-Sudbury’s three-year absenteeism figures generally ranged from about 40 to 80 on any given day. Superintendent Parry Graham and Dr. Andrew Stepens presented similar multi-year attendance reviews for their districts. Committee members said that absenteeism trends, demographic differences, bussing logistics and state and federal holidays must inform any alignment effort.

Chairs Matina Madrick (Lincoln), Nicole Burnard (Sudbury) and Ravi Simon (Lincoln-Sudbury) described the subcommittee’s proposed scope: review start and end dates, holidays and observance accommodations, and develop criteria for calendar decisions that balance learning time, climate considerations and community inclusion. Committee members discussed aiming for a timeline that would allow the districts to vote on the FY 2026–27 calendars in late fall, and they agreed the subcommittee should return a draft charge for approval by each individual committee.

Formal motions to create the Tri-District Calendar Review Subcommittee passed in each committee by roll-call vote. The Lincoln School Committee approved appointments to the subcommittee 5–0; Sudbury and Lincoln-Sudbury approved motions to create or appoint members (each 4–0). The committees noted that some differences may remain because of unique district constraints, but said the subcommittee would pursue maximal alignment where feasible.

The meeting packet included multiple documents reviewed during the session, such as district absence-rate spreadsheets, a school calendar comparison sheet, draft subcommittee charge language, and sample policies and practices from Brookline and Wellesley. The committees agreed to bring the subcommittee charge back to their respective bodies for final approval after the districts reorganize and appoint members.