School committee members spent a significant portion of the meeting on the district’s response to recent changes in state guidance removing MCAS as an absolute graduation requirement and replacing it with alternate competency pathways.

Why it matters: Committee members warned the change — and the way the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) has rolled out guidance — could have disproportionate effects on certain groups of students unless the district clarifies pathways and supports.

Concerns and requested analysis: School Committee member Tory (role: School Committee member) detailed several scenarios she wants the district to analyze at the student level, including: how many recent graduates would have had different outcomes under the new rules; how multilingual learners and students in specialized programs (including the Pre‑ETS employment transition program) will access required coursework or alternative competency demonstrations; and how the district will ensure private‑sector or schedule constraints do not block internships or other transition activities from coexisting with required courses.

District response: The superintendent and district staff said DESE has not yet finalized amended regulations and that the department’s guidance arrived late in the school year. District staff (Joanie and Gabby were identified as working on student‑level analysis) are conducting case‑by‑case reviews for students near the competency threshold. The superintendent said the district aims to ensure the standard remains commensurate with prior MCAS standards while offering alternate pathways for students who could not follow a traditional course sequence.

Data requests: Committee members asked the district to provide counts of students who achieved competency in recent years through alternative routes (for example MCAS‑Alt, portfolio methods, principal approval or other means), and the numbers of students who passed course work but not the MCAS or vice versa. Members emphasized the need to discuss these details in advance of any final policy to avoid changing graduation expectations midstream for students already in the pipeline.

Next steps: District staff will continue student‑level reviews for students possibly affected this year and prepare data and policy language for the committee’s consideration. Committee members requested that staff reach out to families of students in at‑risk categories to surface practical obstacles in advance of any changes.