The most pressing topic was the proposed changes to Natick High School’s graduation requirements. These changes are set to take effect with the class of 2026 and involve a substantial shift from the MCAS as the sole competency assessment tool. Instead, students will need to demonstrate mastery through coursework aligned with state standards in core subjects like English, math, and science. This adjustment follows a recent ballot initiative, and the district will now certify student competency through their academic performance rather than standardized test scores alone.

Principal Blocker explained that students must pass specific courses to earn their diplomas, including fulfilling community service hours. The proposal includes allowing students to demonstrate competency by passing specific coursework or equivalent assessments, accommodating students transferring from different districts or states.

Concerns were raised about the larger cohort of students in the class of 2027, who will not have taken the necessary assessments. The proposed requirements for competency determination include passing either the MCAS or relevant coursework in 10th grade English, with options for higher grades and credit recovery facilitated by platforms like Edgenuity.

The meeting also delved into the nitty-gritty of how competency determination would be assessed without the MCAS as a central pillar. The concern was particularly focused on students who may pass varied math courses yet fail a specific course, like geometry, still required to meet graduation standards. The School Committee discussed the historical precedent for portfolios, which demand extensive documentation to prove competency, especially for students with learning challenges.

The discourse extended to the implications of statewide regulations on portfolio submissions and the feasibility of expanding this option. The philosophical debate about the MCAS focused on whether it should remain a competency tool or if local control over educational standards was more appropriate. The varied requirements for graduation across different districts were also discussed, with suggestions for creating regional standards to address these discrepancies.

A significant portion of the meeting was dedicated to addressing future school facility needs, with the Memorial School’s current and proposed classroom structures taking center stage. The breakdown of classroom allocations emphasized the need for more space to accommodate growing enrollment. The proposed new building would include five pre-K classrooms.

The need for dedicated spaces for special education and English learners was underscored, stressing inadequacies in the current facilities. The conversation touched on classroom size, projected enrollment figures, and the implications of creating a school for approximately 600 to 700 students. The potential for redistricting was recognized as necessary to balance enrollment across schools.

Further discussions focused on the strategic planning initiative aimed at preparing for the next school year. A proposal to start activities over the summer was introduced, with varying suggestions on representation for this initiative. The committee considered forming a task force for the new proposed field at the high school, with discussions on community engagement and subcommittee assignments.

Lastly, the meeting tackled the superintendent evaluation process, discussing the timing and involvement of key representatives. The timeline for the evaluation was set for June 2, with preparations for the evaluation process to be completed by June 30. This included ensuring the METCO representative’s participation.