Cambridge School Committee Election Guide

CPS is best served with districtwide math curricula in elementary grades with a system for supporting students of all abilities in meeting or exceeding math expectations through elementary and middle school. We should work toward the goal of every student having a strong enough math foundation by 8th grade to allow them to pursue advanced math in high school if they choose.

CPS should prepare students for 8th-grade Algebra 1 by building strong foundational skills, offering targeted support, emphasizing problem-solving, and ensuring teachers are well-equipped to meet every student’s needs.

First, the next question is premature. We absolutely should offer 8th grade Algebra 1. As to whether it should be mandatory for all students in 8th grade, we don't have data right now to suggest whether that model best serves all students, most students, or just the most advanced learners; when we do have data, that should inform how we answer this question. We should prepare students by focusing on early-grade interventions to close opportunity gaps as early as possible; begin teaching basic algebraic concepts even earlier, in elementary school; and expand academic supports in 6th and 7th grade.

First, make sure every child gets a strong elementary math foundation. That means we stop promoting students who haven’t mastered the basics, and we stop holding back students who are ready for more. We have high schoolers who still can’t multiply. Perpetually excusing our lack of great instruction and kicking the can down to the road is fair neither to the kids, nor to subsequent teachers expected to squeeze years of catchup into a single course. Similarly, if a student is ready for Algebra BEFORE 8th grade, find a way to make it happen.

CPS should prepare every student for the challenge of Algebra 1 by investing in universal, high-quality math instruction in earlier grades, including robust tutoring, hands-on math labs, and dedicated support for students who need it, ensuring the foundation is laid for all. The goal should be universal readiness, not a universal mandate that sets up students to fail without the proper foundation; we must first guarantee the resources and teaching supports for true equity, making the question of a mandate a secondary one.

Increasing available resources, for which the lowest hanging fruit is recruiting and matching high school and college volunteer tutors. The second priority is focusing on the problem solving aspect rather than rote memorization of formulae.

The Illustrative Math curriculum includes algebraic thinking starting early in Elementary School. I believe it is more important to solidify and strengthen algebraic concepts than it is to prepare students specifically for the course called, "Algebra 1". However, the School Committee has already made this decision; it seems prudent to continuously track the data and educator feedback so that any changes are rooted in evidence and experience, not opinion.

The preparation for Algebra begins with a solid foundation in the principles of basic math in our early grades. The Concerned Black Staff Report, 1986-87 (I'm co-author) on disparate achievement at CRLS, recommended Albegra 1 in the 8th grade and that CPS hire math specialists to teach math in the early grades. The Algebra 1 recommendation was adopted in the 8th grade, but the rationale and recommendation for math specialists to teach math was not.

CPS should prepare students for Algebra in 8th grade (or whenever they’re ready) by providing engaging, hands-on math instruction that builds deep mathematical thinking. CPS should continue investing in teacher professional learning to support differentiated instruction, expand enrichment and intervention for all learners, and ensure every student is challenged and supported at their just-right level (in every subject). This approach is strengthened through interdisciplinary learning; connecting math to engineering, art, science, and the humanities, and by organizing the school day so there’s dedicated time for all students to learn at their own pace and depth.

Math instruction needs to be structured to ensure that students understand basic concepts, complimented by a creative energy so that they enjoy learning and applying their knowledge. Students need to be monitored closely starting in the early elementary years to ensure that they master foundation principles, and build on those principles to master more advanced concepts. Educators need the time and specialized training to teach students well, and combined with tutoring or math-centered activities, students will be on track to master Algebra I in 8th grade.

Ensuring that they receive the proper training at home and allowing parents/caregivers to be encouraged to participate in the curriculum with both administrators and teachers for their child’s learning

First, consult with math teachers in elementary, middle, and high school. Long-term: shore up elementary math, which isn't cutting it. Short-term: intensive supports for any student behind in math. Always: celebrate excellence - let advanced students learn at their level. Algebra must be on offer in 8th grade; CPS should get to the place where it's the requirement (but isn't there yet).

Gaps in math learning appear as early as preschool. Cambridge should continue to invest in early years education. We should recognize that math learning can’t happen when kids are hungry, or feel insecure in their basic needs. We may need more social workers to ensure that kids are actually coming to school.

Our new K-12 math curriculum is designed to support 8th grade Algebra 1. We must assess – is it closing opportunity gaps as intended or perpetuating inequities? – and adjust pacing and support. I support our teachers’ work with Kentaro Iwasaki on “complex instruction” which supports all students to succeed by “...examin[ing] status and power dynamics in a classroom around race and gender and socioeconomic status, language, and just how status shows up in a classroom and how that gets in the way of student learning and engagement” (Dr. Iwasaki). We must ensure curriculum and instruction don’t leave anyone behind.

With a strong foundation in math literacy through their k-7th grade learning. My understanding is, as both a parent to a 3rd grader and as a School Committee candidate speaking to a wide array of folks around the district about the K-12 math curricula and its history, that we are teaching Algebraic concepts starting very early on. That's to say that I think we need to update our collective understanding of what the current curriculum offers, the sequencing, and what must change to better prepare our students for 8th grade Algebra 1.

Answer: Yes

Answer: No

Answer: No

Answer: No

Answer: No

Answer: No

Answer: No

Answer: No

Answer: No

Answer: Yes

Answer: Yes

Answer: No

Answer: No

Answer: No

Answer: No

Answer: Yes

Answer: No

Answer: No

Answer: Yes

Answer: No

Answer: No

Answer: No

Answer: Yes

Answer: No

Answer: Yes

Answer: Yes

Answer: Yes

Answer: No

Answer: Yes

Answer: No

The superintendent search was successful in that it has resulted in a qualified superintendent. Now it is the responsibility of the school committee to provide the superintendent with the support and accountability necessary for a well-run school district. What was missing from the past search was clear and transparent communication with the public on the timeline, with objectives and milestones. It was confusing and distracting that our current school committee did not, as a body, insist on these points in the most recent superintendent search.

I would engage all stakeholders, cast a diverse national and local candidate pool, vet candidates thoroughly, and ensure a transparent process—improving on the last search with greater community involvement and focus on equity and student outcomes.

I would hire a professional search firm with experience conducting national searches for major districts. I would not wait almost a year to start, consider bids from three highly qualified firms, turn them down for reasons unknown, and then subvert the competitive bidding process to hire an inexperienced local firm. I would include basic Google searches in the process of vetting candidates. And if I ended up with three finalists of whom only one was a classroom educator and none was a permanent superintendent, I would start over.

The search firm the leadership hired was a joke, but luckily their job is limited to logistics. If you need a search firm to tell you who your next leader should be, you’re already admitting you don’t know what you’re looking for. Judgment can’t be contracted out, nor can recruiting. I personally don't want a leader who's hung up on buzzwords, twelve point plans, and academic frameworks. I want someone with a clear simple vision (focus on kids' academic achievement; if it doesn't improve - you're doing something wrong) and guts, and that's what we got in the end.

I would overhaul the process to center transparency and community voice from day one. This means: issuing a fully public RFP for a qualified, experienced search firm; establishing a community-led oversight board with binding authority to interview finalists and provide feedback; and making all candidate interviews public. The changes are clear: no more no-bid contracts to unqualified firms, no more NDAs that silence community panelists, and no more decisions made behind closed doors that shut out both the public and committee members themselves.

To clarify the previous answer, the end result of the superintendent search was a reasonable candidate, but the process was a mess. Future superintendents should actually come from a national search, based on candidates who most improve test results and extracurriculars in their school districts. I think the school committee needs to get their own hands dirty and play a leading role in the search rather than delegating to contractors.

The key things I would change would be making a clear plan, sticking it to it, and working collaboratively. This most recent search had nine different timelines and several assigned projects, such as writing a leadership profile, that were never completed. It is also clear that some members had no idea what other members were doing. School Committee members shouldn’t have to become hiring experts - there are professional search firms who do this successfully - the School Committee just needs to govern properly.

The candidates were screened blindly by a subset of School Committee members, and were vetted once they completed a phase of the process. Unfortunately you cannot guarantee that inidviduals who vote and agree to a process, will respect and uphold their agreement and respect the its confidentality.

The superintendent search did not meet the standard of transparency or collaboration our community deserves. Hiring a superintendent is the most important lever the School Committee has to shape a successful district. I’d lead a proactive, transparent search grounded in community voice, not delegate the process. I’d recruit proven, equity-driven superintendents and rising leaders directly from other districts and education networks to ensure the best possible candidates. I’d begin early, communicate regularly, and include educators, students, families, and community members from the outset. My goal would be to identify a leader with a commitment to collaboration, innovation, and systems-level excellence.

The School Committee would successfully locate and vet talented superintendent candidates by 1) providing a clear job description, 2) describing the hiring process clearly from the start, 3) setting a realistic timeline, 4) involving students, families, and educators in setting goals and expectations, 5) selecting a search firm with solid experience placing academic leaders, 6) ensuring thorough candidate background checks, 7) holding multiple finalist interviews in public, 8) preparing a smooth transition, and 9) working with the new superintendent on defining clear goals, metrics, and evaluation criteria for annual reviews.

Candidate must have professional experience and knowledge to ensure they can handle the structure and challenges that comes with a high/multicultural and successful district such as Cambridge Public Schools. Parents/Teachers Union/teachers/educators also much ensure that they support what the goals of the upcoming superintendent are in relation to the goals of CPSD

I would hire an executive search firm that has actually conducted executive searches in the past. (This was not true of The Equity Process, which inexplicably got the CPS contract for this disastrous search.) Luckily, Dave Murphy seems smart, capable, and willing to make hard choices that put kids first.

While I’m ultimately satisfied with the outcome of the Superintendent search, I think that this entire search undermined all candidates’ capacity and effectiveness and was handled poorly at almost every single point. This search needed a better defined scope, a more realistic understanding of a professional search firm’s appropriate compensation, and the inclusion of the CEA and caregivers from the beginning. In the future, I would hire a professional search firm with experience doing this task, and make the entire process more public with clear and simple communication for the community.

I committed to selecting our superintendent through a comprehensive, nationwide search, in a process that meaningfully engages with families, caregivers, teachers, and students. I would again advocate for Cambridge to hire a search firm with successful experience supporting similar communities, and who would be able to provide a thorough, equity-aligned vetting process. Key changes: begin more quickly, allow more time for each stage of the process, build in deeper family, student, and educator engagement at earlier stages of the process, and greatly improve communication with the community at every stage to avoid misunderstandings and miscommunication and to support that engagement.

We should hire an outside interim superintendent to assess what Cambridge needs to recover from years of poor hiring and frequent turnover. The SC must rebuild trust and lead a national search for a permanent superintendent. Future searches must use a reputable firm experienced in recruiting strong district leaders and include robust community engagement to define our shared values, criteria, and vision. The School Committee should hold town halls and listening sessions in libraries, schools, and community spaces, and ensure the educators' union is an equal partner in selecting our next instructional leader.

My concerns are that there is not enough after school programming to serve all the families who need it; and that the city and school district's nonprofit partners don't have the resources necessary to consistently provide the level of after school care our community needs. I support policies to make our school and city buildings more available to community partners, to provide partners with material and financial support, and to improve communication with our partners and families.

To improve after-school care, I propose expanding access and affordability through more program slots and sliding-scale fees, enhancing program quality with academic support, enrichment, mental well-being, and life skills, strengthening community partnerships, and ensuring inclusivity for all students.

We should provide universal afterschool at all CPS elementary schools. This is a no-brainer; we just lack the political will to do it. The current system privileges families who can afford to hire private afterschool care (like nannies) and is particularly severe on families with, for example, a single working parent or two working parents. That is inequitable and unjust.

This is a program run and funded by the City, not the School District (i.e., School Committee members don't control this), so you're asking the wrong people. But, as a voter, I want to see City Council expand afterschool seats to accommodate all families in need. The City does not have excess money this year, but I would like to see them provide this essential and important service by eliminating other programs that sound nice, but haven't had demonstrable sustainable impact. That takes guts, which few have - but that we should demand of everyone.

I support moving from a scarce, competitive lottery to universal, affordable after-school care for every student who needs it, funded by new revenue from commercial tax justice, and integrated with community partners to provide enriching, not just custodial, programming.

Making it easier for volunteers in the community to host extracurricular workshops and programs in schools after hours, and keeping school buildings more open and available after the school day and on weekends.

I support the expansion of after-school care to make it universal. There is a 5-year plan to do so, I would like to see it happen more quickly. We also need processes that foster better collaboration between the school district and DHSP. The two programs share space (often contentiously) and could support each other better by sharing staff and knowledge. I propose DHSP reps on school councils. There are also administrative difficulties, some of which could be managed with a common application to all programs. I would also support policies aimed at productive and fun after-school spaces for older kids.

After-school is a complex joint venture between the city and the school department to provide after-school care to children and their families. I support the policies that are responsive to the needs of families and based on data collected from families and their providers.

After-school time is essential for connection, play, and regulation, but access and continuity remain inequitable. Many students lose critical relationships and supports once the school day ends. We need dedicated time for teachers, building leaders, and after-school staff to connect and share information so every child experiences a smooth handoff and consistent care. I’d pilot extended-day models that integrate enrichment, movement, and mentoring while reimagining the school day so art, robotics, and outdoor learning happen for all students. Strong bridges between school and after-school, trauma-informed practices, and expanded learning opportunities will create a more robust, equitable day for Cambridge kids.

This year’s drop in applications for after-school programs is a sign that the district needs to ensure that programs are offered to caregivers when and where they are needed. It would help parents if there were more transparency about seats in each grade that are reserved for returning students and incoming siblings versus seats available for new students. And asking caregivers for feedback on why they chose specific after-school programs would help the district offer programs that parents need.

Affordable/safe after schools programs, especially that parents can make sure support academic studies and safe community spaces for children and students to learn and grow

The City runs the afterschools. This is a City Council question. But I do have a blog post on City candidates' answers to my survey on this question — my goals are universal afterschool by 2027, improved quality of offerings and staff, and better community use of school buildings. I will be pushing City Council to achieve these goals.

I support implementing aftercare at every single school in the district; I think the School Committee must work far more closely and collaboratively with the City Council and the district to bring this goal to reality.

Expanding access to afterschool to meet 100% of need should be one of our district plan strategic priorities. I served on the Joint City Council/School Committee Ad Hoc Committee that helped establish universal preschool. Expanding afterschool also should be a city/school effort. We must analyze use of space to maximize programming, and explore ways CPS can collaborate with the Department of Human Services Programs and independent providers to staff programs. And afterschool programs must support accessibility and special education needs for all children, so no child is excluded. CPS Office of Student Services will play a key role.

Expand the program to meet the current unmet demand. We simply need to commit the funds to this expansion. Including, to better pay staff to fill needed positions.

Cambridge's new universal preschool program, like any new school program, needs a listening and responsive school committee to help it succeed. I would advocate for early and robust feedback systems to gather families' and educators' experience before I proposed changes. I would pay particular attention to families' experience accessing spots for their children, to children's transitions into and out of the program, and to teachers' experience.

I would make the application and enrollment process accessible with a user-friendly, multi-language website and simple, clear information about program options and locations. Programs should be flexible to accommodate family schedules, offering shorter or longer hours without transfers. Preschool should focus on joyful, play-based learning, early literacy, and sufficient qualified staff. Programs should also partner with families to identify and address early learning or developmental needs, ensuring every child receives the support they need to thrive.

Related to the preceding question, afterschool should be available and guaranteed for pre-K students in CPP programs. We are also in the midst of an attempt to centralize CPP programs, which I am against; I would strive to keep CPP programs at each elementary school. We should ensure city-run programs are developmentally appropriate, and centered around play-based learning. If the City Council is willing to fund it, I would love to see universal pre-K extended to all three-year-olds.

This is a program run and funded by the City, not the School District (i.e., School Committee members don't control this), so you're asking the wrong people. But, as a voter, I want to see City Council expand universal pre-k to cover all three year olds. Private pre-school runs $30-40k - sums that most families cannot afford. I want to see the City focus on programs like this, that have demonstrated real impact, over those that simply sound nice. And again, this will require tough decisions, as the macro economic environment worsens.

I will fight to expand JK/K inclusion by ensuring every classroom has the paraprofessionals and special educators needed to successfully support students with disabilities, and to raise wages for all early childhood staff to a living wage to solve the recruitment and retention crisis. I support the expansion of preschool programs to start at the age of 3, like Somerville has done.

The eventual goal is to make the program available to even younger students. The money can be reallocated to this program from ineffective educator master's degree tuition programs.

I think Cambridge should be very proud of our universal preschool! However, there are still some wrinkles to iron out. Two top concerns I have are the lack of after-school coverage and the potentially age-inappropriate academic focus of some programs. From what I can tell, the program is growing and revising in response to the experiences families and providers are having. At this point, the School Committee can play a key accountability role by making sure stakeholder reports are relevant and regular and the program is meeting the needs of all families.

I am interested in reviewing the number of sites, but any changes to the current universal preschool would have to be the result of data gathered through listening sessions, surveys, and meetings with caregivers, providers, and city and school department staff.

Cambridge’s universal preschool program is a major achievement, and now we must ensure it’s both equitable and excellent. I’d strengthen CPP classrooms so they’re literacy-rich, play-centered, and relationship-driven, with trauma-informed and multilingual supports for every child. Early educators need professional development, fair pay, and resources to build inclusive, joyful environments. I’d deepen family partnerships through home visits and culturally responsive communication, and align preschool with wraparound services like healthcare and mental health supports. Strong early childhood education should reduce stress for families, close early opportunity gaps, and create a culture where curiosity and connection drive learning every day.

The Universal preschool program rolled out in September 2024 and is working well, but enrollment data has to be constantly evaluated to ensure the community is well served: are families applying, are they assigned to their preferred programs, are they accepting offers, or do they go elsewhere for childcare? Are assignments equitable across the district? Monitoring census data and temporary residents projects to ensure that enrollment is sustainable for both community partner and for-profit programs is important for the long-term viability of the program.

Not all of the parents receive vouchers for every preschools in the city’s vicinity. I would also recommend that those parents who are interested in receiving financial assistance be recommended or given some some of financial support if needed

What I've done: Written a parent guide to this needlessly confusing system. What I'd like to do: Make wealthy families pay part — our 2nd-biggest budget item shouldn't be huge subsidies to the well-off. (Note: universal afterschool eludes us for just $2M.) Publish lottery data so families know their chances. Treat nonprofit partner preschools fairly — ask them: they're currently bullied by capricious rules. Discover the ROI — how many more families are being served now than under the old DHSP preschool system? It's ridiculous to have no answers.

This program needs to offer full day care, not just care during school hours. Families with single parents and reduced income are most impacted when care ends at 3 pm.

I’m proud to have been a leader in getting support and funding for the groundbreaking Cambridge Preschool Program, guaranteeing spots to all four-year-olds and many three-year-olds. Now in its second year, we must examine the implementation, including the process of requesting and being assigned spots in programs, and continually improve it with the goals of ensuring access to the right programs for everyone – and expanding programs to meet demand, such as possibly adding more longer-day or full-year spots or additional Cambridge Public Schools spots. As we perfect the current program I also support expanding universal preschool to all three-year-olds.

Make it more child-centered and play based. It's way too focused on an outdated idea of academic rigor that is developmentally inappropriate, which will just undermine the learning we'd like to see in the program.

Answer: Yes

Answer: Yes

Answer: Yes

Answer: Yes

Answer: No

Answer: No

Answer: Yes

Answer: Yes

Answer: Yes

Answer: Yes

Answer: Yes

Answer: Yes

Answer: Yes

Answer: Yes

Answer: Yes

While racial and socio-economic academic achievement gaps have existed in CPS for a very long time, we have an opportunity now to significantly close those gaps through a coordinated approach from the new (permanent)superintendent, the teachers' union (CEA) and a school committee that is committed as a body to collaborate with these partners to close gaps. I want to be part of a school committee that treats teachers as valued and necessary partners in education, and that trusts the supt to bring the skill and expertise of administration to the service of academic excellence for all students.

To close racial and socio-economic achievement gaps reflected in MCAS data, CPS needs to close opportunity gaps by providing targeted support to students based on their individual needs, ensuring all students can access the curriculum. MCAS data should be used as a reference, not the sole focus; we also need meaningful assessments that track each student’s progress and growth.

First we need to acknowledge and understand the root causes -- economic inequality and systemic racism. CPS can't eliminate inequality, but we can expand wraparound services, and make it easier for families to access services already in place, to mitigate its effects. We know that gaps are already in place when students enter CPS, and we should address them at the source; add educators to pre-K, K, 1st, and 2nd grade classrooms so that when kids come into school with gaps, we can give them more individualized focus, coaching, and interventions to get caught up by 3rd/4th grade.

If a kid comes in behind, step back and get them what they need. Don't promote them to the next higher grade out of pity if they haven't mastered the material for their current grade. Similarly, do NOT close the gap by holding back kids who are at or above grade level now. That's virtue signaling bullshit. (If you're tempted to put ideology ahead of kids' academic achievement, don't vote for me; you won't like me.) Finally, raise the bar; remove leaders and teachers who aren't excellent and use the funds to improve pay for the teachers that are.

We must confront the structural roots of these gaps: thoroughly review the segregative controlled choice system, fully fund our highest-need schools, replace discriminatory discipline with restorative justice, and ensure a living wage to recruit and retain a diverse, expert educator workforce.

The most effective route is to spend more time with disadvantaged students. Keeping school buildings open after-hours, combined with a more proactive recruitment of community volunteer tutors and mentors, is the most important first step.

Most factors that contribute to MCAS scores are not controlled solely by schools, which points to including community-based solutions for paying down the educational debt that underserved students are owed. There are well known and effective in-school (small group lessons, diverse teaching staff, culturally responsive curricula) and community (housing/food security, strong home-school partnerships, early childhood supports) interventions. We have many of these things throughout the district, but where we fall flat is follow-through and evaluation. If we don’t keep track of what we are doing and how well we are doing, we end up over-relying on MCAS.

The adoption of universal preschool is one step toward the goal of closing the racial and socio-economic achievement gap. Assessing the specific needs of individual students who are preforming below grade level and providing them with rigorous and targeted support will address individuals student needs. However, we must also assess the bias in the curriculum, teaching methodologies, and structures in our schools. We must provide support to our schools who are unable to meet these goals. We must provide our staff with anti-bias training, as well as broaden the diversity of our teaching, all with targeted goals for achieving this.

To close racial and socioeconomic achievement gaps, CPS must pair exceptional, engaging, culturally relevant teaching with deeper learning: critical thinking, collaboration, communication, self-direction, and academic mindset. I’d support teacher-driven, community-informed curriculum design instead of top-down rollouts, ensuring fidelity and transparency in implementation. We should make Universal Design for Learning the norm so all students— multilingual learners, students with IEPs, and diverse thinkers—have multiple entry points into content. Embedding restorative practices and social-emotional learning strengthen school culture and student regulation. Actual progress means rigorous, joyful learning for every student, connected to identity, community, and the real world.

This is the conundrum that committee members have struggled with for decades. There is no easy simple answer. In a nutshell CPS needs to ensure that all students have access to the resources they need — academic, emotional, social, physical — by making tools available to students, families, educators, and administrators so that they can work together to help all students pursue their passions to the best of their ability.

Increase reading rates in the City (Massachusetts is lagging behind in reading scores as has been published in recent 2025 studies), increase access to Math and Science STEM classes to enrich the quality of learning for students, address the racial/socio-economic/language barriers that prevent many students from learning at the same rate as other students of their peers group

- Increase the focus on student learning; drop inane programs with equity in the name. (Learning is the equity we're after.) Cut what doesn't work; grow what does. - Consult with teachers on what's working and what's not. - Keep families better informed of how kids are doing academically and socially. - Increase teacher coaching and feedback (something our teachers say they want (!) and something economic research supports). - Hold teachers accountable for their students' learning. - Intensive tutoring and support for kids who are behind. - Treating these disparities like a hair-on-fire crisis.

Create a culture of real family engagement at every level; share the curriculum with all caregivers. Evaluate principals with increased rigor and higher expectations. Adapt the reading curriculum for multilingual learners. Increase tutoring capacity and programming throughout CPSD. Ask if we’ve got the right kinds of teacher support staff. Are we using real teaching teams or are we defining the term paraprofessional too broadly? Finally, do we do a good job of defining our high expectations for all of our students and then inspire our students to internalize those high expectations for themselves?

I am on the core team of leaders designing our coordinated “success planning” system I advocated for. Every child will have an adult navigator connecting them with needed supports and opportunities to thrive, so they graduate CRLS prepared to succeed. I sponsored our advanced learning policy; our equity goals demand we identify and meet the needs of every child. To close opportunity gaps, we must set the academic floor high, support all students to get there, and not impose ceilings. With a focused structure to ensure each child’s needs and strengths are known and met, we will make more progress.

Increased and more effective evaluation practices across the district (360 evaluations); equitably distribute resources based on educator expertise and student need instead of based on spreadsheets and formulas.

MCAS data is an important indicator of how CPS is doing in its mission to educate all of its students. It allows us to see how we are faring in comparison to our goals but also to the rest of the country. I see it as one element of the "report card" on the district and school committee's leadership. MCAS data should not be used to evaluate individual students' readiness to graduate, or to close a school, or to evaluate a teacher.

MCAS data should be used as one reference to understand student performance in a particular setting, helping identify areas for support, but it does not capture the full potential or growth of a student.

MCAS is not going anywhere, and we should use results as one data point among several. But all data needs appropriate context -- including the correlation between socioeconomic status and parental educational attainment, and standardized test scores. We should not treat MCAS proficiency scores as the be-all and end-all. In terms of assessing the effectiveness of schools, I would like to see a shift in focus from proficiency scores to growth data, as the latter is more useful with respect to assessing instruction. We should not use MCAS proficiency scores to evaluate teacher performance.

As one measure of who can read, who understands math concepts, and who understands basic science concepts. Tests aren't perfect - they don't tap innate potential (just current understanding), and some students have real test anxiety that detracts from our ability to figure out how much of the underlying content they really grasp. But these are no excuses to throw them out altogether. Accountability is important, and I will not let the District grade it's own test. This is a District that tells you today that it's doing well, when half our kids can't read and high schoolers can't multiply.

MCAS data should be used to identify systemic resource inequities across our district; it must be prohibited to use MCAS data (and any standardized testing data) to determine high-stakes decisions like student graduation, teacher evaluation, or school funding that punish the very students and educators it claims to measure.

Individual evaluations to generate student-specific study plans based on their particular strengths and weaknesses.

To be clear, I do not believe the MCAS is a good measure of student ability or teacher effectiveness. I also think that the way we report MCAS scores, in proportions of students who fall into large categories instead of looking at the data continuously, is harmful and overly simplistic. That said, because all students take the same test, MCAS scores could be used to compare students to one another. This is potentially useful for identifying specific groups of students who need additional support with specific academic skills, especially if we use cross tabulations to compare intersections of specific groups.

The MCAS data should be used as an diagnostic tools that tells us how our students are doing relative to their state peers.

MCAS is one data point among many and should be interpreted in context. It can highlight trends and inequities, but it’s not a full picture of student learning or flourishing. Cambridge should minimize test-prep practices that narrow instruction while expanding authentic learning and assessments like exhibitions, student-led conferences, and portfolios that reflect diverse ways of knowing. Cambridge can lead in developing assessment systems that uphold academic rigor while valuing creativity, critical thinking, and deep learning, the mindsets that truly prepare students for their futures.

MCAS data, an annual test with results that are released months after the test was taken, should be used only as a rough guideline. The District should use data pulled from the multiple software packages used by students across all grades. These packages generate granular data in real time that can help educators evaluate student progress, while factoring in information from classroom. These data should be relied on instead of MCAS data when making decisions to direct student learning.

community support and parent evaluation to make sure their children as successful in getting access to a quality education; as well as measuring the quality of a school district in relation to other communities within Massachusetts

The MCAS test began in 1993 to see if public schools were serving all students (nope!). It's a basic test of student knowledge — much easier than the SAT. Without it, we wouldn't know about the unacceptable inequities referenced above. MCAS is an accountability measure to hold schools accountable for teaching their students. As Harvard economist Raj Chetty has shown, teachers’ impact on students’ test scores is a good measure of teacher quality. This matters most for the most vulnerable students: great teachers unlock economic mobility. That's great news + CPS should be all about it.

MCAS data are useful in assessing the health and equity of a district as a whole – but are only valuable if one disaggregates that data to show how demographics are served over time in a specific school and throughout the district, and includes data points like chronic absenteeism, school completion rates, and school culture surveys. My questions: How well does the MCAS show learning progress for multilingual learner students and students with disabilities? Is there a better alternative for more accurate assessment of students with those specific learning profiles?

MCAS data is better for evaluating how we are doing as a district, rather than how we are doing with individual children. It should not be used to “teach to the test” or evaluate educators, but rather to alert us if there are concerning or promising trends, or if there are places within CPSD where we see positive or negative outliers so we can address issues, and build on strengths. MCAS data is one tool for ensuring that we don’t overlook opportunity gaps but instead identify them so we can address them in targeted ways.

Reminding us that we have work to do to address systemic opportunity gaps if we want to see better test scores. But we know this, so I frankly don't know that we need to be paying so much attention to these annual scores, also when we have so many other assessment tools. We are awash in "data" while in dire need of actual solutions to respond to that data.

Not at this time.

Yes, I support adding non-voting members to the School Committee to represent all stakeholders, including the teachers’ union, school councils, community groups, and retired teachers.

I do. A representative of the Cambridge Education Association should be included as a non-voting member of the School Committee.

No.

Yes. I unequivocally support adding a non-voting seat for a representative from the Cambridge Education Association to bring frontline educator expertise directly into policy deliberations.

No. Elections are the process by which we have democratically chosen representatives on our School Committee.

Yes! I believe that educators, through their union, should have standing representation at the School Committee table.

No, I do not support adding an additional non-voting members to the School Committee.

I support adding a non-voting Cambridge Education Association (CEA) representative to the School Committee and creating structures for real shared governance. I believe in collaborative leadership: “nothing about me without me.” It’s time to move beyond “us/them” thinking and ensure educator voice helps shape decisions before they’re finalized. I’d file a policy order to amend Committee rules so the CEA president (or designee) participates ex officio with a standing “CEA Report.” I’d also strengthen connections with school councils through regular updates and feedback loops. Including educator and school-level perspectives will make policy more proactive, transparent, and effective.

Candidates were asked at Cambridge Education Association forum if they would support adding a non-voting CEA member to the school committee. I wasn’t sure, so I asked local districts including Somerville, Lexington, Brookline, Acton-Boxborough, and Boston. None seat a non-voting representative, several said it would require changing their city’s charter, and one added that state approval would be unlikely. A representative at the Massachusetts Association of School Committees told me they don’t have an opinion. I’d like to know if non-voting members can be appointed to the committee under Cambridge’s city charter and then weighing my answer.

Yes; Adding Teachers Union Members to the committee which has been discussed in various meetings and forums

No. When I was a teacher, my union fought for earlier high school start times (great for staff commutes, terrible for teens). But most teachers sided with the teens. Union leadership didn't consult us. Sadly, Cambridge's teachers union has also been fighting for earlier high school hours. Consulting affected teachers should be prioritized in any new policy. But talking to union leadership is not an acceptable short-cut for that work. Worse, the union often fights student interests: pushing for covid closures, supporting strikes, opposing state-wide Science of Reading requirements, reacting anemically to antisemitic materials it distributed. Please, look it up!

I support a non-voting seat for the CEA at School Committee meetings. My views on this topic have been shaped by School Committee comments about educators that, over the past year have been reason for concern.

I sponsored our recent, successful motion to restore non-binding votes to our student school committee members, and I support adding a non-voting teacher representative to the School Committee. I also support reviewing the School Committee rules to look at ways to better foster meaningful discussion and community engagement at meetings.

Yes! More non-voting student members, a non-voting seat for the CEA president, AND let's empower subcommittees by inviting members of the public to serve on them as non-voting members.

Answer: no

Answer: No

Answer: Yes

Answer: Yes

Answer: Yes

Answer: Yes

Answer: Yes

Answer: Yes

Answer: Yes

Answer: Yes

Answer: Yes

Answer: Yes

Answer: Yes

Answer: Yes

Answer: Yes