Not that anyone asked me but: on state education priorities

In their past two meetings, the Board of Ed has established priorities; in November, for the FY27 budget request, and in December, for the Commissioner, which he proposed as being the foundation of a strategic plan. 

I'd first note--and I do realize that the Board here is constrained by state deadlines on budget--that the above is really backwards; you always want to establish your priorities before you do your budgeting. You set your values before you spend your money. 

With that in mind, then, let's consider first the priorities, with a connection to what one would then need for budgetary priorities. 

Let's first note that he started with this slide: 

...which I just find super disheartening as framing. Someday, someone is going to note? remember? that public education is guaranteed by the state "for the preservation of their rights and liberties" and that it is for the good not only of individual children, but for all of us. THAT is what we should be leading with, anytime we are asking how we are doing.

The Commissioner has offered the following as his priorities, which wasn't amended by the Board: 

• Power of Presence: increasing student attendance and engagement
• Literacy Launch: strengthening evidence-based early literacy practices
• Future Focused: expanding college and career pathways
• Inclusive Impact: strengthening evidence-based practices for students with disabilities and English learners
• Teach Tomorrow: building a robust teacher pipeline
• Accelerating Achievement: providing comprehensive support for low–performing schools
...so the first thing we know is that someone spent some time on the alliteration. 

This is, for sure, what this gubernatorial administration and this Board has been spending time and attention on. 

I would not say that these are the highest needs or concerns in Massachusetts schools right now. If I get six, here's mine (with apologies for not spending time working out the alliteration): 

1. Responding to whatever the heck is going on with the federal government
   I'm sure there's some sort of internal "we must carry on" weird stiff upper lip sentiment behind the above list, but the reality is that every 48 hours or so, we have some new utter insanity coming out of the Trump administration on policy. As we know, "if it's out there, it's in here": nearly any policy decision hits schools somehow.
   The bulwark for federal policy for districts in Massachusetts is the state. Now, as it happens, Massachusetts has been doing okay on this; Massachusetts has, from very early on, been uncompromising in its very public comments that it intends to support all students. See,for example, Secretary Tutwiler in February.
   It also leads the core values on the Secretary's page:
   

   Advance Equity and Inclusion We acknowledge the relationships between the legacy of discriminatory public policies leading to educational, economic, and social disparities that persist in society. We stand as advocates to dismantle barriers and practices and develop policies to create pathways to excellence and maximized potential for all students.

   Even yesterday, Attorney General Campbell is among those in 19 states and D.C. who filed suit against the federal government to challenge their ban on gender affirming care. This joins a host of other lawsuits Massachusetts has been part of¹ since last January, many of them, in one way or another, ensuring we have support for all students. 
   There are absolutely ways in which Massachusetts could be doing better. We aren't particularly strong in being outspoken as a state about ICE operating within our borders². 
   It is concerning to me as someone in public education, however, that this is all being articulated by the AG and by the Governor's appointed Secretary. This should be much more clearly articulated by the Commissioner, the head of K-12 education in the Commonwealth, as a focus of the agency. If in fact the state is there to ensure that districts can focus on serving all students, then the head of that agency should see that as a core responsibility. And this costs money! There's a budget priority. 
   This need for being our bulwark does not seem to be going away anytime soon. Articulate it and make it the first priority. Say it often, loudly, clearly, and unceasingly. 
   
   
2. Ensuring the well-being of students and staff, providing then that learning can take place
   I saw something recently that scoffed at the well-being of students being something that matters, that we needed to be all about academics as a focus. This is, of course, ignorant (or intentionally ignoring) how it is that people learn.
   I note, though, that the Commissioner, when talking about how students are doing, led with MCAS scores, so I don't feel a whole lot better there. 
   Now, as it happens, I am not among those who think that MCAS scores don't matter; I'll instead remind you that teachers review the questions and set the levels at which students are scored on questions that align with the state standards every public school in Massachusetts is supposed to be teaching. 
   But the MCAS framing I have seen, including from the Commissioner, continues to talk in terms of if students are "caught back up" to "where they were pre-pandemic." This elides over that these are not the same students: when one says "third graders were here, and now they are here," those are not the same kids being discussed. 
   I know the Commissioner knows this, but in the eagerness to make the point, I don't think we're being clear. 
   Every smart teacher knows that you teach the child in front of you--you don't get to pick or make up the kids you have in your class. I know (and lament) that we as a society have entirely refused to acknowledge the incredible loss of life and of health that the pandemic meant. For us to do the same with our children is leave ourselves unable to appropriately work with the children we have in classrooms now. 
   Note that can and should not be just alarmist comments about what grade children might have had online, that seems always to be immediately be followed by stern words about redoubling efforts or calls for new curriculum. We need to consider what it meant and means for children to have been through the loss of life and of health of so many, in the various ways in which they experienced that. And what does that then mean for them now?
   From a staff perspective, I think that the pandemic was the most disheartening experience many educators have ever been through, as it became clear that all the nice words about how much people support teachers turned quickly to calls for them to risk, in very real ways, their own health for their jobs, and the subsequent push at the governance levels of various kinds of demands made of school districts. 
   We badly need leadership that understands, in a core foundational way, all of the above, and makes responding and supporting it a function of the Department. That "responding" is going to cost money; there's a budgetary priority.
   
   
3. Being real about our segregated state school system
   I had some real hopes for Pedro Martinez on this one, given some of the comments he made during his interview--noting the tie, for example, between school performance and community wealth--before he was hired. 
   But it hasn't come very much since, thus far.
   Because our educational system in Massachusetts is so town-based, and because our towns are the result of red-lining, we have among the most segregated school systems in the nation. We do not talk about it. The only acknowledgement we have at a state level is the annual appropriation of money to send about 3000 kids of color from Boston and Springfield to their outlying majority-white suburbs for school.³ 
   This does not serve ANY of our children well. We should share a foundational understanding of our school system that includes this⁴, and the Commissioner has a responsibility on this count.
   If we then wanted to do something about this, I suspect it would be cost money.
    
4. Using actual data to inform school finance discussions
   We have had far too many sweeping comments about chapter 70 not working, particular schools being underserved, and even cities getting more than their share or what have you.
   The actual numbers don't support this, but that takes work on using the data that the state collects from districts and presenting it in a fashion that is more generally understandable.⁵ 
   We can show, for example, that we as a state are funding some districts at 25% or more of their foundation budgets, and what it is that they then are doing with that funding. We can show what districts that are funded at their required state minimum budget can and cannot do with that minimum funding, and what districts nearby can and do do for their students because they have that additional funding. We can show that some districts are being very loud about cuts to programs that some districts have never been able to afford to have. 
   None of this is to say that the districts that are running and have been able to offer these supports and programs for students are doing something wrong; I'd go so far as to say that those are things we should be able to offer more broadly. But we are not having real conversations about school finance in constructive ways when we are leaving out hold harmless funding and local contributions over minimum in our discussions.
   You do not get this through per pupil spending reports (I personally think those often hurt more than they help in a progressive spending system; districts that have greater needs among their students should be spending more), and we do not get this through headlines that only speak of what is being cut. 
   We have the data; let's use it in ways people can understand.
   I suspect, if noting else, both the data and the finance offices could need more staffing to make this work. 
   
   
5. Get a grip on the role of technology in education. 
   Yes, this first of all is how we should absolutely beyond everything bar AI across the board in education. But it also means that we need to stop ascribing every evil on earth to cell phones in schools; we need to remember the actual students we have sitting in actual seats when we talk about this, and do so without being condescending to parents). It means talking about if we really ought to be handing out iPads as early as we are. It means not allowing for teachers to share students' information willy-nilly (because no one is reading the user agreements on those apps they're downloading without checking with anyone). 
   And probably more.
   This may not cost money, at least offhand.
   
   
6. Do some real work on rural schools.
   Yes, I know there was a report, in the Legislature. But, related to the above discussions on finance and on how our school districts are arranged, the state has been pretty hands off on small districts, in a way that the state is not, for example, with urban districts.
   Towns want their own schools, because towns have always had their own schools, and schools are often the center of life in towns. That is something I'm very sympathetic to. 
   We are also, as a state, running schools that are very, very small; we are running districts that are small and in multiple buildings. There are ways in which this is not only expensive (which it absolutely is); it also can deny students opportunities they otherwise would have.
   It is really hard for "Boston"⁶to have this conversation, and I'm not sure it's one Martinez can do. But to put a "rural schools grant" on this and/or label this as a chapter 70 issue is also not the answer.
   

As always, the above is just from me as me, and offered because, above all, I believe in what we are striving to do in public schools in Massachusetts (and everywhere). We can do better for our kids and for ourselves. 

May we in 2026 strive to do so. 
__________________________________________________________________

¹ While this does not allow you to sort by plaintiff, Lawfare tracks litigation involving the Trump administration here. I have not seen a recent update on the number of times Massachusetts has sued this administration, but I believe that in November it was approaching twenty. 

²Why is it that people keep getting taken from Logan airport?

³ METCO, which was the only visible outcome of the 1965 report on racial imbalance "Because It Is Right: Educationally" which was a report asked for by the Board of Education!

⁴If we'd all shared this understanding, this might, among other things, have made our recent conversations around admission to regional vocationals go differently.

⁵I'm doing my best out here, people, but I cannot do this on my own!

⁶It doesn't matter than the Department is in Everett now; they're still "Boston" once you're outside 495.