A decision on whether to adopt an integrated or traditional model is expected to be made in February 2026. (Genevieve Morrison / Heights Editor)
At Newton School Committee (NSC)’s meeting on Wednesday, Newton educators and parents established that it’s more than just homework and homerooms on their minds—it’s the future of math instruction and a new long-term place for its older school buildings.
Newton currently ranks 16 out of 16 peer districts in math rigor. The proposal would offer Algebra I or Integrated Math I for all eighth graders, with the introduction of an accelerated eighth-grade option for those who qualify, according to Director of Mathematics PK–12 Jennifer Shore.
Star Assessments, Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System, unit tests, and teacher recommendations will determine the placement for the latter. Star Assessments is a program that tests K-12 students in a wide range of subjects.
High school students would then move into Math 1-3 (integrated) or Algebra-Geometry-Algebra II (traditional) curriculum based on the model adopted by the administration. A decision on whether to adopt an integrated or traditional model is expected to be made in February 2026, following extensive educator and community input, according to Shore and Gina Flanagan, assistant superintendent of teaching and learning for Newton Public Schools (NPS).
Though supporters of the proposed overhaul argue the new program will expand rigor and ensure equity, not everyone was convinced.
Manu Sarna, a parent of a kindergartener and first-grade student, argued that the proposed program does not improve the schools’ rigor enough.
“When you benchmark Newton against different school districts … It takes us just from 16 out of 16 to 14 out of 16 [in rigor],” Sarna said. “That is not sufficient. That is not what I think parents want or expect from this school district.”
Paul Sherman, author of the Independent Math Pathways Report that broke down Newton’s lackluster standing in mathematics compared to other Boston-area schools, agreed with Sarna.
“I’m here to say this plan is not nearly ambitious enough in two key ways,” said Sherman. “One, there is not enough differentiation to meet all student needs. And two, it doesn’t raise the ceiling high enough.”
Sherman expanded on earlier criticisms by arguing that the plan does not do enough to serve both struggling learners and advanced students. According to Sherman, the proposal lacks geometry—unlike most peer districts—and fails to serve the interests of students who are two grade levels ahead of the national average.
“The proposed plan puts the highest eighth-grade offering at one grade level ahead of national standards,” Sherman said. “So even under this new plan, not just a few, but huge numbers of students will not be challenged.”
NSC also reviewed a draft timeline through 2050 for various district projects because many of Newton’s school buildings are approaching 100 years of age. The proposed timeline prioritized the oldest schools first, making them more modern and accessible, followed by projects at Charles E. Brown Middle School and Newton South High School.
“We put a draft timeline out to 2050, as we know that there is still a lot of work to do in our school buildings,” said NPS Superintendent Anna Nolin.
Committee members noted that this was an early draft and that timelines could change, so the committee planned to finalize a decision by mid-December.