District parents and members of the school committee and the teacher’s union voiced near-unanimous opposition at Tuesday night’s committee meeting to a motion that would bar third-graders without reading proficiency from being promoted to fourth grade.
The motion, co-sponsored by Committee Members Richard Harding and Elizabeth Hudson, would have tied promotion to performance on an external, standardized reading test. It included exceptions for English Learners and students on Individualized Education Programs (IEPs).
Third grade represents an important transition in student learning, after which reading becomes an “assumed skill,” Hudson said.
Right now, 10 percent of third graders in the Cambridge public schools do not meet expectations in English Language Arts for their grade level, and 29 percent only partially meet expectations, according to 2025 data from last year’s Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS). Statewide, 19 percent of third graders do not meet expectations and 39 percent only partially meet expectations.
But the numbers in Cambridge skyrocket for third graders in marginalized student groups – only 30 percent of Students with Disabilities and 41 percent of current and former English Learners met or exceeded grade-level reading expectations. For White third graders, 76 percent met or exceeded expectations, compared to 33 percent of Black students and 46 percent of Latino and Hispanic students.
Don’t hold back
The meeting started with an unusually crowded public comment section, with comments from a dozen community members, including one third grader (he was opposed to the motion, saying he would not want to be held back for having trouble with one subject). The majority spoke in opposition. Many commenters were members of the Cambridge Education Association (CEA), the labor union representing nearly 1,500 Cambridge educators and staff members.
Some commenters voiced concern that a policy prohibiting the promotion of those not meeting reading expectations would unfairly target Black and Brown students. “Black and Latino students are disproportionately affected by retention policies, as they are consistently more likely to be retained than white students over the past three decades,” said Betsy Preval, vice president of the CEA.
Black and Brown students would also be disproportionately affected by the emotional consequences of repeating a grade, which “carries significant social and emotional consequences for many struggling students, their confidence comes from their peer community,” said Isabella Ehrlich, parent to four students in the district, one of whom has experience with retention.
Harding argued that the need for retention indicates a larger problem. “Everybody’s going to throw the Black and Brown kid and say they’re protecting them,” Harding said. “I think what is more harmful is when you don’t acknowledge the fact that you’re failing them miserably.”
While acknowledging “logistical impacts” to holding students back, Hudson said “it is, however, not nearly as impactful to hold a student back in junior kindergarten, kindergarten, first grade, second grade or third grade as it is to have a student who makes it to 9th grade or 10th grade and can’t read.”
Other concerns surrounded the viability of data from standardized exams, like the MCAS, which some community members argued is not an effective measure for vulnerable student populations and may not represent a student’s true reading comprehension.
“We need to deeply consider the costs of amplifying the stakes of testing for our youngest learners,” said Karen Engels, an elementary-school teacher at Graham and Parks, contending that standardized exams are a source of anxiety of elementary school students.
Committee Member Arjun Jaikumar expressed concern that the policy may prioritize a student’s test-taking abilities over their reading comprehension. When schools “organize learning around passing a specific test, kids do learn to pass that test, but may not learn more broadly,” Jaikumar said.
The motion provides two additional opportunities for students who do not pass the threshold on initial assessment, one of which is a mandatory, free summer reading program.
Literacy problem acknowledged
Despite the negative reaction to the motion, public commenters and school committee members found common ground over the need to address Cambridge’s literacy problem.
“I commend [members Harding and Hudson] for this motion. I think it is urgent,” committee Vice Chair Caitlin Dube said. “I think we have an ecosystem failure that we are working to address, but I think this motion is a Band-Aid.”
Calls for change have increased since the release last month of an equity audit for the district, which asserted Cambridge can address persistent achievement gaps with its existing resources. And the district has implemented literacy-based interventions that should be a part of the conversation on effective solutions, noted CEA President Christopher Montero.
Engels agreed, saying “In literacy alone, we’ve begun providing targeted intervention during WIN blocks. We’re seeing results,” Engels said. (WIN blocks are slots during the school day dedicated to helping students address issues, called individualized intervention).
Asked about existing personnel strengths on Wednesday, CPS Director of Communications Jaclyn Piques said via email that closing achievement gaps must be “stronger in execution, not solely in more investments.” Nonetheless, the district’s budget proposal for fiscal 2027 will include money for “an increased complement of interventionist staff for this specific purpose,” the statement said.
Ultimately, the motion was referred to the Curriculum and Achievement Subcommittee for further discussion.
A stronger
Please consider making a financial contribution to maintain, expand and improve Cambridge Day.
We are now a 501(c)(3) nonprofit and all donations are tax deductible.
Please consider a recurring contribution.