The Massachusetts high school Class of 2003 was the first required to pass a test to graduate.

The impact of the mandate, part of the state’s education reform law known as the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System or MCAS, was felt within two years.

In 2005, Massachusetts public school students outperformed students in all other states in all subjects tested on the National Assessment of Educational Progress. They have continued to do so for most years since then.

Sounds like the state has something that really works. Who would want to get rid of the requirement?

Teachers.

A question on the November election ballot will ask the state’s voters to end the graduation test. The referendum is being pushed hard by the Massachusetts Teachers Association, the state’s largest teachers’ union.

Each year, more than 70,000 students starting in the third grade take the standardized tests. Students in Grade 10 are required to pass the math, English and science exams to graduate from high school.

The MTA and other critics argue that Massachusetts has become an outlier as one of only eight states that require students to pass a test to graduate from high school. They also cite recent research showing that passing an exit exam does not increase students’ academic achievement or employment rates but merely improves their test-taking skills.

Instead of a test, the MTA say students will be “eligible for a high school diploma if, among other requirements, they complete coursework demonstrating mastery of competencies in our state’s high academic standards.”

We understand the concerns.

Yes, the tests consume a lot of time and resources.

Yes, the MCAS needs improvement. As we have said in the past, we urge Gov. Maura Healey and the Legislature to order a study to review and put into place innovative ways to assess performance in our public schools.

But, no, Massachusetts voters should not eliminate the graduation test. There are many reasons why.

Massachusetts may be one of only eight states that mandate a graduation test, but many countries with top-ranked public schools require them.

Independent research shows that students whose scores were boosted in Grade 10 earned over 20 percent more by age 30.

“The higher the MCAS scores, the greater the future earnings,” one researcher told the state Board of Elementary and Secondary Education.

The teachers’ union also says the MCAS is merely a reflection of the students’ zip codes — in short, their socioeconomic status.

But even within zip codes, MCAS scores can vary, depending on whether students attend good schools or poor or mediocre ones.

Most importantly, eliminating the graduation test would strip the state of its ability to assess schools and teachers and to intervene when a district is underperforming.

We urge voters to retain the graduation test. We have a system that is working. Our schools are among the best in the country.

There’s no reason for change.

BOSTON (WHDH) – Protesters gathered in Boston and Springfield Monday to push back on newly-announced state emergency shelter rules that advocates say will increase the number of people with no safe place to sleep at night. 

Protests took place outside the State House in Boston and the state office building in Springfield. 

In a previous statement announcing the demonstrations, organizers said Massachusetts “is on the verge of forcing hundreds of children and their families into unsheltered homelessness in an unprecedented violation of our state’s values.” 

As officials grapple with the effects of the influx of migrants arriving in Massachusetts, Gov. Maura Healey on Tuesday of last week said the state would soon prioritize shelter space for families who are homeless due to no-fault evictions or sudden circumstances such as floods or fires. 

Healey’s administration said families would also be prioritized if at least one family member is a veteran, if they are at risk of domestic violence, if they have significant medical needs, or if they have newborn children. 

The new policy is scheduled to take effect on Thursday of this week and will establish a five-day cap for families waiting in overflow shelters for more long-term placement in an emergency assistance shelter.

If people utilize an overflow shelter, though, they will need to wait six months before qualifying for emergency assistance shelter placement. 

Just under a week after Healey’s announcement and just days before the new shelter rules take effect, advocates called on the governor to protect Massachusetts’ right to shelter law and “avoid a humanitarian crisis that will put a stain on Massachusetts’ moral standing for generations.”

“[Emergency assistance] shelter is the last resort for families with no safe place to sleep,” organizers said. “Under the changes announced by the Governor, families who are deemed eligible for shelter will now be forced to choose: wait in an unsafe place for a shelter placement or stay for 5 nights in a state-run overflow site but then wait at least 6 months to access [emergency assistance] shelter.”

“Five days is not enough time to find housing or alternative temporary options, and this change is going to leave families and children with no other options but to sleep on the street,” organizers continued.

Karissa Hand, a spokesperson for Healey, in a statement said the state currently does not have space available in its emergency assistance shelters or in its overflow shelters. 

Hand said state Family Welcome Centers “do everything in their power to connect families with alternative options,” including offering transportation to family and friends and providing various diversion services. 

“[B]ut it is essential that families understand the lack of shelter space before they travel here,” she said. 

Hand said the “key reason” for new changes “is to free up space and provide short term respite to newly arriving families in need.” 

“There are approximately 8,000 families in shelter in Massachusetts at present, including both longtime Massachusetts residents and newly arriving immigrant families, and unfortunately we do not have additional capacity at this time,” Hand said.

(Copyright (c) 2024 Sunbeam Television. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.)

As Nantucket continues to reel from the Vineyard Wind turbine blade failure, critics are raising concerns around how the project’s parent company, Avangrid, has donated thousands of dollars in campaign money to state elected officials.

A Herald analysis found that employees who list Avangrid as their employer have made 217 donations totaling $57,677 to dozens of state and local campaigns since March 2018, two months before the Baker administration selected a Vineyard Wind bid for contract negotiation.

Notable figures include project supporters Gov. Maura Healey receiving 38 donations totaling $16,425 since 2018, and state Sen. Julian Cyr, a Democrat whose district represents the Cape and Islands, collecting 17 contributions for $3,036 since 2021, according to the state Office of Campaign and Political Finance.

While the donations represent minuscule portions of Healey and Cyr’s cumulative campaign funds, sharply less than 1%, respectively, critics argue the electeds are putting their interests with Avangrid ahead of their constituents.

Vineyard Wind, a venture of Avangrid and Copenhagen Infrastructure Partners, continues to clean up debris — a mix of foam and fiberglass pieces of various sizes — on Nantucket and the surrounding area in the aftermath of the turbine blade failure.

“Campaign donations have bought their support for a project that makes very little sense at this point,” said Paul Diego Craney, a spokesman for watchdog Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance. “Elected officials should think objectively on policy decisions, but in this case, their judgment is getting blinded by the campaign donations they are receiving.”

The Healey campaign declined to comment.

The $3,036 that Avangrid employees have donated to Cyr since 2021 counts for 0.4% of the $688,518 in contributions he’s received in that time, the senator told the Herald.

Cyr highlighted how Massachusetts campaign finance law limits the maximum contribution a candidate can receive per person per calendar year to $1,000.

“By capping contributions, we ensure that the voice of every voter matters, rather than allowing those with deep pockets to dominate the political landscape,” the senator said in a statement Saturday. “This promotes fairness, transparency, and trust in our elections, ensuring that our representative democracy is truly for the people, not for those who can spend the most.”

Christopher Lauzon, a Barnstable resident and Republican candidate running for Cyr’s seat, called the Vineyard Wind situation “one of the biggest disasters to hit the Cape and Islands since Hurricane Bob.”

“It’s having devastating environmental and economic impacts,” Lauzon said of the Vineyard Wind blade failure in an interview with the Herald on Friday.

“Senator Cyr has been completely MIA on this issue,” the candidate continued, adding how he visited Nantucket last weekend to speak with island residents. “They are not happy. They feel like they’re being ignored.”

An analysis of Cyr’s social media activity since the blade broke apart on July 13 showed that the senator has not made any posts relative to what many Nantucket officials and residents are calling a crisis.

Healey also hasn’t made any social media posts about her response.

In a July 16 post on X, Cyr included a link to his monthly newsletter. In it, he highlighted a trip he made with Healey to the Vineyard Wind warehouse facility on June 6 and a celebration of “Global Wind Day” at Craigville Beach in Barnstable a week later.

“Vineyard Wind has demonstrated a commitment to the Island,” Cyr wrote in the newsletter. “I am proud to have played my part in working to forge the partnership between Islanders and the nation’s first utility-scale offshore wind installation, and I’m excited to see this effort create a whole host of good in our community.

Healey, during her trip with Cyr, remarked, “To all of the workers, contractors, the people who financed and so many others, thank you for bringing this home. We were serious when we said we were going to make a big bet on wind. It’s where we need to go.”

Lauzon is taking exception to how Cyr has collected five contributions totaling $1,300 from his former chief of staff, Patrick Johnson, who currently serves as Avangrid’s director of public affairs.

Johnson donated five other gifts to Cyr for $1,101.38 under prior employment.

“When you get into the thousands of dollars it does add up. That’s significant,” Lauzon said. “Honestly, it presents a conflict.”

Cape Cod Concerned Citizens highlighted how it “holds the strong opinion that the pattern of campaign contributions that is publicly available for all to see reveals a giant grift that is poisonous to the democratic process and silences the voices of Cape Cod constituents.”

Cyr stood firm with how he makes his “decisions and votes based on what I believe is best for Cape Codders and Islanders, not for any political contributors.”

“I have been all in on clean energy, including offshore wind, but I am clear-eyed that can only happen if we get it right,” Cyr told the Herald. “That means doing right by the local people and communities who host these projects. Anything else is unacceptable.”

During his employment with Avangrid, Johnson has contributed to roughly 25 other campaigns including $500 to Healey, $825 to Lt. Gov. Kim Driscoll and $900 to Rep. Jeffrey Roy, the House chair of the Telecommunications, Utilities, and Energy Committee.

“Avangrid always supports the ability of its employees to exercise their rights and participate in the political process,” company spokesperson Leo Rosales told the Herald in a statement Sunday, “including supporting public officials on important issues like clean energy and climate policy.”

GE Vernova, the designer, manufacturer and installer of the turbines, has pointed to a “manufacturing deviation” and not an engineering design flaw in the failure of its wind turbine off the coast of Nantucket. An initial third-party environmental analysis of the disaster has found the debris from the 351-foot blade to be “inert, non-soluble, stable and non-toxic.”

Vineyard Wind is prohibited from generating electricity from any of its turbines and building any additional towers, nacelle and blades, under a federal order.

The company is permitted to “install inter-array cables and conduct surveys outside of the damaged turbine’s safety exclusion zone,” the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement said in a Friday release.

Nantucket officials, in a Friday update, highlighted how they met with the state for the first time on Thursday to discuss the state’s “monitoring and response efforts.”

The Biden administration restarted permitting for Vineyard Wind 1, the subject of a federal appeal, in February 2021, just a month after the president took office. GE Vernova has installed 24 turbines to date.

Vineyard Wind 1 is planned to grow to 62 turbines that are expected to have the capacity to generate 806 megawatts, enough electricity for more than 400,000 homes and businesses across the state, according to state officials.

Avangrid has either begun construction on or is in review of other wind farm projects in the Nantucket Sound, which Barnstable residents are fighting against.

“The offshore wind industry is critical to our ability to combat climate change and produce clean, affordable energy,” a spokesperson for the state Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs told the Herald, “and the Healey-Driscoll Administration is committed to delivering these benefits to our residents.”