Sign up for the Today newsletter
Get everything you need to know to start your day, delivered right to your inbox every morning.
As a Massachusetts state senator, I unequivocally support high educational standards for the students in our public schools. I believe that maintaining rigorous academic expectations is essential for preparing our children for the future. I am voting Yes on Question 2 to eliminate the MCAS requirement for graduation.
During my first term, I have made it a priority to visit all 48 schools in the First Worcester District. Throughout my time in these schools, I have been fortunate to have the opportunity to observe our scholars and educators in action. Unfortunately, I have also seen firsthand how the current MCAS graduation requirement places undue pressure on students and creates an unfair barrier to graduation. That’s why I’m supporting Question 2 on the ballot this November.
As a legislator, I understand it is vital to be able to measure our students’ level of comprehension at each grade level and ensure that all our schools adequately prepare them for lifelong success. Educational assessments can offer insight into student progress and aid in identifying areas where additional support might be needed. They provide valuable data on how students are performing and can help guide instruction. However, in meeting with educators and observing students in the classroom, I know that we have other tools available.
I have observed students utilizing 21st-century technology such as ST Math, STARS and DIBELS as part of their learning, which can periodically access students’ grasp of the current unit in real time, which allows the educator to intervene immediately when a child is struggling to understand the concept at hand. Additionally, principals can review this data to understand when there is widespread difficulty with a particular topic. Lastly, the superintendent can also access this data for districtwide assessments. This allows both the principal and the superintendent to provide additional support where needed in real time, unlike MCAS, which doesn’t even get released until the following school year.
I have met students who excel in their classes, are actively engaged in their education, and still struggle with the format of standardized tests or experience test anxiety. For these students, the stress of high-stakes testing can be overwhelming, which, compounded by the prospect of not graduating because of a single MCAS score, is a significant and unjust burden. The MCAS scores are not a fair reflection of our students’ abilities or achievements.
That’s why Question 2 is so important. This measure does not eliminate the MCAS altogether but rather adjusts its role in the graduation process. Voting yes on Question 2 means that the MCAS will no longer be the sole determinant of graduation. Our excellent Massachusetts state frameworks, which have been developed by educators and field experts, are not impacted by this change at all. This approach maintains the high educational standards we value in the commonwealth while also ensuring a fairer and more comprehensive evaluation of each student’s readiness.
While my focus remains on the promotion of and investment in students and educators in the First Worcester District, as a legislator, I understand that our decisions and legislative actions affect students across the state. We are responsible for ensuring that every student in the commonwealth has equal access to high-quality education.
That is why we also need to have a plan to ensure that as we transition away from the MCAS as a graduation requirement, we can be sure that all students are graduating with a more holistic graduation standard that demonstrates our students’ academic achievements and capabilities. Next session, I will join my colleagues, led by Sen. Jason Lewis, the Senate chair of the Joint Committee on Education, in supporting legislation to require all schools to adopt MassCore, a recommended set of courses for high school students.
According to the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, MassCore includes four units of English, four units of mathematics, three units of a lab-based science, three units of history, two units of the same world language, one unit of the arts and five additional “core” courses. Additionally, a computer science course that includes rigorous mathematical or scientific concepts and aligns with the 2016 digital literacy and computer science framework can substitute for either a mathematics course or a laboratory science course.
Implementing this standard high-quality curriculum will ensure that all our students are prepared for their future educational and professional goals and ensure that we can continue to be confident that we are graduating students who are workforce ready, and will enhance production and innovation for employers in the commonwealth.
Supporting Question 2 is about making sure our educational system works for all our students. It’s about ensuring that we assess our children’s educational progress in a way that reflects the full range of their abilities and achievements, not just their performance on a single test. It’s about providing a more holistic evaluation of student readiness, which aligns with the comprehensive and rigorous standards we’ve set for education in Massachusetts.
I want to maintain high standards for achievement, and I also want a system that supports each student through their unique educational journey. By voting yes on Question 2, we can achieve both: maintaining rigorous standards while ensuring that every student is evaluated fairly and given the opportunity to succeed based on their full academic record.
By voting yes on Question 2, we can create a fairer and more balanced approach to education. Vote yes on Question 2 to help ensure that our educational standards remain high while making the graduation process more equitable for every student.
Robyn Kennedy is state senator for the First Worcester District.
Local News
New Hampshire is leading an effort from 25 states to challenge a Massachusetts gun law, and this month, they’re taking it to the Supreme Court.
The centerpiece of the argument is the Pheasant Lane Mall in Nashua, N.H., which reaches across state lines into Tyngsborough. If shoppers park on the south side of the mall’s parking lot, they might end up crossing state lines during a visit.
The attorneys general of New Hampshire and 24 other Republican-led states say this poses a potential problem for firearm holders. A New Hampshire resident who is legally carrying a firearm on their home state’s side of the parking lot may inadvertently be breaking the law when they cross the lot into Massachusetts, where it is illegal to carry without a permit.
Joining New Hampshire are the attorneys general of Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming, who are calling the arrangement unconstitutional. The states have rallied behind Phillip Marquis of Rochester, N.H., to ask the Supreme Court to protect out-of-state residents from Massachusetts’ firearms regulations.
“The geography of the mall is such that a New Hampshire resident might find themselves in Massachusetts if she parks on the south side of the parking lot or visits Buffalo Wild Wings,” reads a brief from the New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office to the Supreme Court. “If that person is carrying a firearm without a Massachusetts license — which would be constitutionally protected activity in most of the mall—that person risks being charged as a felon and facing mandatory incarceration in Massachusetts.”
The trouble began for Marquis in 2022 when he was in a car accident in Massachusetts, according to the brief. When police arrived, he informed them that he had a pistol on him and was subsequently charged with carrying a firearm without a license.
Marquis previously sued the Commonwealth for the burdens that Massachusetts’ firearms permit law creates on out-of-state visitors, but the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court denied his claims. They ruled in March that the state’s nonresident firearms licensing laws were constitutional, according to court documents.
Claiming that the Massachusetts court denied him his Second and Fourteenth Amendment rights, Marquis has petitioned the Supreme Court to federally overrule that court’s decision. In his petition, Marquis invoked New York State Rifle & Police Association, Inc. v. Bruen, where the court established that state firearms restrictions must be covered by the Second Amendment or adhere to historical firearms regulations.
Using Bruen, Marquis and the Republican attorneys general supporting him are aiming to prove that there is no justification for applying Massachusetts’ firearms restrictions to out-of-state residents and that to do so would be unconstitutional. However, the state’s Supreme Judicial Court found the law constitutional even under Bruen because it intends to prevent dangerous people from obtaining firearms, just as historical regulations have done.
“To the extent that the Commonwealth restricts the ability of law-abiding citizens to carry firearms within its borders, the justification for so doing is credible, individualized evidence that the person in question would pose a danger if armed,” the Supreme Judicial Court’s decision read. “Both case law and the historical record unequivocally indicate that this justification is consistent with ‘the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.’”
It’s not immediately clear if the Supreme Court will respond to Marquis’ appeal or when it will make any kind of decision, but lower courts are at something of a crossroads with how and when to apply Bruen to gun possession cases. As such, they are looking to the Supreme Court for a more definitive answer.
Since the proof of historical context that Bruen requires has led to some uncertainty, any ruling that these lower courts make is likely to amount to a partisan decision. However, if the Supreme Court provides more substantive clarity in a response to Marquis, these lower courts just might find the answer they are seeking.
Get everything you need to know to start your day, delivered right to your inbox every morning.
Massachusetts State Lottery players won two $100,000 prizes Friday from the day’s “Mass Cash” drawings.
The winning tickets were sold at the Roslindale Food Mart on Washington Street and McSheffrey’s of the South End convenience store (with Mobil gas) on Main Street in Woburn.
Mass Cash drawings happen twice daily, at 2 p.m. and at 9 p.m. It costs just $1 to play.
Overall, at least 625 prizes worth $600 or more were won or claimed in Massachusetts on Monday, including 6 in Springfield, 22 in Worcester and 14 in Boston.
The Massachusetts State Lottery releases a full list of winning tickets every day. The list only includes winning tickets worth more than $600.
The two largest lottery prizes won so far in 2025 were each worth $15 million. One of the prizes was from a winning “Diamond Deluxe” scratch ticket sold in Holyoke, and the other was from a “300X” scratch ticket sold on Cape Cod.
If you purchase a product or register for an account through a link on our site, we may receive compensation. By using this site, you consent to our User Agreement and agree that your clicks, interactions, and personal information may be collected, recorded, and/or stored by us and social media and other third-party partners in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Reimagining Finance: Derek Kudsee on Coda’s AI-Powered Future
How Nexstar’s Proposed TV Merger Is Tied to Jimmy Kimmel’s Suspension
Board approves Brent Sanford as new ‘commissioner’ of North Dakota University System
Russian jets enter Estonia's airspace in latest test for NATO
Syria’s new president takes center stage at UNGA as concerns linger over terrorist past
These earbuds include a tiny wired microphone you can hold
Texas brothers charged in cryptocurrency kidnapping, robbery in MN
EU Enforcers Arrest 5 Over €100M Cryptocurrency Scam – Law360