MA Education

Signed by Governor William Weld in 1993, the Massachusetts Education Reform Act (MERA) was created to standardize education across the state. Its goal was to work towards closing the achievement gap between schools and districts who had varying degrees of resources at their disposal. To do this, the state established financial and budget requirements that laid out the minimum operating costs that a district should need to provide a quality education for every student. In addition, frameworks were developed for all students, K-12, that teachers would have to abide by. These frameworks standardized the content that students were taught, and a state-administered standardized exam – the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) – was created to assess the effectiveness of schools and teachers in accordance with the frameworks. This system of statewide assessment would also be used to determine state fund allocation.

Today, the MCAS still exists and is administered to students annually. It has since become a high school graduation requirement, but its other purposes remain. Its effect on how teachers administer content has been significant, to the extent that many are calling for the removal of passing the MCAS as a requirement for high school graduation altogether. Teachers whose domains are subject to mandatory testing – English Language Arts, Mathematics, and Science / Technology – are not only teaching the material as is necessary by the frameworks but are forced to do it in a way that accompanies or influences their students’ abilities to succeed on the MCAS. The phrase “teaching to the test” is often used to describe this scenario. The argument is that if teachers didn’t have to worry about whether students pass the MCAS, they would be better equipped to teach their students in a more natural and effective manner, sacrificing “test taking skills” as a part of their curriculum and replacing it with material that students may be more interested in learning.

The federal 2001 No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) was a federal adoption of similar policies to those defined in MERA. It required states to administer standardized tests to measure student learning progress. However, notably, it did not introduce the concept of federal education frameworks – an idea that would come to fruition in the 2015 Every Student Succeeds Act which expanded upon the shortcomings of NCLB. These exams would be used to track the progress of students as well as determine whether schools were instructing their students sufficiently. It also included language that required schools to provide additional support and resources to students with learning disabilities and other disadvantages so they could (over time) reach scores on standardized assessments that reflect competency in the material. 

In 2015, the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) was introduced to overwrite NCLB, focusing on consistency and accountability. Pertinently, this act introduced federal education standards that were to be the basis for every student’s education in the country. Standardized exams were meant to measure learning within these frameworks and evaluate students and teachers, alike. A major focus of ESSA is accountability at multiple levels. NCLB allowed parents to access the exam results of their children, but ESSA takes transparency a step further by allowing public access to school and district “report cards” which include information such as general test scores, graduation rates, financial and budget information, and teacher qualification statistics. In the name of accountability, this data was made available to put additional pressure on districts to improve the quality of their education for the sake of their communities.

Since 1993, Massachusetts had been practicing much of what was within these acts because of MERA. Though there were changes made to policy and the frameworks, the state did not have to begin from nothing to reach the guidelines set by NCLB. The impact of these acts, however, can still be observed in the classroom. “Teaching to the test” remains a concern among parents and educators, however teachers are more cognizant today about the inequity that standardized assessments present to students. For those with learning disabilities, for English language learners, for historically disadvantaged groups, and more whose education experience is made more difficult by no fault of their own, standardized exams are an unfair measurement of learning.

This is where the conversation rests today regarding these policies, and it is one that has many nuances to consider. How can we accurately measure learning in accordance with frameworks in a way that is equitable to all students? If it is even possible to accomplish this, we are far from it because of the way that our schools operate. Students who are of dominant social groups are rewarded with an easier education experience as societal stigmas surrounding academic disadvantage continue to plague our education system. However, there is hope. Instructional assistants, special education teachers, ESL teachers, and more are all working hard to see their students succeed by providing them the support they need to be successful within the current system. As long as we have dedicated instructors who are passionate about building up students, there will be students who do rise to the top and achieve success despite challenges they may have faced to get there. Yes, there a lot of work to be done to make schools, and especially assessments, more equitable, but there are many people working hard to change our system for a better future.

Lee, A. M. I. (2019a, August 5). What is no child left behind (NCLB)? Understood. https://www.understood.org/en/articles/no-child-left-behind-nclb-what-you-need-to-know

Lee, A. M. I. (2019b, August 5). What is the every student succeeds act (ESSA)? Understood. https://www.understood.org/en/articles/every-student-succeeds-act-essa-what-you-need-to-know

Ouellette, J. (2020). Two decades into education reform effort, commission calls for substantial changes to funding formula. Municipal Advodate, 29, 16–21.