To the editor,

Wellesley Neighbors, a nonprofit organization for seniors, would like to express its appreciation for the $500 grant it recently received from the Wellesley Hills Junior Women’s Club. Since WN serves not only Wellesley but Dover, Natick, Needham and Weston (and more), the WHJWC gift shows a charitable spirit that extends beyond Wellesley borders. The award will be used to enhance WN brochures that invite older couples and singles to enjoy “caring, connection and community” through lively speakers and social activities and the give and take of member-to-member support. For more information, call me at 781 283-0417.

Joyce Wadlington
WN Executive Director

---

The Swellesley Report accepts letters to the editor. Letters must be of general local community interest and must be signed. Community shout-outs are also accepted (example: a non-profit may thank an organization for a donation received).

See guidelines for letters to the editor here.

Send letters to the editor to theswellesleyreport@gmail.com

After two years, the Friends of the Wellesley Free Libraries were thrilled to bring back our beloved spring book sale on April 27-May 1. This was a long-awaited moment for the community and the shoppers who depend on our spring book sale to stock up for their summer reading. And we couldn’t have done it without the whole-hearted support of the community, our volunteers, and the dedicated staff at the library.

Thanks to generous book donations, when the doors opened to the Wakelin Room the first night of the sale, there was a sea of books, CDs, and DVDs displayed on tables, in every genre imaginable. The excitement in the room was palpable.

Please, continue to save your gently used books for us. And this year, we are also accepting textbooks. You can drop them off at the Friends Bookshop any time the library is open.  For more information go to www.friendsofwellesleyfreelibraries.org.

Very truly yours,
Barbara Marx, President
Friends of Wellesley Free Libraries

I am writing this to share my support for Article 44 Academic Excellence.

I am the guardian of a current sophomore at WHS, the sixth child I’ve had in the WPS. We are a Fiske, WMS, and private school family. I’ve had three children graduate from WHS, and one graduate from private school. I’ve been a  three-year Parent Elect to WHS School Council. I’ve been a PTO involved parent and a six-year Head Coach of Cheerleading at WHS. I have a broad background with WPS. I’ve lived in Wellesley for 13 years, and I am an African- American mother who cares about her children’s education as I believe all parents care about their children’s education equally. Often some assume being a concerned parent is not equally distributed amongst all cultures and socioecomic backgrounds. This is unfair and not true.

I’m a vocal supporter of Article 44 because I support the schools and our children, and I want the best for them. I recently collected all the necessary signatures to run for School Committee, and many of you supported me and the evaluation of Wellesley Public Schools. But I don’t have to be a School Committee member, candidate, teacher, or a parent to have an opinion on this matter, and neither do any of you. Yes, we elected a School Committee, but that doesn’t mean they are above reproach.

If the Core Values include Academic Excellence, than I suggest that it is not “working” or satisfactory for all, and as educators or parents, and/ or concerned citizens…we all are obligated to ponder why it’s not working and then strategically figure out how to reverse those troubling trends right now. Let’s put the concern back on students learning transferable life skills and applying academic rigor that increases the rate of success.

I have removed two children from the WPS, so I’ve been through the process and paperwork. I am aware that the School Department is only now beginning to track or evaluate the reasons why a student left, or where a student ends up. Perhaps because I pointed out the lack there, it’s now being done. It’s a stark reality that WPS isn’t doing performance measurement on themselves regarding withdrawn students. What would that report card look like? We have no data to examine this?  Can’t we do more? Why should they fear a committee to evaluate school performance?

I think Bruce Franco is fearless. It’s not easy doing the work that he has done. Mr. Franco is a citizen who is participating in the greatest form of government in this country. Town Meeting, and the articles that a citizen can originate is evidence that this long- standing process does work. Now we can do our work, and examine the motions on their merit, without being clouded by the flaws. Behind the scenes, the author of Article 44 has repaired each flaw that was identified.  We can approve the motions for Article 44 and start the trend of putting school excellence first, for real, and trust all areas of student development will improve once this happens.

The town seal includes three significant symbols—a tomahawk, flower, and a BOOK.

Please Vote YES for Article 44.

Thank you,

Odessa Sanchez
Wellesley resident

As a concerned parent and educator, I am writing to urge the passage of Article 44 in the Town Meeting to restore academic excellence as the highest priority for our public schools.

My family moved to Wellesley to provide the best possible public education for our children, motivated by top school rankings.  While our older children did experience good schools, there has been a noticeable lowering of standards and expectations for our younger children today. Homework is becoming optional. Grades are changing and difficult to interpret. Equal outcomes are increasingly prioritized over individual achievement. Class ranks are no longer recorded, but school rankings have fallen dramatically. Families are resorting to private programs to supplement their children’s education in mathematics and other core subjects—or leaving the public schools altogether.

These trends can only be reversed by prioritizing excellence in core subjects, at a time when many school districts are doing the opposite. I am one of thousands of STEM professionals and educators alarmed by new policies seeking to limit individual advancement in mathematics, as exemplified by the California Mathematics Framework and the removal of honors and AP classes around the country. Our Open Letter on K-12 Mathematics is a fitting companion to Article 44.

Amid growing opposition to standardized testing, it is noteworthy that just last week, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology reinstated the SAT/ACT requirement for admissions following pandemic disruptions, in order “to build a more diverse and talented MIT”.  It turns out that high test scores are the best indicators of success at MIT, providing equal opportunities to meritorious students of all backgrounds, while highly-rated personal essays are more correlated with family wealth.

There is an important lesson here for our public schools, to prioritize measurable academic achievement over ideology.

Martin Z. Bazant
Wellesley resident
Professor of Chemical Engineering and Mathematics
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

This is an open letter urging residents to express their support for a YES vote on Article 44 at Annual Town Meeting, which begins this week.

A YES vote for Article 44 will ensure that academic excellence will be the number one priority in the Wellesley Public Schools (WPS).  Article 44 is not an either/or proposition: It does not advocate taking away from other programs in the WPS in order to prioritize academic excellence. Academic excellence is part of educating the whole child.

As you know, WPS’s rankings in the U.S. News and World Report (USN&WR) have declined significantly over the past seven years. A recent Boston Magazine article has noted this decline as well. Bruce Franco, the sponsor of Article 44 and the father of two school-aged daughters, has done in-depth research that validates the accuracy of the data used in the USN&WR rankings. His research proves that USN&WR’s methodology is statistically sound and that it accurately ranks schools by academic excellence.  Mr. Franco is to be commended for his efforts in developing Article 44 and advancing it to ATM. By his due diligence, Mr. Franco has done our Town a great service, and we need to listen to what he has to say. For further information, please see his presentation to the Select Board on youtube:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=koIqRRZEKus

Many parents have spoken out in favor of Article 44. School rankings affect us all, though, whether or not we have children in the WPS. I am not a parent, but as a tax-payer, I am concerned how declining WPS rankings will impact Wellesley property values. Our taxes are increasing significantly in the coming years in order to support the construction of two new elementary schools. While our property values may not decline precipitously, these will surely not rise commensurate with property values in neighboring communities with consistently higher school rankings. Article 44 will correct the downward trajectory in the WPS rankings to ensure that Wellesley remains a highly desirable community for families.

Lastly, I would like to comment on the Wellesley School Committee’s (WSC) resistance to Article 44. Article 44 is an important wake-up call for our community, and we need to pay attention. Article 44 presents an opportunity for parents and the WSC to work together as partners to ensure that academic excellence is the number one priority in the WPS—as it should be. Instead of digging in their heels and pushing back, the WSC might instead ask themselves what timely and positive steps they plan to take to (1) prioritize academic excellence, (2) improve WPS’s rankings, and (3) give parents a meaningful voice in the education of their children. Article 44 is that right step in the right direction at a critical point in time for our schools. Please express your support for a YES vote on Article 44.

Thank you for your consideration.

Donna Maria Ticchi
Thomas Road, Wellesley
Precinct A

As an educator in the K-12 environment and a parent of a WPS student, I am disheartened and frustrated to see Article 44 on our Town’s warrant. The motion directs the District to focus on the “goal to restore Wellesley High School to its historical top five ranking of all public high schools in the state [sic] of Massachusetts as determined by the US News and World Report annual high school ranking.” To tie the success or failure of our teachers, students, administrators and School Committee to a for-profit media corporation that once reported on the news and can only stay relevant by creating its own systems of rankings should already be a end to this discussion. Apparently though, it’s not, so here are further reasons to reject this motion.

In my professional life, I teach a data science course and believe strongly that data can and should inform choices, however I also want to make sure data answers the questions I care about. When evaluating a child’s experience graduating from WHS I care about two questions: Do my child and his peers report a joy of learning and belonging in the community? Upon entering college or career, did my child and his peers report that The School adequately prepared graduates for future academic and life challenges including the ability to critically evaluate of media, political, and cultural influences? If the US News and World Report wants to come up with a system to properly evaluate and answer those questions, I’m interested. Until then, it’s not useful information to me when making informed decisions about school choice.

I am keenly aware that not all parents share my disregard for rankings, so for a moment I will take a quick dive into the world of rankings. I looked at the top 5 public high schools in MA that are comparable to Wellesley High. (I removed Boston Latin and charter schools as they self-select their student body and then perform well in rankings.) Here are the numbers, as reported by USN&WR (all scores out of 100):

Bromfield: 98.82
Belmont 98.82
Lexington 98.63
Dover-Sherborn 98.38
Weston 98.21

Wellesley (#17 again looking at only traditional HS’s) 96.11

So, yes, we aren’t #1. We could jump 5 spots and beat out Brookline if we gained a little over half a point. And we would be back in the coveted top 5 if we gained slightly more than two points out of a 100. Do those two points equate to a noticeably better experience and outcome for the students (as judged by USN&WR)? To attempt to answer that compare Belmont (which is effectively tied for the top spot) and Wellesley. I chose Belmont because of its similarity to Wellesley in size, location, and demographics. Of the ranking factors, the one where Wellesley has the largest gap when compared with Belmont is “Math and Reading Performance Rank”. Belmont scores a rank of #953 nationally and #19 state. Wellesley scores a ranking of #5,929 nationally and #116 at the state-level. Wellesley is nearly 100 schools below Belmont in this ranking. (The rest of the state-level disparities are 28, 20, and 6.) So, if we are to guide our priorities based on what USN&WR has decided is important, then we should start with our Math & Reading Performance Rank. They define that rank as, “How aggregated scores on state assessments compare with U.S. News’ expectations given the proportions of students who are Black, Hispanic and from low-income households.”

That is ambiguous, so I dug deeper and found this explanation: “In all 50 states, there is a very positive statistical relationship between the proportion of a student body that is Black, Hispanic and/or from a low-income household—defined as being eligible for free or subsidized school lunch—and a school’s results on state assessments. Schools performing best on this ranking indicator are those whose assessment scores far exceeded U.S. News’ modeled expectations.” Ok, now we are getting somewhere, albeit not far. We don’t have any insight into how the company arrives at those expectations, but we at least know what they are claiming Wellesley’s biggest deficit is: we are not outperforming expectations enough for our Black, Hispanic, and/or low-income students enough. So, to accomplish the goals of those in favor of Article 44, to increase our ranking, we need to ensure access to affinity groups for students and staff, continue training for faculty and staff in reaching and empowering the aforementioned groups of students, and re-evaluate the curriculum in this light. Every programmatic decision should start with, “How does this lift up our student body, particularly those who we currently are underserving?” A notion I support, but one that stands in contrast to what it appears that supporters of Article 44 are peddling, where the benchmarks proposed are tied to deeply flawed standardized testing. As an aside, this approach has been central to the reforms undertaken in WPS in recent years and I hope they continued to emphasize and expand these programs.

The language of Article 44 would endanger not only programs outlined above, but co-curricular programs in general. The language reads, “…Academic excellence shall take priority over all other programs, policies, and initiatives with regard to curriculum, text book selection, staffing, and budgeting; and that it shall expend all funds in a manner that reflects this priority in all schools and school programs…” Given the warrant in this article, each line item would have to be scrutinized for its contribution to “academic excellence.” WSC would need to start having debates on every program. Do sports programs lead to better MCAS scores? Which sports? Shall we cut any and all sports that can’t be definitively tied to every benchmark listed in the motion? If this motion passes and the District and School Committee are forced to live by its decree, the budget approval process could devolve into a nightmare scenario where programs, services, and staff that could not be directly tied to the benchmarks put forth in the motion would need to be cut.

This motion, while perhaps well-intentioned, is harmful and dangerous to our Town and its students, and ultimately may have the opposite impact as intended. Wellesley’s reputation in the Commonwealth and beyond is not and should not be tied to a ranking system, particularly one that has been developed in the for-profit sector and not by educators or using data that can be clearly tied to student outcomes beyond high school. (For more on this, see how GPAs predict college success better than standardized test scores.) Finally, it is insulting to the WPS educators to suggest that academic success has not always been central to their work. Our educators continue to recognize that academic success is the result of a program that supports the development of the full child and provides opportunities for each of them to thrive.

Jason Bock
Precinct B
Weston Road, Wellesley

As a community, Wellesley has traditionally shown great respect for neighborhoods impacted by projects. It was reassuring to hear in the March 3rd Natural Resources Commission meeting that the commissioners were concerned about potential disturbance to residents living near ClockTower Park on Route 16, in regards to a request for one single evening of location filming involving two dozen film crew members and minimal sound.  I implore each of the NRC commissioners to demonstrate the same respect and consideration regarding the proposal to install lights at the Hunnewell Track and Field. A proposal that, as it stands, would result in 20 evenings of night games and up to 10 floodlit practices per year, every year.

Many unsavory and derogatory comments have been made online towards the local residents who have voiced objections to the “Lights proposal.”  Others have claimed that the NRC has been obstructive in not hurrying up and approving the School Committee’s proposal.  The fact is, the Track and Field facility is owned by the NRC, not the School Committee.  The NRC has a specific charter and mission, which lays out the criteria by which the NRC will assess changes in the use of land.

The NRC’s 2017 Law, Policies, & Regulations Handbook, which can be found on the town website, is an important protection against the simple “will of the majority” and it is expressly intended to enable the natural resources of our town to be maintained so “the full value of the town’s natural assets can be passed on to future generations.”  Page 30 of the document outlines Criteria for Evaluating Changes to Resources under NRC Jurisdiction.

Two of the criteria that the NRC is required to assess in deciding on changes of land use—namely natural resources and the neighborhood—are undeniably impacted, negatively impacted, by the proposed lights.

Over several NRC meetings in 2022, members of the public have provided details about the great variety of birdlife and other wildlife observed around the skating pond and trees surrounding the Track and Field site. Disruption to bird migration patterns and damage to other wildlife caused by artificial night light is well documented.

In fact, each of the commissioners (all five) that served over the last several months of meetings on this topic has acknowledged that natural resources would be impacted by this proposal. The question for the commissioners as they prepare to vote is: as members of the Natural Resources Commission, how much do they care?

Regarding the peaceful neighborhood around the Track and Field facility, which I have enjoyed for 24 years:  the fields are simply too close to the adjacent neighborhood for night lights and twenty-plus night games and practices to be reasonable.  Noise, night-light disturbance and traffic problems cannot be overcome. The Lights proposal, if adopted, would “substantially affect the character of the neighborhood.” Those words should sound familiar to the NRC Commissioners—they are written in the criteria laid out in the NRC’s own  Policy and Criteria for Evaluating Changes to Resources under NRC Jurisdiction.

I urge the commissioners to examine the proposal thoughtfully and find a solution that is more amenable to the people who will be most impacted by the decision.  That’s the people who live in earshot and sight of the fields. It’s very different if you live close by.

People in Wellesley trust in the NRC to make informed decisions to preserve the natural character and beauty of our parklands for the benefit of all. To ensure that the resources are preserved for future generations.  That’s what the NRC’s mission says.

Finally, if the proposal to install lighting is approved without significant modification, and the NRC in effect overrides its own mission and purpose, there must be guarantees that the Track and Field facility will not be allowed to become a hub for night-time sports activities.

We all know, if lights are installed, there are many groups beyond high school sports teams who will expect that they can pay to take advantage of night field use. And once 80-foot tall light poles have been installed, it would not seem so difficult to consider, “hmm, well, since we already have lights, that’s not such a big change…” upon successive requests for expanded night-time use. Yes, the slippery slope. A very real risk.

And this would have a severe, incremental, negative impact on the peaceful lives of those living near the track, as well as forever changing the character of the neighborhood.

So, I urge the commissioners to please take the time needed to examine this proposal thoughtfully. Afford the Track and Field neighbors the same respect that has been granted to other neighborhoods near town amenities. We are fortunate to have such dedicated volunteers serving on the NRC Board, and I hope they will each reflect carefully on their mission as they prepare to vote.

Alastair Ironside