PITTSFIELD, Mass.—The School Committee is okay with pushing middle school restructuring back one year, recognizing that it is a complicated project needing due diligence.

 

Superintendent Joseph Curtis will bring a proposed timeline to the committee on March 26. This will pave a path for a junior high model that groups all fifth and sixth graders in one school and all seventh and eighth graders in another— allowing for universal pre-kindergarten at the elementary level.

 

"I do think waiting a year and planning a year for this and working with the staff who will be working in the building or those buildings is the sound way to go with this," Chair William Cameron said.

 

After eight meetings and about 16 hours of prep work, the committee in early February voted for gradual restructuring beginning in 2026. The phased approach is said to allow "careful implementation" and gives time to assess progress and make any necessary adjustments.

 

At its Feb. 12 meeting, member Sarah Muil reported "The plan is for school year 2026-2027 where grade five and six and grade seven and eight are in the same middle schools, so five and six will be together, seven eight will be together."

 

"We all came to this committee for our own reasons but we always held the needs of our students, educators, and school staff at top of mind throughout our discussions and decision-making," she said.

 

"Our collective goal is to propose inclusive, equitable, and sustainable changes for the betterment of all students, faculty, and staff in our public schools."

 

Curtis said the presentation was thoughtful, honest, and transparent, "and I said to a couple of members individually that I appreciated their level of honesty, and, more importantly, their delivery of that honesty in a way that we all could hear them clearly and respectfully."

 

"I am happy to draft a possible next-step outline in the decision-making process for your review, but it would be critical for me to understand the intention of the committee," he said.

 

"Whether you agree, if you will, as a body that the restructuring should be delayed, or I won't use that word, would occur starting not this school year but next."

 

Vice Chair Daniel Elias reported that several community members were concerned about restructuring starting this fall and would like it pushed to the following year.

 

Cameron observed that the more significant grade alignment and programming changes are, the more important it is to take enough time so there can be professional development for educators.

 

"If it's going to be significant, we need time to do it in a phased and organized fashion," he said.

 

Curtis reported the restructuring committee’s "strong desire" to stay as a working group and provide support.

 

"My strongest takeaway was the building reconfiguration is certainly important but what happens inside of the school is much more important," he said.

 

"… I would suggest, it's certainly not my decision, that maybe a consulting group be brought on board to really research all the different opportunities that our students can have and make recommendations to this committee because that is the, I would guess, the topic of most passion that people will bring to the table."

 

Diana Belair is on the restructuring committee and chair of the curriculum subcommittee. She would like to be as involved as possible.

 

Cameron suggested that when a planning process is underway, the bodies work together to bring recommendations to the School Committee for adoption. Curtis said one of the subcommittee’s charges could "certainly" be to research educational consultants.

 

"We heard clearly that restructuring is important to bring parity—and the restructuring we are building, certainly— and to fit into the larger master plan," Curtis said.

 

"But as you just said and certainly affirmed as a member, what happens inside of the school is where we're going to regain, at least in the testimony of the committee members, school choice."

 

A public hearing will be held in early March.