Medford schools say ‘no’ to School Choice, update policies for bullying, restraint language and new handbooks

School officials spent a quiet night approving and updating policies last week following a tough budget season.

Superintendent Dr. Suzanne B. Galusi asked the School Committee on May 18 to approve a recommendation to vote Medford Public Schools as a “no” vote on School Choice.

The Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) asserts that all children in the state are entitled to attend a public school for free and must attend between the ages of 6 and 16. While most kids attend in their local district, Massachusetts state law allows for families to choose to enroll their children in school outside their home district.

Galusi said schools are mandated to participate in this program and accept out-of-district students unless their local school committee takes an official vote to opt out.

The district must then officially report its decision to DESE by June each year.

“After careful consideration, we are here and looking at our operational capacity and our financial capacity and it’s the recommendation that the Medford School Committee vote not to participate in the School Choice program for next year by voting to opt out,” Galusi said. “We have maintained a consistent, historical position, a position that Medford has held since this state program’s inception. Our decision is rooted in operational and financial responsibility.”

Galusi said accepting out-of-district students could introduce “unexpected enrollment fluctuations” across grade levels.

She added Medford has maintained its position in order to maximize resources and instructional time for local residents.

The School Committee voted unanimously, 7-0, to opt out of School Choice with no discussion.

Policy updates

Director of Student Services Joan Bowen was before the School Committee, asking that language in the district’s restraint policy and Bullying Prevention and Intervention Plan be updated.

She said DESE has required bullying policies be updated to include the word “vulnerability.” While the word appears on page 4 of Medford’s plan, the word must also be added to page 8.

DESE is also requiring districts to update language around school restraint laws, effective Aug. 17.

In June 2025, DESE updated restraint laws — outlined in 603 CMR 46.00 — making changes in language from seclusion to timeout, using emergency seclusion or prone restraint, new requirements for physical space for time outs and a new requirement for grievance procedures.

DESE laws govern “the use of physical restraint on students in publicly funded elementary and secondary education programs, including all Massachusetts public school districts, charter schools, virtual schools, collaborative education programs, and the school day of special education schools approved under 603 CMR 28.09: Approval of Public or Private Day and Residential Special Education School Programs, as provided in 603 CMR 18.05(5)(h). Educational programs in facilities operated by the Department of Youth Services, the Department of Mental Health, the Department of Public Health, or County Houses of Correction shall be governed by the restraint, seclusion, and time-out requirements of such agencies.”

Bowen said some of the state definitions are still unclear, but all Medford staff must be trained and all district documents “ready to go by the time school starts in September.”

School Committee member Jessica Parks questioned how to get parental consent for seclusion if that’s not in an Individual Education Plan.

Bowen said there is a process, but Medford would need guidance from DESE.

She added Medford does not do seclusion for students at this time.

“Nor, in my opinion, is that something that we should do,” Bowen added.

She said seclusion is locking a student in a room and not allowing them to leave at all.

“That’s not a therapeutic methodology I would like staff to be using,” she explained.

Bowen said right now, there’s a time out room, sometimes called a sensory room, at the Missituk School.

“Sometimes, students need a break and they ask for that,” she said. “Then they go back to their classroom when they’re ready.”

Parks asked whether parents of students put into time out are required to be notified, as opposed to seclusion.

Bowen explained that Medford does not need to notify parents if that happens, unless restraint is used and that must be reported to DESE.

Erika Reinfeld also questioned the update to the bullying policy and whether the new language is being used to differentiate people with disabilities.

Bowen, however, said the new language updates help students who are vulnerable to bullying for a variety of reasons.

While the two policy updates are separate, the School Committee voted unanimously to change the language on both.

School handbook

The Medford Public School handbook is on hold until Galusi can go back to leadership and administrators to clean up errors and bring policies into line across the district, including on AI and academic honesty.

Paul Ruseau said he was “uncomfortable” with recess being taken away from students as a punishment. He asked the measure be removed.

Galusi said the loss of recess should be for logical consequences and the handbook should be clearer about what that means.

“It should be more explicit,” Ruseau said. “Recess seems like the worst thing to be taken away.”

Mike Mastrobuoni questioned the length of the handbook.

“It’s really long and hard to read,” he said. “It’s 70 pages long and there’s a lot of jargon and legalese.”

He also asked how the district updates students and parents when there are changes that impact them.

Galusi said an audit of the handbook hasn’t been undertaken. She said the book normally has specific school information in the front and then Medford and DESE policies at the back.

She added before COVID-19, there was a move to provide some alignment among the four elementary schools, but the two middle schools haven’t been looked at.

Ruseau suggested a page be added to the front of the handbooks, explaining what new changes there are in any given school year. He added he also wanted to revisit the need to sign off on the handbook.

“A signature on something that’s 70 pages long and that very few people have probably read doesn’t seem right,” Ruseau said. “Asking them to sign that they have received it is one thing, reading it is another.”

Handbooks are translated into several languages across the district in order that all families have access to school policies and information.

Ruseau maintained there are policies in the handbook many families have never seen or even know about. He said he’d be OK if parents were asked to sign off on five or 10 pages, but he insisted no one is really reading the handbook.

Galusi suggested the School Committee table the handbook discussion.

The School Committee agreed, voting unanimously to table the issue until the June 8 meeting.