Summary
Swift River is a small public elementary school in rural New Salem, MA, serving grades PK–6 with 134 students as part of the New Salem-Wendell district. Because it is small, grade-level results can swing from year to year based on a small number of students. In 2025-2026, Swift River ranked 601st of 899 Massachusetts schools, placing in the 33rd percentile with 2 stars—a slight uptick from 30th percentile the prior year but below its earlier peak in the 51st–62nd percentile range.
Academically, Swift River shows a clear split. In 2025-2026 MCAS Next Generation results, 28% of students met expectations in English language arts and 29.33% in math, both about 12 points below the state. Science is the standout: 55% proficient, 14.02 points above the state, and science proficiency has risen from 42.86% in 2022-2023 to 55% in 2025-2026. The largest gaps are in upper grades: 6th-grade math (17.65% vs. 42.59% state), 6th-grade ELA (23.53% vs. 40.26%), and 4th-grade ELA (21.74% vs. 37.43%). Third-grade math is relatively close to the state, and 5th-grade science is 11.93 points above it.
Compared with nearby schools, Swift River outperforms Athol Community Elementary School, Fisher Hill School, and Sheffield Elementary School in ELA and math, and is far above those two in science. But it trails most small town elementary schools in ELA and math, including Shutesbury Elementary, Pelham Elementary, Petersham Center, Leverett Elementary, and Erving Elementary. Science is more competitive with Gill Elementary, Erving Elementary, and Petersham Center, though below Pelham Elementary and Shutesbury Elementary. Spending was $24,376 per student in 2020-2021, with a 9.1 student-teacher ratio in 2024-2025, but nearby Petersham Center spends less and has higher ELA and math proficiency, suggesting spending alone does not explain the differences. Subgroup results are uneven: low-income students ranked in the 80th percentile statewide with 4 stars in 2025-2026, up from the 50th percentile in 2022-2023 and 14th in 2018-2019, while some other groups rank lower. Free/reduced-lunch data is not available, and several subgroup years are missing, so economic context and long-term trends are hard to measure.
Thank you for your feedback!