Maria L. Baldwin vs John M Tobin

Maria L. Baldwin and John M Tobin are both highly rated Cambridge elementary schools, but Baldwin holds a clear edge at the top of the state. Fact 1: Baldwin carries an overall rating of 9.9/10 against Tobin's 9.2/10 — a 0.7-point gap. More tellingly, fact 2: Baldwin ranks #1 of 1,791 Massachusetts elementary schools, while Tobin ranks #27 of 1,791. Both are exceptional results in an extremely competitive state, yet the separation at the very tip of the distribution is real and measurable.

Academically, the gap narrows but persists. Baldwin scores 9.8/10 on academics versus Tobin's 9.4/10, a 0.4-point difference. The growth score tells a sharper story: fact 3: Baldwin posts a 9.9/10 growth score compared to Tobin's 8.9/10 — a full point separating them. Growth scores reflect how much students improve relative to similar peers, so Baldwin's lead here signals that its students are consistently outpacing comparable learners statewide, not merely entering with advantages.

Demographically, the two schools are closely matched. Baldwin enrolls 352 students and Tobin enrolls 326 — a difference of 26 students. Fact 4: Baldwin's student-teacher ratio is 11.0:1 versus Tobin's 10.2:1, meaning Tobin classes run slightly smaller on average. Both ratios are well below the Massachusetts state average, and either school offers a relatively intimate classroom setting. Neither school is dramatically larger or more resource-constrained than the other at this enrollment scale.

Both schools serve grades PK through 5 and sit 1.0 mile apart in Cambridge, making them direct geographic competitors for the same family pool. The grade range is identical, so program structure and years of schooling are equivalent. The difference parents are choosing between is degree of academic momentum — Baldwin's growth advantage suggests students there are accelerating faster, while Tobin's marginally smaller class sizes may appeal to families prioritizing individual teacher attention. At #1 and #27 statewide, both schools represent genuinely exceptional outcomes; the choice turns on subtle performance margins, not a quality cliff.