by Stuart Singer, The Teacher Leader

In his recent post, “If your school has high course failure rates, it’s about time!“, Mel Riddile states the need for imagination and creativity to ensure success for all students.   After reading this post, I was reminded of the situation my school faced in 1997 when we had a growing failure rate in our math program.  The steps we took can serve as an example of the types of innovation Riddile is advocating.

Establishing the Fundamentals                                       

In order to build a successful high school math program, the first step is to build a strong Algebra 1 program.  Because of the sequential nature of mathematics students without a solid foundation in Algebra 1 will have great difficulty succeeding in Geometry and Algebra 2.  Consequently, when we began to restructure the math curriculum at my high school we initiated the majority of our changes in Algebra 1. 

The Ingredients For Student Success

Years of experience had clearly demonstrated that student success in Algebra 1 would depend on a number of variables:

1.  Allow students extra contact time with the curriculum and teacher

2.  Continuity of instruction

3.  Appropriate student placement

4.  Smaller class size for Algebra 1

5.  Increase rigor and raise expectations

Obviously the question is how to create a program that would give our students some or all of these options.  The first step was obvious but not simple.

Getting the staff on board

A goal of 100% success in Algebra 1 would require a great deal of sacrifice on the part of the teachers in the math department, the guidance staff and the school’s administrators. It also requires a very special group of dedicated educators.  It cannot be overemphasized the importance of such professionals.  Our first step was to share with the math teachers the need to focus a great portion of our resources on the most at-risk of our students.  Teachers had to be willing to give up some of the luxuries of past schedules in order for changes to be made.  Upper level courses became much larger in size.  With the addition of more remedial courses teachers had to accept the likelihood that they would teach more of these kinds of classes and have more potential preparations.  Once the teachers were on board the next discussions were with the counseling staff.  They quickly understood that many of our proposals would create additional work and stress the master schedule.  But again the realization that these changes could aid our at-risk students trumped any personal concerns.  And of course, the support of the administrative staff was critical.  They are the ones who would have to deal with any questions or concerns that might be raised as the community and the district assessed what was occurring at the school.  Once all of these commitments had been obtained the next step was the program itself.

The Playing Field

When the state began its end-of-course barrier exam program in 1997 the goal for school accreditation was a passing rate of 70%.  But the reality was very different.  Since students needed a verified credit in Math to graduate, every student who did not pass the Algebra 1 test was in a very weak position.  Consequently, anything less than 90-100% was problematic.  But achieving such a level of success would not be easy.  There are some inherent problems in high school Algebra 1.  About 50% of all students take Algebra 1 in the Middle School.  Consequently, the average ninth-grade Algebra 1 class consists of students who rank in the lower half of the student body in terms of math skills.  Not only have the best students been removed but also more importantly this collection of weaker students has virtually no good student role models to emulate in the classroom. 

The Tools Available

The state required all students to pass three math classes at or above the level of Algebra 1 in order to graduate.  At least one of those credits must be verified by passing the state’s end-of-year exam.   Algebra 1 Part 1 and Algebra 1 can count as two of those three credits.  At the time, every school in the district placed students in either a full year of Algebra 1 part 1 or Algebra 1 by some form of recommendation made in the eighth grade. 

Finding the Problem

Long before the advent of testing, data clearly indicated that the Algebra 1 Part 1 / Algebra 1 approach was ineffective.  A study of student performance district-wide revealed that many students who made grades of “A” or “B” in the Part 1 classes were struggling in Algebra 1.  Students with lesser grades had little hope of success.  The Math Coordinator of Instruction for the system determined that because the classes were heavily impacted by the weakness of the students that only about 30% of the material in Algebra 1 was being studied.  Consequently students entering Algebra 1 part 2 knew significantly less than half of the material needed to pass the course.  An additional if less significant problem was that many students were incorrectly placed in Algebra 1 and had to either be moved back at some point in the school year or fail the class.  Regardless of which area was being scrutinized, it was clear the program was not working. 

Finding the Solution(s)

Some schools are ethnically diverse; some are not.  But all schools are diverse when assessing learning styles.  To ensure success for our Algebra 1 students several program changes were going to be necessary.  The first adjustment had to be in the amount of time students had to succeed in Algebra 1.  Taking advantage of the opportunity to offer credits in both Part 1 and Algebra 1, it was quickly decided that a two-year Algebra 1 program needed to be created.  The first group of students addressed was the weakest of the incoming ninth-graders. 

Doubling Them Up

Many of our failing students had good attendance records, excellent work habits and positive attitudes.  But success was continually eluding them.  It was decided that the traditional block schedule where they would have a math class only two or three times a week was not conducive to their chances of retaining the information.  To offset that problem the “Double-Block Algebra 1” class was developed.  In this class students would dedicate two class periods to Algebra 1.  They would meet every day for a full block and work on their fundamental skills during the first portion of the year, then study Algebra 1 and finally review and prepare for the end-of-course exam.  Selling the community was not easy.  Students were being asked to relinquish an elective in order to take a second period of math.  But the argument in favor was powerful.  A successful Double Block Algebra 1 student at the end of the year would have two-thirds of their required math credits completed and have the required verified math.  More persuasive was the success of the program.  Working with students who had little or no hope of succeeding in the traditional class, these initial double block classes had more than a 75% pass rate on the barrier exams.  Within two years the number of students in the double block had more than doubled and the pass rates were soon above 80%.  A word of warning—other schools in the district have used the double block with little or no success.  That is because they use them as a “dumping” ground for their least successful students.  Students with attendance or behavior problems do not belong in a double block.  All of those negatives are simply magnified.  Success with a Double Block Algebra 1 will only occur if the classes consist of properly placed students and a forceful and dedicated teacher. 

Actions Speak the Loudest

As previously mentioned, Part 1 and Algebra 1 were not effective.  With little success for Part 1 students in Algebra 1 and many years of misplaced students, my school abolished Algebra 1 part 1 as an option for our students.  Instead, we place all of our non-double block students in Algebra 1 for the first semester and allow the student’s actual classroom performance to determine whether they should be placed in Algebra 1 or Algebra 1 part 1.  At the end of the first semester those students who are struggling to succeed are reassigned to Algebra 1 part 1 classes; those who are performing well continue in Algebra 1.  The students in Part 1 are given an “adjusted grade” for the first semester reflecting the fact that a grade in Algebra 1 is more rigorous than one in Part 1.  This compensation does wonders for the student’s attitude.  They are getting a fresh start in a new room with a reasonably good grade to build upon.  The teacher nightmare of the failing student sitting in a classroom with no reason to work is diminished.  Equally important, these students have studied the first half of Algebra 1 in an actual Algebra 1 classroom spending time with highly successful students.  They not only learn 50% of Algebra 1, they learn it twice.  At the conclusion of the year they will receive a full year credit toward graduation and will then take the second year of Algebra the following school year.  While the ultimate number of students in part 1 at our school was similar to others in the system there was one critical difference.  We know our students are placed correctly.  In 2005 100% of the students in our Algebra 1 Part 2 classes, all of whom had come through this program passed the end-of-course exam.  Likewise, 100% of the students who continued in Algebra 1 the previous year passed as well.

Paying the Price

This process is not without cost to the math teachers and guidance counselors.  Over the years methods have been found to minimize the impact of these changes on other teachers and classes in the building. At midyear many math teachers are forced to add an extra preparation to their teaching day.  All Algebra 1 classes are changed at mid-year.  For all of these teachers they are not only adding preps but also starting their classes over in terms of classroom management issues, knowing the students, etc.  But due to the success of this program in providing students with verified credits, the math teachers are more than willing to accept these problems. 

As Mel Riddile has stated, finding avenues to success for students takes innovation, hard work and flexibility.  This program is one illustration of what has worked.  While the specifics may not be appropriate for all districts it does demonstrate the fundamental approaches that are needed to find the right plan for an individual school.