by Stuart Singer, The Teacher Leader

A number of recent postings have detailed various aspects of the highly successful “Algebra Project”.  This intense study of a unique approach to an introductory high school math course is not directed exclusively at those people who are preoccupied with solving quadratic equations or graphing lines.  Hopefully this path to creating a plan to improve student performance in a particular subject can serve as a template that can be modified and tailored to address issues throughout the curriculum. 

A Word of Warning

There is little question that positive student achievement, especially in a school with high poverty and ELL rates, is the mother of many good feelings.  Students become energized, parents are thrilled, teachers and counselors gain a sense of professional accomplishment and the administrative team is confident their school is headed in the right direction.  Unfortunately, this positive response to the significant improvement in our math barrier exam pass rates was not universal.  As these scores soared to the top levels of the district Mel Riddile was well aware of the potential politics of the situation.  He gave me advice that proved extremely useful during the  unpleasant moments he knew were awaiting us.  “We are succeeding because we are working harder and smarter.  But remember this:  when you are doing better than other people, they have two choices.  They can do the hard thing—ask what you are doing, study it and try to use that knowledge to improve their situation.  Or they can take the easy way and simply say you must be doing something that is deceitful or even unethical.”  

Plenty of Followers

Over the years I have spoken about the philosophy of the math department to educators from all corners of the country.  Teachers and administrators from Pennsylvania, Maryland, Georgia, Texas and beyond would relate to me their struggles to raise student performance.  In response I would explain the obstacles we faced, the methods we used to measure our success and the various plans we implemented.  The question-and-answer sessions often became an exercise in group therapy.  The sense of desperation at these meetings was palpable.  Their schools had serious, entrenched problems and they were seeking models that were flourishing from which they could adapt new strategies.  When we adjourned there was a flood of requests for copies of my Powerpoint explanations, my email and phone number and in some cases job offers.  Many of these districts did adopt portions of our plans for their schools.

On the Other Hand

As Riddile had warned, not everyone was as excited about our achievements.  Interestingly almost all of these assaults came from within the school district.  During a break at a system-wide K-12 math chair meeting, the Coordinator of ELL sat down next to me and asked, “So how are you getting those scores?  We figure you must be hiding kids to keep them from testing.”  Her reference to “hiding” was the assumption that we were placing weak students who we felt could not pass the exam into classes that would both prevent them from testing and ultimately diminish their chances of graduation.  My initial response to her insinuation was shock.   After I recovered, I invited her to come to our school and visit our classrooms.  I also offered to sit down with her and anyone else to explain every aspect of our program.  She said that would be interesting but then warned me “It would have to be a very big meeting.  There are a lot of people throughout the district who feel the same way.”  Unfortunately that offer was never accepted.  If it had been I would have shared with anyone who attended a slide from my powerpoint presentation entitled: “Can We Sleep at Night?”

High School accountability has brought out the best in our schools and the worst.  Many schools have responded to the challenge with creativity, greater focus, and sacrifice.  Others have employed tactics that are at best questionable in terms of ethics.  In addition, great success in any field of endeavor brings scrutiny.   Our math program changes at semester are designed to ensure the most appropriate placement possible.  It is extremely critical to understand that this is not a ploy to avoid the state exam.  It is a program to ensure that our students are prepared when they take the state exam.  Once again, last year the students who had been moved to Algebra 1 part 1 the previous year took Algebra 1 part 2 and an end-of-course exam.  100% of these students passed that exam.  For the math teachers of our school, that statistic is worth virtually any price.

This paragraph had been written long before any accusations had come forth.  Throughout the entire process of creating the Algebra 1 program the most important question being considered at all times was “Is this program ethical and does it best serve the needs of the students at our school?”  These conversations occurred before implementation and continued afterward.  As student success and achievement increased year after year the answers were obviously “yes”.

A Little Background

Our school district is extremely economically diverse.  When we first introduced our program it had twenty-four high schools with free and reduced lunch rates ranging from less than 1% to our 54%.  No other school had a percentage above 36 at the time.  In broad terms there were four basic groups.  One was very affluent (less than 8%), the next moderately so (between 8% and 18%); some where the impact was significant (18% to 26%) and then the schools where poverty was a major issue (26% to 54%).   During the latter part of the 1990s I referred to our scores as the “best of the worst”.  We consistently finished better than the five or six other schools with the highest levels of poverty, but by the beginning of the new century as the Algebra 1 program became more refined and successful, the comparisons were dramatically altered.  The school’s scores were now among the top ten in the district and several times rose to the top five.  

A Surprise Ambush

Not everyone was greeting this level of success with equal enthusiasm.  The year after my interaction with the ELL coordinator, the principal moved to a new school.  Within two months of the next school year I was “invited” to a meeting with the district’s Coordinator of Instruction and the Coordinator of Math as well as the school administrative team.  I asked if I needed to bring any items and was told it was scheduled to be an informal discussion of overall math program and no preparation was necessary.  I soon discovered that was not the case.  In a presentation involving dozens of pages of “documentation” our program was accused of “stock piling” students (a new word for hiding) and of reckless disregard for ethical behavior.  I sat for an hour empty handed and dumbfounded.  I was told that consultations would follow between the district Leadership Team and the principal to “resolve” the issues raised.

Fortunately there was a happy ending to this story.  I immediately contacted the Assistant Superintendent responsible for our school.  I explained to her what had happened and in a one-on-one meeting with her shared with her the data and philosophy of our math program.  Her response was two sentences—“This is a wonderful program.  We are going to schedule a second meeting and this time you will be the one talking”.    That second meeting (chaired by the Assistant Superintendent) had a very different tone and outcome. This time we had copies of our statistics, handouts, etc. and our math program was to remain unchanged.  

One Last Hurdle

The director of guidance who was so instrumental to our program’s success was promoted to a position at the district level and her replacement was less than enthusiastic about the program.  He questioned the propriety of the format and requested a meeting with the district’s coordinator of guidance.  He and I presented our cases to the coordinator in a small conference room at the school.  After listening to both sides, his response was, “This program really seems to be working for the students (At this point our pass rate had risen to 76%).  Keep up the good work.”  It was the last time we discussed this issue.

By the end of the year the director had transferred to another school.  Within two years he became an assistant principal and one of the subjects under his supervision was math.  A few months later he called to proudly share that his school had implemented exactly the same program for their Geometry classes.  Go figure.