Enrolling students in high school math courses is a critical decision that can significantly impact their future college opportunities and career paths.
The pressure to reach Calculus by senior year often leads to the expectation of completing Algebra I by eighth grade. While Algebra I is typically a ninth grade course, taking it on this accelerated schedule can hinder students from meeting the prerequisites for Calculus in their remaining high school years. This is crucial as advanced math classes on a student’s transcript can enhance their chances of admission to certain colleges.
However, the benefits of eighth-grade math acceleration are nullified when students who excel in Algebra I are required to repeat the course in ninth grade.
This disproportionately affects students of color and low-income students due to their schools’ placement practices. This inequity was brought to light over a decade ago by civil rights advocates in California and has been confirmed by various research studies, including one conducted last year by our organizations.
In 2015, legislation was passed to address this unfair practice, mandating the use of multiple objective measures for student placement. Despite successful students achieving high grades or proficiency on state assessments, many are still held back to repeat eighth-grade math instead of advancing to the next course in the math sequence.
However, almost a decade since the law’s enactment, the impact on equitable ninth-grade math placement remains unclear. Several states have implemented policies that have shown initial success in expanding access to acceleration opportunities in middle and high school. California cannot afford to overlook this equity issue, especially considering the lackluster progress in implementing the state’s policy.
The California Math Placement Act of 2015 requires a fair, objective, and transparent math placement policy using multiple measures to determine placement. It discourages subjective measures like teacher recommendations, which can introduce bias. While teacher recommendations are allowed for advancing students, using them to hold students back goes against the legislation.
However, a recent report by Rand Corp. reveals that California high schools are more inclined to use teacher recommendations for math class placement compared to schools in other states. A significant portion of California schools rely solely on recommendation data, surpassing the national average.
Without further research, we cannot ascertain the prevalence of teacher recommendation practices or whether progress has been made in providing equitable access to accelerated math courses for students of color and low-income students. Existing research indicates persistent disparities in access to advanced math courses for marginalized student groups.
While teacher recommendations can offer valuable insights into students’ motivation and persistence, they should not override objective measures. Clear guidelines are needed for schools to comply with the provision that restricts the use of teacher recommendations to advancing students.
It is imperative to have transparent measures in place to track how students are placed in math classes across the state. Several other states have adopted automatic enrollment policies, which have shown promise in addressing inequities in math placement.
California should follow suit and rigorously monitor access to advanced math courses to ensure equity regardless of students’ race or socioeconomic background.
•••
Pamela Burdman is the executive director at Just Equations, a policy institute focused on reimagining math education equity.
Rachel Ruffalo is the senior director of strategic advocacy at EdTrust-West, an organization dedicated to promoting equitable policies and practices in California’s education system.
The views expressed in this commentary are those of the authors. EdSource welcomes diverse perspectives in its commentaries. If you wish to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and reach out to us.