Improve Math Scores With a Customized Plan Built in 10 Sessions & a Full Year of Accountability.

Before

Michael and Morgan stepped into the job with no roadmap. They were keen but swamped: two people supporting six schools, trying to fix too many things at once, while test scores fell year after year.

What we did

Coaching calls every other week. We didn't hand them answers. We helped them think, narrowed the work to three clear goals, and built both coaches' own math knowledge so they could build it in their teachers.

The result

Clarity, structure, and a plan they believe in. Michael calls the change in focus "night and day." In 2024, every grade level improved on state testing compared with past years.

Before

The math team felt like they were juggling too many things at once, with no clear vision or goals tying the work together.

What we did

We helped them get clear on their vision and goals first. Then we changed how they led teachers: support instead of compliance.

The result

Gwenn calls the clear vision the big breakthrough. Her teachers noticed too: "Teachers reported that our vision alignment session was some of the most impactful PD they've had in years."

Before

Every school year brings a new initiative to chase. The district needed to hold one focus long enough for it to change how math is taught.

What we did

Regular coaching conversations with Jon and Kyle. The questions kept pulling the team back to one focus and the changes it needed in math instruction.

The result

Betty credits the coaching with keeping the district's math work focused, instead of chasing whatever came next.

Before

Derek set out to reach every school, every PLC, every classroom. All 600 plus teachers got the same PD days, the same newsletters, the same drop-in coaching. The effort was heroic and nothing took root. Walkthrough data showed little change and math achievement was flat. In his words, they were busy but not effective.

What we did

We showed him what it actually takes to change how one teacher teaches: a shared vision, a chance to see the practice, belief they can do it, then coaching over time. That runs to about 49 hours per teacher. Once his team did that arithmetic against their own capacity, the target changed.

The result

Scattered effort became one clear roadmap, with leadership built inside the district. Derek says they are no longer spinning their wheels, and that they are building something that lives beyond any one person.

Before

Riverside had clear math goals, a walkthrough tool, coaching feedback, and new digital platforms. By every normal measure they were doing it right. By the end of the year the team was worn out and could not see the change they wanted. The goals were good but too broad, and only two people in the central office were carrying all of them.

What we did

We asked one question: if you could make a single change this year, what would it be? They chose classroom talk. Their own walkthrough data showed teachers doing most of the talking, and the district had already made discourse a board priority, so the work could ride a wave that was already moving.

The result

Coaches now work with purpose and teachers get support on purpose. Mary describes it as moving from reacting to a system-wide approach that is already showing up in classrooms.

Before

The board's math work was spread wide, with no structure separating what happens at district level from what happens in a school or inside one classroom.

What we did

We gave them a structure that splits the work into three layers, so each conversation happens at the level it belongs to instead of all of it landing at once.

The result

Conversations with principals and teachers got sharper and more specific. The board reports EQAO scores increasing after continued support.

Before

Two coordinators carrying math across 75 schools and 90,000 students, with nobody to tell them whether the path they had picked was the right one.

What we did

We gave them a different perspective by challenging their thinking, pushed them to name action steps out of each conversation, then followed up on those steps rather than leaving them on a list.

The result

In their words we validated the work they were doing and coached them into better leaders. The isolation that comes with running math at this scale stopped being the job.

Before

Math improvement work was spread across 160 schools with fragmented effort and no shared way of telling whether any of it was working.

What we did

We helped them unite the district around one clear math vision and a plan that scales, then built the indicators that show whether the work is moving.

The result

They can measure their milestones because they have specific indicators. They know what to look for and have systems in place to track impact.

Before

The division was prescribing solutions to its schools. Blaine wanted professional learning that could meet each school where it actually was, rather than one fix handed down to all 79.

What we did

We supported them through the academy, group coaching calls, and learning tools that keep getting updated, so schools had access to high quality material and timely guidance instead of a single fixed programme.

The result

The division shifted from prescribing solutions to empowering school-led improvement. Blaine describes real progress where it matters most, in the classroom.

Before

Their biggest hurdle was alignment and trust across a team of coaches and coordinators, many of them navigating initiative fatigue and effort that had fragmented across schools.

What we did

We listened to their context first, then built a support plan around it. We did not force a top-down approach. We ran a process where their own instructional leaders created the math vision, set the objectives, and took ownership of the work.

The result

Coaches are more aligned and leading with purpose, and teachers across the district are starting to feel the impact. Christine calls it a foundation for growth they did not think was possible.

Before

In Leidele's words there were a lot of grey areas at the start of the year, and no clear sense of how the work would move forward. Schools were improving in isolated pockets.

What we did

We started counting what was real: how many teachers had been trained, where each school had got to with Number Talks, and what the next step was to go deeper. Every conversation tied back to effective teaching practices.

The result

The work is no longer happening in isolated pockets and schools are not trying to outdo one another. As Leidele puts it, they are all in the same canoe, paddling in the same direction.

Before

Like most districts, the pull was to change the focus each year. Coaching happened, but without the consistency that makes a change stick in a classroom.

What we did

We worked on their coaching cycles so they went deeper rather than wider, and held them to the three goals they had chosen instead of adding new ones.

The result

Every leader now carries the same message to teachers, and Dawn says the consistency is finally producing visible results. She credits the change in their coaching to the work done together.

Before

Two years into the new Eureka Math Squared curriculum, only about a third of 6th to 8th graders were meeting grade-level expectations. The district had bought 150 coaching days from a PD provider, but implementation coaching was uneven. Teachers told Beverly, “I’m doing all these things, but I’m not sure it’s making a difference.”

What we did

We co-created a shared vision with the district and set key results in Wait Time, Discourse and Conceptual Proficiency. Eight schools received over 30 coaching days, and the math leads ran a book study on The Five Practices.

The result

By the end of 2024-25, middle school math proficiency rose 6 points, from 32% to 38% across grades 6, 7 and 8. “Still lots of work to do, but that bump is very motivating,” Beverly said. “Thank you for helping us narrow our focus in math professional learning.”