As a high schooler growing up in Yonkers, I was the kid my math teachers could ask to help the students who struggled in class. I was fortunate that math came pretty easily to me, and I could explain concepts and approaches in many different ways until it made sense to my peers. By 11th grade, I knew I wanted to be a math teacher.
Now, as I enter my fourth year teaching Algebra I at New Directions Secondary School in the Bronx, my favorite thing is getting to witness the moment a new idea clicks for my students. Some kids arrive in my classroom convinced they’ll never be good at math, and then a quarter of the way through the year, they’ll nearly jump out of their seats yelling, “I get it now!” Seeing that pride and accomplishment will never get old.
Back in 2022, my school piloted the new NYC Solves curriculum, Illustrative Mathematics, which prioritizes real-world problem-solving and class discussions. New Directions serves transfer students, including those who have fallen behind in credits, and students who are new to the U.S.
About 70–80% of the kids in my classroom are either learning English or have disabilities, and sometimes, both. I teach in English and Spanish, but I have kids who speak other languages at home.
The thing all my students have in common is that they are behind in math, some by a grade level or more. It’s a daily challenge to teach a group of kids with such vastly different life experiences, educational experiences, and needs, but I don’t know a single teacher in New York City who doesn’t face the same thing to some degree. Even with the best curriculum in the world, it’s still a tall order to differentiate instruction and meet the specific needs of every student.
Since New York City Public Schools first adopted Illustrative Math, I’ve heard plenty of critiques of the curriculum — specifically, the speed with which teachers are expected to cover the material, that it’s out of step with the Algebra I Regents exam, and that it lacks sufficient remediation for students who have fallen behind. And I’ll acknowledge that the curriculum’s high level of rigor made for a more challenging transition, especially because the district didn’t provide enough professional development early on.
When my co-teacher and I first started teaching the curriculum, we received a two-hour Zoom training, and then we were sent on our way. The training is supplemented with coaches, but they are stretched thin among New York City’s many math teachers.
We made all kinds of preventable mistakes in those early days. For example, we focused our efforts on trying to cram 60-minute lesson plans into our 45-minute teaching periods, which felt like we were rushing our kids through material they still weren’t understanding. It was a constant source of anxiety.
But after that first year, it started to click. I learned that I could adjust the lessons and the pacing to fit our classes without sacrificing the rigor. I watched my students go from memorizing equations to learning and discussing math. And that’s when I started to really appreciate the Illustrative Math curriculum.
The language routines built into Illustrative Math — like Notice and Wonder and Three Reads — introduce consistency and structure that help my students with math anxiety know what to expect. A lot of my kids arrive in my classroom with gaps in the background skills required to do grade-level math.
If a student who is behind also feels anxious or uncomfortable trying to understand material they didn’t get when they were younger, the prerequisite material doesn’t sit right. The routines give all my students a confidence-inspiring place to start, reduce anxiety, and free up their brain space to learn.
“I’ve seen what happens when students who think they’re ‘bad at math’ start to lead discussions, defend their thinking, and believe in their ability.”
— Brian Wong
The curriculum also creates opportunities for synthesis that are often missing from classrooms. Students in my Algebra I class discuss, collaborate, and reflect on the concepts they’re learning. During Unit 4 on functions, one of my students shared how she understood the rate of change in her own words. As she explained it to her classmates, more students started contributing their own ideas on how and why the concept made sense. When I see my students listening to each other’s strategies and analyzing their own thinking, I can see the wheels turning and the concepts clicking.
And most importantly, the Illustrative Math Algebra I curriculum is grade-level math. It’s the math my students should be doing, and we need more of that in New York City classrooms. When given the opportunity, so many students rise to the challenge.
Now that I’ve been using Illustrative Math for a few years, I can dial the challenge in a given lesson up or down without making the problems any easier. For example, if an activity has five problems, I’ll just break my students into groups and have each group take two problems. Then I’ll share out what they learn afterwards. By giving them more time to work on fewer problems, I never have to sacrifice rigor.
From September to May, I had students go from confused and frozen to confident and engaged. Four students who had difficulty understanding number lines in September are now successful in graphing systems of equations by themselves. Of the kids who started more than a year behind in math, almost three-quarters are showing significant improvement, engaging with the routines, and meeting expectations.
Like any curriculum, Illustrative Math isn’t perfect. But I’ve seen what happens when students who think they’re “bad at math” start to lead discussions, defend their thinking, and believe in their ability. It’s not just a benefit that outweighs the drawbacks; it’s also the reason I teach.
Brian Wong is an Algebra I teacher at X350 New Directions Secondary School in the Bronx.