It’s official: This fall, eighth graders in San Francisco public schools can take algebra for the first time in 10 years. Tuesday night’s Board of Education vote greenlighted the move, and school officials said it would happen in phases.
The plan is a complicated program that will test three options to fit algebra into the school day. Roughly a third of the district’s 21 middle and K-8 schools would have one of the options, and the pilot tests will run for two years, starting this fall.
For the majority of schools and thousands of students, however, there will only be either an online or summer class until the 2026–27 school year.
Six board members voted yes, with only Kevine Boggess in dissent. Board member Alida Fisher, along with Boggess, expressed doubts about the district’s ability to find funds and staff for the plan. But after a pause, Fisher said yes. The district faces a $420 million deficit and chronic staff shortages.
Advocates who have led the charge for middle-school algebra, for their part, weren’t jumping for joy either. SF Guardians co-founder Autumn Looijen said during Tuesday night’s public comment that the slow rollout, with some kids forced to go online or to summer school, was better than nothing.
Rex Ridgeway, Lincoln High PTSA president, said a lawsuit to bring back algebra will press ahead. (Ridgeway is one of the plaintiffs.) Despite a partial setback last year, the plaintiffs still hope the judge rules in their favor on test criteria that allow incoming high school freshmen to jump ahead in ninth grade.
What’s more, Proposition G, the March ballot measure that calls for algebra’s return to eighth grade, is still “relevant and necessary,” according to its sponsor Sup. Joel Engardio. He expressed dissatisfaction with the limited pilot, including the summer and online options. “Parents don’t trust the implementation promise over multiple years because they have seen school board plans go off the rails too often before,” Engardio wrote via text last night.
SFUSD superintendent Matt Wayne pushed back against complaints that the rollout was too slow. The district needs time to prepare, he said during the meeting, noting “some teachers will be teaching algebra for the first time in 10 years.”
Prop G is not binding, but Engardio asserted it’s had an effect. “The school district wouldn’t have even come this far without the political pressure,” he wrote. Ten of 11 supervisors voted to put it on the ballot last year, with Sup. Shamann Walton in dissent.
Testing 1, 2, 3
The district will spend two years vetting three in-school versions of eighth grade algebra, then make a decision in spring 2026. The first version will have all eighth graders take algebra, even those who don’t meet the criteria. (The district says there will be extra support for them.) The second version will try “compression” — regular eighth grade math and algebra in one course. Kids who qualify will enroll automatically with a chance to opt out; kids who don’t qualify can still opt in if they want to give it a go.
The third version could be called a double-up: Students who take algebra during the school day would also have to take a separate eighth grade math course and potentially drop an elective.
A complicated matrix of criteria will determine who is eligible for algebra.
Each option will be tested at just two or three schools. With 21 middle or K-8 schools in the district, students at 12 to 15 schools will have to settle for online or summer classes. The pilot schools will be announced March 15.
The district has pledged to bring back algebra without tracking students along racial and ethnic lines — the rationale for the board’s vote in 2014 to remove it from middle school. Plans call for more tutoring, an expansion of the district’s Black Star Rising summer program for Black students, and boosting classroom time for math and other core subjects.
SFUSD focusing on Algebra 1 options in middle school is like a person behind on their mortgage discussing which new stove to buy, gas or electric.
Denman middle school math teacher rori abernethy
There’s a lot riding on the overhaul. The district pledged in 2022 to raise student scores by 2027, and in particular narrow the gap between Black and brown kids and their white and Asian counterparts. The overall goal in math is 65 percent in proficiency among eighth graders. Officials acknowledged last month they are “significantly off track,” based on October 2023 test scores.
Also looming is a $420 million budget deficit. The bulk of the district’s funding comes from the state and is tied to enrollment, which recently dropped below 50,000 students. SFUSD also receives money from San Francisco, but with City Hall grappling with its own massive deficit, prospects for more are dim.
“Everyone is in favor [of eighth grade algebra], but there is no staff, resources, or money,” said Rori Abernethy, a math teacher at Denman Middle School. “SFUSD focusing on Algebra 1 options in middle school is like a person eight months behind in their mortgage discussing which new stove to buy, gas or electric.”
Ridgeway insisted that the district will have to close schools to pay for the math overhaul. School closures are a fraught topic (just ask Oakland). With some SF schools under-enrolled, closures are also part of a larger debate as the district works toward a new budget that must be approved this June. Late last year, SFUSD both signed off on a large raise for educators and said it would eliminate 927 vacant positions to save money.
When asked about SFUSD’s ability to fund the plan, Engardio said the promise of algebra in eighth grade could bring back families, and “enrollment will increase along with state funding tied to the number of students.”
Staving off suit
As if the district doesn’t have enough drama, the threat of a lawsuit based on the California Voting Rights Act (CVRA) has forced officials to consider changing the at-large elections of board members to district elections. Under pressure from an attorney who rakes in fees from municipal bodies — even when they comply with such threats — the school board has crafted a resolution, with changes introduced last night, to buy themselves time to consider options.
Several commenters at last night’s meeting urged the board not to cave in to the attorney’s demands. Changing its fall election scheme (four of the seven board seats are in play) would be a financial and logistical headache.
But fighting a lawsuit could also be expensive. With so many other problems on the district’s plate, Commissioner Boggess urged the board to reject the amendments and go with the “safest option” — switching to district elections this fall. His colleague Matt Alexander disagreed, saying the amendments were a safe approach, bought the district more time, and made clear that “we intend to initiate a transition to something compliant to CVRA.”
The amended resolution passed 6 to 1, with only Boggess in dissent.