Parents, staff and board members clash over middle‑school math changes and data transparency

Parents and some board members pressed the Montgomery Township School district on Tuesday to restore a double‑accelerated middle‑school math pathway, saying the change removed opportunity for high‑achieving students. School staff and other board members said curriculum changes followed data review and multiple presentations to the district’s curriculum committee.

At the meeting, a parent who identified himself as Balaji urged the board to “Please bring back the double academic math program in Montgomery that includes that in fifth grade, you’ll have free algebra.” He said removal of the option forced families to pay for private tutoring and created inequities.

Director of Curriculum, Construction and Staff Development Fiona Borland responded that the district’s curriculum and placement decisions were made by certified educators and based on multiple data reviews. Borland told the board that “our teachers are not overwhelmed by parents’ concerns regarding inadequate academic programming” and said district staff had presented data at the ACI committee supporting the current program. She also said it is possible for a “freshman [to] start high school in Algebra II and take Calculus BC as a junior without any summer classes.”

Discussion at the meeting moved beyond public comment into repeated exchanges among board members about whether the underlying assessment and placement data should be published in greater detail. One board member called a point of order after a parent said a petition had been circulated; that member observed, “There was a vote, and it did not pass.” Other board members said they wanted routine, disaggregated reports of student growth across local percentile bands (for example 10th, 25th, 50th, 75th) for grades 3–11 to inform policy and to monitor impacts of curriculum changes.

Attempts to convert those requests into an immediate board motion were blocked on procedural grounds: several members said such policy or reporting changes should be handled through the district’s Assessment, Curriculum and Instruction (ACI) Committee. A board member said the correct next step is to route such requests through ACI, while others maintained the board has a responsibility to request district‑level data and accountability reports.

Board discussion also noted that the ACI committee has previously received presentations on the math program and related data; some board members said they had seen comprehensive reports in prior years. Several board members emphasized that enrollment and retention trends affect funding and staffing and said they wanted an ongoing district report showing longitudinal trends and disaggregated achievement bands.

The meeting produced no immediate policy changes. Board members agreed to continue the discussion in committee and to seek clarity on what assessment data the district can publicly provide and what the proper procedure is for requesting program evaluations and disaggregated student‑growth reporting.