Over the weekend, I happened to have a long conversation with Avery Wang, who is running for Palo Alto school board. You may know him as the parent who successfully sued the district after his son was denied access to more advanced math. The district ultimately moved his son into the class and settled the case. PAUSD is obviously still a very high-achieving school district. But I find its approach to advanced math concerning. The district has repeatedly put restrictions in the way of kids who want to accelerate in math. One argument is equity. Another is that offering increasingly advanced math creates too much pressure and isn’t good for student wellness. But why is math different? We let kids take extremely difficult classes in other subjects. We encourage them to compete intensely in sports. Kids spend enormous amounts of time getting better at music, debate, robotics, etc. If a kid happens to be really good at math, enjoys it and wants to go faster, why should we make that harder? Is limiting opportunities for kids who happen to be good at and enjoy math actually going to help kids who are struggling with it? I think we’re conflating two completely different problems. We should absolutely help kids who are struggling. But I don’t see why doing that requires putting a ceiling on kids who want to go further.