Evidence & accountability

NO COHORT
HAS RUN YET.
HERE IS EVERYTHING ELSE.

Most organizations put their best numbers on this page. We do not have any yet, so this page holds what we do have: what has been built, the research it rests on, what it costs, exactly how we intend to measure it, and the results that would tell us we were wrong.

When there are outcomes, they will appear here, favorable or not.

501(c)(3) DeterminedIRS Publication 78 ListedCA Nonprofit, Active and in Good StandingForm 990-N (e-Postcard) Filed

What exists today

BUILT, NOT CLAIMED.

4
Programs Designed
Discrete Math, Leadership, Venture Lab, Financial Literacy
36
Weeks of Curriculum
Discrete Math Adventures, Grade 2
20
CA Standards Mapped
8
Week Program
Founders and Executives tracks
$0
Cost to Students
100%
Materials Open
Every workbook and guide is free to download

Note what is absent: students served, districts reached, engagement, score gains. Those are outcome claims and we have none, because no class has run the program. This section will grow from the left as that changes.

The research base

WHAT THE LITERATURE
DOES AND DOES NOT SUPPORT.

Four sources carry most of the argument. Each is summarized with its actual weight, including where a study is too small or at the wrong grade to prove what we would like it to prove.

Curricular argument

Discrete Mathematics in the Schools

Rosenstein, Franzblau & Roberts (eds.), 1997

DIMACS Vol. 36 · American Mathematical Society and NCTM

The foundational curricular case that discrete mathematics can and should be taught in K–12, including material for the K–2 band, and framed as a vehicle for teaching reasoning rather than an extra topic competing for time.

Existence proof

Math for seven-year-olds

Hamkins, 2013

Second-grade classroom account

Vertex coloring, chromatic numbers, Eulerian paths and the Seven Bridges of Königsberg taught to seven- and eight-year-olds, who went on to build their own challenge graphs. Almost exactly the content of Weeks 17, 18, 26 and 27.

Small study, seven gifted students

Graph theory for primary school students with high skills in mathematics

Blanco & García-Moya, 2021

Mathematics 9(13), 1567

Map coloring, the four-color theorem, Eulerian paths, the handshake problem and vertex degree with primary students aged 6–11. Reports increased motivation and the emergence of real problem-solving strategies.

Strong method, but eighth grade

Graph theory and combinatorial calculus

Ferrarello, Gionfriddo, Grasso & Mammana, 2022

ZDM – Mathematics Education 54, 847–864

A careful study within the Teaching for Robust Understanding framework showing students can model real situations as graphs and reason about constrained arrangements.

There is no efficacy trial at this grade level.

We could locate no randomized or quasi-experimental study of a discrete mathematics enrichment program in the early elementary grades with measured outcomes. Anyone who tells you the evidence base here is strong is overstating it. That gap is the reason the study below exists.

The evaluation

HOW WE WILL KNOW.

A matched-classroom quasi-experiment across four to eight Grade 2 classrooms, run over a single school year, with classrooms rather than students as the unit of assignment. A randomized design is not realistic at this scale and we will report it as what it is.

Mathematical disposition
Established elementary attitude scale, administered orally
Pre and post
Reasoning and justification
Task-based interview on two unfamiliar problems, scored by rubric
Pre and post
Grade-level achievement
The district’s existing benchmark, no additional testing
District schedule
Participation breadth
Teacher log: which students volunteer explanations, by week
Continuous
Feasibility
Weeks completed, minutes spent, teacher exit interview
Continuous, then post

The participation-breadth measure is the one we care about most, because it operationalizes the actual hypothesis: that a different kind of content changes who gets to be the child explaining something to the class.

Pre-committed

WHAT WOULD SHOW
WE ARE WRONG.

Published before data collection, so it cannot be moved afterward.

Grade-level benchmark performance declines relative to comparison classrooms. That would mean the opportunity cost is real and the supplement is not affordable.

Participation breadth does not move, or moves toward students already identified as high-achieving. That would mean we built a better gifted program, not a wider door.

Teachers do not complete the year. Below roughly two-thirds of weeks, the design has failed regardless of what the other measures say.

Cost

WHAT A CLASSROOM
ACTUALLY COSTS.

Published so a principal can see there is no catch and a funder can see what a seat costs. These are our internal figures at local print rates, not a price.

Student workbooks, 77 pages, B&W, bound
24 copies at $4.00
$96
Teacher guide, printed and bound
One copy; also free online
$9
Classroom kit
Already in the room
$0
Orientation and year-long support
Volunteer-delivered
$0
Total per classroom of 24
about $4.40 per student for the year
$105

A school with its own reprographics can run the program for the cost of paper, since every file is free to download.

Voices from the field

THIS SPACE IS FOR
OUR FIRST COHORT.

When students, teachers and families have something to say about the programs, their words will appear here with their permission and their real names, and not before.

CHECK US BEFORE YOU FUND US.

Our registration, filings and open gaps are published in full, including a board seat we have not filled. Young Innovators for Change · EIN 33-1544346.