Stalled in South Jersey
When a district or school launches a math improvement effort, the initial spark often comes from one person: a coordinator, a coach, or sometimes even a superintendent. They are passionate, persuasive, and determined. If all the energy rests on their shoulders, the improvement effort will fade the moment they step away.
Take for example, a midsize district in New Jersey, a promising math improvement effort was underway. Both Tom and Cary had worked with teachers to develop a clear vision, strengthen practices, and begin shifting culture. Teachers were engaged—some even “begging” for more task-based learning. They seemed to be focusing on all the right things.
But the effort rested heavily on Tom’s role as math coordinator and Cary to support. They had the strong facilitation skills.
They had the deep conceptual understanding needed to drive instructional shifts in the district. They had clarity that narrowed focus on vision, goals, and objectives were needed for systematic gains in math improvement.
However, when Tom’s position was eliminated due to budget constraints, and Cary soon left for another district, the work stalled.
Teachers were left without clear leadership, and the new senior administration set math lower on the priority list than language arts. The district struggled to maintain focus and momentum. They resorted back to the spaghetti at the wall approach.
Without a pipeline of math leaders who also had the clarity, deep understanding, and systems thinking to carry the vision forward, the district essentially had to start over. What could have been a continuation of steady growth turned into stagnation and backsliding.
This illustrates the fragility of improvement efforts that rely too much on individual leaders rather than building systems that endure transitions
Vulnerable in Vermont
Julie drove much of the math work in her district. She designed training programs, organized ambitious teaching initiatives, and anchored the math committee’s efforts. Solely designed the vision, objectives, and annual goals. Yet much of the work lived on her shoulders.
When Julie moved into a new role as Technology Director, she tried to transition responsibilities to Emma, a capable colleague.
However, the hand-off lacked the broader structures of distributed leadership.
While Emma had a starting spot and some tools and support, the system wasn’t yet designed to spread leadership across principals, teacher leaders, or a wider bench.
As a result, the math improvement effort faltered.
Schools and educators who had seen early gains wondered what would happen next. Some of the momentum dissipated, and the district risked losing both the resources invested and the trust of teachers who had leaned into the work.
The math portfolio was eventually passed again to another leader and the vision, objectives, and momentum fell through the cracks.
The telephone game was very much being played here.
Even passionate, capable leaders like Julie and Emma can unintentionally create fragility when leadership is concentrated instead of multiplied
The Paradox of Math Leadership
Both of these districts highlight a paradox: the very leaders who ignite change can also make it vulnerable if leadership isn’t distributed and pipelines created and supported. Without intentional pipelines—coaches, principals, teacher leaders, even superintendents—math improvement remains dependent on individuals rather than embedded in the system.
True sustainability comes when leaders “multiply” their role.
That means building teams who can carry the vision, aligning processes that survive transitions, and embedding the work in district routines. Otherwise, the spark of change fades the moment a single leader steps away.
Shift from Heroic Leader to Distributed Leadership
James Spillane’s work on distributed leadership highlights that sustainable change doesn’t come from a single charismatic leader.
It emerges when leadership is treated as a shared practice, distributed across people, roles, and structures.
You need a team who not only understands the vision but can carry it forward when you’re not in the room. That’s when math improvement really becomes sustainable.
Business research echoes this. Jim Collins, in Good to Great, describes the paradox of the “Level 5 Leader”: the best leaders channel their ambition not into personal glory but into building conditions where leadership thrives at every level.
Think about it this way: If your district’s math work is tethered to one name at the top, then every personnel change becomes a crisis. If leadership is distributed — through teacher leaders, coaches, and administrators who share ownership — then the system can withstand transitions. The work doesn’t collapse when one person moves on.
Build Leadership Pipelines
You can’t build for sustainability if you’re constantly handpicking people in the moment to help out.
Instead, design structures where leadership development is expected, not accidental.
Corporate history provides a striking analogy.
Under Jack Welch, General Electric became famous for its leadership pipeline. The company deliberately identified high-potential leaders early and placed them in stretch roles to grow their capacity. The result was a deep bench of leaders ready to step in — the organization was never one retirement away from crisis.
Sports offer a similar lesson. Bill Walsh, legendary coach of the San Francisco 49ers, didn’t just build championship teams — he built a coaching tree.
By intentionally mentoring assistants like Mike Holmgren and George Seifert, Walsh ensured the 49ers’ culture outlasted him. Many of his protégés went on to lead other teams, spreading his philosophy across the league.
For math coordinators and administrators, the key move is the same: make leadership growth systematic. Establish routines where teachers rotate into leadership roles in PLCs, invite emerging coaches into districtwide planning, and design mentorship structures where today’s “helpers” become tomorrow’s leaders.
Instead of trying to hold the entire vision alone, successful teams create “core leadership groups” of teacher leaders and coaches who co-design improvement goals, monitor progress, and lead professional learning.
Some districts call these core teams Math Council or Math Task Force or Math Influencers.
What matters is that these teams are distributed leadership in action.
These are collections of teachers / coaches / admin who are committed to long term systemic improvement efforts. At their respective districts they make math decisions together, receive leadership support, receive more intensive pd training, know the impact of a fractal approach to improvement goals and focus at the district level down through the classroom level.
These teams didn’t just naturally come together. They were crafted by key leaders who knew the fragility of doing the work of math improvement alone and its downfalls.
Durable in Denver
When a district just outside of Denver CO adopted Illustrative Mathematics K–12 who we supported in our Make Math Moments District & School Improvement Program, leaders quickly realized that sustainability could not hinge on a single coordinator. With 150 schools, 5,000 teachers, and 70,000 students, they needed a leadership structure that would outlast individual roles.
Their Director of Mathematics, brought together a cross-functional “math task force” of eight leaders: two district coordinators (elementary and secondary) and six Teachers on Special Assignment (TOSAs) drawn from elementary, middle, and high school. These individuals were intentionally chosen not just for content knowledge, but for complementary leadership skills—visionary thinking, facilitation skill, emotional intelligence, and organizational capacity.
The task force was charged with co-designing the district’s math vision, supporting the rollout of Illustrative Mathematics, and building the leadership bench across schools. Rather than relying solely on the Director to set direction, the group co-created objectives, action plans, and professional learning structures. They met weekly to align on goals and spread consistent messaging about unit internalization, learning goals, and mathematical discourse.
Each member took ownership of a slice of the work: facilitating PLCs in schools, running learning walks, modeling lessons, designing professional learning, and gathering feedback from teachers. This distributed model allowed the district to build a web of leadership influence. Coaches in schools were supported by the task force, which created guidance documents, routines (like a 4-step unit internalization process), and even “breadcrumb” communications to ensure consistent focus.
Distributive leadership and a pipeline was alive here in this district.
The effect of creating a core leadership group is twofold:
- Capacity grows — Educators see themselves as part of a leadership journey, not just as classroom practitioners.
- Continuity is preserved — When a coordinator moves districts or a coach takes leave, the improvement plan doesn’t grind to a halt. The leadership bench is already there.
What This Means for You as a Math Coordinator or Leader
If you’re leading math improvement, your goal is not to be the hero but to make heroes of others.
Sustainability comes when leadership is both distributed and pipeline-driven:
- Distribute leadership: Share ownership of the work across multiple roles, so the math plan is not dependent on one name or title. Think: If I step away for a year, what happens to the math improvement efforts?
- Build the pipeline: Identify potential leaders early, mentor them, and give them responsibility that stretches their capacity.
When you shift from a heroic-leader mindset to a distributed-leadership system, you create the conditions for improvement efforts to survive staff changes, budget cycles, and shifting priorities.
The payoff is enormous: a math culture that doesn’t collapse when one leader leaves, but instead continues to grow — generation after generation of educators who see themselves not only as teachers of math, but as leaders of math.
For Leaders Facing the Same Challenge
If your district’s math progress feels tied to one person’s shoulders, you’re not alone. Many improvement efforts stall the moment a key leader moves on.
The good news?
There’s a better way.
By building leadership pipelines and distributing responsibility across coordinators, coaches, and teacher leaders, you can create lasting momentum that outlives any single role.
And remember: sustainability isn’t about doing more alone — it’s about multiplying leadership so the vision continues without you.
Need support building your district’s math leadership pipeline? We’re here to help. Explore our support programs.
