And no one can better impart the facts than Bill Hanlon, the man who helped design the math tests that so many students failed. Many men in Hanlon's position would join in the Las Vegas Review-Journal-led chorus, calling the 90 percent failure rates on some math exams "inexcusable" and "staggering."

Hanlon

But Hanlon is not piling on. Indeed, he is doing quite the opposite - he is defending the district, especially Superintendent Walt Rulffes.

"I believe that Superintendent Rulffes should be seen as a hero in this," Hanlon writes in a document he has prepared outlining the history of the math testing problems. "This is his second year as superintendent and rather than stick his head in the sand and ignore problems, he chose to do what is in the best interests of students."

Hanlon believes the full story has not been told in reaching a conclusion - the failure of the kids is the failure of the district. So he has set out to recite a little history of how the current situation came to be - and, in his usual, blunt style, he pulls no punches.

Hanlon says the root of the problem can be traced to former Superintendent Carlos Garcia's pledge when he was hired that all students would be taking algebra by the eighth grade.

"While that was a laudable goal and had the support of many in the community, from my standpoint it was not realistic or attainable, especially with the NCLB (No Child Left Behind) legislation, which results in math being taught as a bunch of isolated facts rather than as a body of knowledge that affects our way of thinking," Hanlon writes, adding nuance to the blanket criticisms.

Hanlon went on to show the progression: "I was not then and am not now aware of anybody in the math community (who) agreed with or supported that initiative. There were a number of discussions with the former superintendent to try and dissuade him from this initiative by explaining (the School District's) course of study did not align so students would have the necessary background for them to take algebra successfully by eighth grade, that some of our students did not have the prerequisite knowledge or skills to be successful in algebra, and that with the teacher shortage, we did not have the math personnel to make sure each student had a qualified teacher."

Hanlon, to his credit, acknowledges that Garcia's argument that he would "rather have students fail algebra than take general math over again" had some merit. But he insists that by trying to get fourth through seventh graders better basic math skills, the problems began.

"As states continually push curriculum down into lower grades, there is less and less time for teachers to teach to mastery," Hanlon writes. " You can only use an hour once."

Hanlon says the district began to change its curriculum to teach to the proficiency tests, which resulted in a higher pass rate, but not without consequences.

"The downside was less time was spent teaching an already dense algebra curriculum, which might predictably result in lower scores on an algebra test," Hanlon writes. "This watering down of the academic curriculum was repeatedly brought to the previous superintendent's attention and we were told repeatedly, year after year, that this would be fixed. But without having the results of the end-of-year computation tests in the earlier grades and in algebra, there seemed to be no sense of urgency because there was no hard data to support observations."

Exit Garcia and enter Rulffes. Hanlon met with the new superintendent, and he agreed to change the curriculum. "To better gauge student performance and act on data rather than perception, he asked for the creation of semester exams in Pre-Algebra, Algebra I, Geometry and Algebra II that would reflect increased rigor that would enable more students to pass the high school proficiency exam on the first attempt, perform better on the ACT and SAT, and to transition into the university system without having to be remediated," Hanlon writes.

But then came legislative fiats followed by budget cuts, and Hanlon neatly crystallizes the consequences:

"In addition to these issues, he was also dealing with budget cuts to an already stressed budget, a shortage of qualified teachers that resulted in 8,000 students in secondary schools not having a math teacher last year, inheriting class sizes that are far beyond any acceptable norm reaching 35, 38, 42 and 45 students in first year algebra, and some parents and members of the business community who demand accountability of others and act like they play no role in the plight of public education in Nevada. Those things clearly hurt student achievement. Who among us want our kids in a class of 40 students? Who want to volunteer their children to take classes like algebra and geometry from a fill-in substitute teacher that may or may not have a math background?"

Hanlon sees Rulffes as doing his best under circumstances thrust upon him. "He has taken corrective measures to ensure our students are mastering the basic skills, that they are more appropriately placed, that the classes will have the rigor to prepare students for the high school proficiency exam, ACT/SAT and transition into college without remediation," Hanlon writes. "He's also making sure all schools place the same level of emphasis on preparing students for tests, high stakes or otherwise, and he's instructing school administrators to take a closer look at instruction to ensure student understanding earlier in the school year."

So, Hanlon concludes, Rulffes should be "saluted, not criticized." Perhaps he's right. But if anyone expects that to happen in this environment of easy shots and an "aha" mentality among public school critics, then you also think two plus two equals five.