Buyer Playbook Rep Only
Know who you're sitting across from.
Each buyer type has different priorities, different concerns, and different criteria for saying yes. The same product described the same way will land differently with a teacher than with a superintendent. These profiles describe what each buyer cares about, what worries them, what to show, and what to ask for at the end of the meeting.
What they care about
Standards alignment — can they map every session to specific standards in their framework? How this fits the existing scope and sequence without requiring a curriculum adoption cycle. Evidence of effectiveness — or at least a credible plan for generating it. Implementation fidelity — whether the product works consistently across 15 classrooms, not just the one with the strongest teacher. How much training this requires and whether it scales beyond a pilot.
What concerns them
Another initiative that launches with enthusiasm and fades by November. Products that sound good in a presentation but create problems at scale — unclear pacing, missing materials, teachers who can't run it independently after the training wears off. They've seen too many "innovative" programs that required a champion teacher to survive. They also worry about anything that requires a formal curriculum adoption process when they're not in an adoption cycle — that's a multi-year commitment they may not be ready for.
How to frame Math Labs
Position as supplemental application — not a replacement for core instruction. Math Labs fit enrichment time, STEM blocks, or flex days. They cover the same standards the core curriculum covers; the difference is that students apply those standards in extended, collaborative projects rather than isolated practice. The teaching portal (slides, timer, video walkthroughs from Howie Templer) means implementation doesn't depend on individual teacher expertise. No curriculum adoption required — this sits alongside whatever they're already using.
What to show
First: Teaching Portal
Click through 3–4 slides so they see the session structure — the timer, the activity instructions, Howie's video walkthrough. This answers the implementation question: any teacher can run this.
Second: Standards Alignment
Show the standards-by-session table on the Explore page. Switch to their framework (TEKS, CCSS, Florida, etc.). They need to see that the math is specific and mapped, not vague.
Third: Evaluation Partnership
The one-pager with four research design options. This is what separates Math Labs from every other supplement that promises results without a plan to measure them.
If time: Session Arc
Walk through the 10-session progression to show mathematical coherence — sessions build on each other, not standalone activities.
Products by grade band
Likely objections
- "We already do hands-on math" — They mean manipulatives. The distinction is single-session vs. extended project.
- "Where's the evidence?" — Lead with the evaluation partnership. Offer to help them generate local evidence.
- "Teachers don't have time" — Math Labs go in the enrichment/STEM block. They fill time that already exists.
Suggested next step
“Can I walk you through the teaching portal? It takes five minutes and you'll see exactly what teachers would use day to day. Then I can send the standards alignment document for your framework and the evaluation partnership one-pager.”
What they care about
Whether this works in their specific classroom with their specific students. How much prep. Whether students stay on task. Whether they need to be a math specialist to run this. Whether the pacing is realistic for a 45-minute or 60-minute block. Whether the materials management is doable when they have 28 students and no aide.
What concerns them
More prep on top of an already full workload. Another product that looks good at a conference demo but falls apart with actual students — the kid who refuses to work in groups, the kid who finishes in 5 minutes, the kid who is three grade levels behind. Materials that require specialized organizational systems they don't have time to set up. Promises about engagement that don't account for the realities of classroom management.
How to frame Math Labs
Lead with the teaching portal. Show them that the slides advance the session, the built-in timer keeps pacing, and Howie Templer's video walkthroughs demonstrate every activity before students start. This is structured — not an open-ended framework that depends on the teacher designing the experience. Materials ship sorted and labeled by session: pull the bag, open, distribute. The teacher facilitates; the portal runs the lesson.
What to show
First: Teaching Portal
Click through 5–6 slides from their perspective. Show the timer, play one of Howie's walkthroughs. They need to see what their screen looks like during a session.
Second: Classroom Photo
One photo of students building — measuring, tiling, constructing. The combination of structured support (portal) and physical activity (materials) is what matters for a teacher evaluating feasibility.
Third: Materials Breakdown
Show them what's in the kit. Pre-sorted by session. This answers the "how much setup?" question before they ask it.
If they're skeptical: Free Game
Offer a print-and-play game as a zero-commitment trial of the collaborative format. Fifteen minutes, no materials to buy, no portal to learn.
Likely objections
- "I don't have time for another thing" — This goes in the enrichment block, not on top of existing instruction.
- "My students can't handle group work" — The structure handles management. Teams of 3–4, defined roles, session-by-session pacing.
- "Will this help with test scores?" — It covers the same standards. The evaluation partnership can measure impact in their context.
Important: Teachers are not the budget holder. If a teacher is interested, the next step is to connect with whoever controls purchasing — usually the coordinator or principal. Don't leave the conversation without knowing who that person is and whether the teacher can make an introduction.
Suggested next step
“Can I send you a free game to try this week? Fifteen minutes, print and play. I'll follow up Friday to see how it went. If the format works for your students, I can show you the full lab.”
What they care about
School improvement metrics — state assessment scores, growth data, third-party evaluations. What this looks like when a district administrator or parent walks through the classroom. Teacher capacity — whether their team can run this without constant hand-holding. Scheduling feasibility. Budget that doesn't require a curriculum adoption line item. Whether this purchase creates a visible, defensible improvement in instruction.
What concerns them
Spending money on something that doesn't move assessment results. Teacher pushback — if teachers resist, the principal ends up managing the conflict. Scheduling disruption to existing programs. Having to defend the purchase to the superintendent or school board without data. Products that require a champion teacher and fall apart when that teacher transfers or burns out.
How to frame Math Labs
Math Labs fill the enrichment gap that exists in every school schedule. When the adaptive platform time ends, what are students doing? Math Labs are the structured answer — standards-aligned mathematical application, not free time with manipulatives. Frame for walkthrough optics: “What you'd see during a classroom visit is students in teams measuring, building, and presenting mathematical arguments to their classmates. The teaching portal is on the screen running the session. The teacher is circulating and asking questions.” Emphasize that this doesn't require a curriculum adoption process — it's supplemental, funded from enrichment or STEM budget lines.
What to show
First: Classroom Photos
Students building, measuring, presenting. This is what their classrooms would look like during a walkthrough. Lead with the visual.
Second: Standards Alignment
Show the standards-by-session table. This answers: is it rigorous? Is it defensible?
Third: Pilot + Evaluation
Propose 2–3 classrooms for one quarter with built-in evaluation. Low risk, visible results, data for the next budget conversation.
Fourth: PD Workshop
If teacher buy-in is a concern, the PD workshop addresses it directly. Teachers experience the lab themselves before running it with students.
Likely objections
- "We don't have budget" — Supplemental, not adoption. Fundable through Title I, IV-A, STEM, or enrichment lines.
- "What about test scores?" — The evaluation partnership gives them a plan to measure impact in their building.
- "We can't add anything to the schedule" — This fills existing enrichment/STEM time, not new time.
Suggested next step
“What if we piloted this in two or three classrooms for one quarter? Low commitment, high visibility. We'll help design an evaluation — pre/post using your existing benchmark — so you have data before any scaling decision. I can send a pilot proposal this week.”
What they care about
Per-pupil cost and total cost at scale. Whether this works across 10 or 50 schools, not just one. Federal and state funding compliance — can this be charged to Title I, Title II-A, Title IV-A, or CTE Perkins? Evidence that holds up in a board presentation. Political risk — what happens if this gets implemented and doesn't produce results? Alignment with district strategic priorities.
What concerns them
Spending at scale without evidence. The gap between a sales presentation and what actually happens in classrooms once the initial enthusiasm fades. Programs that depend on a few motivated teachers and don't transfer to the broader system. Single-vendor risk. Being the person who approved a six-figure purchase that the board questions a year later.
How to frame Math Labs
Frame at the systems level. As adaptive digital platforms handle more of the individualized skill practice, districts need structured mathematical application for the time that opens up. Math Labs are that — hands-on, collaborative projects where students apply grade-level math in sustained contexts. Fundable through multiple federal channels. The per-student cost is comparable to a consumable workbook. The pilot-first model means the district can start with 3–5 schools, run a structured evaluation, and scale with evidence rather than promises.
What to show
First: Funding Pathways
The funding guide showing Title I, II-A, IV-A, and Perkins coverage. Per-student cost breakdown. This is the operational conversation.
Second: Evaluation Partnership
Four research design options — from delayed-start RCT to implementation study. A superintendent who can say “we're running a controlled study” has a defensible story for the board.
Third: Grade-Band Coverage
Show the 3–8 product sequence. One product per grade band, building from area through algebra. This is a systems story, not a single-product pitch.
Do not show: Teaching Portal
Save the classroom-level detail for the coordinator and teachers. The superintendent needs the systems-level case: cost, evidence, funding, scale.
Likely objections
- "Where's the evidence?" — Offer the evaluation partnership. Lead with the research design options, not product claims.
- "We don't have budget" — Walk through the funding guide. Multiple federal pathways, plus the PD is a separate Title II-A line item.
- "What about test scores?" — The evaluation partnership is the answer. Structured study, their assessments, transparent results.
Suggested next step
“I can put together a pilot proposal this week — which schools, which products, the evaluation design, and pricing with funding pathways mapped. Can we schedule 30 minutes to review it together?”
What they care about
Keeping students engaged — attendance in afterschool is often voluntary, and programs that feel like more school lose participants. Whether their staff can run this — afterschool and summer instructors are typically not certified math teachers. Parent satisfaction and the ability to communicate what students are doing. Differentiation from the regular school day. Cost per program cycle.
What concerns them
Activities that feel academic and drive away voluntary participants. Staff who don't have the content knowledge to teach math and will struggle with material they don't understand. Complex setup or materials management when they have limited space and no dedicated classroom. Programs that are designed for school-day schedules and don't adapt well to the shorter, less structured afterschool block.
How to frame Math Labs
Math Labs are team-based, project-driven, and physical. Students build things — pet supply stores, motorized racers, balance structures. The activity format is structurally different from the school day, which is why it works in afterschool. The teaching portal runs the session: slides, timer, video walkthroughs from Howie Templer showing exactly what to do. Staff facilitate the activity; they don't teach the math. Parents hear “your child is designing a pet supply store using area and perimeter” — that's a sentence that communicates both engagement and substance.
What to show
First: 60-Second Video
If a video clip exists, it does more than any description. Show students working in teams with physical materials.
Second: Teaching Portal
Demonstrate how simple the session flow is. Click through 3 slides. Emphasize: slides and videos do the instructional work. Staff manage logistics.
Third: Programs Page
The Algebra Studio Programs page is specifically framed for afterschool/summer buyers. It addresses staffing, scheduling, and parent communication directly.
Start with: Free Games
Offer 2–3 free print-and-play games as a no-cost trial. If those work in the afterschool context, the full lab conversation follows naturally.
Likely objections
- "We don't have curriculum budget" — Afterschool funds, 21st Century grants, Title IV-A. Different budget lines than school-day purchases.
- "Our staff aren't math teachers" — The portal runs the session. Staff facilitate, they don't teach.
- "We need something engaging, not academic" — Students build physical structures in teams. The math is embedded in the activity, not presented as a lesson.
Suggested next step
“Can I send you two free games to try in your program this week? They demonstrate the collaborative, hands-on format with zero prep. If your students respond well, we can talk about a full lab for your next program cycle.”
The reality
You're interrupting their day. You don't know what they care about yet. You have about 60 seconds before they decide whether to keep listening. Lead with a real question about their instruction, not a pitch about your product. One sentence about the gap, one sentence about what Math Labs are, one ask for a short meeting.
The opener
“As digital math platforms handle more of the core practice, what are your students doing with the time freed up? We make hands-on Math Labs — extended, collaborative projects where students apply the math they're learning. Supplemental, not core replacement. Can I show you one session? Takes 90 seconds on a screen share.”
What not to do
Don't send the full catalog. Don't describe multiple products. Don't lead with pricing. Don't lead with research. Don't email a four-page PDF. Don't pitch kit contents. Send one thing: a 60-second video link or one Explore page. One product, one grade band. They can absorb exactly one idea on first contact.
What to send
If email: one Explore page link, one sentence, one ask. “This is PRISM — a 10-session hands-on lab where 3rd graders design a pet supply store using area and perimeter. Here's what it looks like: [Explore page link]. Do you have 15 minutes this week for a quick walkthrough?”
If phone/in-person: have one 60-second video clip or one classroom photo ready. Ask an open question first. Listen for the pain point, then match to one product.
If they push back
- "We're swamped right now" — “Understood. Can I send one link and follow up in two weeks?”
- "We're focused on digital" — “So are most districts. The question is what students do with the time freed up. That's what this is.”
- "No budget" — “Fair enough. Can I send a free print-and-play game your teachers can try this week? Zero cost, 15 minutes.”
Suggested next step
“I'd like to show you one session of our flagship lab — it takes 90 seconds on a screen share. When works this week?” If they're not ready for a call: “Can I send you one link? I'll follow up Friday.”