NASBE President Interviewed About State Advances in Math

“Over the past several years, state boards have played a central role in advancing the science of reading. That work has helped build shared understanding, align policy, and drive meaningful shifts in instruction alongside student growth. Now, we’re seeing a similar shift in math. Like reading, math is foundational to learning across subjects. But the path forward in math is less defined, and in many ways, more complex. There are differences in how students learn math, how it’s taught, and even how people think about their own ability in the subject. So what does leadership in math look like right now? To help address that question, NASBE President Paolo DeMaria joined HMH Senior Vice President, Policy and Government Affairs Lindsay Crawford Dworkin for an episode of Policy in motion , a LinkedIn newsletter. A portion of the interview is below, read the interview “Three ways state boards are taking on math in 2026” in full here . “Changing how people think about math is tremendously challenging….But the reality is that all students are capable of learning math.” Hi, everyone. Happy to be with you all today. I think one of the reasons we’ve always focused on reading and math as the two anchor points is that they really connect to all other learning. There’s a general understanding that reading is essential. You learn to read, so you can read to learn. Math is similar in that it’s the language of quantities and numbers, and that’s just as important for learning across disciplines. But culturally, we’re in a different place. What I mean by that is that most people feel comfortable supporting literacy. For example, many parents understand the importance of reading to their children. Math, however, is different. It’s not always as clear what that support looks like, and many people carry their own experiences with math—sometimes not positive ones—into how they interact with the subject today. That’s part of why we’re seeing math emerge as a priority now. To get at Lindsay’s question, from a state board perspective, there isn’t just one lever. What I’m seeing is work happening across a few key areas. Using standards as a stronger foundation. One of the most consistent starting points is math standards. Though there’s a lot of commonality in what gets taught across states, how standards are written and used still matter. One thing states are elevating is the importance of making standards more understandable. Often, they’re written with a lot of jargon, under the assumption that they’re just for teachers. But in reality, they should be accessible to a broader audience. That includes educators who may not have deep math backgrounds, as well as families who deserve to understand what their children are learning in class. States are also looking at how to focus standards more effectively. Rather than covering as much content as possible within a given school year, states are prioritizing a smaller number of key concepts that drive math learning in each grade. And then there’s the idea of progression and coherence. Math is inherently sequential, and it helps to see how concepts build over time, not just within a single grade. Some states are starting to present standards in a way that shows that progression more clearly, so educators can see how their grade level aligns to others. There are also examples of states intentionally reinforcing key concepts across grade levels. Maryland, for instance, included expectations around fluency with times tables in multiple grades, signaling that if students haven’t mastered that skill yet, it’s still appropriate—and necessary—to address it. States like Illinois and North Carolina are also in the process of revisiting their standards, with an emphasis on clarity, focus, and coherence. …

Summary generated from the RSS feed of NASBE. All article rights belong to the original publisher. Click through to read the full piece on www.nasbe.org.