The Math Education Crisis: How We Lost Our Way and How to Find It Again

 The Math Education Crisis: How We Lost Our Way and How to Find It Again

A 25-Year Teacher's Perspective on What Went Wrong and What We Can Learn from Countries That Got It Right

By Sean Taylor, M.Ed.

Twenty-five years of teaching has taught me this: we're failing our children in mathematics, and it didn't have to be this way.

I've watched students enter fourth grade unable to subitize—a skill kindergarteners should master. I've seen the light go out in their eyes when faced with abstract concepts they have no concrete foundation to understand. I've held progress monitoring assessments like the Brigance Inventory of Basic Skills in my hands and seen the same devastating patterns year after year: children who should be thriving are instead falling through the cracks.

The data now confirms what teachers like me have been witnessing in our classrooms. According to recent national assessments, nearly 40 percent of eighth graders are scoring below basic levels in mathematics—meaning they struggle with fundamental concepts like using similarity to find the length of a triangle's side. Even more alarming, 45 percent of high school seniors scored below basic achievement on the 2024 National Assessment of Educational Progress, the highest percentage since 2005. These aren't just statistics. These are our children's futures.

But here's what keeps me up at night: this crisis didn't begin with the pandemic. Math scores began their decline in 2013, plateaued, and then fell off a cliff. The gap between our highest and lowest performers has been widening for over a decade. And the students hit hardest? Our most vulnerable—those with disabilities, those learning English, and students from underserved communities.

The Revolving Door of Educational Carpetbaggers

After a quarter-century in education, I've witnessed something that would be laughable if it weren't so tragic: the endless parade of "ultimate systems" that promise to fix everything. Every two to three years, districts adopt new programs, new curricula, new processes—each one marketed as the silver bullet that will transform math education.

These aren't educational reforms. They're business cycles driven by funding processes that have left schools devastated in their wake.

We've abandoned what works for what sells. We've replaced teachers with technology. We've prioritized EdTech software over hands-on manipulatives. And when it inevitably fails, we blame the teachers, the kids, the parents—everyone except the system itself.

Meanwhile, countries that consistently outperform us—Finland, Singapore, Japan—don't have this revolving door. They stick with what works. Finland's national math curriculum for grades 1-9 is a concise 10 pages. Ours? The Common Core State Standards for math K-12 run 93 pages. Finland gives teachers broad guidelines and trusts them to get there. We give teachers prescriptive mandates and then wonder why they're fleeing the profession.

Singapore has maintained curricular consistency that allows for deep, sustained learning. Their approach emphasizes procedural fluency built on concrete understanding—exactly what research tells us works. And their results speak for themselves: Singapore scores significantly higher than all other countries in mathematics on international assessments.

The Common Core Catastrophe

Let me be clear: the adoption of Common Core State Standards marked a turning point—but not the one its proponents promised. Research from California, which had strong mathematics standards before Common Core, tells a devastating story. Students performed significantly better under California's pre-Common Core standards. The hardest hit? Our most vulnerable students.

Before Common Core, California made immense progress getting students to take Algebra I in eighth grade—a critical gateway to higher mathematics and college readiness. In the decade following California's 1997 math standards, the percentage of eighth graders taking Algebra I soared from essentially zero to significant numbers. This wasn't just about acceleration; it was about equity. Early algebra was no longer the privilege of the few and the affluent.

Then came Common Core, which expects Algebra I in ninth grade. Within four years of Common Core implementation, the number of eighth graders taking Algebra I in California dropped precipitously to 19 percent in 2017—taking California back to where it was around 1999, when early algebra was indeed the privilege of the elite.

The architects of Common Core math standards—Rhodes Scholars with no experience teaching elementary school students—created standards that prioritize concepts over procedures, understanding over fluency. It sounds progressive until you realize they've ignored decades of cognitive science research about how children actually learn.

Young children love memorizing and systems. Their brains are geared for it. They want to learn how to do things. But Common Core tries to teach concepts first, to incorrectly-aged students. The result? Students losing procedural proficiency, struggling with basic math facts, and developing math anxiety at unprecedented rates. It's now generally accepted that only honors compression or outside tutoring achieves the STEM-readiness that used to be accessible to any motivated and capable student.

The Missing Foundation: Concrete to Abstract Learning

When I first started teaching, we used Everyday Math, which was packed full of hands-on manipulatives and games. I watched even my self-contained students with developmental delays and cognitive impairments not only love math but achieve strong results on assessments like the Brigance Inventory of Basic Skills, especially for computational math and number sense.

Then the University of Chicago Everyday Math program was changed. The deep spiral was gone. The tubs of math manipulatives disappeared. Student performance declined.

Here's what's fascinating: almost every single math manipulative in use today can trace its heritage back to Montessori math manipulatives—the original concrete, hands-on mathematics developed by Dr. Maria Montessori over a century ago. These beautifully crafted materials allow children to experience abstract mathematical concepts through sensorial exploration. They progress deliberately from concrete to abstract, from highly transparent representations to more abstract ones over time.

Research consistently shows that children who attend high-fidelity Montessori programs demonstrate higher mathematics achievement. Why? Because the approach aligns with how children actually learn. Begin with concrete materials. Use them consistently over time. Avoid distracting irrelevant features. Explicitly explain the relation between manipulatives and mathematical concepts. Then—and only then—fade to abstraction.

But Montessori, for all its brilliance, lacks one critical element: cooperative learning structures. This is where frameworks like Kagan cooperative learning and whole brain teaching come in. Combine the concrete-to-abstract progression of Montessori with the engagement strategies of cooperative learning, and you have a powerful combination.

What the Data Really Tells Us

The numbers are stark and getting worse:

•       American fourth graders' math scores on the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study fell 18 points between 2019 and 2023; eighth graders fell 27 points—the biggest drop since the United States began participating in 1995

•       On the 2024 National Assessment of Educational Progress, only 22 percent of 12th graders performed at or above proficiency in mathematics

•       The lowest-performing 25 percent of students have shown marked declines since about 2015, while higher-achieving students began rebounding after the pandemic in 2024

•       Over half of fourth graders with disabilities and three-quarters of eighth graders with disabilities scored below basic on the 2024 NAEP

•       More countries are now edging ahead of the United States in math achievement, including Japan, Singapore, Korea, Finland, Estonia, and many others

But here's the most critical insight from my years using progress monitoring tools: it costs four times as much to do intervention in fourth grade as it does in kindergarten and first grade. Yet we continue to neglect early foundational skills—number sense, numeracy, subitizing—in favor of racing through content or implementing the latest EdTech solution.

A Personal Story That Changed Everything

When I took over the K-5 self-contained class at Liberty Elementary School, I asked how I was supposed to teach such a wide range. The answer was simple but profound: do your lesson, make it short, then get out the games and play all the different games.

Luckily, I had tubs of games from kindergarten through fifth grade. I was shocked by what happened. The kids loved math. They were engaged. And when I did progress monitoring using the Brigance Inventory of Basic Skills, the kids were thriving academically and mathematically. There was an absolute love of math.

They even wanted to go home and play the games. That's the greatest indicator: when something is worthwhile, children want to continue it beyond the classroom.

This wasn't a fluke. This was concrete-to-abstract learning in action. This was building number sense through hands-on manipulation. This was mathematics as it should be taught.

The Path Forward: Learning from Success

We don't need to reinvent the wheel. We need to look at what works. Finland, Singapore, and Japan have figured this out. They haven't abandoned their approaches every few years. They've refined and improved them over decades.

Finland's Approach: Decentralized management, teacher autonomy, minimal standardized testing, and a focus on equity over competition. They give teachers broad objectives and trust them to determine how to get there. Teachers are highly trained (only the top 10 percent of applicants are admitted to education schools) and well-respected.

Singapore's Success: Highly structured curriculum with low variance across schools, ensuring all students receive the same foundational knowledge. Emphasis on procedural fluency and fact recall to automaticity. High-quality resources provided to teachers, allowing them to focus on how to teach rather than what to teach.

What They Share: Curricular consistency, concrete-to-abstract progression, highly trained teachers, and a commitment to equity. They don't chase the latest trend. They build on proven foundations.

Most importantly, they understand that good instruction beats good technology every time. Research shows that one of the best ways to prevent math anxiety is good instruction that solidifies foundational skills. High expectations coupled with attentive teacher support ensure students don't fall through the cracks.

Concrete Solutions for Today's Classrooms

Based on my 25 years of experience and what successful countries demonstrate, here's what we need to do:

1. Return to Concrete-Pictorial-Abstract Progression

Start with hands-on manipulatives. Progress to pictorial or graphic representations. Only then move to abstract symbols. This isn't revolutionary—it's how children's brains actually develop mathematical understanding. The Montessori materials provide an excellent framework, as do traditional manipulatives like base-ten blocks, fraction bars, and algebra tiles.

2. Build Number Sense from the Beginning

Number sense and numeracy can't be shortcuts. Students need subitizing skills—the ability to instantly recognize quantities without counting. They need to understand the 13 mathematical heuristics that serve as problem-solving strategies. These foundations must be in place before we rush to procedures and algorithms.

3. Use Progress Monitoring Effectively

Tools like the Brigance Inventory of Basic Skills aren't just for special education. They help identify missing keystones—the foundational skills students need before they can build higher. Use these assessments to understand what students actually know, then fill the gaps systematically.

4. Integrate Cooperative Learning Structures

Combine the self-directed, concrete materials of Montessori with structured cooperative learning strategies. Kagan cooperative learning structures and whole brain teaching techniques increase engagement and help students articulate their mathematical thinking.

5. Stop the Revolving Door

Adopt a coherent curriculum and stick with it long enough to properly implement it, train teachers, and assess results. Stop chasing the next shiny EdTech solution. Invest in proven approaches and give them time to work.

6. Invest in Teachers, Not Just Technology

Finland and Singapore make teaching prestigious and rigorous. They train teachers extensively and pay them well. We cannot fix math education by replacing teachers with software. We fix it by empowering teachers with the training, resources, and autonomy they need to be effective.

The Stakes Couldn't Be Higher

Recent research from the Urban Institute reveals that math achievement is more predictive of earnings at age 30 than reading scores, peer relationships, or even health outcomes. Students who pass Algebra I attend college at almost twice the rate of students who don't take or don't pass it.

This isn't just about test scores. It's about life trajectories. It's about equity. It's about whether our most vulnerable students have access to the same opportunities as their more privileged peers.

And right now, we're failing them. The achievement gaps are widening. The lowest-performing students are falling further behind. And we continue to implement the same failed approaches while expecting different results.

A Call to Action

After 25 years in education—as a self-contained special education teacher, an LD resource teacher, and a classroom teacher—I've seen what works and what doesn't. I've watched programs come and go. I've seen students thrive under hands-on, concrete instruction and struggle under abstract, disconnected approaches.

The solution isn't complicated, but it requires courage. We need to:

•       Admit that the revolving door of curriculum changes has failed our students

•       Acknowledge that Common Core, while well-intentioned, has not delivered on its promises and has actively harmed progress in states that had stronger standards

•       Return to concrete-to-abstract instruction with hands-on manipulatives

•       Build foundational number sense and numeracy before rushing to procedures

•       Learn from countries like Finland and Singapore that have maintained consistency and achieved results

•       Invest in teacher training and autonomy instead of EdTech solutions

•       Intervene early in kindergarten and first grade, where it costs a quarter of what it does in fourth grade

We owe our students better than the current system. We owe them the kind of math education that builds confidence, competence, and a genuine love of learning.

I've seen it work. I've watched students with significant learning challenges master mathematical concepts when given concrete materials, patient instruction, and engaging activities. I've seen the joy on their faces when they finally understand. I've witnessed them wanting to take math games home to play with their families.

That's the standard we should aspire to. Not higher test scores driven by drill-and-kill worksheets. Not EdTech solutions that replace genuine understanding with gamified compliance. But genuine mathematical competence built on solid foundations, coupled with the joy of discovery that makes students want to continue learning.

The data is clear. The research is conclusive. The successful models exist. All that's missing is the will to learn from our mistakes and the courage to implement what actually works.

Our children deserve nothing less.---

Sean Taylor holds a Master of Education and has served for 25 years as a special education teacher, LD resource teacher, and classroom teacher. His experience spans self-contained classrooms, resource settings, and general education, with a particular focus on mathematical instruction and intervention for students with diverse learning needs.