Student-Centered Math Reforms in High School

In student centered math classes, students reason mathematically, communicate their mathematical thinking to other students, connect math concepts to their experiences, and solve complex, real world math problems rather than solely memorizing procedures. This research explores how districts implement student-centered instruction in math at the high school level. This research focuses on the outcomes of these reforms. The research also addresses how profiled districts train and support teachers and assess the outcomes of student-centered instruction.

Optimize high school math instruction

Administrators at profiled districts implemented student-centered math instructional reforms on the basis of qualitative, theoretical, and/or emergent research (e.g., frameworks from the National Council for Teachers of Mathematics). This research empowered profiled districts to shift high school math classrooms’ emphasis from lecture-based instruction to students’ development of knowledge. In student-centered math classes at profiled districts, teachers use tactics such as problem-based learning to encourage students to develop higher-level mathematical thinking. Contacts at all profiled districts share the belief that student-centered instruction—which encompasses a wide range of practices—creates learning environments that better match students’ strengths, preferences, and interests (i.e., facilitates personalized learning).

Read More

Boost engagement and learning with student-centered math

At District D, after administrators redesigned the high school math curriculum to create a student-centered curriculum, the number of students who achieved proficiency in high school math courses increased by 30 percentage points. In addition, contacts at most profiled districts report improvements to school climate and student engagement—for example, at District A, discipline referral rates dropped after math teachers implemented student-centered instruction. However, contacts do note that concurrent reforms (e.g., block schedules) could account for some benefits.

At District D, before implementing student-centered instruction only 50 percent of students achieved proficiency in high school math courses (i.e., 30 percent of students failed the courses and 20 percent of students received a passing grade below a C-). Now, contacts report 80 percent of students achieve proficiency in one year’s worth of math content each year.

Read More

Encourage teacher reflection and skills-building

Contacts at District C recommend that administrators design trainings in which teachers experience students’ perspectives of math lessons. Specifically, contacts recommend that administrators require teachers to solve math problems using a method that does not match their preferences and learning styles. Contacts report that this type of simulation helped teachers understand that one-size-fits-all, lecture-based instruction does not suit all students’ needs. In addition, contacts at District A add that administrators should share an extensive library of potential student-centered instructional tactics with teachers to provide them with a broad array of options. Contacts note that exposing teachers to a plethora of student-centered tactics helps mitigate the apprehension that might arise if administrators ask teachers to implement tactics in which teachers lack expertise.

Read More

Hardwire accountability to student-centered instruction

In the first year of implementing student-centered instruction at District A, administrators required teachers to lead one student-centered activity per course per semester. Three years later, teachers now implement four to five activities into every lesson. In the intervening semesters, administrators encouraged teachers to share their experiences leading student-centered activities at staff meetings to both hold teachers accountable to tactic implementation and to troubleshoot any challenges. At District B, administrators use classroom observations to ensure that teachers implement student-centered instructional tactics. If administrators identify teachers relying on lecture-based instruction, they coach these teachers toward more student-centered instruction.

Observations from principals, math department leaders, and peers contribute to the ongoing supports available to teachers at District A, District B, and District C. At District A, a math department leader conducts observations using the Marzano teacher evaluation framework, which encourages teachers to use specific, evidence-based practices that drive student learning, engagement, and achievement.

Read More