Build a Coherent, Programmatic Approach to Mathematics
Too often, math instruction is fragmented. Different grade levels use different instructional materials, teachers develop their own assessments, and schools lack a unified vision for instruction. This is particularly common when special education teachers use resources that are entirely different from those used in the general education classroom.
Specialists often pull resources from the internet rather than accessing the high-quality materials that schools are increasingly turing to for core instruction.
There are better ways to build a system. What Florida schools should be implementing now — especially given declining achievement trends — is a cohesive approach that ensures every educator uses consistent models, vocabulary, and strategies aligned to Florida's B.E.S.T. Standards.
Schools doing this well offer a useful model. In one example, a teacher introduced students to ratios by using a tape diagram to build conceptual understanding — a hand-drawn model students had been using since third grade to visually represent equal parts of a whole. Later that same day, a special education teacher working with students from that class used the same model. The school's entire support staff had been trained on the math curriculum and provided materials that mirrored the strategies used throughout the building.
Design Schedules That Reflect Your Instructional Vision
Instructional time is precious — and often misused. In many schools, schedules are shaped more by tradition than by instructional need and the demands of math content. How time is allocated sends a clear message about what a school values.
In many schools, students are pulled out during core math instruction for intervention meant to help them catch up. But that approach does not serve students well. They need access to grade-level instruction in addition to targeted support — or they will remain behind.
Professional learning schedules that prevent support staff from participating in math-focused learning compound this problem. One of the highest-value uses of summer planning time is to maximize the potential of every student, teacher, and support staff member through thoughtful schedule design.
The school schedule should ensure high-quality math instruction for every student in K–5 and place targeted support at the least intrusive point in the day.
A leadership team that treats schedule design as a critical summer engineering challenge — one of its highest-priority tasks — will ensure students have maximum access to strong core instruction and targeted support, while teachers have time to collaborate and grow.
Leaders must ensure the time allocated to core content areas reflects their goals for teaching and learning.
Prioritize Conceptual Understanding
It is widely understood that school and district leaders must be instructional leaders. In mathematics, that means placing a clear focus on building students' conceptual understanding. It is the number one thing leaders should look for and support.
As educators, it is tempting to fall back on tips, tricks, and memorization strategies when a student needs support — to help them master a topic as quickly as possible. That approach may seem helpful in the moment, but it can be detrimental over time.
Many of these shortcuts appear in fraction operations — the butterfly method for adding and subtracting fractions, flip-and-multiply for fraction multiplication — and they work in the short term. But they expire quickly when students encounter more abstract applications in later grade levels, and they do not help students make meaning of the mathematics they are learning.
Teachers can build conceptual understanding by using concrete objects and pictorial representations like tape diagrams during lessons. To do this well, educators need professional learning that is tied directly to their classroom materials and aligned to Florida's B.E.S.T. Standards and MTR Standards.
Procedural fluency — such as knowing multiplication facts — matters too. It allows students to work efficiently and accurately, freeing their attention for reasoning. But when procedural fluency is paired with a strong foundation in conceptual understanding, students can approach unfamiliar problems with confidence.
Each of these three steps stands on its own. Together, they form a clear blueprint for strengthening math outcomes across Florida's K–5 classrooms. This is not a prescriptive model. It is a call to lead with clarity, coherence, and purpose. That work starts with leadership.