Beyond the math wars: Focus on teachers to improve instruction

A tale of two classrooms: In one, students sit in neat, antiseptic rows, reciting math facts on demand and completing rote practice with no deep understanding. In the second, students buzz from task to task, exploring without guidance or instruction, chatting socially, and learning no math at all.

The entire field of math education agrees that neither of these extreme examples shows classrooms where students will learn math well. Despite that agreement, we continue to argue about whether math should be taught using systematic and explicit instruction or with more student-led constructivist tasks. This situation has led the field far from meaningful and desperately needed improvement.

This debate, which originated decades ago (see Schoenfeld, 2004), has reemerged with fervor. However, the explicit instruction versus constructivist thinking argument misses the point. Students need both kinds of instruction to help them make meaning in math, but they first need teachers with deep knowledge of the subject and how to teach it. They need teachers who can reason about standards, curriculum, and lesson goals.