By: Jordan Baker

The New York State Education Department is under fire for promoting new math teaching guidelines that discourage timed quizzes, repeated practice of math facts, and traditional “explicit instruction” — ideas critics warn will harm student learning rather than help it. The New York Post first reported the controversy.

The guidelines, developed with researchers from the University of Michigan, claim that timed math tests create anxiety, discourage students, and fail to improve long-term learning outcomes. They also recommend that teachers allow students to “find their own ways” to solve math problems instead of relying on memorization or standard algorithms like addition, subtraction, and multiplication drills.

But experts say these changes ignore decades of research showing the importance of practice and foundational fluency. “Teachers are very hungry for information on how to teach math better, and if they are listening to this advice coming from the state Education Department, inevitably their kids will do worse, not better,” said Benjamin Solomon, a psychologist and math-curriculum expert at SUNY Albany, who spoke to the Post.

Solomon, along with nearly 200 other academics, researchers, and parents, sent a letter last week to State Education Commissioner Betty Rosa demanding that the department retract what they call “critically flawed” guidance. The letter takes aim at multiple claims in the state’s “Numeracy Briefs,” a series of documents released in May outlining the new recommendations.

One of the most contentious ideas is the call to end timed testing, which supporters say helps students strengthen recall and prepare for real-world time constraints. Solomon told the Post that there is no definitive research proving timed drills cause “math anxiety.” On the contrary, he said, “It’s been shown to be pretty important for kids to get really good at math. They need to know their math facts cold.”

The state’s guidance also argues that repetition and standard algorithms are less useful than exploratory learning, where students use manipulatives like blocks or diagrams to find solutions on their own. Solomon said this approach “sounds good in theory” but is “disastrous in practice” when students have not yet mastered the fundamentals.

“Solving algebraic proportions cannot be learned if children have not mastered all the prerequisite skills,” Solomon wrote to Rosa. “The methods in the NY briefs diminish the critical importance of mastering and performing fluently all the foundational skills that build advanced math performance.”

The letter further criticizes the department’s recommendation to replace explicit instruction — in which teachers clearly demonstrate and model skills — with student-led exploration. “There is a 50-year consensus that explicit instruction works better,” Solomon said. “The brief bizarrely dismisses it, and if teachers start following that advice literally, we’re in trouble. That’s really bad advice.”

Danyela Souza Egorov, a fellow at the Manhattan Institute and vice president of Manhattan’s District 2 Community Education Council, agreed that the department’s math briefs should be taken down. “They are unscientific and promote terrible ideas to teachers at a time of record low performance among New York students,” she told the Post.

Egorov argued that the state must overhaul its process for selecting educational content and vetting outside contributors. “The department should ensure that what is being distributed to school districts and teachers follows the science of learning,” she said.