New York State Education

‘Math Wars’: New York Wants to Reform Math Instruction, but Experts Disagree on How

On the heels of a “Back to Basics” reading effort, New York is launching a similar initiative for math.

Melissa Manno · June 25, 2026

A student's hand using a calculator on a math worksheet.

The “Back to Basics in Math” law, passed as part of the state budget last month, requires school districts to use “evidence-based” methods in elementary school math classrooms. | Fernando Veloso Leão/corelens | Illustration: New York Focus

BlueSky Tweet Share Email

Sign up for Staying Focused, our newsletter keeping readers up to speed on New York politics.

New York school districts will soon begin revamping math instruction under a new law aimed at improving test scores — but the effort comes amid sharp debate over how math should be taught.

“Back to Basics in Math,” passed as part of the state budget last month, requires school districts to use “evidence-based” methods in elementary school math classrooms.

It directs the State Education Department to develop best practices for teaching math in grades K-5 by January, and requires that school districts complete a survey verifying their alignment with those standards by September 2027. The budget also sets aside $2 million for the teachers’ union to administer a training course and another $2 million for regional pilots supporting districts with low math performance.

A book lies open and face-down on a desk.

Scores of New York School Districts Report Using Discredited Reading Curricula

Melissa Manno

The structure mirrors Governor Kathy Hochul’s signature literacy initiative, which has been criticized as having weak accountability measures and using a questionable union-developed training course.

Transforming math education could be even more challenging.

Unlike “the science of reading,” which relies on a widely embraced framework, educators and researchers are less aligned on what counts as evidence-based instruction in math. While most states have adopted laws or policies related to the science of reading, far fewer have done so with math, leaving New York with few models to draw from.

Advocates say those ongoing debates over math instruction, coupled with the state’s decision to model the initiative on its literacy reform, could hamper progress. For state leaders, the effort’s success could help transform New York from one of the Northeast’s lowest-performing states in math into a model for improvement. For students, it could shape their access to higher education and high-paying jobs.

But only if it’s implemented properly. “I think there’s a big lack of understanding of what proper instruction is, and there’s a really big disconnect between ‘evidence-based practices’ and teacher training programs,” said Erica Fanning, math researcher and school psychologist at the City School District of Albany.

As with reading, the stakes are high. Research shows that math proficiency is one of the strongest predictors of future adult earnings, high school graduation, and college enrollment.

Improving math education is also key to reducing educational inequities: On the 2024 NAEP eighth-grade math exam, Black and Latino New York students scored below white students by 26 and 30 points, respectively. New York was ranked 38th in the nation for fourth-grade math, behind all other Northeastern states besides Maine, and 17 points below top-ranked Massachusetts.

Hochul said the initiative aims to ensure New York students are “the most academically prepared in the country.” If the effort fails, advocates say, students of color and those from low-income backgrounds have the most to lose.

Across the country, schools have seen a decade-long decline in reading and math performance that was exacerbated by the pandemic. That’s spurred a wave of reform, including a high-profile push based on the science of reading. This phonics-based approach is grounded in the idea that reading isn’t innate and must be explicitly taught through skills like sounding out words. When New York enacted its Back to Basics plan in 2024, it joined at least 37 other states that had implemented similar policies.

Math instruction, by contrast, has received relatively little attention. The push to change how children learn math is still in its infancy. That’s in part because there’s little agreement on the best approach.

On one side of the so-called “math wars” are advocates of more explicit, teacher-led instruction who argue that students should first build fluency in foundational skills — such as memorizing multiplication tables or working through a math problem step by step — before they can understand deeper concepts. On the other are proponents of inquiry-based instruction, which emphasizes student problem-solving and exploration of mathematical ideas before formal procedures are introduced.

Many New York schools use curricula that align with the latter. But critics, including special education researchers, say it can reduce student confidence, hinder learning of foundational skills, and cause struggling students to fall further behind. Ben Solomon, a math researcher and associate professor of school psychology at the University of Albany, said there’s a time and place for both pedagogies — but he and other “science of math” advocates believe students should primarily receive explicit instruction before moving on to more conceptual lessons.

The lack of consensus makes it difficult to know what the law counts as “evidence-based teaching techniques and materials.” The clearest indication so far came last year, when NYSED released eight briefs outlining “best practices” in numeracy and math instruction. Written by Deborah Loewenberg Ball, a professor of education at the University of Michigan, and TeachingWorks, a project at the university, the briefs take the more conceptual approach, arguing that explicit instruction should “be grounded in meaning and understanding of why the procedures work.”

Solomon is among a group of over 200 math researchers, educators, and parents who signed a petition describing the briefs as full of factual inaccuracies and calling for the state to retract them.

“We’re trying to turn around a huge ship that’s been cruising for a long time.”

—Ben Solomon, University of Albany

In an October response, the state agency doubled down on the guidance, and Loewenberg Ball argued that Solomon cited only a narrow segment of research that was not broad enough “to address the complexity of mathematics teaching and learning.” The guidance is still in place.

Solomon said he worries the agency’s response to his criticisms reflects a reluctance to draw on the expertise of a broad range of math researchers when deciding on what counts as evidence-based math instruction.

“We’re trying to turn around a huge ship that’s been cruising for a long time,” Solomon said. “That takes deep structural change that will be very challenging in New York.”

Jeff Smink, deputy director at the advocacy group EdTrust-NY, shares that concern, though he noted that the math debate is more nuanced than literacy, and effective instruction likely falls somewhere between the petitioners’ and the state’s positions.

In a statement provided to New York Focus, NYSED spokesperson Karen Male said the briefs are “grounded in research,” and underwent external review to support high-quality P-12 math instruction. She added that while NYSED shares Solomon’s dedication to improving math outcomes for students, the department “will not be swayed by misinformation or efforts to undermine our work to advance equity and excellence in education.”

Five Questions for New York’s Education Leaders

Melissa Manno

Some advocates worry the math law’s structural similarities to the reading initiative portend difficulties down the line.

As part of the new law, school districts will have to report the curricula and instructional materials they’re using in K-5 classrooms and verify that they align with state-developed standards, but it’s largely up to individual districts to make the transition and self-certify.

The reading initiative also tasked school districts with completing an alignment survey: A New York Focus analysis of their responses found that more than 130 school districts reported using curricula that researchers criticized as inconsistent with the science of reading — including dozens that claimed that their materials aligned with all recommended best practices.

In New York, most decisions about public schools, from curricula to school spending, are determined at the district level, posing obstacles to successful education reform, Solomon said.

“If you create objectives and goals and then let it work its way through the system, it’s going to mutate based on everyone’s individual philosophies,” he said.

In order for the math initiative to be more successful than the reading effort, Smink said the state must increase transparency regarding the curricula and instructional materials in use, and hold districts accountable if they are out of alignment with best practices. (The Education Department said it would follow up with school districts that had failed to comply with the literacy law, but did not specify when districts must achieve full compliance.)

As with the reading initiative, the state budget sets aside money — $2 million — for the teachers’ union to administer a training course. A recent Hechinger Report investigation found that the $10 million union-developed training course for the Back to Basics in reading effort featured some of the instructional methods Hochul set out to replace.

The union has defended the program and refuted the idea that it promoted discredited strategies. Elizabeth Bird, Hochul’s assistant secretary for K-12 education, told New York Focus the criticism was “instructive,” and that the governor’s office is asking the union to review training materials “to make sure they are guided in evidence-based practices.”

Finding the right curricula could also be a challenge. There are few evidence-based math curricula readily available for districts to use, said Lynn Gaffney, an assistant superintendent at Watertown City School District. That’s in part because publishers tend to design materials aimed at satisfying school districts’ broad range of instructional approaches, rather than adhering to national standards.

A high-contrast photo of a rolled up graduation diploma closed with a tassel against an orange and black background.

New York High Schoolers Might Be Getting a New Diploma. Here’s What to Know.

Melissa Manno

When Gaffney transitioned into a new role overseeing curriculum and instruction at the Jefferson County district, she faced a troubling reality: Fewer than one in three students in grades 3 through 8 were meeting math proficiency standards. The district was relying on outdated instructional programs that failed to reflect research on how students best learn math, she said.

For the past three years, Gaffney has been leading an effort to implement evidence-based math. But when it came time to implement a new curriculum, Gaffney said the district was unable to find one that aligned with both the science of learning and New York state standards, prompting district leaders to develop their own.

Gaffney is excited by the state’s attention to math instruction, but like Solomon, she said she needs to see the state’s guidance before determining its potential impact on student outcomes.

“We’re not an evidence-based profession traditionally, we’re more of an ideology-based, philosophy-based profession, and that works to some degree, but it’s not working for most of our kids,” Gaffney said. “So we need to move away from that towards the evidence.”