The report looks at several areas NCTQ identified as essential to strengthening instruction and rates states on how well they hit those markers. 

It found, for example, only 21 states provide clear, detailed guidance to teacher preparation programs about what they should teach in regard to numbers and operations, algebraic thinking, geometry and measurement, and data analysis and probability — topics the group found, based on research, critical to teachers’ and students’ success.  

And 24 states offer no recommendation as to which materials districts should be using in the classroom, a missed opportunity to suggest the best possible curricula for young children, NCTQ found.  

“We know how important strong math skills are for students: They add up to better reading scores and they’re a signal of stronger college readiness,” said NCTQ President Heather Peske. “We found that across the country, states can do much more to better prepare elementary teachers to teach math.”

U.S. students’ ongoing struggles with math proficiency have sparked multiple examinations of how math is taught throughout K-12 and what needs to change to bring about improvement. The most recent National Assessment of Educational Progress, released in January and often referred to as the Nation’s Report Card, showed math scores were flat for eighth graders and up slightly for fourth graders, but those gains went mostly to high achievers.

In the NCTQ report, Alabama is a notable exception in its approach, making improvements to math instruction on multiple fronts, including in teacher training programs and the use of high-quality instructional materials. 

State Superintendent Eric G. Mackey said the effort began roughly seven years ago, starting with the development of new standards — followed by new assessments. After that came a coaching pilot program that was so successful, he said, it will be available in every K-5 school within just a few years. 

Mackey said the effort around finding stellar curricula proved challenging: It took the state two years to develop the first list. 

“But it wasn’t good enough,” he said. “So, we did a second and third round of vetting and got it down to a pretty tight group.”

Alabama also updated all of its standards around teacher training and added a new master’s degree, that of an elementary math specialist, he said. Some of the efforts seemed to pay off: Fourth-grade Alabama NAEP scores rose six points between 2022 and 2024 and were just a single point below the national average. 

But the state still struggles with older students: 8th-grade scores dropped by two points in that timeframe and were the national average. 

“We are limited on funds,” Mackey said. “Our strategy is to get it right in elementary school and then maintain that through middle school.”

NCTQ notes that while states have the authority to set the standards for teacher preparation programs, 16 outsource that job, often to national organizations that don’t always focus on the teaching of mathematics. 

And, their analysis found, many states don’t require teacher prep programs to address the knowledge and skills teachers need to teach math concepts, despite the long-recognized benefits to students. 

NCTQ also found fault with many of the 30 elementary math licensure tests used across the country: 31 states offer “unacceptable” or “weak” licensure tests, it found. 

Iowa and Maine have none at all.

Only 10 such tests were “acceptable” by NCTQ: All paid adequate attention to numbers and operations, algebraic thinking, geometry and measurement and data analysis and probability. Thirteen states — Alabama, Connecticut and Texas among them — require a “strong” and “acceptable” test for all elementary math teacher candidates. 

Only six tests were deemed “strong” and are used exclusively in five states: Texas, Kansas, Missouri, Alabama and New York.. 

Of the 17 weak tests, five address less than half of the subtopics in one or more areas and all combine math with one or more other subjects. 

Three tests were deemed “unacceptable” because they omit one or more math content topic areas — but they are used in nine states: Michigan, Alaska, Delaware, Idaho, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, South Dakota and West Virginia. 

And, NCTQ found, just 21 states make the passing rates on their elementary math licensure test public, making it difficult to identify those that have failed to offer robust programs.

Like other studies before it, NCTQ notes the importance of high-quality instructional materials, curriculum aligned with college- and career-ready standards: Such tools have great potential in improving student performance. Despite these benefits, only four states require their use, including Rhode Island. 

State law requires the state education department to identify at least five high-quality curricula that align with state standards. Rhode Island districts must implement one of them, though the plan does allow for some flexibility: Districts can apply for a waiver if at least three-quarters of students meet state assessment goals — and no student subgroups need targeted help. 

Like Alabama, many states find their academic goals constrained by limited budgets. Just 24 states provide funding for math curriculum materials and only two — South Carolina and Tennessee — provide funding for this purpose and require schools to select materials from an approved list, NCTQ found. 

The report also touts the importance of professional development for math teachers, noting that nearly 60% of the potential impact of adopting high-quality curricula depends on teachers improving their instructional practices.

“We know the importance of professional learning,” Peske said. “It goes hand in hand with the adoption of high-quality instructional materials.”

The group said only six states financially support math coaches/specialists in K-12 schools, and just four â€” Alabama, California, Georgia and Michigan — provide funding for both professional learning and coaching.

Louisiana schools have used high-quality instructional materials for math and English language arts for more than a decade, but it wasn’t enough to improve student achievement, State Superintendent of Education Cade Brumley said. 

The state now requires all fourth- through eighth-grade math teachers to complete a 50-hour numeracy course — teachers in younger grades will soon have to meet a similar requirement — and while districts are free to select their own curriculum, the state created a rating system that has encouraged many to pick what it considers the best offerings. 

Louisiana also invested $100 million in tutoring programs in recent years. It has already seen a difference in student performance. 

“We have made really good progress,” Brumley said. “But what happens in Louisiana is the same as what happens across the country: As students matriculate from 4th to 8th grade, academic performance declines. Our intent is to be the first state to correct that issue in math.

“We are also refreshing our math standards with great emphasis on foundational math skills in the early grades,” he added. “We talk about fluent readers but we don’t talk enough about fluent mathematicians — and that needs to change.”

But if classroom instruction isn’t improving, we shouldn’t be surprised that test scores are stagnant or dropping. 

How teachers are taught to teach—along with what curriculum materials they use with students and how they use those materials—are the most critical factors for improving student learning. Many state education leaders are doing their part to ensure school districts adopt high-quality curriculum materials and help teachers use them well. The colleges and universities that prepare teachers to enter the profession largely have not. 

Back in 2017, the Council of Chief State School Officers formed a of interested state departments of education – called the High Quality Instructional Materials and Professional Development Network – to put good curriculum into the hands of teachers.

The network is getting its job done: According to and that of the states themselves, more teachers are using curriculum materials for English language arts and mathematics that are aligned with rigorous state standards. More schools are also providing professional development to teachers that is grounded in their curriculum materials. 

Louisiana – a network state that is also for state curriculum reform efforts – was the only state to see gains in fourth-grade reading scores on NAEP since 2017. Louisiana and Mississippi, another network member, were two of only four states that have seen gains in fourth-grade mathematics since 2017.

But one area where we consistently have seen little change is in college and university teacher preparation programs. In surveys every year since 2019, RAND has asked teachers across the nation which approach their teacher preparation program emphasized: 

(a) “how to develop my own lessons and unit plans,” or

(b) “how to skillfully use and modify curricula provided to me.” 

Year over year, only about 10% of U.S. teachers indicate that their program emphasized helping them use curriculum materials. A little less than half say the emphasis was on how to develop their own lessons and unit plans. The balance say their program emphasized both or neither.

These percentages hold regardless of the teacher’s state, whether the teacher is in an elementary or high school; in an urban or rural school; in an English language arts/reading, math or science classroom; or was trained 20 years ago versus in the past five years. 

All teacher preparation programs should show teachers-in-training how to skillfully use the curricula they are given. This is a prerequisite to ensuring that most children meet state academic standards. Think about it: If every teacher uses a school-provided curriculum that is aligned with their state standards, the chances of meeting those standards is better than if teachers are reinventing the wheel by developing their own lessons.

Other data beyond our surveys underscore this point: Teacher preparation is slow to incorporate what we know about good classroom instruction. 

For example, the and confirmed that elementary schoolers need instruction in five key components: phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary and comprehension. Yet, in NCTQ’s 2023 nationwide of the elementary reading course syllabi of nearly 700 teacher preparation programs, they found that only 25% of those programs adequately addressed those five core components of reading instruction. Another 25% didn’t adequately address any of those components. 

The idea that teachers should write their own curriculum is outdated and ill-serving; it’s a holdover from the era before the advent of academic standards in the U.S. and growing knowledge about what makes a good curriculum material. These days, according to a recent RAND American Instructional Resources Survey, encourage teachers to develop their own curriculum. Instead, most principals expect teachers to use their required curriculum materials.

At their best, professional curricula are developed by experts in subject matter and pedagogy, are written to build students’ knowledge over time, and have been endorsed by third party organizations such as that deem the material aligned with state academic standards. 

Adopting a prepared curriculum needn’t turn teachers into robots; it takes considerable skill and subject-matter knowledge to use any materials thoughtfully and productively. Teacher prep programs should give teachers ample, hands-on training on how to use their grade-level curriculum materials and the expertise to make just-in-time adjustments that help students catch up when they are struggling to master those materials. 

States and school districts know that curriculum matters. Many have revamped their policies accordingly. It’s time for teacher preparation programs to do the same.