EQUITY IN MOTION

P- 1 2
PRACTICE CHECKING IN:
APRIL
2 01 8 Are Math Assignments Measuring Up?

EQUITY IN MOTION
THE EDUCATION TRUST | MATH ANALYSIS | APRIL 2018 | 1
EQUITY IN MOTION

AS OUR DATA SHOW, WE AS EDUCATORS

MUST DO MORE TO PROVIDE STUDENTS
WITH QUALITY MATH ASSIGNMENTS THAT
PROMOTE COGNITIVE CHALLENGE, BALANCE
PROCEDURAL SKILLS AND FLUENCY WITH
CONCEPTUAL UNDERSTANDING, PROVIDE
OPPORTUNITIES TO COMMUNICATE
MATHEMATICAL UNDERSTANDING, AND
ENGAGE STUDENTS WITH OPPORTUNITIES
FOR CHOICE AND RELEVANCE IN THEIR
MATH CONTENT.

Sonja Santelises is the vice president of K-12 policy and practice

at The Education Trust and a former chief academic officer. 

Joan Dabrowski is a former director of literacy, teacher coach,

and curriculum writer.

© Copyright 2015 The Education Trust. All rights reserved.

 EQUITY IN MOTION

BY KE I T H DYSA R Z

INTRODUCTION
Students can do no better than the assignments they’re given. That • B
 ut underneath what seemed to be good news, there was
simple idea has been a driving force for The Education Trust’s news of a different sort: Most of the assignments were low-
practice work since its inception in the 1990s. And it animates a new level. Although generally aligned, at least in some part, with
generation of that work today, which involves analyzing classroom grade-appropriate standards, the assignments tended to have
assignments in the context of more rigorous common standards and low cognitive demand, over-emphasize procedural skills
calling teachers to action. This kind of painstaking analysis of the and fluency, and provide little opportunity for students to
daily academic experiences of students provides hugely important communicate their mathematical thinking. Moreover, this
insights into what teachers know and understand about college- and tendency was often worse in higher poverty schools.
career-ready standards — and what those teachers believe students
can do independently as a result of their teaching. • T
 hese results were not just isolated to small districts or in
districts implementing decentralized curriculum practices.
Our experience shows that classroom assignments strongly reflect A fair amount of the assignments we analyzed came from
the expectations that educators hold for their learners, providing a districts that have invested significant time and financial
lens into the day-to-day experiences of students and their interaction resources into aligning curriculum materials to the Common
with curricula. So when assignments are not aligned with grade- Core. Nonetheless, the majority of assignments that their
level standards — as we found with roughly 6 in 10 middle-grades students received on a daily basis — six-plus years into the
literacy assignments in previous review1 — or tap only the lowest adoption of new math standards — remained far below the
levels of cognitive demand, we worry that students will never meet college- and career-ready level.
the standards that state leaders adopted with such fanfare six-plus
years ago. And as an equity-focused organization, we are always As we have seen in past standards movements, rigorous content
troubled when assignments in high-poverty schools are less rigorous standards do not automatically lead to cognitively demanding tasks
than those in low-poverty schools. Yes, low expectations take many that promote mathematical reasoning and problem-solving. Rather,
forms, but classroom assignments are perhaps the most concrete the implementation of the standards and resulting decisions we as
manifestation of them all. educators make about how students experience content are critically
important. If we are going to meet the true intent of the math
Building on our previous analysis of ELA, science, and social studies standards and ensure mathematical proficiency for all students, it is
assignments, we now turn our attention to math. Nationally, student imperative that we give attention to the quality of assignments that
performance in math has been flat, and achievement gaps persist. we are putting in front of students on a daily basis.
And with a growing economy driven by industries in the science,
technology, engineering, and math (STEM) fields, educators are
tasked with instilling interest in and preparing students for college
studies and careers that will supply these in-demand jobs. Now,
Why Assignments?
more than ever, it is critical that we as educators reflect on the daily
experiences of our students, and consider how we are preparing Historically, assignment analysis has been
them to meet the demands of more rigorous math standards. a powerful lens for viewing the day-to-day
experiences of students.2 Assignments:
For this analysis, we reviewed over 1,800 middle-grades assignments
from over 90 math courses from 12 middle schools in six districts • Are a clear window into classroom practice.
across the country (see sidebar: A Deeper Look At What We Did).
We used a framework comprising five key areas: alignment to the • Represent what teachers know and
Common Core, cognitive challenge, aspects of rigor, communicating understand about the college- and career-
mathematical understanding, and the potential for motivation and
ready standards.
engagement (see sidebar: Math Assignment Analysis Framework).
• Give insight into the school leader’s and/or
SO WHAT DID WE FIND? district’s expectations for what and how to
• A
 lignment with at least a part of a grade- or course-appropriate teach.
math content standard was high: roughly three-fourths of
assignments. Furthermore, given the high rate at which • Reflect what teachers believe students
multiple standards were addressed within a single assignment, can do independently as a result of their
it seemed that teachers were grasping the interconnected teaching.
nature of the math standards, which is promising.
• Show how students interact with the
curriculum.

Keith Dysarz is director of P-12 practice at The Education Trust.

THE EDUCATION TRUST | MATH ANALYSIS | APRIL 2018 | 3

 EQUITY IN MOTION

WHAT WE FOUND

1 2
More than 70 percent of math Only 9 percent of assignments
assignments we reviewed were at pushed student thinking to higher levels.
least partially aligned with one or more
grade- or course-appropriate Common The overwhelming majority required low cognitive demand,
Core math content standards. with more than 9 out of 10 assignments limiting students to
recalling a fact, performing a simple procedure, or applying
basic knowledge to a skill or concept. This was even more
And over two-thirds of these aligned tasks addressed pronounced in high-poverty schools, where only 6 percent of
multiple standards, either within the same domain or across assignments were classified as requiring strategic or extended
domains in the same grade level. thinking, compared with 12 percent in low-poverty schools.

3 4
Assignments were more than Less than one-third (32 percent)
twice as likely to focus on procedural of math assignments provided
skills and fluency (87 percent) compared an opportunity for students to
with conceptual understanding communicate their thinking
(38 percent) or application of a or justify their responses.
mathematical concept (39 percent).
The majority of assignments were answer-focused and did not
This imbalance meant less frequent exposure to assignments ask students to defend or explain their thinking at any point
containing multiple representations, a critical indicator for within the task. Only 36 percent required students to write
developing conceptual understanding in mathematics. anything besides an answer, and 95 percent of assignments
Only 39 percent of assignments incorporated varied types showed no opportunity for discussion.
of mathematical representations.

5
Students were rarely given
opportunities for choice in their
assignments (3 percent), and only
2 percent of tasks provided some
aspect of relevancy using real-world
experiences.

Both choice and relevancy are critical motivating factors in

helping to engage adolescents in mathematical content.
Despite this importance, very few assignments went beyond
superficial attempts to connect with real-world events or
students’ own personal experiences.

4 | THE EDUCATION TRUST | MATH ANALYSIS | APRIL 2018

 EQUITY IN MOTION

A DEEPER LOOK AT WHAT WE DID

School Sites and Participants

12 middle schools from 6 school districts

(urban, suburban, and rural) across three states 63 teachers from 91 math courses

Ten of the 12 schools were traditional middle schools (grades Sixth-, seventh-, and eighth-grade teachers
6-8), one was a junior high school (grades 7-9), and one was an teaching math courses, ranging from math 6
intermediate (grades 5-6). through geometry.
Free and reduced-price lunch (FRL) rates ranged from 16 percent Average number of assignments submitted
to 82 percent across the schools. We classified six schools with per course = 20. The median number of
FRL rates higher than 65 percent as high-poverty in our data
assignments submitted per course = 19.
analysis. Student racial/ethnic populations were also different;
students of color (African American and Hispanic students)
ranged from 8 percent to 84 percent of the total population.
The percentage of English learners also varied across
schools (from less than 5 percent to 22 percent).

Assignment Collection

Assignments were defined as any in-school or out-of-school task that a student completed independently or with a
group of peers. Assignments completed during teacher-led practice or assignments given by substitute teachers were
not counted for the purpose of this study.
We collected all classroom assignments meeting our definition over the course of a two-week period from each of our
participating teachers. Collecting all assignments over a consecutive two-week period allowed us to see the full range of
assignments students received (e.g., from brief tasks like exit tickets to longer-term math projects) and provided evidence
of students’ opportunities to learn and the competencies they are typically asked to demonstrate. Two-thirds of the
assignments were collected between February and March 2016, with the remaining one-third collected during winter 2015.
All assignments were given a unique identification number to ensure teacher, school, and district confidentiality.

Assignments Scored
by the Numbers
Total number of math
assignments submitted: 2,176 Total number of math
assignments scored: 1,853 (85%)
Assignments were not scored if they were incomplete or illegible. Additionally, lesson plans or other
curriculum documents were not scored.

Assignments by Math Course Type of Assignments

Math 6 / 30% Pre-Algebra/Algebra Prep / 9% Short/Brief = 46%

Math 7 / 19% Algebra I / 13%

1-2 Class Periods = 53%
Compacted 7/8 / 11% Algebra II / 1%

Math 8 / 14% Geometry / 3% Extended = <1%

Assignments by Honors/ Advanced Designation

Non-honors courses = 87% Honors courses = 13%

THE EDUCATION TRUST | MATH ANALYSIS | APRIL 2018 | 5

 EQUITY IN MOTION

MATH ASSIGNMENT ANALYSIS FRAMEWORK

ALIGNMENT TO THE COMMON CORE

A Common Core-aligned math assignment should fully reflect the depth of the grade-level cluster(s),
grade-level content standard(s), or part(s) thereof to be considered aligned. Additionally,
an aligned assignment should clearly articulate the task so that students can fully understand
what is expected of them as defined by the standard(s).

PERCENTAGE OF
ANALYSIS INDICATOR
ASSIGNMENTS
The assignment aligns to at least part
of one grade- or course-appropriate
Common Core math content standard.
73%
The assignment clearly
articulates the task. 98%
COGNITIVE CHALLENGE
Our analysis utilizes Norman L. Webb’s Depth of Knowledge Levels to assess cognitive challenge.
Assignments at the strategic level (level 3) or extended thinking level (level 4) are considered
to have high levels of cognitive demand.

PERCENTAGE OF
ANALYSIS INDICATOR
ASSIGNMENTS
The assignment requires high levels of
cognitive demand. 9%

ASPECTS OF RIGOR
Mathematical rigor is defined in the Common Core as having a “deep, authentic command of
mathematical concepts” pursued through three aspects of rigor: conceptual understanding,
procedural skills and fluency, and application.3 Connected to these aspects of rigor, particularly
conceptual understanding, is the use of varied mathematical representations.

PERCENTAGE OF
ANALYSIS INDICATOR
ASSIGNMENTS

The assignment incorporates

conceptual understanding. 38%
The assignment incorporates procedural
skills & fluency. 87%
The assignment incorporates application.
39%
The assignment provides
multiple representations of a
concept and/or equation.
39%
6 | THE EDUCATION TRUST | MATH ANALYSIS | APRIL 2018
 EQUITY IN MOTION

COMMUNICATING MATHEMATICAL UNDERSTANDING

A core principle of mathematical understanding is the ability to communicate one’s thinking
using the language of mathematics. This incorporates Standards for Mathematical Practice (SMP)
3 and 6, which note that mathematically proficient students construct and respond to arguments,
justify their conclusions, and communicate to others using precise language.4 Opportunities
for writing and discussion provide insight into student thinking, and are useful indicators to
measure when analyzing math tasks.

PERCENTAGE OF
ANALYSIS INDICATOR
ASSIGNMENTS
The assignment requires students to
communicate their understanding using
the language of mathematics. 32%
The assignment requires students
to write short phrases, sentences,
or one or more paragraphs.
36%
The assignment provides opportunity for
informal or formal discussion. 5%

MOTIVATION AND ENGAGEMENT

Both curriculum and the design of instruction impact student attention, interest, motivation,
and cognitive effort and must be considered in the design of assignments. Specifically, two key
areas hold priority: choice and relevancy. Students should be given opportunities for choice in
their tasks, with rigor maintained across all options. And assignments should be relevant by
focusing on poignant topics, using real-world materials and experiences, and giving students
the opportunity to make connections with their goals, interests, and values.

PERCENTAGE OF
ANALYSIS INDICATOR
ASSIGNMENTS
Students have choice in the assignment
in one of the following areas: content,
product, process, or mathematical tool.
3%
The task is relevant. It focuses
on a poignant topic, uses real-world
materials, and/or gives students
the freedom to make connections
2%
to their experiences, goals,
interests, and values.

THE EDUCATION TRUST | MATH ANALYSIS | APRIL 2018 | 7

 EQUITY IN MOTION

A DEEPER LOOK AT WHAT WE FOUND

The proceeding sections further explore each of our five key findings, with a handful of annotated example assignments selected from
among the more than 1,800 tasks that we reviewed. Throughout each of these sections, we deepen our analysis with additional data and
examine how factors like a specific math course, honors/advanced designation, and rates of free- or reduced-price lunch (FRL, a proxy for
poverty) play out in the types of math assignments that we received. Courses classified as honors or advanced were self-reported by the
school or district. In this analysis of middle school math tasks, all assignments from algebra II and geometry were reported as honors, in
addition to select sections of math 6, math 7, math 8, and algebra I.

ALIGNMENT TO THE COMMON CORE

The number of middle-grades tasks aligned to the Common We would caution, however, that the aggregate rate of alignment
Core was high, with more than 70 percent of the assignments for individual assignments can be somewhat misleading, as
focusing on all or part of a grade- or course-appropriate math we discovered during our analysis. While assignments were
standard. In addition to overall alignment, we also looked considered aligned if they focused on grade-appropriate content
at how frequently assignments addressed multiple standards of a grade-level cluster, standard, or part(s) thereof, we often saw
within a grade or course. Over two-thirds of the aligned tasks teachers give two-week’s worth of assignments that, when taken
addressed more than one standard, either within the same together, did not address all parts of the grade-level standard
domain or across domains in the same grade level. (see Example 1).

That these math assignments mostly aligned to the Common We also observed a handful of instances in which a particular
Core should not be overlooked, particularly given the math standard was incorrectly executed across an entire school or
substantial shift in focus that more rigorous standards call for district. In these assignments, our reviewers could see an attempt
in mathematics. Previous math standards typically required to address a particular standard, but in ways that clearly did not
educators to cover lots of topics in a “mile-wide, inch-deep” meet the standard’s intent. In some cases, these assignments
curriculum approach, and we anticipated seeing remnants of were replicated across multiple courses within a school, and
this affecting the alignment in the current math assignments even throughout the district, leading large numbers of students
that students were receiving. But what we saw instead made us to experience content that entirely missed a standard’s true
cautiously optimistic that teachers are embracing the deep and target. This underscores the critical importance of thorough
narrower philosophy called for in the Common Core — and understanding by teachers and curriculum staff when it comes to
truly using the standards to help focus instruction in the critical the standards and the instructional shifts they demand.
areas that have been identified at each grade level.

Figure 1: Alignment to the Common Core in Math Assignments

Aligns to at least part of one grade- or course-appropriate

Common Core math content standard
73%

Addresses multiple standards within the same grade or course

68%

8 | THE EDUCATION TRUST | MATH ANALYSIS | APRIL 2018

 EQUITY IN MOTION
EXAMPLE 1

MATH 6: PARTIAL, NEVER ALL

Grade 6 Math Standard:5

6.NS.C.6. Understand a rational number as a point on the number line. Extend number line diagrams and coordinate axes familiar
from previous grades to represent points on the line and in the plane with negative number coordinates.

a. Recognize opposite signs of numbers as indicating locations on opposite sides of 0 on the number line; recognize that the opposite
of the opposite of a number is the number itself, e.g., -(-3) = 3, and that 0 is its own opposite.

b. Understand signs of numbers in ordered pairs as indicating locations in quadrants of the coordinate plane; recognize that when
two ordered pairs differ only by signs, the locations of the points are related by reflections across one or both axes.

c. Find and position integers and other rational numbers on a horizontal or vertical number line diagram; find and position pairs
of integers and other rational numbers on a coordinate plane.

ORDERED PAIRS EXAMPLE 1

Math 6
In grade 6, students are expected to extend their
knowledge of the coordinate plane by understanding
the continuous nature of two-dimensional space using
fractional increments. Specific to this standard, students
should identify coordinates that include rational numbers
as well as integers. Additionally, students should be able
to identify points in all four quadrants and discuss the
relationship between the signs of numbers in ordered
pairs and their corresponding effect on the position in the
coordinate plane.

In this example, and in all the subsequent assignments

from this course, students practiced identifying the
coordinate pairs for a given point and labeling points with
a given set of coordinated pairs. This is representative of
the tasks that were intended to meet standard 6.NS.C.6.
Write the ordered pair for each given point. However, no assignments – individually or taken as a
1. B _____ 2. A _____ group from this math 6 course, addressed all aspects of
3. L _____ 4. H _____ standard 6.NS.C.6 — parts a, b, and c — within our two-
week collection period.
Tell what point is at each ordered pair.
5. (2, 3) _____ 6. (-7, 8) _____ While this individual assignment did move beyond the
7. (-5, 0) _____ 8. (6, 1) _____ grade 5 standard by incorporating all four quadrants,
students were never asked to plot rational numbers,
reason about the effects of signs on the position of
Plot the following points on the coordinate grid.
the coordinates, or consider the relationship between
9. S(3, 4) 10. T(3, -7)
coordinate signs and reflections across one or both axes
11. U(-6, -2) 12. X(0, 4)
during the two-weeks in which we gathered assignments.

THE EDUCATION TRUST | MATH ANALYSIS | APRIL 2018 | 9

 EQUITY IN MOTION

COGNITIVE CHALLENGE
We found a very different story when we took a closer look at these algebra I content, we question why they should be relegated to
assignments to analyze cognitive demand. Only 9 percent of tasks assignments any less rigorous. In these cases, the course content and
required high levels of cognitive demand that pushed student instructional standards should change; opportunities to experience
thinking to the strategic level. And when we disaggregated the data cognitively challenging math tasks should not. This becomes even
by school FRL rates, we found an even bigger disparity: In high- more worrisome when you consider the intersection of student
poverty schools, only 6 percent of assignments were classified as demographics and course access that we typically find in schools
requiring strategic thinking, compared with 12 percent in more and districts across the country — specifically the disproportionate
affluent schools. The majority of assignments demanded little of number of low-income students and students of color placed in
students, not moving them beyond recalling a fact, performing a lower level, remedial courses. Could this be yet another example of
simple procedure, or applying basic knowledge to a skill or concept. well-intentioned, but misguided, efforts to “catch students up” by
No assignments in the over 1,800 that we collected pushed students slowing them down?
to extended thinking (see Figure 2).
Not surprisingly, assignments with higher levels of cognitive
Given that we collected all tasks from teachers (including warm-ups, demand were also much more likely to incorporate a number
procedural practice, and exit tickets), we certainly would not expect of other indicators on our framework, including opportunities
all assignments to be cognitively demanding. We did, however, to communicate mathematical understanding and develop
assume that the progression of a particular topic would unfold conceptual understanding. And these high-demand assignments
over a two-week period and allow us to see a rich distribution of almost always took longer to complete, which makes us wonder
tasks that promoted mathematical reasoning and problem-solving. about the impact of repetitive routines and formulaic structures
Unfortunately, that was not the case. Teachers in more than three- that we often find in math classrooms. Could it be that we are
fourths of the courses that we analyzed gave two or fewer cognitively seeing the results of such structures hinder our ability to get
demanding assignments within the two-week period, with students to more challenging math tasks that promote reasoning and
in 38 percent of courses never experiencing even a single task problem-solving, and instead, implementing answer-focused
requiring strategic or extended thinking. tasks centered on the application of a formula or routine
procedure?6 Or should we be rethinking how we use warm-ups
We were particularly alarmed by the extremely low number of and exit tickets to promote higher levels of cognitive demand
challenging tasks in the pre-algebra/algebra-prep courses that (see Example 2)? The warm-ups and exit tickets we saw in
eighth-graders took when they were not placed in algebra I. In our analysis typically looked like Assignment A, though we
these remedial courses, 97 percent of the assignments fell at questioned why individual prompts from Assignment B couldn’t
the recall or basic application levels. While the students in pre- be used as stand-alone warm-ups or exit tickets in the same way,
algebra/algebra-prep courses may have been unprepared for thereby creating brief tasks with high cognitive demand.

Figure 2: Cognitive Challenge of Assignments

Based on Norman L. Webb’s Depth of Knowledge (DOK) Levels

Recall and Reproduction

Recall a fact, term, principle, concept; perform a routine procedure or a simple algorithm;
32% or apply a formula.

Basic Application of Skills/Concepts

Use information, apply conceptual knowledge, select appropriate procedures for a task,
complete two or more steps with decision points along the way, complete routine problems,
59% organize/display data, or interpret/use sample data.

Strategic Thinking
Requires reasoning or developing a plan or sequence of steps to approach the problem;
requires some decision-making and justification; it’s abstract, complex, or non-routine; and
9% there is often more than one possible answer.

Extended Thinking
An investigation or application to real world; requires time to research, problem-solve, and
process multiple conditions of the problem or task; and requires non-routine manipulations
0% across disciplines/content areas/multiple sources.

10 | THE EDUCATION TRUST | MATH ANALYSIS | APRIL 2018

 EQUITY IN MOTION
EXAMPLE 2
MATH 8 HONORS: A TALE OF TWO TASKS

Algebra Standard:7

A.SSE.A.2 Use the structure of an expression to identify ways to rewrite it. For example, see x4 - y4 as (x2)2 - (y2)2,
thus recognizing it as a difference of squares that can be factored as (x2 - y2)(x2 + y2).

ASSIGNMENT A EXAMPLE 2
Math 8 Honors
For each of the following problems, factor completely (you may
have to use more than one type of factoring), and state for each Assignments A and B are both aligned to the same
step which type of factoring you are using. Label as “PRIME” algebra standard that focuses on seeing structure and
if a polynomial cannot be factored. producing equivalent forms of expressions (A.SSE.A.2).
Both tasks also incorporate Math Practice Standard 7 —
1. -x 10 + 25 7. x 16 – 256 look for and make use of structure. And both assignments
2. 3x 4 – 12 8. x 2 + 8x + 15 ask students to use their procedural knowledge of
factoring, yet do so in distinct ways, ultimately leading to
3. x 2 – 8x + 15 9. 2x 2 + 12x – 32 notably different levels of cognitive challenge.
4. 10x 2 – 28x – 6 10. 25 – 10x + x 2
Assignment A is a more conventional task found in algebra
5. 5x3 b – 3x2 b2 + 15x5 b 11. 3x 2 + 3x – 90 courses that asks students to select an appropriate
procedure to factor different types of polynomial
6. x 4 + x 3 – 6x 2 12. x 8 – x 4
expressions – a routine algebraic practice that requires the
basic application of a skill/concept (DOK Level 2).

Assignment B also requires students to use their knowledge

ASSIGNMENT B of appropriate procedures, but does so in a way that requires
strategic thinking (DOK Level 3) by having students create
Create your own problems. Create expressions that can be factored
their own polynomials. To complete this task, students must
according to the following criteria. Briefly explain the process you used to
develop a plan to approach the problems, make decisions
create your expression.
about how to solve, and justify their solutions. Additionally,
the prompts in Assignment B allow for more than one
1. A quadratic trinomial that has a leading coefficient between 1 and 5. possible answer. This assignment also demonstrates how a
The trinomial should be factorable. procedural task can have high cognitive demand. Extension
questions such as those posed in questions 2, 3, and 4
2. A
 n expression that can be factored using the greatest common factoring elevate the rigor from solely procedural to also include
first, then difference of squares factoring. The greatest common factor conceptual understanding about polynomial factoring by
should be 5. Explain your process for determining your expression. incorporating Math Practice Standard 3 — construct viable
arguments and critique the reasoning of others.
3. A
 quadratic trinomial with a leading coefficient of 1 that can first be
factored using greatest common factoring. The greatest common factor
Assignments A and B are both opportunities for students
should be 2x. Explain your process for determining your expression.
to meet the standards. However, only providing students
(Alternate wording: An expression with the greatest common factor of
with problems in Assignment A limits their opportunity to
2x. When the greatest common factor is factored out, the remaining
engage in cognitively demanding tasks.
expression is a quadratic trinomial with a leading coefficient of 1.
Explain your process for determining your expression.)

4. A
 n expression that can first be factored using the greatest common
factoring with a factor of 3x2. Explain why there are an infinite number
of polynomial expressions that can satisfy the description.

THE EDUCATION TRUST | MATH ANALYSIS | APRIL 2018 | 11

 EQUITY IN MOTION

ASPECTS OF RIGOR
A central tenet of the Common Core math standards is the equal Understandably, some of the middle-grades standards portrayed in
pursuit of rigor in three areas — conceptual understanding, assignments during our collection period may have lent themselves
procedural skills and fluency, and application — so that students more clearly to a particular aspect of rigor. But even in the two-
can obtain an authentic command of mathematical concepts.8 week window in which we collected assignments, it seemed
Taken together, these aspects of rigor allow students to develop extreme for the practice of procedural skills and fluency to be so
a deep understanding of mathematical content, carry out disproportionately stressed. Given that the time students spend
procedures flexibly and accurately, and apply their knowledge studying math is finite, this over-reliance on a particular aspect of
in mathematical situations. Importantly, these three should be rigor has the potential adverse effect of coming at the expense of
pursued with equal intensity. others. If this same pattern is emphasized throughout the school
year, how can students experience the balance in rigor called for
However, in our analysis of math assignments, what we in the standards? Does this not lead to a narrow, answer-focused
found was an over-emphasis on procedural skills and fluency perception of mathematics rather than the coherent body of
compared with the other two aspects of rigor (see Figure knowledge it is intended to be?
3). Assignments were more than twice as likely to focus on
procedural skills and fluency (87 percent) compared with Related to this, we also measured the use of multiple representations
conceptual understanding (38 percent) or application of a within each assignment, including contextual, visual, verbal,
mathematical concept (39 percent). Though half of the tasks physical, and symbolic forms.9 Thirty-nine percent of assignments
we reviewed contained two or more aspects of rigor within the prompted students to access, approach, or solve problems in
same assignment, the other half focused solely on procedural more than one way using multiple representations. And logically,
fluency. And when multiple aspects of rigor were present in assignments incorporating multiple representations were more
a single assignment, they were typically isolated as discrete likely to focus on conceptual understanding and application of
sections in a particular order (e.g., a section of procedural mathematical content rather than procedural skills and fluency.
problems at the beginning and problems involving application This opportunity to interact with varied representations in math
toward the end) rather than being integrated. Assignments like tasks is critical for providing students multiple entry points into
Example 3 were rare in our analysis. the same problem — a major implication in the equitable access
of content in our math classrooms.

Figure 3: Aspects of Rigor in Assignments

Conceptual Understanding
Students access concepts from a number of perspectives in order to see math as more than
38% a set of mnemonics or discreet procedures.

Procedural Skills and Fluency

Students have speed and accuracy in calculation in order to have access to more complex
concepts and procedures.
87%

Application
Students use math in situations that require mathematical knowledge.
39%

12 | THE EDUCATION TRUST | MATH ANALYSIS | APRIL 2018

 EQUITY IN MOTION
EXAMPLE 3

MATH 8: A BALANCING ACT

Grade 8 Math Standard:10

8.SP.A.4 Understand that patterns of association can also be seen in bivariate categorical data by displaying frequencies and relative
frequencies in a two-way table. Construct and interpret a two-way table summarizing data on two categorical variables collected from
the same subjects. Use relative frequencies calculated for rows or columns to describe possible association between the two variables.

SHHH … IT’S A SURPRISE! EXAMPLE 3

Your family plans a surprise party for you. All your family Math 8
and friends will be there. When you arrive, this is what This example is an aligned assignment that integrates
you discover: conceptual understanding, procedural skills, and application
• 75 people are at the party. in a meaningful way. The task also shows how rigor can be
• 12 are family. enhanced by asking purposeful questions that can result in
• 23 are neither a friend nor family. a deeper understanding of a mathematical concept.
• 10 are both a friend and a family member.
Conceptual understanding can be found, as students:
Part A. Use the information above to answer the
• T ranslate between multiple representations of bivariate
following questions:
categorical data that include verbal descriptions with
• How many of your friends came to the party?
numbers and tables.
• How many of your family members came to the party?
• R eason about which categories will make up the
Part B. Create a two-way table that displays the same data. relative frequencies based on the data.
Total • E xplain why and justify their thinking at multiple points
throughout the task.

Total
Procedural skills and fluency can be found, as students:
• If you were not given all of the data needed to complete a • C onstruct a two-way table to record frequencies of
two-way table, can they be calculated? Explain how. bivariate categorical data in part B.
• Compare and contrast the information that is readily
• C alculate relative frequencies in order to complete the
available in each representation.
table in part C.
Part C. Recreate your table below with the relative • Calculate probability in part C.
frequencies, based on the data given in Part B.
Total Application can be found, as students:
• D
 escribe possible patterns of association for bivariate
Total categorical data in a real-world context.
• E xplain what the individual data summaries represent
• H  ow did you change from raw data to relative
in terms of the context of the problem.
frequencies?
• If a guest is selected at random, what is the probability • U
 se the data to make generalizations or predictions of
that the guest is neither a friend nor a relative? expected behavior.
• Give at least 3 statements that provide an interpretation It is important to remember that all three aspects of
of the association between variables based on your table. rigor do not always have to be presented together, just
as they do not always have to be presented separately.
Instructional balance among the three should be evident
across a series of assignments and/or unit of study.

THE EDUCATION TRUST | MATH ANALYSIS | APRIL 2018 | 13

 EQUITY IN MOTION

COMMUNICATING MATHEMATICAL UNDERSTANDING

The classroom tasks students receive directly impact their to justify or explain their answer — significantly improve the
ability to cultivate the critical skills of reasoning, justification, possibility for mathematical communication?
and argumentation — all essential elements of learning to “do
mathematics.”11 In the Common Core, we see these dominantly We also attempted to gauge the level of mathematical discourse
emphasized in at least two of the eight Standards of Mathematical by measuring opportunities for discussion evident within the
Practice: SMP 3 (Construct viable arguments and critique the task itself. Only 5 percent of assignments showed any opportunity
reasoning of others) and SMP 6 (Attend to precision).12 Yet for discussion, be it formal or informal (see Figure 5). And though
despite this attention within the standards, we found limited our analysis may not have captured the math conversations that
opportunity for students to engage in these important processes took place within the lesson as a whole, we gave credit
when completing their assignments. Just over one-third of to assignments that referenced a previous or future discussion
the tasks we reviewed asked students to communicate their (see Example 4). Still, the vast majority of tasks showed no sign
understanding using the language of mathematics. The majority of providing opportunities for students to discuss their thinking,
of assignments were answer-focused and did not ask students to create an argument, or critique the argument of others. Even
justify or explain their thinking at any point within the task. if we assume that a greater number of discussions took place
during the lesson that the assignment did not capture, it seems
Moreover, when it came to written explanations, only 36 percent like a missed opportunity not to reinforce these, even if just in
required students to write anything besides an answer, with almost reference, within the classroom tasks that students received.
two-thirds requiring no writing or communication whatsoever
(see Figure 4). The 4 percent of assignments that asked students Like many of our other indicators, we also discovered interesting
to write more than a few sentences almost always consisted of a patterns when we looked at this data by math course and school
single constructed response question at the end of an assignment. poverty levels. Opportunities to communicate mathematical
And while we saw a handful of assignments that stated the understanding were significantly higher in the advanced courses
old math adage “show your work,” this phrase often stood in of compacted 7/8, algebra I, algebra II, and geometry compared
isolation, as if to be obligatory, without further direction or with other non-advanced courses. And in schools with lower FRL
indication of what was expected of students. Would an easy, but rates, the number of assignments that required justification or
intentional, enhancement to that statement — asking students argumentation was higher (38 percent) compared with tasks in
high-poverty schools (26 percent).

Given these results, we wonder: Are math classrooms continuing

Communicating Mathematical Understanding
to operate in a teacher-centered way, where teachers tell students
• S
 MP 3: Construct Viable Arguments and Critique the content they need to know and students rely on teachers to
the Reasoning of Others validate their thinking and responses?13 And if so, what self-
imposed barriers are we creating that may be preventing students
• SMP 6: Attend to Precision from meeting the demands of college- and career-ready standards,
particularly for low-income students and students of color for
• M
 athematically proficient students construct and
whom this type of teacher-centered instruction is more common?
respond to arguments, justify their conclusions, and
communicate to others using precise language.

Figure 4: Writing Demand of Assignments Figure 5: Discussion Demand of Assignments

No writing or communication No evidence of discussion

63% 95%

Short phrases up to 2 sentences Informal and/or brief

discussion
32% 3%

Paragraph or more Formal and/or extended

discussion
4% 2%

14 | THE EDUCATION TRUST | MATH ANALYSIS | APRIL 2018

 EQUITY IN MOTION
EXAMPLE 4

MATH 6: COMMUNICATING UNDERSTANDING

Grade 6 Math Standard:14

6.G.A.1 . Find the area of right triangles, other triangles, special quadrilaterals, and polygons by composing into rectangles or
decomposing into triangles and other shapes; apply these techniques in the context of solving real-world and mathematical problems.

AREA OF QUADRILATERALS EXAMPLE 4

Math 6
Directions: Work on the exercises independently and then
discuss your answers with your table. Be prepared to discuss In this assignment, students find the areas of triangles
the results as a class. and simple polygonal regions in the coordinate plane by
composing into rectangles and decomposing into triangles
and quadrilaterals (6.G.A.1). Students also use the
coordinate plane as a tool to determine the area of figures
with vertices at grid points.

This assignment demonstrates mathematical

communication by asking students to think, talk, and write
about their responses.

• T he directions of this task convey the expectations of

mathematical discourse.

• D
 uring the check-in with a partner and the whole class
discussion, students have the opportunity to critique
the reasoning of others (SMP 3) and communicate their
understanding using the language of mathematics
1. Find the area of figure d by using what you know about the
(SMP 6).
area of triangles and rectangles.
• In questions 3 and 4, students reflect on their learning,
2. Choose a quadrilateral from the figures above. deepening their understanding of strategic approaches
to finding area by writing to explain different
a. Find the area of the quadrilateral using mathematical processes that produce the same
two different methods. solution. The expected writing output is more than two
sentences.
b. Describe the methods used, and explain
why they result in the same area. The expectations for mathematical communication in
this assignment produce valuable information, allowing
teachers to formatively assess learning and provide
3. C ompare your methods and results with your partner.
feedback based on student responses.
What is the same about your methods, and what is different?

4. C hoose a different quadrilateral from the remaining figures.

Find the area of the quadrilateral using two different methods.
Discuss the advantages or disadvantages of each method.

THE EDUCATION TRUST | MATH ANALYSIS | APRIL 2018 | 15

 EQUITY IN MOTION

MOTIVATION AND ENGAGEMENT

Much like our literacy analysis, a review of middle school math a fixed mindset that certain students are innately better at math
assignments showed little opportunity for choice and insufficient than others. Students come to see math as something that is
attempts at relevancy in the tasks that were given to students. beyond them, particularly when they are not given opportunities
Only 3 percent of assignments offered students choice in content, to connect it to their interests or experiences.15 Providing
product, or process. And only 2 percent of assignments attempted engaging and relevant tasks that connect mathematics to students’
to make the content relevant by focusing on a poignant topic, experiences and backgrounds can help students see themselves
using real-world materials, or connecting with students’ interests as a “doer of math,” rather than a passive spectator — something
and values (see Figure 6). particularly important as we work to address access and equity
issues in mathematics for historically underserved populations.16
Many assignments attempted to connect with students using word
problems that infused popular icons or familiar contexts (e.g., word The need to engage students in mathematics is even more critical,
problems about concert ticket sales). While real-life references and given frequently proclaimed phrases — “I’m not a math person”
contexts can be helpful hooks, we do not consider them substitutes or “I’m never going to use <insert math topic>” — that all math
for meaningful connections with a student’s experiences. Most often, teachers have heard from their students at one point or another in
the assignments that focused on a poignant topic or made relevant a given school year. The Common Core math standards provide
connections centered on data collection and analysis based on a a unique opportunity for educators to address these issues of
student’s personal interests (see Example 5). math identity, inclusion, motivation, and engagement; so that all
students experience mathematics in a way that prepares them for
It is particularly troubling that opportunities for choice and success in college and their careers. High-quality, relevant classroom
relevancy in math tasks were so low, given what we know assignments should be a critical tool for accomplishing this.
about best practices for engaging and motivating adolescents in
mathematics. Undesirable math identities and attitudes often start
at a young age and are reinforced in multiple ways, promoting

Figure 6: Choice and Relevancy

Students have choice in the assignment in one of the following areas: content, product,
process, or mathematical tool.
3%

The task is relevant. It focuses on a poignant topic, uses real-world materials, and/or gives
students the freedom to make connections to their experiences, goals, interests, and values.
2%

16 | THE EDUCATION TRUST | MATH ANALYSIS | APRIL 2018

 EQUITY IN MOTION
EXAMPLE 5

MATH 8: SEEING ONESELF IN MATHEMATICS CONTENT

THROUGH RELEVANCY AND CHOICE
Grade 8 Math Standard:17

8.F.B.5 Describe qualitatively the functional relationship between two quantities by analyzing a graph (e.g., where the function is increasing
or decreasing, linear or nonlinear). Sketch a graph that exhibits the qualitative features of a function that has been described verbally.

CREATING A CHANGE STORY EXAMPLE 5

Directions: During our unit on linear and nonlinear functions, we have been Math 8
analyzing graphs to describe relationships between two variables. In this Assignments like this one were rare. This task not only
culminating project, you will work as a group to create a story about a changing highlights relevancy and choice, but is also aligned to a
quantity over time. You will record your story and create a graph that models it. grade-appropriate standard, requires strategic thinking,
Your story should be about the change in a quantity (e.g., speed, height, length, and encourages collaboration and communication
volume, size, weight, distance to OR away from something) over time. through discussion with classmates. Students work in
groups to select a variable of interest (distance, speed,
SETUP etc.) that they can measure over time, and then create
1. C hoose roles for each group member: director, lead actor, director of props, a video and graph displaying the relationship between
recorder, final graph creator, and presenter. the two quantities. Given the connection to real-world
2. A s a group, decide which quantity you want to measure over time. Choose a experiences and the choices in product (via varying
variable that can be shown on video changing over a 15-second time frame. contexts) and process, this assignment has the potential
to engage students with a wide range of interests and
VIDEO
abilities in deep mathematical thinking.
1. C reate a video script for your lead actor to use (with props!) that portrays the
variable’s change in quantity over time. There must be at least two different
Relevance
actions (increasing, decreasing, constant, etc.).
2. U sing your script, props, and an iPad, the recorder should record your This assignment meaningfully connects mathematical
15-second change story, starring your group’s lead actor. topics (describing qualitatively the functional relationship
3. Once the graphing story begins, the director should count 15 seconds out loud. between two quantities by analyzing a graph and sketching
(This will help once you start sketching your graph!) a graph that exhibits the qualitative features of a function
that has been described verbally) to experiences that
GRAPH are relevant to students’ lives. Students are prompted to
4. W hen your video is complete, each member of your group should watch the choose a real-life experience that is relevant to them to
video and graph the story on their own. Be sure to: record and then translate into a graphical representation.
a) decide on a graph title that accurately describes what is happening, and This assignment provides students with freedom to make
b) label your y-axis (you can choose the exact scale of your y-axis later). connections to their experiences and interests.
5. E ach group member should share their graph. Once all group members
have presented, discuss the parts of each group member’s graph that most Choice
accurately reflect the change story your group recorded. Be sure to ask your
In this assignment, students can choose what graphing
peers to justify and explain their thinking!
story they want to tell and how it will be depicted in their
6. B ased on this discussion, the final graph creator should sketch the group’s
video. They are also asked to select which role they will
final graph that will be presented.
assume in producing the video, providing an opportunity
PRESENT for individuals to highlight their identified strengths.
7. T he presenter, with support from the group, should present the team’s Additionally, students are provided a choice in how they
graphing story to the class. Be sure to show your recorded video and describe will graph their story.
what is happening as the video plays.
8. A sk classmates to sketch their own graph based on the video and description
provided by the presenter.
9. R eveal the group’s graph and have a brief discussion on similarities and
differences between what the group created and what your classmates
sketched.

THE EDUCATION TRUST | MATH ANALYSIS | APRIL 2018 | 17

 EQUITY IN MOTION

WHERE DO WE GO NEXT?
This analysis of middle-grades math assignments show that • H
 ow are we utilizing multiple representations as an
schools and districts across the country are falling short when it opportunity to build conceptual understanding through
comes to providing their students with high-quality math tasks multiple points of entry?
that meet the demands of college- and career-ready standards.
The high percentage of aligned assignments demonstrates • H
 ow frequently are we asking students to communicate
that teachers are adjusting from the “mile-wide” philosophy their mathematical understanding by asking them to
of previous standards movements and embracing the focused explain or justify their responses, or critique the reasoning
prioritization of content that the math standards provide. These of others?
high rates of alignment should be celebrated and strengthened.
However, alignment on its own is not enough to meet the high • W
 hat role does student choice play in our math
bar set by rigorous college- and career-ready math standards. classrooms?
As our data show, we as educators must do more to provide
students with quality math assignments that promote cognitive • D
 o we offer opportunities for students to bring their own
challenge, balance procedural skills and fluency with conceptual ideas, experiences, and opinions into the work they do?
understanding, provide opportunities to communicate
mathematical understanding, and engage students with 2. B
 egin with assignments. As we suggested in our literacy
opportunities for choice and relevance in their math content. analysis, teachers and leaders need to track what their students
As with our literacy analysis, we recommend two starting points are being asked to do on a daily basis in their classrooms.
for this work: Analyzing the math tasks that students experience provides
the necessary insight to gauge the quality of college- and
1. D
 ig deeper through questions. This analysis has cued for us career-ready standards implementation. It illuminates how
important questions that all stakeholders should be asking the standards have been actualized in classrooms. And it
about math tasks in middle schools in the era of college- and prompts us to question the frequency with which we are
career-ready learning standards. Now more than ever, we providing students with high-quality math tasks that promote
wonder: mathematical reasoning and problem-solving.

• W
 hat level of cognitive demand are we asking of our B
 ased on our analysis, we have created a Math Assignment
students in mathematics? Are we pushing students, Analysis Guide that practitioners can use to engage in their own
particularly low-income students and students of color, to analysis of math assignments in their school or district. And
think strategically in math? When and how frequently? we look forward to diving deeper into policy questions and
implications that schools, districts, and states might want to
• D
 o we have different expectations for what cognitive consider (e.g., the role of assessment expectations, instructional
demand levels can be met based on accelerated or remedial time, and curriculum decisions) as they work to ensure their
math course identification? How can we provide all students students are college- and career-ready. As we explore these
in all courses cognitively challenging math tasks? topics in further detail, it is already clear that important work
lies ahead for those committed and determined to strengthen
• H
 ow are we ensuring a balance between procedural skills the implementation of these demanding standards. Our
and fluency, conceptual understanding, and application nation’s students deserve no less.
within and across the classroom assignments we provide
for our students?

18 | THE EDUCATION TRUST | MATH ANALYSIS | APRIL 2018

 EQUITY IN MOTION

NOTES:
1. Sonja Brookins Santelises and Joan Dabrowski, “Checking In: Do Classroom Assign-
ments Reflect Today’s Higher Standards?” (Washington, D.C.: The Education Trust,
September 2015), https://edtrust.org/resource/classroomassignments/.
2. Lindsay Clare and Pamela R. Aschbacher, “Exploring the Technical Quality of Using
Assignments and Student Work as Indicators of Classroom Practice,” Educational
Assessment 7, no. 1 (2001): 39-59.
3. “Common Core State Standards for Mathematics” (Washington, DC: National
Governors Association for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers,
2010), http://www.corestandards.org/other-resources/key-shifts-in-mathematics/.
4. Common Core State Standards.
5. Common Core State Standards.
6. Cathy L. Seeley, Smarter Than We Think: More messages about math, teaching, and
learning in the 21st century (Sausalito, Calif.: Math Solutions, 2014): 264.
7. Common Core State Standards.
8. “Common Core State Standards for Mathematics” (Washington, DC: National
Governors Association for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers,
2010), http://www.corestandards.org/other-resources/key-shifts-in-mathematics/.
9. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Principles to Actions: Ensuring
Mathematical Success for All (2014): 24-25.
10. Common Core State Standards.
11. Courtney Koestler et al., Connecting the NCTM Process Standards & the CCSSM
Practices (National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, 2013): 29-30.
12. These practice standards build on the prior recommendations of the National
Council of Teachers of Mathematics’ Reasoning and Proof, Communications, and
Representation Process Standards, as well as the National Research Council’s
adaptive reasoning strand from Adding It Up.
13. Cathy L. Seeley, Smarter Than We Think: More messages about math, teaching,
and learning in the 21st century (Sausalito, Calif.: Math Solutions, 2014): 89-90.
14. Common Core State Standards.
15. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Principles to Actions: Ensuring
Mathematical Success for All (2014): 62.
16. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Principles to Actions: Ensuring
Mathematical Success for All (2014): 60.
17. Common Core State Standards.

THE EDUCATION TRUST | MATH ANALYSIS | APRIL 2018 | 19

 EQUITY IN MOTION

ABOUT THE EDUCATION TRUST

The Education Trust is a nonprofit organization that promotes closing opportunity gaps
by expanding excellence and equity in education for students of color and those from low-
income families from pre-kindergarten through college. Through research and advocacy,
the organization builds and engages diverse communities that care about education
equity, increases political and public will to act on equity issues, and increases college
access and completion for historically underserved students.

EQUITY IN MOTION
ABOUT THIS SERIES

In this series, we will take a close look at how issues of equity are playing out in the daily
activities of schools and educators. We aim to advance the work of practitioners and connect
district, state, and federal actions aimed at improving education for low-income students
with meaningful teaching and learning in schools. Most importantly, however, work in this
series will continue to ask how we can adjust our practices, systems, and policies so that
low-income students and students of color are actually benefitting from these efforts.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We are grateful to the many individuals that contributed to the development of this work.
A special thanks to our math team leads, Nakeia Drummond, Toya Jones Frank, and Beyunka
Scates for their work in making this analysis possible. We would also like to extend our
gratitude to the thought partners that provided valuable insight and feedback on this work,
including: Achieve, The Charles A. Dana Center at The University of Texas at Austin, and
Student Achievement Partners.

1 2 5 0 H S T R E E T, N W, S U I T E 7 0 0 , WA S H I N G T O N , D . C . 2 0 0 0 5
P 2 0 2 - 2 9 3 - 1 2 1 7 F 2 0 2 - 2 9 3 - 2 6 0 5 W W W . E D T R U S T. O R G
20 | THE EDUCATION TRUST | MATH ANALYSIS | APRIL 2018