America’s mathematics challenges extend beyond examination results. They raise questions about how students develop foundational skills, how teachers receive support, and whether education policies prepare young people to use mathematics in college, employment, and everyday decisions.
The 2024 National Assessment of Educational Progress offers a mixed picture. Fourth-grade mathematics scores improved compared with 2022 but remained below 2019 levels. Among twelfth-graders, the average mathematics score fell by three points between 2019 and 2024. These findings provide a reason to examine both early instruction and the preparation students receive before leaving high school.
Toheeb Babatunde Ibrahim brings a classroom and applied mathematics perspective to that discussion. A doctoral student in applied mathematics at Bowling Green State University, he has taught college algebra and calculus and worked on mathematical modeling problems. His academic background includes studies in Nigeria, Cameroon, Italy, and Poland.
In this proposed interview, Ibrahim examines the challenges facing mathematics education in the United States and the practical questions policymakers should ask.
When you look at mathematics education in the United States, what concerns you most?
The continuity of learning deserves more attention. Mathematics builds on earlier knowledge. A student who does not understand fractions may later struggle with algebra, and difficulties with algebra can make calculus feel inaccessible.
We often focus on the course in which a student is struggling without checking where the difficulty began. A college student’s problem with an equation may come from an earlier misunderstanding of negative numbers or proportional reasoning.
Policy should make it easier to identify these gaps early and provide focused help. Moving students through the system without addressing them makes the eventual challenge more difficult.
How should the public interpret disappointing national mathematics results?
The results should prompt serious questions, but we must be careful about the conclusions we draw. A national assessment can show patterns in achievement. By itself, it cannot establish that one teaching method, curriculum, or policy caused those patterns.
I would ask what students are struggling with, which groups need additional support, and whether schools have the capacity to respond.
There is also a communication challenge. Families need understandable information about what their children can do and what they need to learn next. A score becomes more useful when it leads to a clear response.
What does teaching college mathematics reveal about the school-to-college transition?
It highlights the importance of connecting procedures with meaning. Students need to know how to carry out a calculation, but they also need to understand why the method works and when it applies.
Consider a student who can use a formula but cannot explain the quantities inside it. That student may succeed on a familiar question and struggle when the same idea appears in a different setting.
College preparation should therefore include opportunities to interpret graphs, explain reasoning, estimate answers, and recognize whether a result makes sense. Those habits help students work more independently.
Does the United States need a different mathematics curriculum?
Curriculum deserves examination, but changing a curriculum document is only one part of improvement.
A useful curriculum should have a coherent sequence, clear explanations, appropriate practice, and opportunities to apply ideas. Teachers also need time to understand the materials and respond to students’ questions.
I would be cautious about reforms that introduce new expectations without providing the training and classroom resources required to meet them. Policymakers should ask how the proposed change will work during an ordinary lesson, with students who have different levels of preparation.
What should effective support for struggling students involve?
It should begin with identifying a specific learning need. Saying that a student is “weak in mathematics” is too broad to guide instruction.
Does the student misunderstand place value? Have difficulty interpreting a word problem? Apply a rule without understanding its limits? Each requires a different response.
Federal evidence-based guidance for elementary mathematics intervention emphasizes systematic instruction, mathematical language, representations, number lines, and structured work on word problems. Those recommendations offer practical starting points for design support.
My policy preference would be to connect assessment, instruction, and follow-up. Schools should check whether an intervention helps students understand the targeted concept and use it later.
What role should teachers play in shaping mathematics policy?
Teachers should help design implementation because they can identify difficulties that may be invisible in a policy proposal.
A requirement might sound straightforward until a teacher explains the preparation time, scheduling changes, or additional support it demands. Those details affect whether the policy reaches students as intended.
Professional development should also be closely connected to classroom mathematics. Teachers benefit from discussing misconceptions, examining student work, and exploring different ways to explain a difficult idea. A single presentation is unlikely to meet every instructional need.
Can technology and artificial intelligence improve mathematics learning?
They can be useful when their purpose is clear. Graphing tools can help students explore how changing a parameter changes a curve. Interactive representations can make an abstract relationship easier to examine.
The educational question is what the student does with that information. Can the student explain the pattern, make a prediction, and justify an answer?
With artificial intelligence, I would want schools to examine accuracy, privacy, accessibility, and the effect on independent reasoning. An application producing a correct answer does not establish that learning has occurred.
Assessment should include opportunities for students to explain their work and solve problems without relying entirely on automated assistance.
How should policy address unequal access to advanced mathematics?
Schools should examine how students enter advanced courses and what support helps them succeed.
A student’s earlier performance should inform instruction, but it should not become an unchangeable judgment about future ability. There should be clear opportunities to strengthen preparation and reconsider placement.
At the same time, access must include meaningful support. Enrolling students in a demanding course without addressing gaps in prerequisite knowledge can leave them frustrated. Course availability, preparation, guidance, and instructional support need to be considered together.
How does your applied mathematics background shape your view?
Applied mathematics makes the value of understanding especially clear. In modeling, an equation represents assumptions about a real process. You must ask whether those assumptions are reasonable, whether the available data are suitable, and whether the result matches the question.
That way of thinking can enrich mathematics education. Students can examine a budget, interpret health statistics, compare rates of change, or investigate a physical process.
They still need mathematical fluency. Applications give them another reason to develop it and another setting in which to test their understanding.
What would you ask policymakers to prioritize?
I would begin with three connected priorities: stronger foundations, sustained support for teachers, and timely help for students who are falling behind.
I would also ask policymakers to explain how they will judge progress. Adopting a curriculum, purchasing software, or launching a tutoring program is an activity. The intended outcome is improved learning.
A useful evaluation should examine implementation, student understanding, and whether progress reaches those who need the most support. It should also allow for revision when an approach falls short.
What is your final message to students and families?
Difficulty with mathematics should be treated as a problem to investigate. Identify the concept that is unclear, ask for an explanation, and work through examples that reveal the reasoning.
For families, a helpful question is, “Can you explain how you reached that answer?” It can open a conversation about understanding without requiring the parent to know every method.
For the education system, the responsibility is broader: make strong instruction and timely support available consistently. Mathematics education succeeds when more students can reason confidently, recognize mistakes, and use what they know beyond the classroom.
