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.

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation’s investment marks the beginning of a decade-long strategy to prioritize math gains, particularly for Black, Latino and low-income students, making the subject its primary K-12 investment for the next decade.

The Foundation’s work in math is , but making it their top priority signals a major shift: from roughly 40% of its K-12 budget to 100% through 2026.

“Math helps students make sense of the world. It gives them critical thinking and problem solving skills they can use later as adults,” said Bob Hughes, director of the Gates Foundation’s K-12 program on a press call earlier this week. 

“And even before the pandemic, too many students did not have equitable , advanced coursework, high quality curriculum, tutoring or other resources necessary to master, enjoy and succeed at math.” 

New programming will likely roll out next year, targeted in states with high numbers of Black, Latino and low-income students who disproportionately struggle with math: California, Florida, New York, and Texas.

Nationwide, the latest math scores from suggest the pandemic eliminated two decades of growth and exacerbated gaps along racial lines. 

Such a setback will have long-term impacts on students’ economic and social mobility. Research has long-affirmed students who , for instance, are twice as likely to graduate high school and . 

In efforts to flip the bleak script, the Foundation’s strategy includes focusing on elementary and middle schools and funding teacher preparation; research, along with culturally, socially relevant curricula and materials. In feedback sessions, parents told the Foundation their children want to know why math matters in their lives. To make the connection, Gates will prioritize applied statistics and data science-related math pathways in high school, courses that help students make sense of political polls and health risk assessment amid the pandemic.

To address historically persistent shortages of math teachers, the Foundation is backing alternative models to build up pipelines. Districts that Gates already partners with in western Texas are building residency programs — modeled after medical residencies, providing in-house preparation — for community members and staff to become licensed without the financial barriers of traditional programs. In Baltimore, lead and early career teachers are paired up to support Algebra learning.

“We’re spreading the expertise, but also giving other teachers who might not be at that level the opportunity to come alongside and support in real time,” said Sonja Santileses, CEO of Baltimore City Schools. “…There are ways of inducting folks into mathematics teaching as well as looking at teaching not as just one teacher in front of the classroom anymore, which we’ve been talking about for years.”

Gates officials also anticipate efforts, like improving assessments or professional development, will benefit other subject areas. 

“Improving math isn’t a pipe dream. We can create classrooms and instruction where everyone is good at math. So today is the beginning — much remains to be done,” Hughes said, adding more funding may be on the horizon, to be determined with the next budgeting cycle in 2026. 

For now, financial resources will be shifted away from English language arts — historically about 20% of the K-12 budget — to fund more math initiatives, though the Foundation is working with other philanthropies to ensure funding in the humanities remains. 

“We don’t want the entire field to follow us to math,” Hughes said. “We’re really hoping to go deep to understand what does the professional development need to look like around something as concrete as fractions … understand the barriers that young people or teachers face in enacting instructional visions and then use that to inform the entire field.”

The $1.1 billion for math, while comparable to recent funding for teacher effectiveness, is four times the amount dedicated to the Foundation’s . Hughes said the experience reaffirmed the reality that every district has different assets and priorities to consider when adopting new curricula — it can’t be prescribed as a one-size-fits-all. 

“We’re instead saying, we’re going to try to improve materials,” said Hughes, “give you greater insight into what’s effective for different types of students and populations, and work to ensure that you have those tools.”

Disclosure: The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation provides financial support to The 74.