Formative Assessment in Math: The Leadership Shift That Changes Everything

Far too many students are navigating our math classrooms with a single, destructive belief: “I’m just not a math person.” This belief doesn’t come from thin air. It’s often shaped—intentionally or not—by the way we assess student learning. As school leaders, if we want to close achievement gaps and transform how students experience mathematics, we must first evaluate what matters most for student learning.

And here’s the hard truth: many of our current assessment practices are working against us.

Why Traditional Assessment Practices Are Failing Our Students

Most traditional assessments do little more than label and sort students. They tell teachers what students know—but they rarely tell students anything meaningful. Instead, students often walk away with grades that signal either success or failure, with no clear understanding of how to grow. That’s not assessment. That’s judgment.

Ask yourself: Are the assessment systems in your school helping students answer these three critical questions?

1. What did I do well?

2. What areas still need improvement?

3. What specific actions can I take to increase my understanding and/or improve my performance?

   
   

If the answer is no, your school may be prioritizing the wrong data—and unintentionally reinforcing low expectations, particularly for your most marginalized learners.

The Problem with the “Data-Driven” Approach

We’ve been told to be data-driven. But are we measuring what matters or just what’s easy?

Many commonly used benchmark assessments may provide useful data for teachers—but they often leave students without any actionable feedback to guide their learning. Meanwhile, these assessments consume significant instructional time, yet the insights they provide often fall short of justifying the disruption—especially when they contribute to labeling students in ways that undermine their confidence in math.

Even worse, some students—particularly those already marginalized—begin to see themselves through the lens of these assessments. They internalize labels like “low,” “behind,” or “remedial,” and start to disengage from the very instruction meant to support them.

Compounding this issue is a limited view of what counts as data. Too often, school leaders and instructional teams equate data exclusively with standardized test scores—while overlooking rich, qualitative sources of information that offer deeper insight into student learning. Student work samples, self-assessment rubrics, open-ended survey responses, classroom interviews, and reflective journals can provide powerful evidence of student thinking, persistence, and growth over time.

When we focus only on numerical scores, we miss the nuances of student understanding—and more importantly, we miss opportunities to build student agency, confidence, and ownership of their learning.

The Role of Stereotypes and Deficit Thinking

Assessment practices don’t exist in a vacuum. When layered on top of racial, cultural, or gender-based stereotypes, they become a tool for perpetuating inequity.

Teachers may not even realize it, but beliefs like “Black boys don’t try,” “Asian students are naturally good at math,” or “Girls aren’t as confident in math” shape how we interpret assessment results. These biases influence which students are seen as “gifted,” who gets pushed into enrichment, and who’s constantly pulled out for intervention.

That’s why meaningful change in math assessment starts with leaders who are willing to lead with purpose and clarity.

What Leadership for Equitable Assessment Looks Like

Shifting your school’s approach to assessment means shifting your leadership stance. You must:

• Expect more from all students, and act accordingly—not by assigning more work, but by assigning work that matters.

• Include others as experts, especially students, in the learning process.

• Be critically conscious of how current systems may disadvantage certain students.

• Assess, activate, and build on students’ prior knowledge—academic, cultural, and personal.

  
  

In short, it’s time to move from assessment for sorting to assessment for growth.

A Better Way: Formative Feedback That Drives Student Learning

One powerful tool we use at Seda Educational Consulting is the Claim-Evidence-Reasoning (CER) Single Point Rubric. This rubric provides students with:

• Clarity on what proficiency looks like

• Specific feedback about what they did well

• Constructive suggestions for what to do to improve

• Optional guidance on how to push their work to an exemplary level

It’s not about giving students a number or a letter—it’s about helping them take ownership of their learning. And it works.

When assessment becomes a mirror for self-reflection rather than a hammer of judgment, students begin to ask: “How can I improve?”—not just “What grade did I get?”

This Change Starts With You

Improving math achievement in your school or district will require more than curriculum changes or new software. It demands courageous leadership that evaluates what matters most and challenges the comfort of tradition.

It means creating systems where assessment is not something we do to students—but something that works for students.

When leaders commit to this kind of intentional work, we create schools where every student—regardless of their zip code, race, language, or learning history—can see themselves as capable mathematicians.

Let’s lead that change.