Guest writer: Malissa Esquibel
As our Grades K–6 school prepares to adopt a new mathematics curriculum next year, I have been working with our teachers to help them modify their teaching approach and have learned a lot in the process.
Whether you’re a seasoned leader or just starting out, the following strategies have been game-changers in our classrooms when it comes to laying the groundwork for a discourse-based curriculum that will be required in every California school for the 2025–2026 school year.
1. Shift Teacher Mindsets
For years, our school was stuck in a cycle of remediation. The most significant obstacle was the collective teacher belief that grade-level work was too difficult for many of our students. Our teachers’ tendency to remediate came from the heart—they did not want to see our students struggle—but they were unknowingly doing students a disservice.
Our first step was to change our teachers’ mindsets and help them recognize the potential of all their students instead of thinking, “My kids can’t do that,” or “That’s too hard for them.” According to John Hattie, changing this mindset is essential. We needed to give our students a chance to show what they could do and push them to stretch themselves beyond what they thought was their potential.
2. Reiterate the Dangers of “Meeting Students Where They Are”
One of the most crucial aspects of our journey has been delivering grade-level content instead of lowering the bar to meet students’ current levels. We have amazing teachers who provide good instruction, but if they are not teaching grade-level content, students will never reach proficiency—it’s not an achievement gap; it’s an opportunity gap. This was a “lightbulb” moment for me: teaching Grade 2 students Grade 1 material indefinitely prevents them from ever catching up.
Instead, we scaffold students to grade-level expectations by teaching the prerequisite skills they need right before the connected unit of study. If lessons are attached to working memory, the new learning is assimilated into the brain—and it sticks. Staying on pace with the curriculum while finding strategic ways to fill gaps can make all the difference.
We’ve seen issues like students not knowing multiplication facts by Grades 4 or 5, which can impede their progress. However, giving students tools like multiplication charts to help them access grade-level content is not “cheating,” it’s a way to help them grasp grade-level content.
3. Make Data Less Scary
One significant shift was changing how we view and use student data. Leaders helped us open the door to sharing data openly, making it a constructive tool for growth rather than a “gotcha” moment. Data meetings have become collaborative and non-judgmental spaces. Initially, discussing why 80 percent of students were struggling felt uncomfortable and even outside our control. Over time, teachers began to own the data and now see it not as a personal failure but as a collective responsibility, recognizing that all our kids are our kids and have gaps and strengths. These data meetings have now become opportunities for shared growth.
4. Boost Collective Teacher Efficacy
By focusing on understanding student Diagnostic results, we realized that the issue wasn’t our students as much as it was our instruction. We moved away from pointing fingers at external factors and focused on our own instructional practices, understanding learning intentions, and setting clear success criteria. This self-reflection has been transformative. We asked teachers, “What can you change? What can you do?” Validating their concerns while pushing for actionable steps to ensure student success helped increase collective teaching efficacy.
5. Carve Out Time for Students
We created a more inclusive support system, irrespective of placement in the learning center, to ensure every student gets the help they need.
We also implemented a 40-minute intervention WIN (What I Need) block twice weekly, tied directly to core learning. This intervention is about strategically meeting gaps based on data, ensuring it aligns with what students are learning in the core curriculum. This block allows teachers to focus on prerequisites crucial for understanding grade-level content. These sessions reinforce foundational skills without abandoning the core grade-level curriculum.
6. Implement a PLC Model
This year, we adopted a professional learning community (PLC) model focused on acceleration and prerequisites. Teachers are now creating small exit tickets that help identify which concepts must be retaught during WIN blocks. This dual opportunity—reteaching the concept at grade level and ensuring foundational skills through acceleration blocks—has gained strong teacher buy-in and is leading to a noticeable improvement in student performance.
Don’t Wait to Do This Work
The transition from remediation practices and beliefs to acceleration requires time, effort, and significant shifts in mindset and practice. The work involves understanding the prerequisites and prioritizing grade-level content. It also entails making data visible, necessary, and part of an intentional teaching strategy.
If we don’t ensure grade-level content is protected and rigorously taught, no curriculum will be successful. But with the right mindset and leadership, and by aligning our practices with principles that genuinely support learning, we can make sure every student has the opportunity to excel.
About the Author
Malissa Esquibel is a dedicated support teacher at Muscoy Elementary in the San Bernardino City Unified School District. With 20 years of teaching experience, she has spent the last five years specializing in interventions and the multitiered system of supports process, supporting students in achieving academic success. Esquibel has been utilizing i-Ready for the past nine years and has had the pleasure of collaborating with Curriculum Associates on various projects, including Accelerated Teaching and Learning. Her passion lies in helping students thrive through targeted instruction and data-driven interventions.