California's math performance has seen improvement since the pandemic-era decline, but state lawmakers and education researchers told the Assembly Education Committee that the recovery remains slow and uneven. Persistent gaps in student achievement are tied to teacher preparation, district capacity, and inconsistent curriculum implementation, according to testimony at an Oct. 13 information hearing.
Statewide math proficiency fell seven percentage points to 33% in 2022, as described in testimony presented during the hearing. It then rose two points in 2023 and one point in each of the subsequent two years. Despite these gains, fewer than half of California students were reported as meeting math standards by 2025.
The hearing record reported sharp disparities across student groups in 2025. Approximately 20% of Black students, 23% of Native American students, and 26% of Latino students met or exceeded math standards. This contrasts with roughly half of white students and about two-thirds of Asian students. Furthermore, proficiency was reported at 26% for low-income students, compared with 58% for moderate- and higher-income students.
Witnesses also stated that staffing and professional support for teachers remain uneven across California. About 77% of math classes were described as being taught by fully credentialed teachers, with lower rates observed in schools serving larger proportions of low-income students. Testimony called for stronger math content and pedagogical training within teacher-preparation programs, expanded teacher-residency pathways, and sustained coaching paired with interventions designed to track student mastery.
Difficulties in implementing the state's 2023 Mathematics Framework were also brought to the committee's attention. Witnesses cited the sheer number of approved instructional materials, limited local capacity, and the absence of a fully revised middle- and high-school math sequence as significant barriers. Recommendations included clearer state guidance, stronger alignment of math education from transitional kindergarten through third grade, and a more coherent sequence connecting algebra, geometry, and advanced mathematics.
The committee chair noted a current $50 million state budget allocation designated for math coaches, which holds particular relevance for small and rural districts. However, the hearing did not establish how this money will be distributed, which specific districts will receive the funds, when implementation will begin, or what measures will be used to assess its effect. No vote was reported during the proceedings.
These outstanding details regarding distribution, implementation, and assessment are likely to determine whether the allocation becomes more than just a budget figure. While the hearing documented the critical need for coaching and other supports, it did not provide evidence that this $50 million investment has yet improved student outcomes. The eventual guidance issued by the state Department of Education, subsequent grant awards, and the performance measures put in place will be key follow-up points to monitor the impact of this funding.