Strengthening Students’ Foundational Math Skills in Middle School

One morning during school drop-off, a parent waved me over. Her seventh-grade son had always done well in math, so she was puzzled—and more than a little frustrated—that he was struggling with something as basic as dividing decimals. “He keeps saying, ‘I forgot how to do this,’” she told me. “How do you forget something you already learned?”

Our diagnostic data echoed what she, and many families felt: Students who appeared comfortable in their grade-level math classes were unsteady in the skills that should have formed their foundation. Number sense, place value, operations, measurement—ideas that should have felt settled and familiar—were unexpectedly fragile, and although students understood the concepts they were learning in middle school math, they weren’t able to apply them because of gaps in these foundational skills.

When we studied the data closely, the pattern sharpened. We needed to rebuild essential skills without rewriting our curriculum or piling more work onto students’ (and teachers’) already full days. What ended up helping wasn’t a new program or a sweeping overhaul. It was a small schedule adjustment that created space for students to revisit these foundational skills.

A Simple schedule Change with significant Potential

Our school already had a 33-minute flex period one day each week for assemblies and special programs. Rather than taking time away from existing math classes or creating a new schedule, we used this special schedule for one additional day each week and assigned this block to targeted math practice. Although this schedule didn’t accommodate some of our students—those involved in special programs—it gave most of them time to build the skills they needed.

Students met in their advisory groups—groups of students that connected throughout the year with a dedicated staff member. That familiarity mattered because advisory is a part of the day that often feels closest to home base—a place where students already have community, routine, and a teacher who knows them well. Advisory teachers supervised and graded engagement; math teachers selected the skills and monitored overall progress. No one’s workload ballooned. The building didn’t need a schedule overhaul. And time in existing math classes could continue to focus on grade-level content instead of remediation.

How the Model Works to close math gaps

We used IXL as our adaptive learning tool, but this strategy isn’t tied to that platform. Schools can use any adaptive tool that provides skill-specific focus and clear reporting—other options we discussed included Khan Academy and CK-12. The tool matters less than the precision it offers and the consistency with which students can use it.

Math teachers chose foundational skills based on diagnostic data, and students worked through their assigned skills during the weekly 33-minute block. Math teachers watched the data for outliers, checking for the students who were moving unusually slowly—or unusually fast. This let us make adjustments early, before small gaps widened.

Advisory teachers graded engagement, not accuracy. Removing the pressure to be accurate softened the anxiety that often shadows math practice for students. Students could try, struggle, and continue without worrying about the effect on their math grade.

Meeting in advisory groups supplied consistency. Because students saw their advisory teachers every day, this weekly block felt less like a remediation period and more like another familiar part of their routine.

Communicating the Purpose to Families and Students

For this to work, families needed to understand why we were doing it. The heart of our message was simple: This isn’t extra homework or a hidden math class. Every student is working on the specific skills they need. Foundational skills strengthen current learning; they do not compete with it. Strong fundamentals support high school placement, STEM pathways, and long-term confidence. Framed this way, the intervention feels less like a corrective measure and more like an investment in students’ futures.

Early Signs of Success

The early results surprised us with their clarity. In the first eight weeks, each student answered an average of almost 1,500 questions focused on their specific needs. Overall, the improvement during that time was 28 percent higher than expected. To test the effect further, we compared students in the intervention with a convenience sample of peers who weren’t in the intervention. The difference was statistically significant (p < 0.05), indicating meaningful, measurable improvement.

Students noticed it too. Many said they felt more confident in areas that used to frustrate them. Some appreciated the visible progress trackers. Others liked the low-pressure environment—there was something freeing in knowing that trying hard mattered more than getting everything right. Because students practiced at their readiness level, not at the pace of a curriculum map, successes helped build students’ feelings of self-efficacy.

Occasionally, we’ve added lighthearted advisory competitions: most questions answered, longest accuracy streak, highest collective growth. These have given students permission to enjoy the process a little. It keeps the energy from slipping into something heavy or punitive.

Several elements have worked together to make the model effective. Having a consistent weekly time has prevented the intervention from being squeezed out by competing priorities, and having it as part of the weekly schedule meant that the intervention would fit into existing routines.

The built-in community of advisory groups provided a space where students already felt known and welcome. Engagement-based grading shifted the focus from correctness to persistence, and successes in the intervention improved students’ confidence.

A Small Adjustment With a Big Impact

Math gaps aren’t unique to any one school, and no single strategy will erase them completely. At Montverde Academy, we’ve also created targeted small group interventions, added online summer skill-building sessions, and increased after-school tutorial sessions.

But this small structural shift—just 33 minutes each week—has given our students a way to rebuild what they lost and regain confidence in their own thinking, and because it scales easily, it has reached more students than other approaches. It’s a small change, but it’s helping students master the skills they need while building their confidence in math.