Text us your thoughts!

In this quick follow-up to last week’s episode, we invited our guests to model a short, fun classroom debate. In just a few minutes, you can hear a sample debate that captures the spirit of productive mathematical argumentation—thoughtful, curious, and includes reasoning. Tune in for a rapid-fire glimpse of what these debates can look like in action as we ask the question: What is the Best Way to Study for a Test?

• You can contact Rev. Jessica Solomon via email: [email protected]  
• You can find Nigel Nisbet via the website STmath.com or on his blog: Visual First Math 
• Be sure to check out Jessica’s article Has ‘Brain-Based’ Education Gone Too Far?

Listened to the episode? Now, it’s your turn to share! Find us on Social Media: @DebateMath to share your thoughts.

Don’t forget to check out the video version of this podcast on our YouTube channel!

Keep up with all the latest info by following @DebateMath or going to debatemath.com. Follow us @Rob_Baier & @cluzniak. And don’t forget to rate and review us on Apple Podcasts!

Text us your thoughts!

You’ve probably heard it before—claims about how the brain learns best or teaching moves justified by neuroscience.  These ideas have shaped classrooms, professional development, and even policy. But here’s the question we’re asking today: Have we gone too far?

In this Hot Seat, we’re joined by two guests who will be arguing that math education over-relies on brain-based research—and that this reliance may actually be limiting how we think about teaching, learning, and students themselves. So let’s dive into the debate with this resolution:
Math Education Over-Relies on Brain Research.

• You can contact Rev. Jessica Solomon via email: [email protected] 
• You can find Nigel Nisbet via the website STmath.com or on his blog: Visual First Math
• Be sure to check out Jessica’s article Has ‘Brain-Based’ Education Gone Too Far?

Listened to the episode? Now, it’s your turn to share! Find us on Social Media: @DebateMath to share your thoughts.

Don’t forget to check out the video version of this podcast on our YouTube channel!

Keep up with all the latest info by following @DebateMath or going to debatemath.com. Follow us @Rob_Baier & @cluzniak. And don’t forget to rate and review us on Apple Podcasts!

Text us your thoughts!

In this quick follow-up to last week’s episode, we invited our guest (Deborah) to model a short, fun classroom debate. In just a few minutes, you can hear a sample debate that captures the spirit of productive mathematical argumentation. Tune in for a rapid-fire glimpse of what these debates can look like in action as we ask the question:

Which is better: bar graphs or pie charts?

• You can find Dr. Deborah Peart Crayton on social media: @mathersgonnamath 
• Check out her website: MathersGonnaMath.com

Listened to the episode? Now, it’s your turn to share! Find us on Social Media: @DebateMath to share your thoughts.

Don’t forget to check out the video version of this podcast on our YouTube channel!

Keep up with all the latest info by following @DebateMath or going to debatemath.com. Follow us @Rob_Baier & @cluzniak. And don’t forget to rate and review us on Apple Podcasts!

Text us your thoughts!

In our last Hot Seat, our guests challenged the idea that everyone is a math person. Has the idea gone too far? And in today’s Hot Seat, we’re following  up on this idea with a subtle but powerful shift in language—and mindset. What if we had a word other than mathematician or math person? Join us as our Hot Seat guest invites us to rethink not just what we call our students, but how those words shape their relationship with mathematics, as our guest argues: We are all born Mathers!

• You can find Dr. Deborah Peart Crayton on social media: @mathersgonnamath 
• Check out her website: MathersGonnaMath.com

Listened to the episode? Now, it’s your turn to share! Find us on Social Media: @DebateMath to share your thoughts.

Don’t forget to check out the video version of this podcast on our YouTube channel!

Keep up with all the latest info by following @DebateMath or going to debatemath.com. Follow us @Rob_Baier & @cluzniak. And don’t forget to rate and review us on Apple Podcasts!

Text us your thoughts!

In this quick follow-up to last week’s episode, we invited our guests (Vanessa & Chris) to model a short, fun classroom debate. In just a few minutes, you can hear a sample debate that captures the spirit of productive mathematical argumentation. Tune in for a rapid-fire glimpse of what these debates can look like in action as we ask the question: Is 100 a Good Approximation for 147?

• You can find Vanessa Vakharia on social media @TheMathGuru and visit her website: MathTherapy.com 
• You can find Chris Nho on social media @nhoskee 

Listened to the episode? Now, it’s your turn to share! Find us on Social Media: @DebateMath to share your thoughts.

Don’t forget to check out the video version of this podcast on our YouTube channel!

Keep up with all the latest info by following @DebateMath or going to debatemath.com. Follow us @Rob_Baier & @cluzniak. And don’t forget to rate and review us on Apple Podcasts!

Text us your thoughts!

You’ve probably heard it before — maybe from a teacher, a colleague, a speaker at a conference, or even yourself: “Everyone is a math person.” It’s become a kind of rallying cry in math education. A statement of belief. But is it really true? Or are we over-doing it? It came from a place of countering the narrative that we often hear from students, saying “I’m just not a math person” or “I’m just not good at math.” But is everyone really a math person? And is it OK not to be into math? What are the consequences — good or bad — of telling students that everyone is a math person? We wanted to explore this in more detail with our latest Hot Seat debate: Is Everyone Really a Math Person?

• You can find Vanessa Vakharia on social media @TheMathGuru and visit her website: MathTherapy.com 
• You can find Chris Nho on social media @nhoskee 
• Chris mentioned the TRU Framework (truframework.org)
• Rob mentioned A Mathematician’s Lament by Paul Lockhart

Listened to the episode? Now, it’s your turn to share! Find us on Social Media: @DebateMath to share your thoughts.

Don’t forget to check out the video version of this podcast on our YouTube channel!

Keep up with all the latest info by following @DebateMath or going to debatemath.com. Follow us @Rob_Baier & @cluzniak. And don’t forget to rate and review us on Apple Podcasts!

Text us your thoughts!

In this quick follow-up to last week’s episode, we invited our guests (Jay & Steve) to model a short, fun classroom debate. In just a few minutes, you can hear a sample debate that captures the spirit of productive mathematical argumentation. Tune in for a rapid-fire glimpse of what these debates can look like in action!

• Check out their website: 21stcenturymathassessment.com
• You can find Jay Meadows on exemplars.com or on LinkedIn.
• You can email Steve Leinwand at stevelmath@aol  

Listened to the episode? Now, it’s your turn to share! Find us on Social Media: @DebateMath to share your thoughts.

Don’t forget to check out the video version of this podcast on our YouTube channel!

Keep up with all the latest info by following @DebateMath or going to debatemath.com. Follow us @Rob_Baier & @cluzniak. And don’t forget to rate and review us on Apple Podcasts!

Text us your thoughts!

Let’s talk about state assessments. These exams carry enormous weight. They influence school ratings, district decisions, curriculum, teacher evaluations, and often, whether students feel successful or not. They’re designed to measure learning. To provide accountability. To ensure standards are met. But is that what we’re really getting from these tests? Is the way we assess learning narrowing instruction, distorting priorities, and sending the wrong message about what it means to truly understand mathematics? Today’s Hot Seat guests are making a bold argument: that what we are currently doing isn’t what’s best. That we can do better. They are here to argue the resolution:  It’s Time to Overhaul Assessments 

• Check out their website: 21stcenturymathassessment.com
• You can find Jay Meadows on exemplars.com or on LinkedIn.
• You can email Steve Leinwand at stevelmath@aol 

Listened to the episode? Now, it’s your turn to share! Find us on Social Media: @DebateMath to share your thoughts.

Don’t forget to check out the video version of this podcast on our YouTube channel!

Keep up with all the latest info by following @DebateMath or going to debatemath.com. Follow us @Rob_Baier & @cluzniak. And don’t forget to rate and review us on Apple Podcasts!

Text us your thoughts!

This month’s debate is a recording from a LIVE debate that took place at the West Virginia Council of Teachers of Mathematics (WVCTM) Conference in March of 2026.

In this quick follow-up to last week’s episode, we invited each of our guests to model a short, fun classroom debate. In just a few minutes, you can hear a sample debate that captures the spirit of productive mathematical argumentation—thoughtful, curious, and includes reasoning. Tune in for a rapid-fire glimpse of what these debates can look like in action!

• You can reach Sissy Collins at the Harrison County Board of Education, via email at [email protected], or on Facebook.
• You can find Sarah McGivern via Jefferson County Schools or on Instagram: @SSMcGivern
• You can reach Ellen Holt at Summers County HS, via email at [email protected], or on LinkedIn
• And find Jason Massie via Mountain View School.
• And thanks to the WVCTM Conference for inviting us in!

Listened to the episode? Now, it’s your turn to share! Find us on Social Media: @DebateMath to share your thoughts.

Don’t forget to check out the video version of this podcast on our YouTube channel!

Keep up with all the latest info by following @DebateMath or going to debatemath.com. Follow us @Rob_Baier & @cluzniak. And don’t forget to rate and review us on Apple Podcasts!

Text us your thoughts!

This month’s debate is a recording from a LIVE debate that took place at the West Virginia Council of Teachers of Mathematics (WVCTM) Conference in March of 2026.

When students don’t have the prerequisite skills, do we hit pause? Or do we stay the course and fix gaps in real time? You’re working on solving equations, but integer operations are falling apart. Or you’re introducing functions, and foundational algebra skills are missing. If you pause grade-level content, are you giving students what they truly need — or widening opportunity gaps by lowering expectations and delaying access to rigorous math? If you push forward, are you maintaining high standards — or setting students up for confusion and frustration? 

Listen in as two teams argue their side in a LIVE debate on this resolution: It is better to pause grade-level instruction to rebuild prior skills than to push forward and address gaps as they appear.

• You can reach Sissy Collins at the Harrison County Board of Education, via email at [email protected], or on Facebook.
• You can find Sarah McGivern via Jefferson County Schools or on Instagram: @SSMcGivern
• You can reach Ellen Holt at Summers County HS, via email at [email protected], or on LinkedIn
• And find Jason Massie via Mountain View School.

And thanks to the WVCTM Conference for inviting us in!

Listened to the episode? Now, it’s your turn to share! Find us on Social Media: @DebateMath to share your thoughts.

Don’t forget to check out the video version of this podcast on our YouTube channel!

Keep up with all the latest info by following @DebateMath or going to debatemath.com. Follow us @Rob_Baier & @cluzniak. And don’t forget to rate and review us on Apple Podcasts!