: Leading Effective Change in Maths: Evidence-Based Strategies for Retrieval Practice This blog explores how research evidence has shaped the approach to teaching and leadership in Secondary Maths.

As a Secondary Curriculum Leader of Maths, I have found the Education Endowment Foundation (EEF) research invaluable in shaping my leadership approach and improving student outcomes. Their evidence-based strategies provide a clear framework for informed decision-making, particularly around metacognitive strategies and teacher feedback, which have been integrated into our teaching practices.

The EEF’s Implementation Guidance Report has been instrumental in leading change within maths. It provides a framework for adopting evidence-based strategies, ensuring changes are effectively embedded into practice. By following its recommendations, we have been able to plan, implement and evaluate interventions more systematically. This has improved not only the consistency of our retrieval practice but also our ability to monitor its impact over time, ultimately leading to more informed decision-making and better student outcomes.

According to cognitive scientists, retrieval practice — ​‘the act of recalling previously learned material’- is essential for strengthening long-term memory and improving learning outcomes. In mathematics, where a spiral curriculum builds upon prior knowledge, securing foundational understanding is crucial. If not addressed, gaps in learning can quickly widen, leading to misconceptions, disengagement and even ​‘maths anxiety,’ which reinforces the false belief that mathematical ability is fixed.

Retrieval exercises also promote the transfer of knowledge to new contexts, allowing students to apply concepts across different topics. Given its significance, we sought to refine our approach based on research insights, ensuring it was both purposeful and effective.

Initially, our retrieval practice involved projecting questions at the start of lessons to engage students. However, this routine consumed a substantial portion of lesson time, without delivering the intended impact. Learning walks and student work analysis revealed that retrieval activities, though embedded, lacked a clear focus on areas where students most needed reinforcement.

Guided by the EEF’s Improving Mathematics in Key Stages 2 and 3 report we shifted towards a more strategic model (Recommendation 1: Using Assessment to build on pupils’ existing knowledge and understanding, page 8). A key adjustment was introducing retrieval quizzes informed by Question Level Analysis (QLA) from termly assessments. These quizzes, consisting of six focused questions, were conducted mid-lesson rather than at the beginning, transforming retrieval from a passive settling activity into an intentional learning experience.

This approach ensured that students revisited areas for development while maintaining engagement. By incorporating previous assessment topics, students became more aware of their progress and the role of retrieval in improving their long-term working memory. Explicitly linking quiz content to future assessments reinforced the importance of regular revision, fostering a proactive study mindset.

To evaluate the effectiveness of our retrieval practice, we systematically tracked student progress. Post-assessment QLA data allowed us to measure improvements in targeted areas. When students demonstrated progress in previously weak topics, it provided evidence for the importance of retrieval in their academic development. By embedding retrieval into lessons with a clear, structured approach, we helped shift student mindset, demonstrating that progress results from sustained engagement rather than innate ability.

The EEF’s Using Research Evidence: A Concise Guide outlines the advantages of using research to inform practice. This has been essential in refining our maths curriculum, ensuring it is grounded in effective, proven methods. Additionally, the guide stresses the importance of monitoring and evaluation, allowing us to assess the impact of our strategies over time and adjust accordingly.

However, the guide also highlights the limitations of research. It cautions that not all research is directly applicable to every context, as each school setting is unique. There can be significant differences between what works well in one school compared to another. In our case, after trialling a period of mixed-prior attainment groupings at key stage 3, we acknowledged it required additional adaptation. While general research supports mixed-attainment setting, our experience showed that our students benefited more from prior attainment-specific groupings. This evidence-informed wisdom led us to tailor interventions accordingly to better support our students and staff.

Our journey with retrieval practice highlights the necessity of continuous reflection and adaptation. Learning walks and student feedback provided crucial insights that allowed us to refine our methods. By aligning retrieval with assessment data, we moved beyond generic review tasks to a targeted strategy that directly impacts student learning.

Through this research-driven approach, retrieval practice has become an integral and impactful part of our maths teaching. It not only enhances retention but also cultivates a culture of regular, targeted revision, equipping students with skills essential for both exams and lifelong learning. As we continue to evaluate and refine our methods, we remain committed to ensuring that our teaching strategies are both evidence-based and responsive to our students’ needs.