One Year Later: A HIVE Reflection on Making Learning Possible

As I prepare to return to HIVE this summer, I can't help but think about where I was one year ago.

Last July, I was putting the finishing touches on two conference sessions that would challenge educators to think differently about mathematics instruction. One focused on bridging the gaps between mathematical domains. The other explored how we make students' thinking visible through intentional planning and the purposeful use of anchor charts. At the time, I thought I was presenting on two different topics.

Looking back, I realize they were really the same conversation.

One of the greatest gifts of reflection is recognizing the consistency in your own thinking. Sometimes you spend so much time creating the next thing that you don't notice the thread connecting everything you've already created. As I revisit last year's podcast episode, The Margin Is the Map, I'm struck by how little my philosophy has changed.

The language has evolved. The examples have expanded. My experiences have certainly grown. But the heartbeat remains the same.

I've always believed that learning becomes possible when we intentionally design for understanding.

Last year's conversations centered on visibility. If students cannot see the relationships between ideas, they struggle to build coherent mathematical understanding. If they cannot see what success looks like, they struggle to monitor their own thinking. If we don't make our instructional decisions visible through intentional planning, representations, and questions, we unintentionally leave students to navigate mathematics on their own.

That realization shaped everything I shared at HIVE.

One phrase from that season has stayed with me ever since:

The margin isn't a detour. It's the map.

When we intentionally design instruction for the learners who need the greatest clarity, everyone benefits. The work isn't about simplifying mathematics. It's about making mathematical thinking more visible. It's about anticipating misconceptions before they happen, selecting representations that reveal structure, and creating opportunities for students to reason their way toward understanding.

As I prepare for HIVE 2026, I see that same philosophy showing up again, just through different conversations.

This year, I'll be facilitating a session on the Concrete-Representational-Abstract progression. On the surface, it may seem like a completely different topic. But at its core, CRA is another way of making thinking visible. It helps students connect what they can touch, what they can see, and what they can eventually reason about symbolically. It doesn't lower the cognitive demand. It builds the understanding necessary to meet it.

I'll also be leading conversations around standards alignment and high leverage instructional moves. Again, different topics, but the same underlying belief. Standards alignment is about helping teachers see the mathematical story across grade levels. High leverage teaching moves are about making intentional decisions that position students to do the thinking instead of simply following procedures.

I've come to realize that I'm not really interested in individual strategies.

I'm interested in the conditions that make learning possible.

Whether I'm talking about coherence, CRA, cognitive demand, standards alignment, or instructional planning, I'm asking the same question: What do students need to experience so they can make sense of mathematics for themselves?

Perhaps that's why this year's return to HIVE feels less like preparing new presentations and more like continuing an ongoing conversation. The titles have changed. The slides are different. I've grown as an educator, completed my master's degree, stepped into a new leadership role, and I'm preparing to begin doctoral studies. Yet the work continues to point in the same direction.

Make mathematics visible.

Design with intention.

Believe every learner is capable.

When those three ideas come together, learning becomes possible.

As I head to HIVE this year, I'm grateful for the opportunity to keep learning alongside educators who ask hard questions, challenge assumptions, and believe we can do better for students. If last year's conference helped me recognize the thread running through my work, I hope this year's conference helps me continue weaving it into something even stronger.

Because the conversation was never just about conference sessions.

It's always been about making learning possible and making math happen!