by Jarek Janio, Ph.D.
In a recent Friday SLO Talk, Dr. Ruth Lane emphasized that many students especially in online or accelerated math courses arrive with high levels of anxiety. This isn’t just emotional discomfort; it directly interferes with learning. Students who are terrified of getting it wrong may avoid showing their work, posting in discussion forums, or asking questions. That means instructors have no behavioral evidence to assess not because learning didn’t happen, but because fear blocked its expression.
In this context, math anxiety is not just a psychological concern; it is a pedagogical one. Observable learning outcomes whether “demonstrates use of order of operations” or “communicates problem-solving strategy using mathematical language” cannot emerge from students who are afraid to try.
Why It Matters for Learning:
SLOs are only meaningful if they reflect what students can actually do. A student who submits only an answer without showing steps may appear disengaged or dishonest but Lane invites us to consider another possibility: that the student is simply too anxious to reveal their reasoning. This interpretation doesn’t excuse incomplete work, but it reframes the instructor’s response from punitive to supportive.
When an instructor builds a low-stakes, safe, and emotionally aware learning environment, students begin to show behaviors that we can observe and assess. That includes submitting partial work, explaining their confusion, revising their thinking, and responding to feedback. These are not just signs of progress they are the raw material of learning itself.
Strategies for Learning-Centered Math Instruction
Lane’s presentation was filled with specific, replicable strategies that demonstrate how instructors can reduce student anxiety in order to elicit more evidence of learning.
Here are two areas where Lane’s ideas can be implemented immediately:
Designing for Demonstration in Week One
The first week of any course especially a five-week math course sets the tone for everything that follows. Lane recommends using this week to lower the affective filter and start prompting observable actions. That includes:
- Creating warm, personalized welcome messages or videos that humanize the instructor
- Asking students to complete simple, low-stakes problem-solving tasks that focus on process, not perfection
- Acknowledging that fear is normal and explicitly stating: “You can do this. And I’ll help you show it.”
By encouraging action early, instructors help students cross the threshold from fear to engagement. From an SLO perspective, this is vital: students must be doing in order for us to observe learning.
Feedback that Prompts Further Demonstration
Lane models a feedback practice that is both compassionate and aligned with learning outcomes. Whether a student’s work is correct, partially correct, or clearly off-track, Lane emphasizes feedback that:
- Names specific behaviors the student has already demonstrated (e.g., clear formatting, identifying the correct problem)
- Points to the next observable step (e.g., “Now try revising your final step using the distributive property”)
- Reaffirms the student’s capacity to succeed (“I know you can do this. Let’s build from what you’ve started.”)
This approach keeps students engaged in a cycle of feedback and response the foundation of demonstrable learning. It also prevents students from disappearing after a mistake, which is especially important in asynchronous environments.
From Safe Spaces to Learning Spaces
What Lane articulates through her presentation is a fundamental truth about education that is sometimes overlooked in discussions of rigor or outcomes: students cannot demonstrate what they’re too afraid to attempt.
Creating a “safe” space isn’t about lowering standards it’s about creating the conditions under which high standards become attainable.
That includes:
- Inviting students to show their work and take intellectual risks
- Observing behavior not only when it is correct but also as it evolves
- Designing prompts that elicit reflection, revision, and reasoning not just answers
- Recognizing when short or absent responses may indicate not laziness, but fear of failure
This mindset transforms how we interpret student behavior and allows us to design learning environments where assessment is based on what students do, not just what they finish.
A Shift in Practice and Purpose
If we define learning as observable behavior, as many of us do in the SLO community, then our job is not to wait for students to become confident. It is to build conditions where they are safe enough to act to risk being wrong, to revise, to try again. This is not just about kindness. It is about designing for evidence.
What Ruth Lane showed us is that anxiety is not just an emotional state it is a barrier to learning visibility. When instructors reduce that barrier, what emerges is not just participation, but powerful demonstrations of growth. And those demonstrations are the true indicators of learning not grades, not course completions, and not assumptions.
We don’t teach math. We teach people. And if we want to see what they’ve learned, we must first help them believe they’re capable of learning at all.