Contact

Questions about mathematics education, content accuracy, specific topics covered across this site, or suggestions for areas that deserve deeper treatment are all welcome here. This page explains the geographic scope of the reference material, what makes a message easy to act on, and what a realistic response timeline looks like.

Service area covered

The Math Authority publishes reference material with national scope, oriented toward the United States education system — its standards frameworks, assessment structures, and policy landscape. Content on national standards alignment maps specifically to the Common Core State Standards Initiative, published by the National Governors Association Center for Best Practice and the Council of Chief State School Officers, which has been adopted in some form by 41 states. Material on standardized testing references assessments administered nationally, including the SAT (College Board) and ACT, as well as the National Assessment of Educational Progress administered by the National Center for Education Statistics.

That said, mathematics is refreshingly indifferent to geography. A question about polynomial long division, proportional reasoning, or the logic behind the quadratic formula carries the same answer in Montana as it does in Massachusetts. Readers outside the United States are welcome to reach out — just be aware that policy-specific pages, such as the US policy landscape or equity and access, are written against the American regulatory and funding context.

What to include in your message

The most useful messages are specific. A message that says "I didn't understand the fractions section" is genuinely hard to act on. A message that names the page, identifies the specific concept, and describes what is unclear — that one gets a real response.

For content corrections or factual disputes, include:

For topic suggestions — pages or subjects not yet covered — a sentence or two explaining the educational context is helpful. Requests that come with a named audience ("this would help middle school students who are transitioning from arithmetic to algebra") tend to get prioritized over general suggestions, simply because the editorial decision becomes easier to make.

For questions about tutoring options, study strategies, or tools and resources, the existing reference pages are the first stop. If those pages don't answer the question, a message explaining the gap is useful editorial feedback.

There is no minimum complexity requirement. A simple factual question about a definition in the terminology glossary is as welcome as a detailed question about curriculum alignment.

Response expectations

Response times vary based on message volume and the nature of the inquiry. Factual corrections with strong sourcing are reviewed promptly — errors in reference material carry real consequences for students and educators relying on that material, so they move to the top of the queue. Topic suggestions and general feedback are reviewed in batches, typically within 14 business days.

A few things to set reasonable expectations:

• Tutoring requests are outside the scope of what this site provides. The tutoring options page covers third-party resources organized by format and budget.
• Homework help is not offered directly. The practice techniques and study strategies pages are the right starting point for students working through problems.
• Custom curriculum development is not a service this platform provides. Educators looking for professional development context will find the professional development for teachers page more useful than direct outreach.

Messages that fall outside those categories — content feedback, factual questions, sourcing disputes, suggestions — are exactly what this contact channel is for.

Additional contact options

For readers who prefer structured feedback over open-ended messages, the frequently asked questions page addresses the 12 most common queries received about how this site's content is organized and sourced. It is worth checking before writing, not because messages are unwelcome, but because the answer is often already there, written out in full with citations.

Educators with questions about how this material aligns with specific classroom contexts may find the frameworks and models page useful for situating the reference content within established pedagogical structures — including frameworks published by the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM), whose Principles to Actions (2014) remains a primary reference for K–12 mathematics instruction in the United States.

For parents navigating their child's mathematics education, the explained for parents page is written specifically for that audience and covers the most frequent questions without assuming prior familiarity with curriculum design or standards documents.