Brazil needs to confront this problem once and for all
For the first time, Brazil has held a mirror up to its own teaching force, and the reflection is sobering: fewer than half of the country's mathematics educators meet the minimum standard of competency their students deserve. The National Teacher Exam, administered to more than 760,000 educators in 2025, has done more than produce statistics — it has named a structural wound in how Brazil prepares the people it entrusts with forming young minds. At the heart of the findings lies a deeper question about equity: whether the rapid expansion of distance learning has democratized access to teaching credentials at the cost of the knowledge those credentials are meant to certify.
- Brazil's math classrooms are quietly in crisis — 55% of the nation's mathematics teachers failed to meet the government's own minimum proficiency standard, the worst result of any subject tested.
- The exam has exposed a stark divide between teacher training pathways: graduates of traditional in-person programs passed at a 73% rate, while distance learning graduates cleared the bar at only 47%.
- The scale of the distance learning problem is institutional, not incidental — 60% of EAD teacher preparation programs received the two lowest possible quality ratings from the ministry.
- The government has moved swiftly to contain the damage, banning new distance learning teacher courses and requiring existing ones to deliver at least half their instruction in person.
- Education advocates warn that the data points to something deeper than a testing gap — that EAD programs are amplifying inequality and that Brazil must now reckon with a generational deficit in educator quality.
Brazil's first national assessment of teacher competency has laid bare a troubling reality: fewer than half of the country's math teachers meet the minimum proficiency standard set by the Ministry of Education. Of the more than 760,000 educators who sat the National Teacher Exam in 2025, roughly 65 percent passed overall — but mathematics broke sharply from that trend, recording a 45 percent proficiency rate, the lowest of any discipline evaluated.
The results have also given hard numbers to a long-suspected divide between teacher training models. Graduates of traditional in-person programs passed at 73 percent, while those who completed their degrees through distance learning — known in Brazil as EAD — passed at just 47 percent. The gap is reflected in the programs themselves: of 1,127 EAD teacher preparation courses evaluated, only 225 earned the two highest quality ratings, while 60 percent received the two lowest.
Education Minister Leonardo Barchini described the overall results as 'satisfactory given the needs of our school systems,' while simultaneously announcing that new EAD teacher courses are now prohibited and existing programs must dedicate at least half their instruction to in-person work. He pledged targeted initiatives to strengthen both initial training and continuing professional development, with particular attention to mathematics.
Talita Nascimento of Todos pela Educação was less measured in her assessment, arguing that distance learning programs are fundamentally failing to prepare teachers and that the problem extends across pedagogy courses broadly. 'Brazil needs to confront this problem once and for all,' she said, warning that EAD as currently practiced amplifies inequality rather than reducing it.
What the exam has produced, for the first time, is a detailed and scaled portrait of a system under strain. Whether the government's restrictions on distance learning will be sufficient to lift the majority of math teachers to proficiency — and whether Brazil can close the gap between its two tiers of teacher preparation — remains an open and consequential question.
Brazil's first comprehensive national assessment of teacher competency has exposed a troubling gap in mathematics instruction: fewer than half of the nation's math teachers meet the minimum proficiency standard set by the Ministry of Education. The finding, released from an exam administered in 2025, ranks as the weakest performance across all subjects evaluated in what officials are calling a watershed moment for understanding the state of teacher preparation in the country.
More than 760,000 educators and education students took the National Teacher Exam, and roughly 492,000 of them cleared the proficiency bar—a 65 percent pass rate overall. But mathematics broke that pattern sharply downward. At 45 percent, the math proficiency rate stands as the lowest among all disciplines assessed, signaling what education officials describe as a systemic problem in how the country trains people to teach one of its most foundational subjects.
The exam results have also crystallized a divide that has been suspected but never before measured at this scale: the vast performance gap between teachers trained in traditional classroom settings and those who completed their degrees through distance learning, or EAD as it is known in Brazil. Among graduates of in-person teacher training programs, 73 percent achieved proficiency. Among distance learning graduates, only 47 percent did—a 26-point chasm that underscores what critics argue is a quality crisis in remote education.
The numbers are stark when applied to the universe of teacher training courses themselves. The ministry evaluated 3,420 traditional classroom-based teacher preparation programs and 1,127 distance learning programs. Of the in-person courses, 1,714 earned the two highest quality ratings. Of the distance learning courses, only 225 did. Sixty percent of EAD programs received the two lowest possible ratings, a pattern that suggests systemic weakness rather than isolated failure.
Education Minister Leonardo Barchini acknowledged the math proficiency shortfall but framed it cautiously, calling the numbers "satisfactory given the needs of our school systems," even as he announced that the government is already moving to restrict the expansion of distance learning teacher programs. New EAD courses are now prohibited, and existing programs must dedicate at least half their instruction to in-person classroom work. Barchini said the ministry would develop targeted initiatives to strengthen both initial teacher training and ongoing professional development, particularly in mathematics.
Talita Nascimento, director of government relations at Todos pela Educação, a major education advocacy organization, was more direct about what the data reveals. She argued that distance learning programs are fundamentally failing to prepare teachers adequately, and that the problem extends beyond math into pedagogy courses generally. "The data shows that EAD courses are not training teachers well," she said. "When we look at distance learning, we see it amplifies inequality and compromises the quality of teacher preparation. Brazil needs to confront this problem once and for all to ensure the kind of learning we want for our students."
The assessment represents the first time Brazil has measured teacher competency at this level of detail and scale. What it has revealed is a system under strain, with mathematics education particularly vulnerable and distance learning emerging as a vector for educational inequality. The government's response—restricting new EAD programs and mandating more in-person instruction—suggests policymakers view the findings as urgent. But whether these measures will be enough to lift the 55 percent of math teachers who currently fall short of proficiency, and to close the gap between traditional and remote teacher training, remains an open question as Brazil confronts what may be a generational challenge in educator quality.
Notable Quotes
The data shows that EAD courses are not training teachers well. When we look at distance learning, we see it amplifies inequality and compromises the quality of teacher preparation.— Talita Nascimento, director of government relations, Todos pela Educação
There is a smaller number of proficient teachers in mathematics, but it is still a satisfactory number given the needs of our school systems. We have already instituted several programs to improve continuing education for these teachers and will adopt specific measures for initial training.— Education Minister Leonardo Barchini
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
Why does math specifically underperform so badly compared to other subjects?
The assessment doesn't say explicitly, but math is notoriously difficult to teach well—it requires deep conceptual understanding, not just content knowledge. Distance learning seems to make that worse. You can't easily debug a student's thinking through a screen.
So the EAD problem is really about math, or is it broader?
It's broader. The data shows 60 percent of all EAD teacher programs got the lowest ratings. But math is where the damage shows up most clearly in the proficiency numbers—maybe because math has less room for improvisation.
What does "proficiency" actually mean here? Is it a real bar or a bureaucratic one?
The ministry set it as the minimum standard for someone to be considered fit to teach. So it's not arbitrary—it's the floor. And 45 percent of math teachers are below it. That's not a technicality.
The government is restricting new EAD programs. But what about the teachers already trained through distance learning who are in classrooms now?
That's the harder problem. You can't retroactively retrain half a million people. The 50 percent in-person requirement is meant to prevent future damage, but the current generation of inadequately trained teachers will be teaching for decades.
Is this a rural problem, an urban problem, or does it cut across everything?
The source doesn't break it down geographically, but distance learning tends to serve people who can't access traditional universities—often in poorer regions. So the inequality is probably baked in by geography too.
What happens next?
The government says it will create new policies. But the real test is whether they actually enforce the 50 percent in-person rule on existing EAD programs, and whether they invest in retraining current teachers. Right now it's mostly restriction and promise.