Mathematics is not just memorized facts, but rather it is understanding how to approach and solve problems, and problem-solving requires linguistic proficiency. Too often, English learners' (ELs) relatively low math performance is dismissed due to their supposed "limited" English proficiency. Taking this perspective, a constructivist approach suggests that content-area discussions should improve EL students' math performance. To test this hypothesis, we use nationally representative data from the "Educational Longitudinal Study: 2002" to examine the relationship between students' reported participation in math discussions and their 10th-grade math performance (GPA), considering both course placement and linguistic status. While we find reported participation in student-led discussion to be positively associated with math performance for all students, we also find that EL students report higher participation in student-led discussions "only" in low-level math placement. This pattern suggests that for EL students, participation in student-led discussion may actually be necessary to counteract the limiting nature of low-track placement. We argue that although EL students appear to benefit from student-led discussions in these contexts, until school systems begin to address the overrepresentation of EL students in low-level coursework, instructional experiences alone will do little to improve their overall achievement.