Re: Reply to Vern Kays
Domenico Rosa (rosa@TEIKYOPOST.EDU)
Mon, 15 Jan 1996 14:38:18 GMT
It is unfortunate that the publications of the NCTM and of AMATYC do not
publish any material that questions the assorted "reforms" and "standards"
that these organizations are promoting, with extensive funding from the
National Science Foundation.
Since 1991, numerous articles and letters have appeared in the NOTICES of
the American Mathematical Society. The most recent article, by Hung-Hsi Wu,
appears in the December 1996 issue.
This year, several articles have also appeared in the MAA MONTHLY. The
November 199 issue of the College Mathematics Journal contains an article
by professor Andrews.
Several articles have also appeared in The Mathematical Intelligencer. The
February 6, 1996 issue of Education Week contained a very interesting
commentary by John Saxon, " The NCTM Math Standards are a very bad joke."
I am absolutely appalled by many of the textbooks that supposedly promote
the "standards". Some third, fourth and fifth grade books contain more than
500 pages. The sixth and seventh grade books published by Glencoe contain
more than 600 pages. These latter books come with multiple choice tests and
are coauthored by Jack Price, the past president of the NCTM.
High school books range from 650 to 1,000 pages, and their primary purpose
is to torture students. I have concluded that the U.S. textbook publishing
industry is and enormous racket.
At the other end of the spectrum, another group of "reformers" recognizes
the fact that our textbooks are junk. This group is promoting the
interactive mathematics project, which consists of incoherent problem sets.
Lastly, I would like to point out that most of the "research" that appears
in education journals has no statistical validity and is not worth the
paper that it's printed on. Check with some professors of statistics about
this.
Dom Rosa