> The written document expressing the Standards that NCTM endorses certainly > does include some problems and examples of each standard.
I suggest that these problems and examples are poorly chosen. And that this is extremely important. After all, ideas evaporate, examples condence.
> At each grade > level, after the statement of each standard, the writers attempt to > "unpack" the idea behind that standard and demonstrate one example of how > that standard can be employed in a classroom at that grade level. > > It is absurd to think that the authors are going to give an example > of every single type of problem application of any one standard.
It would be useful.
> That is left for mathematicians and mathematics educators > to do on their own.
Do you think that an average teacher has time and competence to do it ?
> I agree, however, that there are topics not covered as > thoroughly in the document as could have been covered.
Could of should ? Are there topics that are covered adequately ?
> For example, the standard PMG used from K-4 of calculators and computers.
You mean that PMG chose a wrong example. Which is the right one ?
> Unfortunately, at the other levels, 5-8, and 9-12, the use of > technology as a means of exposing the mathematics is not addressed > very concretely. Yet, the document was 5 years ago, and now we > know of many examples that were not fully developed then.
Was there the stone age 5 years ago ? Do you mean that the document is obsolete ? Andrei Toom