The Project 2061 Panel Report on Mathematics has been mentioned several times on the NCTM-Listserv. I do not recall whether there was a specific discussion on the Benchmarks. But you must remember that while NCTM members receive free copies of the Standards, they do not automatically receive the AAAS materials. So, many respondents here may simply not have seen the information you mention.
Ron Ward/Western Washington U/Bellingham, WA 98225 firstname.lastname@example.org
On Mon, 10 Jul 1995, Cathy Brady wrote:
> > Ok I truly get annoyed at all the benchmarks, outcomes, and standards > written to reform little ol' me, when I think I am the source of any > reform that happens in my classroom and I suspect that I get paid a lot > less than those who work on those committees. But there are uses for > them. They do affirm that I'm not alone in my approaches. They provide > justification for what I want to do (Some might say that they are written > broadly enought to justify anything?) > > But I didn't start writing this to vent my scepticism. I wanted to > mention the AAAS Benchmarks, the second step in the Science for All > Americans 2061 process. I think these benchmarks - particularly the math > benchmarks - are great and I am disappointed not to hear them mentioned at > NCTM conferences I have attended. I would hope that NCTM was in the > business of aiding it's members to teach mathematics besides "pushing" > its own literature. > > Cathy Brady Math Specialist/Education > email@example.com Maryland Science Center > The monk picks up his bag "Beyond Numbers" > and walks off. Baltimore's Inner Harbor > >