>>How do I "prove" to you that John Saxon is an educational charlatan? Even a quack can work cures through the halo effect, among other artifacts.>>
C'mon Mike. Perhaps, you'd explain to us how you learned math. I remember plugging through lots of books (not unlike Saxon's, probably not as cleverly construsted to ensure learning) in high school and college, and, jeez, I know a bit of mathematics. And I can actually use it to solve problems.
If your proposition is that Saxon's a charlatan than you better include Dolciani, Anton et. al. Saxon's just done the traditional book better in many cases.
How did you learn, Mike? You're obviously very learned. Is your education a hoax? How did we all learn with this awful pedagogy we tolerated? I really think the NCTM needs to prove its assertions. There's a world of educated mathematicians and non-mathematicians who are evidence of my position.