> I find it very interesting how each generation seems > to have its "traditionalists vs. reformists" battles. > The same arguments are made each time, with little > awareness (or at least, with virtually no explicit > acknowledgment) that the same arguments had been > raised over and over again in previous generations. > Moreover, it often seems to me that each side invokes > what I strongly suspect previous generations would > claim are straw men.
I have a few minutes to comment right now, so I thought I'd follow-up on what I posted yesterday. Over the years I've sat through many in-service programs and math program "pep rallies" in which all sorts of claims were made about how new and original and different the program was from "traditional teaching methods". However, when I happen to read about educational reforms in old journals, I see pretty much the same criticism being levied against traditional teaching methods and pretty much the same reform methods being offered, at least if you factor out the effect of things such as changing technology and the like. Thus, it's not really the arguments themselves I find problematic, but rather it's the near-sighted and often disingenuous to actual history cheerleading tactics that some proponents use. And no, I'm not talking about anyone who posts here, but rather the kinds of promotional selling arguments that were used in the in-service (and other) programs I've sat through.