My question was to any of the luminaries of this list with ties to the NCTM, and not a request to the NCTM itself. Perhaps the NCTM does not want to be judgemental, but I see you are (at least with respect to Saxon's books), so I'm asking you and any of your peers that are in agreement with the Standards:
Does MathLand conform to the released NCTM Standards, and if not, in what way does it diverge from the Standards?
I realize you in particular might not have any firsthand experience with MathLand, but I'm sure there are many on this list that have reviewed MathLand in a professional capacity, especially those of you who are faculty, staff, or hangers on at UC and CSU campuses. It is, after all, the single most popular elementary math program in the biggest State in the Union. What say you of the AMTE?
-----Original Message----- From: Bob M. Drake <email@example.com> To: Multiple recipients of list <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Thursday, February 18, 1999 7:27 AM Subject: Re: Traditional versus reform
|gg> P.S. A question I've never had answered: can anyone with firm ties to |the NCTM please venture an opinion whether or not MathLand, from Creative |Publications, conforms to the NCTM Standards. | |bd> I believe NCTM policy prohibits endorsing (or bashing) vendors' |materials. Even Saxon (representing the antithesis of quality textbooks) is |permitted to rent booth space at NCTM conferences. Critiques of curriculum |materials are sometimes included in their journals, but I don't know if |MathLand has been reviewed. Even if it were, the reviews are usually more |descriptive rather than subjective. Regardless, I don't think NCTM is in |the business of branding curriculum materials with their stamp of approval |-- that's left to others. It wouldn't be a good idea. |