Agreeing in many parts but not in toto to Kirby Urner's arguments dt. http://mathforum.org/kb/message.jspa?messageID=9353106 (http://mathforum.org/kb/message.jspa?messageID=9353106) [his post copied in full below my signature for ready reference], here are a few points I'd like to put forward: > > (Education needs to be) "public, but > under local control" importing influences > selectively, including from > Asia and New Zealand > And EVERYTHING to be *designed effectively* by the stakeholders involved: the stakeholders must involve: -- teachers; students; parents; administrators; education experts; politicians; others interested to contribute. (Even Haim, Professor Wayne Bishop and Robert Hansen should be given the opportunity to put forth their good ideas [and even their bad ideas!]) - AND to see them *integrated* into the systems that develop.
All of the above is entirely possible to accomplish, I claim, and it is not really terribly difficult to do, if all involved would learn how to debate complex issues *effectively*. Some (a very tiny amount of) learning and a fair bit of 'unlearning' is involved in accomplishing the above.
The conventional 'prose mode of discussion and argument' (as is generally practiced (including at Math-teach), will not be sufficient by any means (as should be evident by now). > > More experimentation, not less, is what's needed. > > That means loosening the grip of the top-down > authoritarians. > Absolutely! > I really have little idea about specifically *how* and *when* and *how much* of 'computer science' (CS) needs to be *integrated* with the 'learning of math' - though I AM certain that we have not at all derived the benefits to education made made possible by the developments in CS over the past few decades. For that matter, we have not at all understood how to *integrate* Buckminster Fuller's profound ideas about what I call 'natural engineering'.
This is connected with the fact that our 'conventional systems' (educational; other; you name it) severely suppress and constrict the natural 'question-asking faculty' that every child has. See, for instance, the discussion at "How a Child Learns", herewith attached.