Robert Hansen (RH) posted Jan 1, 2014 11:40 AM (http://mathforum.org/kb/message.jspa?messageID=9354056) - GSC's remarks follow: > > On Dec 31, 2013, at 11:01 PM, GS Chandy > <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > > > Fundamentally, the way this could be done is quite > > simple to articulate (though it will not be quite so > > simple to do/ get done in practice): > > > > Just put up the following 'Mission' (or > > 'sub-Mission'): > > > > "To progress effectively from the process of > > 'teaching arithmetic' and enable learners to > > understand 'theory building' (and to actually build > > effective theories as needed in their own minds)" > > (This would probably be a minor 'sub-Mission' to the > > 'Mission': "To develop an effective math educational > > system"). > > > > - - and then learn how to put together > > (*integrate*) the great many good ideas that are > > already available out there amongst the stakeholders! > > > > AND, of course, ALSO learn how to get rid of the > > bad ideas that are also floating around: some of > > these bad ideas we have seen floating around right > > here at Math-teach - details can be provided, if > > required. > > > > Given some effective, practical tools needed to do > > all of the above-noted *integration* of good ideas > > (AND "getting rid of" bad ideas), this should really > > not take more than a couple of years to accomplish to > > the full satisfaction of all stakeholders! (This can > > be absolutely guaranteed; and it won't cost even a > > tiny fraction of all the HUGE time and money that are > > today being expended on improving 'math education', > > or STEM [or STEAM], or whatever). > > I think I speak for everyone here when I say that I > am very anxious to review what you come up with. > > Bob Hansen > Thank you for at least claiming to "being anxious to review what you come up with".
But sorry, but I really don't think you "speak for everyone here" when you lie that "OPMS is empty list-making and nothing else" - no one else has thus lied.
What I understand is:
- - either you have NOT reviewed what I have put up earlier (dozens of times), where I've described specifically, in some detail; in outline - though not via an adequately interactive website - what OPMS is about and how it works;
- - or you have reviewed it and you've lied about it (and no one else has done that). As you have already lied about it, it is entirely likely that you will do just that in the future too.
GSC ("Still Shoveling! Not PUSHING!! Not GOADING!!!")