Search All of the Math Forum:
Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by
Drexel University or The Math Forum.
|
|
|
|
Re: CMP Connected Mathematics does not introduce Lowest Common
Denominator
Posted:
Dec 6, 2007 1:00 PM
|
|
> I'm all for teaching the Euclidean algorithm, Kirby.
> Just curious as to when you would introduce it and how.
You *claim* to be curious, but I've been answering this
question for many years now. When do we get to the
"oh, I get it now" part?
> I don't draw quite the same conclusion you do about
> the authors of EM, given that I know one of them well
> enough to believe he does "get it."
Yeah, you're all oozy schmoozy politics about it, an
operator, we knew that.
> I'm increasingly disturbed by the apparent need to
> not only say that you (any "you") believe X, but that
> anyone who hasn't already said that they also believe
> X, or something pretty damned close to X, is "clueless"
> or "doesn't get it," or in some other manner just isn't
> up to your own brilliance and insight.
Do you think I lose sleep over what disturbs MPG? I hope
I've at least earned *some* respect as a sparring partner.
> There's a difference between saying, "You're going in
> this direction and I am going in another for the
> following reasons," and stating or implying that those
> who disagree are ignorant.
Oh, funny you should mention that. Check my blog post
of this morning (links back to this thread FYI):
http://mybizmo.blogspot.com/2007/12/math-makeover-update.html
> They might well be, but it seems a collegial thing to
> do to ask first.
They aren't my colleagues, never will be (nor you either).
> Meanwhile, what do a privileged elite have to do with
> the Euclidean algorithm?
You dropped a dot: RSA. If you don't know much about
RSA, you're clueless, not part of a privileged elite
(privileged in the sense of having a K-12 math curriculum
worth beans, even real teachers if you're lucky).
Kirby
|
|
|
|
