The Math Forum

Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Math Forum » Discussions » Education » math-teach

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: Re: New Post at RME: "Constructivism? We Don't Need No Steenking
Constructivism! (or do we?)"

Replies: 0  

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List  
Kirby Urner

Posts: 4,713
Registered: 12/6/04
Re: New Post at RME: "Constructivism? We Don't Need No Steenking
Constructivism! (or do we?)"

Posted: Feb 24, 2009 10:33 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

For those wishing a fairly cogent little thumbnail about
constructivism entitled 'About Constructivism', I
recommend this Coffee Shops Network post:

As your sometime poster here, Dr. Hake, Emeritus
Professor of Physics, Indiana University wrote to me:

Your excellent Math-Teach post of 10 Feb 2009 titled
"Constructivism (forks in the road)" [Urner (2009)] was
evidently distributed to subscribers, but evidently (as
of 16 Feb 08:30:00 -0800) not placed on the quirky
Math-Teach archives at

Then he told me some steps I might take, one of which is
to simply repost the above link.


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Ed. note: The Forum has boot-strapped a copy of Kirby's
10 February message back in to the web archive:

Kirby, please accept our apologies for this error.

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum at NCTM 1994-2018. All Rights Reserved.