Search All of the Math Forum:
Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by
Drexel University or The Math Forum.
|
|
|
|
ruth parker (was: language!)
Posted:
Aug 18, 2000 7:19 PM
|
|
i'd like to thank ms. parker for delurking; her initial post
http://forum.swarthmore.edu/epigone/amte/chimphospu/B5C2AAAD.CB3%25ruthp@pacif
icrim.net
livened up what has been a pretty dull amte
by making some actual charges
of specific wrongdoing by professor bishop
where our regulars generally prefer
vague statements of extreme moral outrage.
.
that's about it; i'm pretty much a fascinated non-participant.
if i've heard of ms. parker before now, i've forgotten about it.
as for the quotes she objected to at
http://www.intres.com/math/ruthquotes.htm
. . . there's what appears to be a friendlier set of notes
for what must have been a fairly similar talk at
http://www.huffmantv.com/hartford/R_parker.htm
; my brief researches have also located a full length paper
http://watt.enc.org/online/ENC2211/2211.html
at the enc: "what will implementation take?".
.
oh, he(ck), i can't resist:
>Instructional practices that align with the NCTM's curriculum standards vary
>significantly from the common practice of teaching students correct
procedures for >solving problems . . .
you can't *invent* this stuff.
|
|
|
|
