On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 4:12 AM, Robert Hansen <email@example.com> wrote: > > On Oct 24, 2012, at 7:55 PM, Paul Tanner <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > > See the links I gave to all those past posts of mine. > > > I did see the links, that is why we are talking about pretending to teach > children algebra. My question was, if the student can't see arithmetic, why > do you think they can see algebra? It appears that you are trying to use a > rote trick just to get the student through the topic, and all teachers > probably face this situation with students that struggle. However, they > pretend to teach algebra during algebra, not arithmetic. Should I call you > lesson "pretending to teach arithmetic" instead? >
If *including* (I did *not* say "replace") in the totality of what is taught are methods that actually result in the students getting better measurements on tests - that which you put so much stock in, then what is the problem? Either you have to change your position that these measurements - these tests - are everything or you'll have to stop criticizing what actually works for so many because part of what is taught does not meet your personal standards on some philosophy of education.