I wanted to reiterate the comments of Steve Means and Mike Goldenberg regarding Ron Ward's weekly posting of questions from the publication _Everybody Counts_ and the discussion that Ron was hoping to stimulate on this list about math ed reform & standards & varying interpretations which we all derive from the rhetoric (to which many of us subscribe) in the various NCTM documents and other related publications.
In a previous posting, under another subject heading, I quoted from an NCTM document on Algebra. It struck me that what was being set forth as the purpose of the Algebra document also held true for (what some of us were hoping would be seen as) the purpose of the Everybody Counts discussion questions. So, I repeat this quotation [with modifications] in an effort to support the spirit of this effort:
"...[Everybody Counts] and the [related questions] are presented here so that, in keeping with the charge, this document provides a foundation for rethinking the [current math ed reforms]. The purpose of the [questions] is to generate thought, debate, reaction, and attention to the many issues surrounding [math ed reform]. The [questions] can serve as a motivation for a continuing series of [email replies] related to [math ed reform]. Various communities should be able to use the [questions] as a basis for constructing their own vision of [reformed math teaching and learning], K-12, that will serve the needs of all students. Mathematics teachers, mathematics supervisors, mathematics teacher-educators, mathematics-education researchers, mathematics curriculum developers, textbook authors, mathematicians, policy makers, parents, and community members will find in the [questions] stimulation for grappling with issues and decisions related to changes in the teaching and learning of [mathematics]."
Thanks, Ron, and others who are grappling with these important questions! Angie ____________________________________________________________ Angie S. Eshelman 116 Erickson Hall Office: (517) 353-0628 Michigan State University E-Mail: email@example.com East Lansing, MI 48824-1034 ____________________________________________________________
At 4:47 PM 3/1/95, Ronald A Ward wrote: >In reply to my posting suggesting that we expand our focus to include all >three NCTM Standards publications [Curriculum and Evaluation, >Professional, Draft Assessment], one member of the NCTM Board wrote to >suggest that we also include related reform documents such as Everybody >Counts. > >So, to generate some discussion of that document leading up to the Boston >meetings, I will periodically ask some questions related to the content >of that document. I will do so "by chapters" so that, if you have not yet >read the booklet, you could easily work your way thru it a little at a time.
At 5:24 PM 3/14/95, Steve Means wrote: >Thank You, Ron. Your contribution are professional at the highest >standards ... and plenty provoking, too.
At 11:53 PM 3/14/95, Michael Paul Goldenberg wrote: >Did I miss something? What is the point of what appear to me to be >unprovoked, nasty attacks on Ron Ward's questions? The questions are >clearly intended to stimulate various lines of discussion in anticipation >of NCTM/Boston. Aside from American-bashing, NCTM-bashing, and >mathematics education-bashing, is there another agenda on the table which >I'm overlooking? If the questions aren't worthy of response, don't give >them one. If someone has an axe to grind, why turn it towards Ron Ward >for simply raising some questions? It strikes me as quite odd, frankly.