 |
 |
ted panitz wrote: > Hi Listers, > > IT IS NOT TO LATE TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE DISCUSSION! My web site is > alive and evolving, with your help. > > If you feel inspired by these testimonials please feel free to e-mail > me your story regarding CL and I will add it to the site. Gary Probst replied: The approach you describe appears to have attributes of the new-new math program used in some public schools called "fuzzy math." Reports on these web sites give the results of "fuzzy math" programs throughout the nation during the past ten years. http://www.mathematicallycorrect.com http://www.eagleforum.org/educate/1999/oct99/math.html http://www.tppf.org/ecot.html These web sites document the educational, political and litigation problems produced by fuzzy math. A web search using "fuzzy math instruction" will find over 2000 web sites describing students' problems and repercussions of this approach to math. In October, 1999, the documented failure of fuzzy math across the United States caused over two hundred Professors of Mathematics in American universities to sign an open letter to the United States Secretary of Education, Richard Riley, denouncing this approach to math. Tom Loveless, Director of Educational Policy at the Brookings Institute also signed this letter. http://www.mathematicallycorrect.com/riley.htm There are national periodicals that have published articles describing the harm experienced by minorities and at-risk-students given fuzzy math instruction. Some of these articles were published in the Harvard Educational Review and the National Review (December 21, 1998). After reading your website, I would like to know the following: 1. Why has fuzzy math, as it is taught in the public school system, failed? 2. What attributes of fuzzy math do you use in your instructional program?