Discovering Algebra,

Discovering Geometry, and

Discovering Advanced Algebra sued OSPI.

The are steamed at OSPI's acceptance of only HOLT for high school core adoption recommendation.

OSPI removed from Discovering from consideration because the SBE found only HOLT mathematically sound enough for recommended adoption.

You can find the entire legal complaint at the bottom of the page on the following page

http://soundmath.wetpaint.com/page/Discovering+Mathematics+Series

at SoundMath. The file is in two downloadable pieces.

---------------------

A cyber-space analyst comments:

The premise of the case appears to be based on - of all things - inappropriate pedagogical considerations on the part of ST.

They claim that:

The discussion of "mathematical soundness" in the ST study quite explicitly uses this term not in its ordinary sense of "free of mathematical errors," but instead as a code word for pedagogical soundness, that is to say, in accord with the pedagogical preferences and beliefs of the ST reviewers.

Wilson and Harel are not mentioned at all, either by name or even indirectly. Their qualifications for the task that ST gave them are avoided altogether. On the other hand -

By contrast, in the OSPI review,

__two eminent scholars__had reviewed the top-four ranked programs and determined that they all provided mathematically sound content. ........... The scholars avoided relying on their own pedagogical preferences in reviewing the mathematical soundness of the proposed curricula, although they expressed their own view that the Holt and KCP curricula "tie together mathematical ideas best."

Isn't this a hoot?

From the OSPI report, on page 104 is the following paragraph:

One characteristic that distinguishes integrated mathematics materials from more traditional materials is the extensive use of contexts and applications as the focus of attention. Mathematics ideas are typically not presented as “naked” mathematics, but rather as ways to solve problems. This does not mean that the mathematics is less important or less well developed, but it does make a review of mathematical soundness somewhat more complex.

One characteristic that distinguishes integrated mathematics materials from more traditional materials is the extensive use of contexts and applications as the focus of attention. Mathematics ideas are typically not presented as “naked” mathematics, but rather as ways to solve problems. This does not mean that the mathematics is less important or less well developed, but it does make a review of mathematical soundness somewhat more complex.

Bright articulates the distinction between "traditional" and "integrated" curricula as being the shift in emphasis towards contexts and applications. Oh, well, there is certainly no pedagogy in play here! {ya sure you betcha}

The phrase "it does make a review of mathematical soundness somewhat more complex" means that those who can't find mathematical soundness fail to do so because they don't know how to look. And those who don't know how to look are clearly incapable because they are not in possession of the "revealed truth" that only select members of an elite club are in a position to know.

This is a hallmark of a cult, and as clear an example of pedagogical bias as any judge should need to see.

This is a hallmark of a cult, and as clear an example of pedagogical bias as any judge should need to see.

--------------

Friendly advice said:

Better to have some think you are a fool than open your mouth and remove all doubt ... Key Press should keep quite.

Better to have some think you are a fool than open your mouth and remove all doubt ... Key Press should keep quite.

## 4 comments:

Issquah School Superindent has put a halt to the high math textbook adoption process, at least for now. They were recommending Discovering Series. I wasn't present at the meeting, but hear there were many unhappy parents. I don't think the board members were fully convinced either. Administrators asked the State to come and support their decision (Discovering Series) in front of board, but looks like the State refused the invitation.

See more details at

http://www.issaquah.wednet.edu/documents/math/09adoptiondelay.pdf

I'm writing to the President. Key Press, Core Plus, and Everybody Math can go kiss my toes.

Why is Key Press being represented by a CaliFornia 1st amendment lawyer?

Does no school system have the right to make disparaging comments about published textbooks or curriculum?

If pedagogical preference is not stated in the state standards but is found in the NMAP and the IES math RtI practice guide, it's not a valid preference?

Censorship - its incredible, but its identical to the suit McGraw-Hill filed in Texas,

According to these rocks - intelligent design is equal to any other science textbook. The adoption process doesn't matter.

Its going to take more than a few unhappy parents to push this trainwreck over a cliff.

Post a Comment