>Don’t you get it? If they switched after the 2003 S&P report, they achieved their high ranking without the ‘benefit’ of reform math, and were subsequently hoodwinked by slick publishing marketing techniques into making a change for change’s sake. This means that those districts are nothing but high-class suckers now, just like Ridgewood.
If you don’t like the word “disingenuous”, then how about “sociopathic”?
If you seek to defend reform math, then defend reform math! Don’t try to convince us that reform math is preferable simply by dropping the names of presumptively high achieving districts that foolishly bought into this social engineering experiment wrapped in the skin of a math curriculum.
Show us why reform math isn’t as pathetic as we all think it is compared to other math curriculums currently on the market. Show us why, despite what we have all seen with our respective two eyes, reform math isn’t devoid of critical math fact and math algorithm content.
Is it because we don’t live in Missouri that you don’t feel obligated to “show me”?