>”Bombace posted in that “obscure blog” at the request of one of the math moms. She evidently felt that posting on your blog was not cool.You did not have to dig too far, the comment is also posted on the VOR math website.So your feelings are hurt that your blog did not get the scoop, it looks like Grandpa Nizzo outdone you! No apology needed, the comments by the Board were true and validated by facts. Many of the parents involved in this controversy have chosen to distance themselves from those who chose those tactics.I can only hope they chose to distance themselves from this blog. Choosing to post on another blog looks like a start. “
*BUT this blogger wants to know ,what are these “tactics” everyone is taking about ?
>I find it hard to believe the posting on the obscure blog was “at the request of one of the math moms.”
I know at least one of the leading “math moms” didn’t think it was nice for our BOE prez to posted on such an obscure site.
I believe the statement should have been posted right next to the BOE’s accusations on the RPS web site.
>yes Pj I am very interested also to hear about these “tactics” we keep hearing about …
>Well, I for one was appalled that Frances Edwards first emailed Dr. Brooks directly, and basically told him not to come here. The text of that email was proudly displayed on this blog. I think that “tactic” was wrong. If Frances did it, I have no doubt others did it, too. But her email is the only one I personally have evidence of.
>in which archive is this letter located?
what do you mean, “basically”? i guess i’ll have to see the letter, for myself, to see what was said.
>to 8:03 am:
I find it hard to believe the posting on the obscure blog was “at the request of one of the math moms.”
Believe it, right after the post from Bombace there is a post from one of the moms. Yes, yes folks. They did not chose this blog for a reason.
>Oh come on! Her email was only meant to be “informative”. She copied some of the comments from this blog and directed him to see for himself. She was really concerned about him (can I sell you a bridge?. But at least she had the guts to put her name on it.
Her husband on the other hand…
>It seems that any criticism, poking fun of and sarcasm directed towards the BOE, combined with calls to Brooks’ office telling him that he and his TERC math philosphy were not welcome, emails to Brooks and Bombace by people who DID NOT hide their identity when corresponding, are the unfair “tactics” which are repeatedly referred to.
It seems that Mr. Bombace & Co. are thin skinned but see no conflict of interest when he goes ringing up those who signed the petition (who happen to work for him and his brother), allowing the principal of Hawes to call all the parents from her school who signed the petition and blaming the serial bailer Brooks’ aborted tenure on the parents who oppose Dumb Dumb math.
We have a bunch of cry babies running our education system in Ridgewood (an example of unfair use of language – mean spirited, name calling).
Oh, I’m sorry. I should be more sensitive and show respect for our hard working volunteers on the BOE.
Maybe we just abolish the bloody body and turn over the hiring of the superintendent to the Village Council. There is no law mandating that we have a BOE.
>Yes, those ARE the unfair “tactics.” Inserting yourself in the middle of a personnel hiring issue was just wrong. Telling someone they’re not welcome…wrong. Not nice. Board of Ed member speaking to one of his constituents to get their feedback/input/opinion? Hmm…seems like responsible representation to me. The woman has said herself that no threats implied or real were made. Stop trying to turn this into something it’s not! Get a freakin’ life already! Come up with some positive solutions, not sarcastic back seat driving!
>Do your job! Don’t hire worn our retreads from districts that have expelled their superintendents.
Learn what TERC is and more importantly, isn’t. Ask some real Math experts for guidence not the hired help with M.Eds. who went to teacher’s colleges.
Come on. Get real. Brooks would only have served to prop up this disaster you pawn off as math.
Without him, you are left all alone to defend this garbage. That is a good thing. Now do your job and stop whinning about the opposition from parents who know this is bad for our kids.
Good grief, just look around at where this TERC, Everyday Math and CMP have been tried. All have been a failure.
Why defend something proven so wrong? Is this just EGO, institutional stupidity or what?
What are our kids too dumb to do the same math as children in Asia and Europe?
The solution is simple, throw this garbage out and put in a real math program.
Be the hero and act in the best interest of the district. And if you don’t know what that is, then resign.
>to 8:56am
You say “emails to Brooks and Bombace by people who DID NOT hide their identity when corresponding, are the unfair “tactics” which are repeatedly referred to”.
If the email to Bombace you are referring to is the one posted on this blog and later removed, it did not contain a signature. It said “pissed off citizen” that does not sound like anyone’s name- maybe a state of mind, but not a name. That person also said “we possess more education than you, the other board members, the administrators and the teachers”
and they copied the Village Manager in an effort to intimidate.
A phone call above board sounds tame to me compared to this.
NOW, those are the tactics everyone is talking about.
Care to own it? It sounds to me you know who sent it since you say “DID NOT hide…”.
>Well PJ it looks like your ratings are back up!
Keep the controversy alive the rest will follow…
>bbwool,
nice try, pretending this blog doesn’t include ALL voices, including even those, like yours, which were supportive of the new superintendent. i remember well your role as apologist for, and booster of, the BOE on this very blog.
after all, it was you who supported the new superintendent on this blog by saying about his commute, “But seriously, it can work for some people…”
anybody who bothers to read this blog will see many voices. just for the record, the ONLY voice advocating violence on this blog belonged to that of a BOE SUPPORTER.
>If the email to Bombace you are referring to is the one posted on this blog and later removed
…,why dont they trace the email back to its source instead of talking all this BULL ,
all emails can be traced just do it or shut up about it .
>gw mom,
i suggest you reread that letter from the “math mom” because it does not support your claim.
it DOES NOT say she asked Bombace to post the letter ONLY on Nizzo’s site. it DOES NOT say she is distancing herself from the Ridgewood Blog.
it DOES thank Mark for publicly posting the letter. (however, i’m sure the math mom would prefer to see it publicly posted where it is most appropriate: namely, on the RPS web site right next to the BOE’s inflammatory comments).
it DOES say PJ admitted the MATH ISSUE (not the Ridgewood Blog) was hijacked by voices taunting the administration.
in fact, why should any “math mom” have to say she is distancing herself from the Ridgewood Blog? everybody knows the blog is PJ’s blog and that it therefore cannot pretend to speak for math moms.
the math moms have their own web sites, one of which is http://www.vormath.info. so if you want to hear the voice of the “math moms,” visit their sites or better yet, attend BOE meetings and witness their always respectful comments.
it’s great Nizzo takes the time to run a blog. but it is hosted by mainstream press, the Ridgewood News. comments are sparse, so either the blog is indeed “obscure” or voices are being censored. or both.
let’s face it, the Ridgewood Blog scooped other media outlets, including the Ridgewood News, on the Brooks appointment. furthermore, there are no fewer than 60 comments on a single thread of the current edition of the Ridgewood Blog, which overshadows the comments on Nizzo’s blog. and they appear to be uncensored. worse, the other media outlets haven’t even bothered to cover much of the news the Ridgewood Blog uncovered.
>”…and they copied the Village Manager in an effort to intimidate.”
As well they should.
You don’t think that news of the BOE President and the Hawes Principal calling up parents was not percieved as “an effort to intimidate?”
Come on. There are people afraid to speak up because of these actions, much less sign the petition.
A chilling effect, indeed it had.
>THIS IS ALL BULLSHIT
>the biggest chilling effect is how you have all conducted throughout this. Go and listen to the high school rep to the Board last night. She put it best. All her peers are reading and are embarrassed at the way many of us adults are acting. She warned us, “your children are watching, be careful of the example you are setting”.
>Please… a sycophant in training.
Nice try flak.
>she also came up with the best suggestion I have heard in weeks….why don’t we ask the students what they think of the math program….especially those that went through it several years ago in the elementary schools and are now in high school and intelligently articulate ( at least some of them can)what they think…..
>I think that BOE student representative should go solve the Palestinian/Israeli conflict and leave it to PARENTS to determine what is best for their children’s education in Math.
My children are reading too and are proud of these parents for making sure that they may be able to do math beyond HIGH SCHOOL if they so desire.
>The tactics are free speech unedited by the Ridgewood News.
It used to be “they” controlled the conversation. Now that there is truly a “free press” in the Internet, the playing field has been evened.
And guess what, “they” don’t like it.
Those that “distance themselves” are to be expected. Very few people are willing to stand up for what they believe in. History is filled with examples.
It has always been the few who have made a difference, never the many.
>How’s this for a math problem
One self appointed sanctimonious blogger + (plus) a few undisciplined self centered I want it my way right away right now parents x (times) many inappropriate letters, e mails & phone calls =(equals) a mountain out of an ant hill.
>Leaving educational decisions in the hands of students is not a good decision. If it were, why have teachers, administrators, and, a BOE at all.
No, this is an adult matter. Let the children be children.
>How’s this for a math problem.I like this one better …How about pompous bureaucrats stifle open debate and squelch free speech in an effort to put one over on the tax payer with this TERC scam
>For the blogger who posted, “How’s this for a math problem…”
If it is a “mountain out of a mole hill,” why all the press?
Why do YOU care.
Obviously, you don’t care what happens to the children of this village. If you did, you would do the required reading about Constructivism before uttering an opinion.
Or, are you just a knee-jerk suck-up?
Ignorance is bliss.
>hey bbwool,
i found that letter from Frances to Brooks and she DID NOT tell him not to come. so what YOU said was…ummm…”basically” a lie. which makes you “basically” a liar.
in fact, she gave him a heads up on the math discussion in our district. furthermore, her polite communication enabled Brooks to respond in kind. it gave him a chance to publicly explain his position and i must say, he did it well and graciously.
bbwool, why did you say the Ridgewood Blog “proudly” posted her letter but not tell us the whole truth, that it also posted Brooks’ response??
but hey, everyone, you don’t have to take MY word for it because here is the parent’s letter and Brooks’ response from the May 9, 2007 blog:
“Dr. Mr. Brooks,
I am a Ridgewood parent of three children in our public schools and I, like many others here, have been made aware of your pending position as our new superintendent. Our Board may not have advised you of this, but you should be aware of the present climate in our district with regard to the “Investigation” math curriculum. Several articles and ‘letters to the editor’ have appeared in our local paper over recent weeks. If the Board kept you in the dark with regard to this protracted circumstance, there may be little left for you to do but to give it your deepest contemplation. The link below is but a sample of the present discussion underway.
Respectfully,
Frances”
https://www.lindamoran.net/blog_teen/2007/04/the_disaster_at_plainview_old.html
“Dear Ms. Edwards:
Thanks for this note. I’d like to make a few comments about the link you attached. The math wars, like the whole language wars of the past decade, are based on a false dichotomy: traditional education v. progressive education. Good instruction focuses on the needs of the child – every child, one by one – and no one approach meets the needs of all children.
The math issue is interesting in that the battle seems to be pitched around algorithmic fluency v. conceptual understanding. They are not mutually exclusive. Both are essential for mathematically literacy. Students who learn algorithms procedurally without conceptual understanding aren’t truly fluent because although they are able to answer questions correctly on tests (when the questions are posed in the precise format the students are used to seeing), they often have difficulty knowing whether to (and how to) apply that algorithm to new and different situations. Teaching for conceptual understanding helps children develop efficient strategies for computing. Understanding the concept that underlies the algorithm helps students know how and when to apply it, helping them to become more proficient in solving new, differently presented problems and/or more complex problems.
Programs don’t teach children, teachers do. Good teachers vary their instruction – and their materials – based on student response.
Respectfully,
Marty Brooks”
>ant hill math sounds fuzzy to me. get back to us when you are done counting the ants and the grains of sand, we could make it a “guess the number of m&m’s in the jar” type contest…
>Is the Village Idiot on the side of the “housewives” when it comes to dumd dumd math?