- The report lays out when children should know what. This seems like a step in the direction of national standards . . . which could lead to a national curriculum and a national test.
-Apparently American students are the weakest when it comes to fractions and the argument is presented that improving knowledge of fractions should be the main focus. I've read elsewhere that fractions are growing less and less relevant in today's world. I wonder if rebuts or otherwise addresses this claim.
-It argues for a math curriculum focused on deep understanding of the subject matter (fewer topics, more depth). This goes well with Bill Schmidt's criticism that U.S. math curricula are "a mile wide and an inch deep."
-This quote says it all about education research (basically, we can never seem to figure out anything definitively):
“There is no basis in research for favoring teacher-based or student-centered instruction,” Dr. Larry R. Faulkner, the chairman of the panel, said at a briefing on Wednesday. “People may retain their strongly held philosophical inclinations, but the research does not show that either is better than the other.”