...with an individual who does not wish to be called "a defender of Reform Math," and who is, most emphatically, neither a relative, nor an associate, of E. Paul Goldenberg (the latter being a much-respected friend of a friend of mine).
Note at what great length Mr. Goldenberg is willing to carry on about how religious and non-lefty I and my "sycophants" must be, but can't "waste time" addressing a single one of my specific points--until (or so he suggests) such time as I supply my actual name and email address.
1. Any choice among curricula should include comparisons of specific problem sets.
2. The problem set comparisons on my blog that you find so unfair compare Reform Math to Singapore Math.
3. You yourself have said that you don't possess Singapore Math materials, and that you currently do not have "an adequate opinion to comment" on Singapore Math.
4. I have taught children of all ages all levels of Singapore Math for the last four years, problem set by problem set.
5. For a forthcoming book I've spent years analyzing specific Reform Math problems from a variety of curricula and at a variety of grade levels.
6. I've invited you to adduce what you consider to be fairer problem set comparisons than those I offer on my blog... and am still waiting for a reply.
7. Yet I'm apparently the one who is "deeply prejudiced and uninterested in learning a thing that [I] don't already know is Absolute Truth".
Funny. We have two anonymous people (the blogger and one of the his sychophants), slapping each other on the back while neither has the guts to post anything under his own name. If "Lefty" was so interested in a responsible exchange of ideas, he'd post under his real name. I don't waste time with cowards. Offer a real name and a reliable e-mail address (e.g., not web-based and untraceable) so that you are accountable for what you write, and I'll worry about what you have to say.
Let's recall that you came to MY blog and started in about Singapore Math on an item that was NOT about that. You then returned to "scare" me about your public posting of our exchange (and maybe you need to read a bit more of my blog before labeling me a defender of "Reform Math"; not to mention that I am one person, not multiple people, so your claim of exchanging with "defenders" is as phony as your pseudonym).
I guarantee I've written more words criticizing specific reform books than you have written criticizing any aspect whatsoever of Singapore Math. True believers NEVER find flaws in those books, though I've met with Singaporean mathematics educators who do, oddly enough. That's because they don't have religious blinders on. Too bad the same can't be said for you, "Lefty."
You may just want to get the other side of your brain engaged, because the one you claim to favor isn't doing such a wonderful job. And that book you're promising on "selected" reform math problems? That should be one interesting example of selectivity.
I've dropped enough clues by now that anyone who really wants to can figure out who I am (including email address, professional activities, and Facebook friends) in about 5 minutes; at the moment I'm enjoying being gender neutral to those who don't choose to spend the time. It's been an interesting experience seeing what assumptions people tend to make about my gender, (not to mention my politics and religiosity). But because of my book, which isn't published anonymously, I will be coming out of the closet soon.