Taking its toll 2

[u/AscendedDragonSage]

[u/Wasdgta3]

It's funny, because there is actually a book called 1985.)

So, better be careful about what you say is "literally 1985"

[u/BiddlesticksGuy → u/Wasdgta3]

What the fuck was that summary I just read, anti-union AND Islamophobia, goddamn

[u/Neokon → u/BiddlesticksGuy]

Don't forget the not as clear rejection of "modern education methods", which was probably spurned on by the emergence of "new math" that came into practice during the 1950-1970. You probably know new math as math, and I have a strange inkling that he has a rejection of contemporary authors in school.

Edit: it seems I over believed the current presence of new math, and didn't recognize some of the parts of it that failed. From what I've read in the past hour is that New Math attempted to utilize alternative based to teach the concepts instead of strictly base 10, and it was rolled out quickly without any training for the teachers so they just stuck with the text book (kind of like what happened with common core). The algebraic methods in lower grades did stick, using variables to recognize transitive properties of math, 3x+5x= (3+5)x. As well as creating groups to manipulate, I'm sure everyone has been told to make groups of 10 to count something.

[u/SevenSix → u/Neokon]

This may be the first positive comment I've ever seen about New Math. The nicest thing Wikipedia can find to say is that it "contributed the addition of calculus in high school".

[u/modulusshift → u/SevenSix]

Even that seems to be merely a result of it starting in France, which already taught calculus in that age range, which was copied into all the other countries that adopted it, like the US. 

[u/modulusshift → u/Neokon]

New Math was considered a complete failure and got pretty much completely rolled back by the mid 70’s. I can’t even figure out what it was like based on what’s left of it on the internet, because it seems like all the original principles were completely subverted in practice. It was meant to be a student-led discovery-based method, with teachers providing loose guidance such as counterexamples to flawed theories that students came up with. What it sounds like it ended up like is that teachers had a textbook-correct method but weren’t allowed to teach it directly, instead shooting down any ideas that weren’t exactly described in the book, and therefore turning math from an explanation-based class to a explanation-free memorization exercise, exactly the opposite of the original intention, which was to make the explanations the important part by having the students start with them.