[The] books were so lousy. They were false. They were hurried. They would try to be rigorous, but they would use examples (like automobiles in the street for sets) which were almost OK, but in which there were always some subtleties. The definitions werent accurate. Everything was a little bit ambiguous -- they werent smart enough to understand what was meant by rigor. They were faking it. They were teaching something they didnt understand, and which was, in fact, useless, at that time, for the child. That was Feynmans opinion of the books used in the 60s. Were he around today, hed not be any more impressed. Current reports of mathematicians who were asked to participate in Common Core indicate that they are most unhappy with todays texts and standards.
Posted on: Mon, 01 Sep 2014 06:32:25 +0000