Surviving the Math Wars - Both Ends Against the Middle

Identity Crisis...

I imagined the following dialogue taking place between a traditionalist (T) and a reformist (R) after both had finished reading the posts I've written on this blog for the past 6-7 months:

T: He is definitely a radical reformer. He uses phrases like investigations, explorations, discovery-learning, problem-solving, working in groups and encourages the use of the calculator for some activities. He is more concerned with conceptual understanding than with content and skills that all students must know. He actually believes that young children can think profoundly about concepts before they have completely mastered their skills. He talks 'less is more.' He has no documented research base for any of his wild ideas, and pretends that decades of classroom instruction are just as legitimate as a carefully developed research study. In what accredited journal of education research has he published?

R: Nonsense. He's one of your kind. He preaches strong foundation in basic skills, automaticity of basic facts, facility with percents, decimals and fractions and generally does not promote the use of the calculator in the lower grades. Other than some esoteric mortgage activity he wrote, most of his math challenges have little to do with the real world, focusing instead on number theory and combinatorial math, topics which are above the heads of most middle schoolers. His geometry problems are very traditional. He is often critical of calculator use. He focuses on standards and curriculum, even suggesting we need a nationalized math curriculum (and we know who will determine that!). He doesn't even applaud the efforts of his own national math teacher organization. He covers up his 'back to basics' approach by pretending he is a centrist. We all know one cannot be a centrist here. Either you're pregnant or you're not! He has no documented research base for any of his wild ideas, and pretends that decades of classroom instruction are just as legitimate as a carefully developed research study. In what accredited journal of education research has he published?

I know the regular readers of this blog know who I am and I know where their heart lies, but what can be done to move math education into a zone of reality that is sorely needed for our children. All these wonderful ideas but there is still so much confusion out there. How far have we come in the past dozen years or so to change the reality of a curriculum that is 'one inch deep and one mile wide'? Your thoughts are welcome...