It's a pretty strong rationale in favor of metric. I believe it actually justifies a stronger conclusion than is made.
I would let them choose the words but my recommendation would be that the argument justifies a position that metric will be emphasized in all instruction, and only the bare essentials of Customary will be taught, until the US makes greater progress in metrication. I would like to say Customary would not be taught at all, but I don't think that is fair to the students as long as our spineless politicians refuse to tackle the issue of converting the US to metric. ________________________________ From: Pat Naughtin <[email protected]> To: U.S. Metric Association <[email protected]> Sent: Tue, February 2, 2010 12:24:56 AM Subject: [USMA:46556] NCTM and the metric system Dear All, This National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) policy bears thinking about: http://www.nctm.org/about/content.aspx?id=6346 Cheers, Pat Naughtin Author of the ebook, Metrication Leaders Guide, that you can obtain from http://metricationmatters.com/MetricationLeadersGuideInfo.html PO Box 305 Belmont 3216, Geelong, Australia Phone: 61 3 5241 2008 Metric system consultant, writer, and speaker, Pat Naughtin, has helped thousands of people and hundreds of companies upgrade to the modern metric system smoothly, quickly, and so economically that they now save thousands each year when buying, processing, or selling for their businesses. Pat provides services and resources for many different trades, crafts, and professions for commercial, industrial and government metrication leaders in Asia, Europe, and in the USA. Pat's clients include the Australian Government, Google, NASA, NIST, and the metric associations of Canada, the UK, and the USA. See http://www.metricationmatters.com/ to subscribe.
