I've seen both of those. I have incorporated some of their suggestions into my classes. Some of their techniques don't fit my personality. The way I learn ma

I've seen both of those. I have incorporated some of their suggestions into my classes. Some of their techniques don't fit my personality. The way I learn mathematics is suited only for a small percentage of the population. As an example, I have little use for diagrams. I don't think in terms of geometry but in terms of abstract definitions. I don't need a diagram to conceptualize and understand that pi is the ratio of the circumference of a circle to its diameter. Even with diagrams most of my students don't understand what this means. Meyer's enthusiasm is contagious and I appreciate that about him. It's exceptional, in fact. It's also not duplicable by most teachers. He's found a style that works for him. It doesn't work for everyone though. One of his methods involves watching videos of water pouring out of a container and experimentally verifying whether or not his calculations make sense. For me, this is a great big yawn. I could not bear watching such a thing in a class as a student. The real problem in education, as I see it, is that schools do a terrible job of matching student personality with teacher personality. I believe that solving this problem would significantly increase retention and learning. It's hard to fit a teaching method to a personality that isn't predisposed to such a method. It just doesn't work. The human interaction dynamic of such a class is a mess.