Consider the time that has elapsed in this drama. I have found very few schools that, had they achieved the results claimed in Boaler's study, would not make it

Consider the time that has elapsed in this drama. I have found very few schools that, had they achieved the results claimed in Boaler's study, would not make it very public. How can you turn an urban school around, let alone, have it surpass other schools and not broadcast it to the world? In science, things become fact by proving them again, again, again, and again. Not by doing one study, claiming stupendous success and that be the end of it, as seems the case in education research. Without the Bishops, Milgrams, and thousands of frustrated parents, who would provide critical review of these studies? There are dozens of NSF studies claiming success, all with a different methods. I have hunted down most of them and none of them appear in the context of high performing mathematics classes. Like honors algebra or AP calculus where the students score 4's and 5's. It seems that in the education research community, especially in the NSF funded scam community, there is an unwritten rule that researchers do not criticize each other. Boaler seems to be pinning her hopes in this letter on that rule. If you were Boaler and you possessed the secret to turning around the mathematics attainment of low performing urban schools, would you... A. Continue to produce stellar results at even more schools? B. Spend ten years arguing with Bishop and Milgram? Bob Hansen