But is one the "vehicle" for the other?
In a nutshell what is the pedigogy, what is so different about it?
The idea behind it is that drill and kill promotes memorization and not understanding.
In the early phases of math learning, the goal is not the right answer but the ability to explain how you came to your answer. Students who are consistently told their answers are wrong in class settings are increasingly likely to not volunteer to answer questions. Once students are comfortable explaining how they got their answers (we're talking at the earliest stages of skill learning), the teacher begins teaching the framework for how to approach the problem. The idea is that the standard "I do, we do, you do" model of instruction is not necessarily as approachable as learning through open experimentation.
Yes, there are tests and assessments to gauge skill mastery. There are regular benchmarks that inform instruction.
As I've said before, my kids have been taught using this approach and have been rocketing through curricula with their classes. They're much more confident with their math skills at this age than my wife and I were.
I don't like that it talks about equipping students to deal with the realities of capitalism, colonialism, and revolution. It actually does a halfway decent job of explaining the capitalism part as equipping the learner to understand interest so they can't be taken advantage of by predatory companies. Colonialism and revolution? Yeah, that's gone more than a wee bit overboard and I didn't see any rationale.
As with anything by the Daily Mail, take the headlines with a grain of salt. It's not a feel good program that gives out participation trophies for 2+2=cucumber. But it does have some serious presentation flaws that take away from solid and accepted pedagogy.
