&gt; It is one of the great errors of the &quot;SCIENCE!&quot; attitude that it convinces people that if we do not have peer-reviewed papers, we must necessarily claim full and total ignorance and berate anybody who attempts to do otherwise.<p>In fact, I think quite the opposite. Its one of the great errors that people assume peer-reviewed papers are always correct, a lot of the time they&#x27;re not.<p>We <i>should</i> be sceptical of people&#x27;s claims when not supported by evidence. That doesn&#x27;t mean we should ignore said claims, just that we shouldn&#x27;t blindly accept them. This is the point where we should go and get some evidence, try to get a few teachers to use tau from the beginning and see if that helps.<p>Though I do agree that we shouldn&#x27;t be scared of doing things just because we don&#x27;t categorically <i>know</i> that it is right.<p>&gt; Given how standardized education is nowadays, as I complained in another comment, it isn&#x27;t exactly a far-out theory that when the same person, in the same context, switches to using tau, and sees a difference in results, that it may have something to do with using the more mathematically-sensible concept for teaching.<p>Or thinking about the same concept in different ways help you to understand the concept better. Its certainly something I believe has helped me a lot previously.