The IMP books were authored by Dan Fendel and Diane Resek, professors of mathematics at San Francisco State University, and by Lynne Alper and Sherry Fraser.
[2] Designed in response to national reports pointing to the need for a major overhaul in mathematics education,[3][4][5] the IMP curriculum is markedly different in structure, content, and pedagogy from courses more typically found in the high school sequence.
[6] Nearly every one of these distinctive characteristics has generated controversy and placed the IMP curriculum right in the middle of the “math wars,” the conflict between those that favor more traditional curricula in mathematics education and the supporters of the reform curricula that were largely an outgrowth of the 1989 NCTM standards.
The new programs are shy on fundamentals and they also lack the mathematical depth and rigor that promotes greater achievement.”[8] Former NCTM president Frank Allen states, “Trying to organize school mathematics around problem solving instead of using its own internal structure for that purpose … (is destroying) essential connections….”[9] Criticism often includes anecdotal evidence including stories of school districts that have decided to discontinue or supplement use of the IMP curriculum[10] and of students who did not feel they had been prepared adequately for college.
[12] Kramer reported that grade 12 IMP students in his study performed better on all areas of mathematics tested by the NAEP test,[13] and Webb and Dowling reported IMP students performed significantly better on statistics questions from the Second International Mathematics Study, on mathematical reasoning and problem solving tasks designed by the State of Wisconsin, and on a quantitative reasoning test developed by a university to administer to entering students.