There's too much of the interesting-if-true about it. The quoted statistics say that in aggregate it's awesomely successful, but the article only gives an imaginary example of how DI is done, with strident assertions that this obviously must logically work and no claim that this method of teaching numbers has ever actually been used. There's also the claim that because this obviously must work, if it doesn't it's the teachers' fault for not doing what they're told, which is pretty much a standard rationality failure.

So there may be something awesome here but if so, it doesn't come through very well from the posting.

I don't see the problems others are talking about at all, to me this seems entirely awesome and I were surprised when I got to the comments and people didn't agree with me.

I found the article interesting and exciting, and emailed the article to a few people that I thought would be interested, and am just now getting to the comments. I am unsurprised that the people who went directly to the comments and left one had a different impression.