I've read the paper, but I still find the grand metaphors like "Post-Linnaean" a bit of a reach. If you want to say that we've reached a point where few languages are pure in their approach (functional, object-oriented, etc), fine. If you want to say modern languages don't pay much a penalty for garbage collection, also fine. I just don't see the evidence that the approach hinted at has relevance to any context outsi…
What gave you the impression that the paper was supposed to have relevance outside of a classroom? The paper has practical applications to teaching, which should be self evident given the content and venue of the paper. If you don't care then don't upvote the story. But don't try to pass off your point as a valid criticism of the paper.
If the teaching is simply an end in itself and the students aren't measurably better with the new method, how can you objectively say that the method of teaching is better?
If it is better, it will produce better results, to suggest otherwise is nonsense.