[Phys-L] Re: Calculators a Distraction?

[John Denker <jsd@AV8N.COM>]

Bob LaMontagne wrote:
> I don't know many college level students (including some of my best ones)
> who could manually calculate solutions.

Wow.

> Please remember that the algorithm
> for square roots is no longer even taught in most school systems. Long
> division is probably not possible for at least half the students - unless
> you really use simple numbers.
>
> Calculators are a fact of life and I think you're looking for trouble by
> banning them. You are trying to evaluate the students understanding of
> physics - I don't see how hand calculations facilitate that.
>
> I feel that far more legitimate questions are: Do you allow formula cards,
> etc.? I know most of us bemoan the student's lack of ability to estimate,
> but on the other hand, it frees us as teachers to stress and evaluate the
> concepts when we are not tied to checking students arithmetic when grading
> exams. I'm sure there are those who still feel that all subjects should be
> taught in Latin. I see requiring hand calculations to be pretty similar.

That is quite a powerful argument.  Yes, not too long ago
fluency in Latin was not just a graduation requirement, it
was an entrance requirement for any college worthy of the
name.  The analogy to long division is striking.

I've been racking my brain, trying to think of a real-world
scenario where somebody would need to do division, without
having easy access to a calculator.  I haven't come up with
any.  The only times I've done long division recently is
when I was teaching the subject!

I'm starting to wonder if Latin might deserve *more* emphasis
than long division, on the grounds that my knowledge of Latin
roots of English words comes in handy almost every day.

So I return the question to the group:  Is there any counter
to Bob's argument?

If, after due deliberation, we accept the argument, the
consequences are profound.  For one thing, we ought to pass
the word to the grade-school teachers, so they don't waste
time teaching long division.  That will make a lot of teachers
and students happy.

We would also have to change the rules for standardized tests.

==========================================================

Chuck Britton wrote:
> Showing the intermediate steps (algebra  first - numbers later)
> is a legitimate requirement.
> Requiring students to 'Show your Work' doesn't go against their
> future work-style.

Agreed.

> If all of the work was done on the calculator - require them to
> staple the calculator to the test paper.
>
> If all of their work was done 'in their head' - require them to
> staple their HEAD to the test paper.

That seems unnecesarily facetious.

A non-facetious version would be to do the work using a
well-commented spreadsheet, and turn in the spreadsheet.
The comments don't change the numerical answer, but they
are mandatory to fulfill the show-your-work requirement.

   True story:  On another list, I recently wanted to show
   my work, so folks could understand the basis for my
   bottom-line numerical answer (and also so they could
   learn how to reproduce the answer). Therefore I attached
   a few lines of C++ code, with comments.

============

To summarize.  Bottom line:  showing your work is mandatory,
always was, and always will be.  This can be done with or
without a calculator.  You are allowed to use a calculator
to do the math, but you're not allowed to use it as an
excuse for not showing your work.