| Chronology | Current Month | Current Thread | Current Date |
| [Year List] [Month List (current year)] | [Date Index] [Thread Index] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] | [Date Prev] [Date Next] |
Bob LaMontagne wrote:
I don't know many college level students (including some of mybest ones)
who could manually calculate solutions.
Wow.
Please remember that the algorithmLong
for square roots is no longer even taught in most school systems.
division is probably not possible for at least half the students -unless
you really use simple numbers.trouble by
Calculators are a fact of life and I think you're looking for
banning them. You are trying to evaluate the studentsunderstanding of
physics - I don't see how hand calculations facilitate that.formula cards,
I feel that far more legitimate questions are: Do you allow
etc.? I know most of us bemoan the student's lack of ability toestimate,
but on the other hand, it frees us as teachers to stress andevaluate the
concepts when we are not tied to checking students arithmetic whengrading
exams. I'm sure there are those who still feel that all subjectsshould be
taught in Latin. I see requiring hand calculations to be prettysimilar.
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
sequences 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.