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]

Re: Sophisticated calculators



Ludwik;

I've been using the CBLs (with a TI-82 but I don't think there is a
tremendous difference until you get to the 92) for two years in intro
college physics. Couple of points:

1) The learning curve not be as big a deal for a student as may first
appear; for one, students may already be using them in math classes. Our
math classes require them (the 82 for algrebra, the 86 for calculus). I
knew little about them till two years ago; my students taught me a lot. I
would suggest that if you do decide to use them, coordinate with your math
people to get the biggest impact.

2) For the CBL stuff, a lot of ready to run program are already out there-
you don't have to learn a lot about CBL programing to get lots of
experiments going. I spent a few weeks in the summer with a student fine
tunning existing programs to do exactly what I wanted and discovered the
language is really not as bad as it looks at first; it is very linear and
there are actually very few comands.

3) True the MBL is much more powerful and the graphs look nicer. I use the
MBL for class demonstrations and experiments when the CBL data collection
is not fast enough. But don't underestimate the effect it has on a student
to carry a CBL unit on the elevator or in a car (with an accelerometer) or
across the room (with a motion sensor) and see the graph. They get to
'feel' the motion and the automatically assume the plot on the calculator
is related to that feeling. And since they are cheap and portable you can
send students out with them overnight to try things like merry-go-rounds
etc. that you might not have at hand in the classroom.

4) I also tutor my high school aged kids in math and they use the TI-83. I
discovered I am quite the 'visual learner' and often have to 'see' a plot
of an equation to understand what is going on. I don't imediately know what
y=3x^3 + 5x^2 - 6x +2 is going to do by just looking at the equation.
Seeing enough of these on a graph begins to give you a feel for polynomials
(what behavior is possible for a given degree etc.) which I confess I never
really had before seeing them on a graphing calculator. There are also some
rudementary numerical methods which can be taught earlier on and for cases
where analytic solutions are not easy. Setting a class of 30 down each in
front of a compter with Maple or Mathmatica or some such software, might,
in the long run, produce deeper understanding but my guess is the software
learning curve is even steeper and so is the expense.

I don't know of any research results but I'd estimate there is a limited
but useful place for the TI calcuator and the CBL in the classroom.

kyle

At 3:34 PM -0400 4/6/98, LUDWIK KOWALSKI wrote:
----snip ----
I know it is not wise to formulate an opinion on the basis of a one-day
impression. But I have a desire to share these reflections. What do you
think about graphic calculators? How many of you use them in the CBL
activities? I also was motivated by the prospect of taking students
outside for data gathering. But I may change my mind. The learning curve
is so steep. And climbing it is so unpleasant. The MBL activities are much
more attractive in that respect. Yes, sophisticated calculators are less
expensive than computers. But are they worth using? What evidence is
available that teaching high school mathematics with them is more
productive than teaching it traditionally?
Ludwik Kowalski


-----------------------------------------------------
kyle forinash 812-941-2390
forinas@indiana.edu
Natural Science Division
Indiana University Southeast
New Albany, IN 47150
http://Physics.ius.indiana.edu/
-----------------------------------------------------