Re: [Phys-l] explanatory and response variables (was calibration )

["Michael Edmiston" <edmiston@bluffton.edu>]

Nothing wrong with abscissa and ordinate as far as my education.  I was 
taught that by my high school algebra teacher in about 1965.  But I am 
pretty sure students of today would be more clueless about that than about 
independent/dependent, and certainly more clueless than about x/y.

I don't have a strong attachment to any of the names I have heard and used. 
I just want to know if there is any agreement or any standard that is being 
taught in high school.  If so, I'll use that.  Right now I have to explain 
things over and over, and the students still get it messed up.  But please 
note this does not necessarily mean students haven't been taught one of the 
sets of words I use.  It is just as likely they weren't paying attention in 
their high school classes.

Michael D. Edmiston, Ph.D.
Professor of Chemistry and Physics
Bluffton University
1 University Drive
Bluffton, OH 45817
419.358.3270
edmiston@bluffton.edu



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Rauber, Joel" <Joel.Rauber@SDSTATE.EDU>
To: "Forum for Physics Educators" <phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2007 4:06 PM
Subject: Re: [Phys-l] explanatory and response variables (was calibration )


> | (1) What should we call the axes of a 2-dimensional graph (in
> | general)?
> |
>
> Anything wrong with abscissa and ordinate?
> _______________________________________________
> Forum for Physics Educators
> Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
> https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l