SPEAKING OF CHEATING...
John Cooley
>
>permit me to give a quick briefing. Individuals are currently battling over
>the question as to whether or not powerful hand helds and their many uses
>(note archiving, math programs, engineering solving, etc) are a form of
>cheating, especially when the universities does not condone such devices.
>Although we are currently arguing over the use of the calculator, I believe
>that a much larger question comes into play: Is it education's fault for not
>expanding to accomadate the introduction of new technology as such?
In college it used to be standard fair to have Exams that were part to
be done with a calculator and part to be done without. (The without
part was done first.) Why? Because the proff wanted us to know the
formulas that we were working with and because calculators can store
these he had not calculator sections of tests.
I have a good friend who went to the Berklee Scholl of Music and he knew of
someone who went to class every day wearing a Sony Walkman. Since it was
a music scholl, nobody thought anything of this. Come exam time, this person
did quite well. Turned out he had recorded various types of music and
played it back during exams to help him with his test! (Yes, this was
considered cheating!) It took a while for the proffs to figure out what
was going on. Perhaps the reluctance for schools to allow students to use
technology is based mnore on it great potential for cheating plus the
problem that not everyone can aford a new widget nor can everyone understand
how to use them at first.
- John
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
REMINE said in the March InterLoc that he wants to completely remove the local
group subsidy. As AMC Treasurer he also squandered $725,000 from the life
membership fund to cover a four year failed advertizing campaign. He also gave
you the surprize dues increase. I'm voting for DICK AMYX for AMC Chairman.
Andrew Tong
>Although we are currently arguing over the use of the calculator, I
>believe that a much larger question comes into play: Is it education's
>fault for not expanding to accomadate the introduction of new
>technology as such?
Hear, hear! This is a particularly relevant (and difficult) question
that is quite important.
>Let's see if we can address this, and perhaps come up with a few
>answers...
>I think there are two problems here: a) Education isn't really
>structured around powerful calculators like the HP48, b) People
>aren't using any foresight. Go back to the late 70's when digital
>calculators came out and did the magic of division, subtraction, and
>best of all: SQUARE ROOTS!
The "foresight argument" presumes the fact that powerful calculators
such as the hp48 are tools which invariably allow professors to design
tests (and courses) which teach more material, provide more practical
experience, and emphasize learning more fundamental and relevant
topics. This is not an obvious fact, and one major task of those
pushing for the use of calculators is to demonstrate this.
>Imagine the luxury of owning such a beast. However, seeing as they
>were quite expensive, only a few could afford them when they first
>came out. Hence, many in the education were upset at their arrival
Affordability should not be the issue. As others have pointed out, an
HP-48 costs only as much as a few books. If it is really true that
the 48 provides an awesomely better education, then it ought to be
_required_ in the courses which will benefit from it.
>Well, we all know the end result. Calculators are more common place
>than pencils in our math class. And how did education react to this
>new phenomenon? It changed. Engineers could do more problems, and
>didn't need their slide rules. No more logarithm tables. More
>problems were completed per unit time. Realistic numbers could be
>used in applied numerical problems, rather than integer results, or
>simplistic mathematical solutions. Education saw this new
>improvement and it adapted to accomodate the new expansion. Now,
>what can education do personal computers become smaller, more
>powerful, and more accessible? Can education scream out for much
>longer "YOU MUST DO LONG DIVISION BY HAND"?
Not all handy inventions are immediately applicable to their use on
tests. The invention of the book was a great leap forward in
education technology, but even today, books are not allowed on many
tests. Your examples are perfectly valid, but they do not directly
address the question of the hp-48, or of tools which can be run on
laptop computers, such as Mathematica.
My current opinion is that most of the tools built into the hp48 (and
even mathematica) are relevant to most engineering courses, and can
probably enhance the course (oops, I'm talking about many courses I've
never taken.). However, the ability of the calculator to store
information is an ability which, in my opinion, precludes its use as a
testing implement. I would like to see a calculator with the basic
functionality of the hp48 (plus some selected abilities from
Mathematica), but without the large amounts of RAM. I know, this
ain't practical, and the calculator wouldn't sell now. But in the
future, when technology gets even _more_ advanced, I see the
possiblity of HP-48 functionality being built into the next generation
of non-programmable calculators.
Of course, if the professor feels that students can be trusted to not
put forbidden info on their calculators beforehand, then the hp48 is a
great tool.
But even so, it is perfectly possible to design a very good test which
measures true ability, but does not require the use of a calculator
such as the hp48.
>I think not. But, education as it is currently oriented can not
>handle this influx of technology. You see, school has three purposes:
>a) Provide tools
>b) Permits one to get their "ticket punched"
>c) Separates the intelligentia from the less keen , less motivated,
> and less equipped. (that's actually an and/or scenario. Brains
> isn't the only desirable asset in today's society. School also
> considers athleticism, keeness, talents, creativity, etc)
>Option a is certainly important, but I sometimes wonder if it isn't
>overshadowed by options b and c. We must prove ourselves as students
>and as people. If we acknowledge and continue to cheat, we are going
>against the moral code of the institution which we attend. Do you
>think an employer wants to hire someone he can't trust? No. If we
>think the easier route is the better route, then we are cheating
>ourselves as well. Always take the steeper of the two roads if you
>wish to be happy and well equipped.
Agreement here.
>My point is this: Marks aren't everything. Hell, I have a B average, but my
>future for grad school is certain. My summer research jobs have never been
>better. AND, I have an hp48. But - I use it when I'm told and how I'm told.
>If I didn't like my university's policies on calculators, I'd have two
>options:
>a) cheat (BZZZZZT - WRONG ANSWER.)
>b) Take my complaints to the various boards meant to deal with this
> (you can make a difference if you aren't too lazy to try. Hell -
> read them my argument if you like - but at least try)
>(whoops, make that three options)
>c) Leave the school.
>Well, "b": seems like the best answer to me.
Again, agreement here. But I believe that the arguments you gave are
not specific enough to convince department heads to change their
policies.
<anti-cheating stuff deleted, since I agree>
>Steve Franklin
--
Andrew Tong
wer...@sex.ugcs.caltech.edu
David Smith (GE)
[deleted]
>
>I have a good friend who went to the Berklee Scholl of Music and he knew of
>someone who went to class every day wearing a Sony Walkman. Since it was
>a music scholl, nobody thought anything of this. Come exam time, this person
>did quite well. Turned out he had recorded various types of music and
>played it back during exams to help him with his test! (Yes, this was
>considered cheating!) It took a while for the proffs to figure out what
>was going on. Perhaps the reluctance for schools to allow students to use
>technology is based mnore on it great potential for cheating plus the
>problem that not everyone can aford a new widget nor can everyone understand
>how to use them at first.
here is a good point, not everyone can understand a 48, or other complex
devices, well, so what, if you are in college, in engeering, which most people
I know are, then you should be able to use it, most of my classmates, and I
have them, but many can't use them to the best of the 48's abality. MAybe
there should be a class on using it, which some schools now have
since it is used more and more in the workplace, right?
If schools cannot equip us to succed in the 'real world' maybe they should
change, not us, since the world isn't going back to using slide rules and
scribners.
>
> - John
Most of my classes now do allow calculators, and many of the professors take
the time to write a fair test for everyone, where you need to show work for
credit, etc. Which I do think is fair, if you can't show HOW you did it,
then you can't do it anyway.
But then ther are some that don't care to give teh time to teach and create
tests that don't allow the 'cheating' since some of my professors can't
figure it out either.
--
David A. Smith | "I like to skate on the other side of the ice"
- das...@suntan.ec.usf.edu | I have no knowlege of anything, and for that
- smi...@eggo.csee.usf.edu | matter, neither does USF.
Richard H Schwartz
>I think there are two problems here: a) Education isn't really structured
>around powerful calculators like the HP48, b) People aren't using any
>foresight. Go back to the late 70's when digital calculators came out and
>did the magic of division, subtraction, and best of all: SQUARE ROOTS!
>Imagine the luxury of owning such a beast. However, seeing as they were
Actually, by late 1977, the TI-30 was readily available for $29. It
could do trig, roots, logs, exponentiation, and even had parenthesis.
HP had a model with similar features (except for the parenthesis of
course), for a little bit more. And lots of $19 models were available
that couldn't do the trig but had everything else.
My chem teacher challenged us to a race. He used his slide rule, we
used calculators. If we beat him to the solution, we could use our
calculators. Of course, he rigged the contest. The answer came out
to be a long non-repeating (within the calculator's precision) decimal,
which we reported as our answer. He gave his answer rounded to three
places, and claimed victory: our answer was wrong, because it went
beyond the precision of the data we were given as input.
He then surprised us by telling us that from then on we could use our
calculators anyhow, but that anyone who gave an answer that exceeded
precision of measurement, or who didn't correct for inaccuracy of the
devices ( sqrt(4) = 1.99999999, etc. ), would be marked wrong. And
he reserved the right to inspect calculators and reject any programmable
models (which were still over $100, thus beyond the reach of most).
-rich
--
Richard H. Schwartz, Scheduling Systems Inc.,
1000 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA 02138
(617) 864 8330; FAX (617) 864 8377
r...@world.std.com
Vicky Hansen
: Individuals are currently battling over
: the question as to whether or not powerful hand helds and their many uses
: (note archiving, math programs, engineering solving, etc) are a form of
: cheating, especially when the universities does not condone such devices.
Having been both a math teacher and a math student, I do not see the need
for using a hand held during exams. If the student can set up the problem
to the point that the hand held could figure it out then there are several
options:
1) use hand helds to get final answer
PRO: easy to grade
CON: requires every student to have equipment with the same capabilities
since grades are comparative
2) make everyone do it by hand
PRO: verifies that they know how to do it
CON: limits the amount of actual problem solving since time is spent on
arithmetic
3) leave answers in formula format
PRO: no testing of arithmetic or finanaces (ownership of equipment) is
done, only problem solving at the level of the class
CON: grader must look at entire answer
I have always felt that method 3 (no calculators needed) during the test was
the best method but put one or two questions of type 2 on a test to verify
that the students did know how to finish.
I think seperate classes on the use of calculators and computers are certainly
usefull but are not needed for an algebra or calculus exam.
Didi Pancake
>fran...@ug.cs.dal.ca (Steve Franklin) writes:
>
>>I think there are two problems here: a) Education isn't really
>>structured around powerful calculators like the HP48, b) People
>>aren't using any foresight. Go back to the late 70's when digital
>>calculators came out and did the magic of division, subtraction, and
>>best of all: SQUARE ROOTS!
Right...and there I was, taking a genetics course in 1966 (BC = before
calculators) when the only thing you could do for square roots was use a
slide rule, and I would consistently forget my slide rule on the mornings
when we had tests and be left trying to figure out the darned sq.rts by
trial and error since I never could remember the "real" way. And the prof
-- a gruff teddy-bear type -- smirking at me for it.
>Affordability should not be the issue. As others have pointed out, an
>HP-48 costs only as much as a few books. If it is really true that
>the 48 provides an awesomely better education, then it ought to be
>_required_ in the courses which will benefit from it.
I agree with this NOW...but affordability WAS an issue when they first
came out. I suspect the "problem" is that academics are slower to adjust
to new technologies than their students (hold the flames, please, I
realize that this is a gross generalization, but having put 23.5 years
into an academic institution and seen the electronic revolution that has
occurred and how many faculty have NOT adjusted yet, I have some
justification on my side...can I fix it by saying "present company
excepted"?)
After all, to add every new technological development instantly would
require redesigning the course every two weeks! :-) Have a heart, folks,
it's tought enough to design a course and get it approved by the
principalities and powers (and cherubim in some cases) much less having
to go through all that to change it every single time it's offered.
I do know faculty members who are avidly designing new courses around
some of the new developments in computer imaging capabilities. And I know
some who are putting reserve materials (not copyrighted materials, but
class notes and old tests) on our gwis (Grounds-Wide Information
Service). But I also know others, even some in computer science who still
refuse to use e-mail. Finally, I know some who would LOVE to get in on
the latest stuff, but their offices and even buildings aren't wired for
the network yet...
Does all that obfuscate the issue sufficiently?
--
Didi Pancake | "If a cat does something, we call it
e...@virginia.edu | instinct; if we do the same thing, for the
---------------------------| same reason, we call it intelligence."
Usual disclaimers apply. | --Will Cuppy
Richard H Schwartz
>Right...and there I was, taking a genetics course in 1966 (BC = before
>calculators) when the only thing you could do for square roots was use a
>slide rule, and I would consistently forget my slide rule on the mornings
>when we had tests and be left trying to figure out the darned sq.rts by
>trial and error since I never could remember the "real" way.
With calculators, you've got two chances to end up in this mess: (1) you
forget the calculator, (2) the battery runs out. :-( Seems to me that
allowing calculators during exams opens some real cans of worms... What
happens if your calculator freaks out during the exam?
John Cooley
>
>With calculators, you've got two chances to end up in this mess: (1) you
>forget the calculator, (2) the battery runs out. :-( Seems to me that
>allowing calculators during exams opens some real cans of worms... What
>happens if your calculator freaks out during the exam?
Already done that one years ago when I took a physics course where my
calculator got drunk on me. Ever since that time, whenever I was in
a potential exam situation, I kept 3 calculators available -- one of
which was solar powered. (I made it a point to have three different
models/brands so as to not have a potential design flaw get me, too!
(You get that way after taking a course in failure analysis.))
Not to fret, dear Richard, it's the American Techie Way (TM) to have high
tech solution to high tech problems!
fis...@qut.edu.au
> Steve Franklin (fran...@ug.cs.dal.ca) wrote:
> : Individuals are currently battling over
> : the question as to whether or not powerful hand helds and their many uses
> : (note archiving, math programs, engineering solving, etc) are a form of
> : cheating, especially when the universities does not condone such devices.
>
the doomsayers when students started to use calculators -
i.e. acceptance of ridiculous answers e.g.
Students not questioning absurd answers to problems in which they
have wrongly used a calculator such as 1.5 or 150 square metres
as the area of a bedroom;
My 4WD car handbook gives the front axle ratio as 4 and the rear as
3.99999;
and inability to do simple arithmetic in an emergency e.g.
An accountancy student who cried in an exam because her hand held's
battery was flat and she couldn't divide by 2.
I would suggest that the time saved by less teaching of advanced
arithmetic should be spent on teaching rough arithmetic and a habit of
deciding whether an answer is reasonable. A great educational advantage of
the slide rule was that almost no one bothered with the rules for
determining where the decimal point went in the answer so you had to
learn to determine a rough answer.
In article <C76D4...@fc.hp.com>, vi...@fc.hp.com (Vicky Hansen) writes:
> Having been both a math teacher and a math student, I do not see the need
> for using a hand held during exams. If the student can set up the problem
> to the point that the hand held could figure it out then there are several
> options:
> 1) use hand helds to get final answer
> PRO: easy to grade
> CON: requires every student to have equipment with the same capabilities
> since grades are comparative
> 2) make everyone do it by hand
> PRO: verifies that they know how to do it
> CON: limits the amount of actual problem solving since time is spent on
> arithmetic
> 3) leave answers in formula format
> PRO: no testing of arithmetic or finanaces (ownership of equipment) is
> done, only problem solving at the level of the class
> CON: grader must look at entire answer
I would add
4) structure questions with simple numbers chosen so that the
correct theory leads to a trivial calculation with an answer very
different to likely wrong theory and ask for an approximate answer.
PRO: easy to grade
emphasises understanding of the problem
tests a practical understanding of the subject
CON: requires more thought in question setting
I once sat an exam in electronic theory in which the paper was headed
"For the purpose of calculation assume pi = 3". Why not?
Bill
Jones Maxime Murphy
programs regularly for *symbolic* calculation, calculus, group theory,
combinatorics, etc... These "symbolic calculators" really disturb a lot of the
mathematicians & physicists I know, since they kinda render a lot of what
passes for research trivial.
Jones
--
Jones M Murphy Jr
Assistant Vice President, New Products
AIG Financial Products (800) 248-SWAP
Alex Ramos
> I once sat an exam in electronic theory in which the paper was headed
> "For the purpose of calculation assume pi = 3". Why not?
I attended my 3 years of highschool in a Latin-American country. Calcu-
tors were absolutely ruled out because 90% of the class could not
afford them (students were allowed to buy textbooks in groups, so
all tests had to be closed book as well).
In all of the tests I took during that time, including an university
admission test (translate to SAT/ACT), any constants were allways
rounded to 1 significant digit -- thus pi=3, g=10, a.n.=6x10^-23, etc..
If we take college performance as comparative measure of the effective-
ness of this system, I guarantee, I learned the material much better
than any above-average American highschool student (which, as I understand,
are all allowed to use calculators).
I have posted earlier, in favor of the use of calculators. I am not
contradicting myself -- I think programmables should be banned from
elementary level classes, such as any math class before Calculus II,
however, any restriction against their use in an Engineering class would
be absolutely ridiculous.
--
Alex Ramos | Electrical Engineering | Fala-se Portugues, tche!
ra...@engr.latech.edu | Louisiana Tech Univ. | [This space for rent]
"Keyboard not found - press any key to continue" -- IBM
Herman Rubin
>>Although we are currently arguing over the use of the calculator, I
>>believe that a much larger question comes into play: Is it education's
>>fault for not expanding to accomadate the introduction of new
>>technology as such?
>Hear, hear! This is a particularly relevant (and difficult) question
>that is quite important.
It is very definitely the fault of anything which purports to be
education if the mere introduction of something as simple as a
calculator causes difficulty.
There is no understanding done by a calculator. The mechanical processing
of input yielding output may involve training, but not in any way
education. The only point in not allowing the use of such tools on
any test, etc., is to see if the student understands the process, not
to see how quickly or accurately that student can perform it.
--
Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907-1399
Phone: (317)494-6054
hru...@snap.stat.purdue.edu (Internet, bitnet)
{purdue,pur-ee}!snap.stat!hrubin(UUCP)
J. M. O'Donnell
>I believe that to some extent we are seeing the sad results predicted by
>the doomsayers when students started to use calculators -
>
I was once in a grocery store where the assistant was using a mechanical adding
machine (turn the handle), but the answer comes out printed on a piece of
paper. The assistant shouted out the price of each item to the whole store as
she did the calculation. The customer in front of me had something like 20
items, and so as the assistant shouted out the numbers I added them up. Get to
the end, and she couldn't read the print on the paper. She told the customer
she would have to do it all again. I was not happy as I only had one item, si
I told her she didn't need to. Of course, she didn't believe my result until
after she had gone thru it all again.
Another fun one to try is calculating sales tax. Many shop assistants will be
surprised if you have the exact change ready for them!
>I once sat an exam in electronic theory in which the paper was headed
>"For the purpose of calculation assume pi = 3". Why not?
>
>Bill
In high school mechanics we always used pi=sqrt(10)=g. (g=acceleration due to
gravity = 9.8ms-1) to check answers. Can cancel all kinds of stuff that way.
John.
The Polymath
}... What
}happens if your calculator freaks out during the exam?
You get a very pointed, real-world lesson in the virtues of backups,
redundant systems, spare parts inventory and fault tolerance.
The Polymath (aka: Jerry Hollombe, M.A., CDP, aka: holl...@polymath.tti.com)
Head Robot Wrangler at Citicorp Laws define crime.
3100 Ocean Park Blvd. (310) 450-9111, x2483 Police enforce laws.
Santa Monica, CA 90405 Citizens prevent crime.
Paul N. Cowley
> In article <C76D4...@fc.hp.com>, vi...@fc.hp.com (Vicky Hansen) writes:
>> Steve Franklin (fran...@ug.cs.dal.ca) wrote:
[Lots'o good stuff deleted...]
> and inability to do simple arithmetic in an emergency e.g.
> An accountancy student who cried in an exam because her hand held's
> battery was flat and she couldn't divide by 2.
>
> I would suggest that the time saved by less teaching of advanced
> arithmetic should be spent on teaching rough arithmetic and a habit of
> deciding whether an answer is reasonable. A great educational advantage of
> the slide rule was that almost no one bothered with the rules for
> determining where the decimal point went in the answer so you had to
> learn to determine a rough answer.
Not to brag or anything... :) but when I was young (~4th grade) I had a
HORRENDOUS time learning division. Most of this was caused by the teacher's
method of presentation, etc... However, my father (who learned all of his math
on a slide rule) taught me to use his old slide rule. He then helped me to
understand that it is often simpler to do quick, rough calculations in your
head if you 'ignore' the decimal point. He also taught me the importance of
quantifying your answer by a simple rough estimate.
In my opinion, kids in late grade school/early junior high should learn to do
basic calculations with a slide rule simply because it teaches someone to
actually THINK about what you are doing with the numbers, and what (about) your
answer should be!
>
> In article <C76D4...@fc.hp.com>, vi...@fc.hp.com (Vicky Hansen) writes:
>> Having been both a math teacher and a math student, I do not see the need
>> for using a hand held during exams. If the student can set up the problem
>> to the point that the hand held could figure it out then there are several
[more stuff deleted...]
>
> I once sat an exam in electronic theory in which the paper was headed
> "For the purpose of calculation assume pi = 3". Why not?
>
> Bill
What I like is when the teacher/professor puts a bunch of terms or constants on
the board, then throws in a bunch of crap with it just to see who REALLY knows
what they are doing. Once, my AP Physics teacher in High School stuck a
'constant' on the board and called it "Finagle's constant." He then wrote
out some ridiculously long definition with all sorts of units and variables.
Amazingly, almost 1/2 of the class tried to use the dumb thing! Only
afterwards did he explain it to them: "Finagle's constant can be whatever you
need to finagle the answer..." He just did it the other way !
=--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=-=
| I have a very firm grasp on reality... | Paul N. Cowley |
| I can reach out and strangle it | C/TSgt, Utah Wing CAP |
| at any time! :) | -=EE Undergrad=- |
|-=--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=| Utah State University |
| CAP: UM 445 NAR: 58973 HAM: Still waiting! | sl...@cc.usu.edu |
=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=--=-=
Richard H Schwartz
>i.e. acceptance of ridiculous answers e.g.
> Students not questioning absurd answers to problems in which they
> have wrongly used a calculator such as 1.5 or 150 square metres
> as the area of a bedroom
Not just students. A letter from a fellow in New Zealand to the Mensa
Bulletin last year flamed American cars for their poor gas milage.
Expressed in kilometers per liter, the figure the writer gave for the
average American car was patently ridiculous: a quick estimat told me
it was off by a factor of three or four, and my calculator confirmed it.
I, and several others wrote letters pointing out the mistake. The
original writer replied, blaming it on having punched the wrong buttons
on his HP.
But the kicker: A friend of my father saw my letter, and showed it to
him, along with the original. My father, an engineer for 40 years, and
a veteran of 30 years of academic and professional slide-rule and back-
of-the-envelope calculation, called me up and said "He's not wrong, you
are." I protested, but he insisted. Then, 20 minutes later, he called
back to apologize. He had checked it out on his calcutor. :-) He's the
one who taught me the art of estimation, but now that he relies so heavily
on his calculator, it looks like he's gotten rusty.
BUG!!!!!!!!!!!!
>> and inability to do simple arithmetic in an emergency e.g.
>> An accountancy student who cried in an exam because her hand held's
>> battery was flat and she couldn't divide by 2.
>>
people who had a difficult time adding up their cards while playing
Black Jack. In fact they were quite impressed as I called the dealers
totals out the instant that they were flipped. Even most of the dealers
that I had seemed to have to pull down their pants to count to 21.
-andy
Tom the Melaniephile
>
>>Right...and there I was, taking a genetics course in 1966 (BC = before
>>calculators) when the only thing you could do for square roots was use a
>>slide rule, and I would consistently forget my slide rule on the mornings
>>when we had tests and be left trying to figure out the darned sq.rts by
>>trial and error since I never could remember the "real" way.
>
>With calculators, you've got two chances to end up in this mess: (1) you
>forget the calculator, (2) the battery runs out. :-( Seems to me that
>allowing calculators during exams opens some real cans of worms... What
>happens if your calculator freaks out during the exam?
>
>-rich
>
>--
Calculators are cheap enough now.
-Tom
Andrew Tong
>In article <C77I0...@world.std.com> r...@world.std.com (Richard H Schwartz) writes:
>>e...@poe.acc.Virginia.EDU ("Didi Pancake") writes:
>>With calculators, you've got two chances to end up in this mess: (1) you
>>forget the calculator, (2) the battery runs out. :-( Seems to me that
>>allowing calculators during exams opens some real cans of worms... What
>>happens if your calculator freaks out during the exam?
>Solutions: (1) Use a solar powered calculator. (2) Have a darn backup! --
>Calculators are cheap enough now.
Anyone forsee a solar powered programmable any time soon?
--
Joel Kolstad
>
>Anyone forsee a solar powered programmable any time soon?
No, but a hybrid solar/battery powered one might work. Maybe I shouldn't
be so quick to jump the gun, though; but power management is hard enough
when you can expect a battery -- it'd get even rougher with only solar
cells.
But as long as you're making one, make it credit card sized, and make it a
virtual clone of the HP-32SII, except give it about 10 stack levels. I'll
buy one. :-)
---Joel Kolstad
Michael Woodhams
>In my opinion, kids in late grade school/early junior high should learn to do
>basic calculations with a slide rule simply because it teaches someone to
>actually THINK about what you are doing with the numbers, and what (about) your
>answer should be!
Could the same be said of learning to use an abacus? (This is a
serious question. Any abacus power users out there?) I think we can
safely assume that using log tables is no longer a useful thing to
learn.
Michael W.
(My collection of handheld computing devices includes an abacus, but I
don't know how to use it. I also have a slide rule, TI-59C, HP-15C,
16C, 18C, 19C, 21, 25, 32E, 35, 41C, 45, 48SX, 55, 65, 67 and 80, and
fingers.) (Anyone have any old calculators or sliderules they would
sell me?)
Herman Rubin
>In article <1993May18.1...@cc.usu.edu> sl...@cc.usu.edu (Paul N. Cowley) writes:
>>In my opinion, kids in late grade school/early junior high should learn to do
>>basic calculations with a slide rule simply because it teaches someone to
>>actually THINK about what you are doing with the numbers, and what (about) your
>>answer should be!
>Could the same be said of learning to use an abacus? (This is a
>serious question. Any abacus power users out there?) I think we can
>safely assume that using log tables is no longer a useful thing to
>learn.
If you are going to take this attitude, why not only allow pencil and
paper and a small set of trig and log tables? I do NOT advocate this,
but this is what I did instead of using a slide rule. This did not
place me at any particular speed disadvantage, but so what? That I
could do manipulations quickly was useful, but had nothing to do with
understanding anything.
Hans de Vreught
Hm..., well, I also have problems adding cards with a well known game over
here where K=4, Q=3, J=2. I always mix them up with K=3, Q=2, J=1 from another
card game. In most games I'm often the first one who has added up his cards
(I quickly reshuffle my cards so I have pairs / triples that make tens, and
then I start adding up). So the adding up isn't necessarily the problem.
--
Hans de Vreught | John von Neumann:
J.P.M.d...@CS.TUDelft.NL | Young man, in mathematics
Delft University of Technology (TWI-ThI) | you don't understand things,
The Netherlands | you just get used to them.
Hans de Vreught
>(My collection of handheld computing devices includes an abacus, but I
>don't know how to use it. I also have a slide rule, TI-59C, HP-15C,
>16C, 18C, 19C, 21, 25, 32E, 35, 41C, 45, 48SX, 55, 65, 67 and 80, and
>fingers.) (Anyone have any old calculators or sliderules they would
>sell me?)
Let me guess. Are you a fan of HP? :-)
Johnson
>In article <1993May18.1...@qut.edu.au>, fis...@qut.edu.au writes...
>>I believe that to some extent we are seeing the sad results predicted by
>>the doomsayers when students started to use calculators -
>yes it's true.
>I was once in a grocery store where the assistant was using a mechanical adding
>items, and so as the assistant shouted out the numbers I added them up. Get to
>the end, and she couldn't read the print on the paper. She told the customer
>she would have to do it all again. I was not happy as I only had one item, si
>I told her she didn't need to. Of course, she didn't believe my result until
>after she had gone thru it all again.
>
carried, so I buy them a couple dozen at a time when I'm at that store.
The clerk looked at the two boxes, and with a resigned look began counting
them, 1...2...3...4... Not having all night, I pointed out that there
were six per layer, two layers per box, two boxes, ergo 24 packages of
Certs. She gave me a bad look, sighed in disgust, replaced the packs in
her hand, and started over...1...2...3...4...
You never see an ad in the paper reading "Rocket scientist wanted to run
laser scanning cash register."
--
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| "Johnson" | Behind every absurdity there lies a basic truth. |
| joh...@wes.mot.com | Behind every basic truth there lies an absurdity. |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
John Cooley
>I was is Laughlin this past weekend and was stunned by the amount of
>people who had a difficult time adding up their cards while playing
>Black Jack. In fact they were quite impressed as I called the dealers
>totals out the instant that they were flipped. Even most of the dealers
>that I had seemed to have to pull down their pants to count to 21.
What about the female dealers having difficultly counting to 21?
;^)
Matt Crawford
> ... I would consistently forget my slide rule on the mornings
> when we had tests and be left trying to figure out the darned sq.rts by
> trial and error since I never could remember the "real" way.
If anyone is nerdly enough to want to know the "real" way, I can post
it. I actually learned it in school, if you can believe it!
__________________________________________________________
Matt Crawford ma...@severian.chi.il.us Java Man
"Bad spelling is rudeness to good readers."
Matt Crawford
> ... there are several options:
> 3) leave answers in formula format
I had an EE class (not my major!) in which the prof insisted not only
on algebraic answers, but with the formulae expressed so as to make
the qualitative characteristics of the solution most obvious! During
the term he even had a rubber stamp made that said "UNILLUMINATING FORM".
Alexander Hanysz
>serious question. Any abacus power users out there?) I think we can
>safely assume that using log tables is no longer a useful thing to
>learn.
I wouldn't be so sure about that last statement. I was fortunate enough
to have an old-fashioned primary school teacher who taught me how to use
log tables. In the occasional bits of tutoring I've done since, I've
been shocked at how many people can't remember whether log(ab)=log a +
log b or log(a+b)=(log a)(log b). I learned this while using log tables
and haven't had to give it a moment's thought since. Besides, just as a
piece of history, finding out how people did involved arithmetic
without calculators was kind of fun :-) (Now if only they'd told me how
the log tables were produced in the first place...) On the whole, I'm
glad I learned how to use a log table, even though I haven't needed it
since primary school (1981).
Alex.
Joel Kolstad
>In article <1993May19....@Princeton.EDU> wood...@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Michael Woodhams) writes:
>>I think we can
>>safely assume that using log tables is no longer a useful thing to
>>learn.
>
>I wouldn't be so sure about that last statement. I was fortunate enough
>to have an old-fashioned primary school teacher who taught me how to use
>log tables. In the occasional bits of tutoring I've done since, I've
>been shocked at how many people can't remember whether log(ab)=log a +
>log b or log(a+b)=(log a)(log b). I learned this while using log tables
>and haven't had to give it a moment's thought since.
All right, but just because you learned the "log rules" via the use of tables
isn't enough of a reason to make everyone use them, in my opinion.
doesn't really matter.)
If I were tutoring people in math, and they didn't know what log(ab) is,
I'd immediately have them _prove_ what it is. That should help them
remember it. ( log(ab)=log(e^log(a)*e^log(b))=log(e^(log a+log b))
=log(a)+log(b) )
>Besides, just as a
>piece of history, finding out how people did involved arithmetic
>without calculators was kind of fun :-)
Yes, I think this is true too, and I bet a fair number of people on this
newsgroup are mildly amused with the topic. However, I'm not so sure that
"The History of Math w/o Calculators" is what we should be teaching the
masses in standard math courses. A course specifically on the subject
would be neat. (It'd be even better if they kept it on a technical level.
We have a "History of sciences" course here, which is a nice idea, but the
science in it is so watered down [to let the music majors understand it]
that I don't think you get much out of it.)
---Joel Kolstad
An almost engineer who sometimes wants to teach
Pete Zakel
>been shocked at how many people can't remember whether log(ab)=log a +
>log b or log(a+b)=(log a)(log b). I learned this while using log tables
>and haven't had to give it a moment's thought since. Besides, just as a
Shoot -- I usually can't even remember trivial volume formulas and have to
derive them from standard area formulas (that I sometimes have to derive
because I can't even remember THEM offhand).
Of course, I almost never have any reason to remember logs -- I are a software
engineer -- so I don't remember these things either.
High IQ doesn't necessarily correlate with good memory -- in my case it helps
compensate for a very *bad* memory! And why should I have to remember things
when I have lots of books around so I can look up what I need to know?
-Pete Zakel
(p...@cadence.com or ..!uunet!cadence!phz)
Flappity, floppity, flip
The mouse on the m" obius strip;
The strip revolved,
The mouse dissolved
In a chronodimensional skip.
Vicky Hansen
: High IQ doesn't necessarily correlate with good memory -- in my case it helps
: compensate for a very *bad* memory! And why should I have to remember things
: when I have lots of books around so I can look up what I need to know?
I have wondered if my bad memory may have even increased my IQ. Since
I don't remember much, I get a lot more practice figuring things out.
Herman Rubin
I have argued here and elsewhere that too much emphasis on memorization
can reduce effective intelligence by destroying the capacity to figure
things out. Seeing the products of this, and other, systems which
rely too heavily on memorization, it seems "obvious."
David Stein
>Vicky Hansen wrote:
>>Pete Zakel wrote:
>>:High IQ doesn't necessarily correlate with good memory -- in my case it helps
>>:compensate for a very *bad* memory! And why should I have to remember things
>>:when I have lots of books around so I can look up what I need to know?
>
>>I have wondered if my bad memory may have even increased my IQ. Since
>>I don't remember much, I get a lot more practice figuring things out.
>
>I have argued here and elsewhere that too much emphasis on memorization
>can reduce effective intelligence by destroying the capacity to figure
>things out. Seeing the products of this, and other, systems which
>rely too heavily on memorization, it seems "obvious."
I could not agree more.
Unfortunately, it seems few share your opinion. One of the
most dispiriting experiences I went through in graduate school
was the "qualifying exams" system here: it requires huge amounts
of memorization and encourages the mastering of tricks and the
knowledge of solutions to a large number of certain "qual" type
problems. About one half of a qualifying exam is made up of
problems from textbooks (but not necessarily the ones used
in class) or from previous qualifying exams--often verbatim.
Once I questioned this practice, and a professor answered that
there is only a finite number of problems one can give on a qual.
Each qual has about 10 problems, 5 in the M.A. section, 5 in the
PhD section. On my algebra qual, all three group theory questions
came straight from the book or from a previous qual. One of these
problems I did the night before the qual. On another occasion, I
passed a real qual (M.A. level) to which I came 2 hours late because
I overslept. I knew the subject only slightly, but I lucked out
because I recognized enough problems, in topology and measure theory,
that I have done before and could do again within an hour.
In terms of learning, I can honestly state that the quals had
a detrimental effect on me.
- David
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I'm not a native speaker of English, so I'm not sure what I wrote.
Flames will be ignored unless you post them in perfect Czech.
================================ - David (the metamathician) - ===
John O'Regan
Dear Vicky & Pete,
Seeing as how you're both so damned smart, why don't you get
together and beget Neitsche's Superman? Honestly, if some people score 100+ on
their IQ tests, they get it into their heads to join a group of right-minded,
right-thinking (emphasis on the right) people like... I don't know - like Mensa,
and pretty soon, by a process of osmosis, they become unbearable egomaniacs like
the rest of them. Saddest thing of all is to see them reach the stage where they
think they're some kind of elite, a breed set apart from "normal" people. Pres-
ent company excluded, I'm sure,
yours sincerely,
JOR.
gilbert.m.stewart
Actually, JOR, when someone talks of IQ, it is not necessary to jump up and
down defensively assuming that it makes them a better person, and then insult
them from a self-righteous posture claiming they are "unbearable egomaniacs".
Particularly when they are discussing a particular fault they have. You
must realize that that very defensive and offensive bahavior could brand one
as an "unbearable egomaniac" to be avoided. Why so nasty?
GMS
David Stein
>I have argued here and elsewhere that too much emphasis on memorization
>can reduce effective intelligence by destroying the capacity to figure
>things out. Seeing the products of this, and other, systems which
>rely too heavily on memorization, it seems "obvious."
I could not agree more.
Herman Rubin
>Herman Rubin wrote:
>>I have argued here and elsewhere that too much emphasis on memorization
>>can reduce effective intelligence by destroying the capacity to figure
>>things out. Seeing the products of this, and other, systems which
>>rely too heavily on memorization, it seems "obvious."
> I could not agree more.
> Unfortunately, it seems few share your opinion. One of the
>most dispiriting experiences I went through in graduate school
>was the "qualifying exams" system here: it requires huge amounts
>of memorization and encourages the mastering of tricks and the
>knowledge of solutions to a large number of certain "qual" type
>problems. About one half of a qualifying exam is made up of
>problems from textbooks (but not necessarily the ones used
>in class) or from previous qualifying exams--often verbatim.
This does not have to be the case. But it does require more work
on the part of the faculty. The way we give our qualifiers (on
undergraduate linear algebra, analysis, and probability) and our
comprehensives if to have the examining committee make the examinations
up covering a specific list of topics, whether those have been covered
in the courses or not. No question gets on the exam unless someone
besides the proposer thinks it is reasonable, and exams are graded
by at least an appropriate subcommittee, each grading independently
and then meeting to discuss the grading.
Our qualifiers consist of 2 sessions of 5 problems each. The questions
are in each session are supposed to be doable in well under 2 hours, and
at least 3 are allowed. Many of the problems are even quite easy, but
these are the hardest for the students. The comprehensives are have
4 sessions and 20 problems.
> Once I questioned this practice, and a professor answered that
>there is only a finite number of problems one can give on a qual.
>Each qual has about 10 problems, 5 in the M.A. section, 5 in the
>PhD section. On my algebra qual, all three group theory questions
>came straight from the book or from a previous qual. One of these
>problems I did the night before the qual. On another occasion, I
>passed a real qual (M.A. level) to which I came 2 hours late because
>I overslept. I knew the subject only slightly, but I lucked out
>because I recognized enough problems, in topology and measure theory,
>that I have done before and could do again within an hour.
This can be a problem in some areas. It helps to bring in junior
faculty who have not seen the same old problems, and to rotate the
membership of the committee.
> In terms of learning, I can honestly state that the quals had
>a detrimental effect on me.
Robb Shecter
>Vicky Hansen writes:
>>Pete Zakel wrote:
>: High IQ doesn't necessarily correlate with good memory -- in my case it helps
>: compensate for a very *bad* memory! And why should I have to remember things
>: when I have lots of books around so I can look up what I need to know?
>
>>I have wondered if my bad memory may have even increased my IQ. Since
>>I don't remember much, I get a lot more practice figuring things out.
>
>I have argued here and elsewhere that too much emphasis on memorization
>can reduce effective intelligence by destroying the capacity to figure
>things out. Seeing the products of this, and other, systems which
>rely too heavily on memorization, it seems "obvious."
>--
>Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907-1399
This is interesting. Are there any empirical data showing a causal
relationship between lack of memorization and intelligence. From casual
observation there seems to be a correlation...Does anybody have anything more
concrete?
--
Robb Shecter
shec...@ucunix.san.uc.edu
gilbert.m.stewart
I seem to remember something, but it's kind of hazy now.
GM("Not Above the Cheap Shot")S
Johnson
=) This is interesting. Are there any empirical data showing a causal
=)relationship between lack of memorization and intelligence. From casual
=)observation there seems to be a correlation...Does anybody have anything more
=)concrete?
=)--
I'd say the same thing subjectively--but what am I comparing my memory
to? I haven't directly experienced anyone else's memory--is it just
that I expect it to be as easy to use as various other mental faculties?
Is it possible that it works the other way--that good deductive
powers tend to make one lazy about developing memory skills? And what
kind of memory:
Sequence memory--memorizing pi, lines in a script, quotes, etc.
Associative memory--names, dates, etc.
Exception memory--grammatical rules, spelling.
Impromptu memory--appointments or schedules.
Visual memory--recollecting an image well enough to derive facts
(like license plate numbers on cars).
Arbitrary memory--recalling trivial facts for no particular reason.
Of course, we could go on and on...
And how about long term vs. short term? Also, how much of memory is
concerned with storage and how much with retrieval? I've heard a
theory claim that the human memory stores all events and impressions
in totality and with complete accuracy, and the only problem is in
actually invoking the memory you want to access. I've never seen
that proven, though. Has anyone else?
After we've figured out a good objective way to measure memory skills,
we'll start working on a good objective definition of intelligence.
:-)/2
--
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| "Johnson" | Behind every absurdity there lies a basic truth. |
| joh...@wes.mot.com | Behind every basic truth there lies an absurdity. |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Motorola may share these views, but that's not where the smart money is. |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
George Hrabovsky
I don't want to sound immodest here, and I don't know about empirical data, but I have a hard time remembering precise details of mathematical concepts that I
do not use all the time, and I am considered very bright. I also have a very
large math and physics library, so I can look things up.
This is one problem that I see with timed exams. Frequently, there will be
questions that involve topics only briefly covered in a course and the students
do badly as a result. I feel it would be better to have hard questions, or
questions about material on briefly covered subjects, for take-home exams.
Leave timed exams to verify the ability to work simple problems which test the
competence of the student.
GEH (for what its worth)
Herman Rubin
>In article <C7vKp...@ucunix.san.uc.edu> shec...@ucunix.san.uc.edu (Robb Shecter) writes:
a given line, add there is a difference of one >.
>>Herman Rubin writes:
>>>Vicky Hansen writes:
>>>>Pete Zakel wrote:
>>>: High IQ doesn't necessarily correlate with good memory -- in my case it helps
>>>: compensate for a very *bad* memory! And why should I have to remember things
>>>: when I have lots of books around so I can look up what I need to know?
>>>>I have wondered if my bad memory may have even increased my IQ. Since
>>>>I don't remember much, I get a lot more practice figuring things out.
>>>I have argued here and elsewhere that too much emphasis on memorization
>>>can reduce effective intelligence by destroying the capacity to figure
>>>things out. Seeing the products of this, and other, systems which
>>>rely too heavily on memorization, it seems "obvious."
>>>--
>>>Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907-1399
>> This is interesting. Are there any empirical data showing a causal
>>relationship between lack of memorization and intelligence. From casual
>>observation there seems to be a correlation...Does anybody have anything more
>>concrete?
>>--
>>Robb Shecter
>>shec...@ucunix.san.uc.edu
>I don't want to sound immodest here, and I don't know about empirical data, but I have a hard time remembering precise details of mathematical concepts that I
>do not use all the time, and I am considered very bright. I also have a very
>large math and physics library, so I can look things up.
One does not learn details of mathematical concepts, but of mathematical facts.
Knowing a definition or a formula or a proof does not mean that one knows the
underlying concepts.
>This is one problem that I see with timed exams. Frequently, there will be
>questions that involve topics only briefly covered in a course and the students
>do badly as a result. I feel it would be better to have hard questions, or
>questions about material on briefly covered subjects, for take-home exams.
>Leave timed exams to verify the ability to work simple problems which test the
>competence of the student.
As someone who always did exams in far less than the allotted time, I agree.
What should be tested is the ability to USE the material.
--
Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907-1399
Vicky Hansen
: High IQ doesn't necessarily correlate with good memory -- in my case it helps
: compensate for a very *bad* memory! And why should I have to remember things
: when I have lots of books around so I can look up what I need to know?
I added:
: I have wondered if my bad memory may have even increased my IQ. Since
: I don't remember much, I get a lot more practice figuring things out.
John O'Regan (jor...@curia.ucc.ie) wrote:
: Dear Vicky & Pete,
: Seeing as how you're both so damned smart, why don't you get
: together and beget Neitsche's Superman? Honestly, if some people score 100+ on
: their IQ tests, they get it into their heads to join a group of right-minded,
: right-thinking (emphasis on the right) people like...Mensa,
: and pretty soon, by a process of osmosis, they become unbearable egomaniacs
Notice that I never said I belonged to Mensa. Only that my bad memory makes
me figure things out more often than someone with an idetic one. John's post
was cute but I do not appreciate the implication that I am an unbearable
egomaniac. I, for the record, doubt if I have ever taken an IQ test and
certainly do not know the score if I did. Since my GRE scores are within
the range allowed for mensa membership, I suspect it is, in fact, over 100
as John suggests.
Vicky Hansen
RE: what kind of memory as in bad memory vs IQ:
: Sequence memory--memorizing pi, lines in a script, quotes, etc.
: Associative memory--names, dates, etc.
: Exception memory--grammatical rules, spelling.
: Impromptu memory--appointments or schedules.
: Visual memory--recollecting an image well enough to derive facts
: (like license plate numbers on cars).
: Arbitrary memory--recalling trivial facts for no particular reason.
Good suggestion. I have always thought of myself as having a poor memory
since I could not recall names and dates for history exams. However, I
got full credit on one question when I wrote "the name can be found
on page 48, the third line down, near the middle of the line, it
starts with a round letter, has several short letters and ends with a tall
one" -- the correct answer was general Grant and his name was there.
George Hrabovsky
>>I don't want to sound immodest here, and I don't know about empirical data, but I have a hard time remembering precise details of mathematical concepts that I
>>do not use all the time, and I am considered very bright. I also have a very
>>large math and physics library, so I can look things up.
>
>One does not learn details of mathematical concepts, but of mathematical facts.
>Knowing a definition or a formula or a proof does not mean that one knows the
>underlying concepts.
>
>>This is one problem that I see with timed exams. Frequently, there will be
>>questions that involve topics only briefly covered in a course and the students
>>do badly as a result. I feel it would be better to have hard questions, or
>>questions about material on briefly covered subjects, for take-home exams.
>>Leave timed exams to verify the ability to work simple problems which test the
>>competence of the student.
>
>As someone who always did exams in far less than the allotted time, I agree.
>What should be tested is the ability to USE the material.
>--
>Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907-1399
>Phone: (317)494-6054
>hru...@snap.stat.purdue.edu (Internet, bitnet)
>{purdue,pur-ee}!snap.stat!hrubin(UUCP)
It seems strange that we are finally agreeing on something (HA, HA).
GEH
Laurence James Edwards
|> In article <C7vKp...@ucunix.san.uc.edu> shec...@ucunix.san.uc.edu (Robb Shecter) writes:
|> >
|> > This is interesting. Are there any empirical data showing a causal
|> >relationship between lack of memorization and intelligence. From casual
|> >observation there seems to be a correlation...Does anybody have anything more
|> >concrete?
|> >--
|> >Robb Shecter
|> >shec...@ucunix.san.uc.edu
|>
|> I don't want to sound immodest here, and I don't know about empirical data, but I have a hard time remembering precise details of mathematical concepts that I
|> do not use all the time, and I am considered very bright. I also have a very
|> large math and physics library, so I can look things up.
|>
|> This is one problem that I see with timed exams. Frequently, there will be
|> questions that involve topics only briefly covered in a course and the students
|> do badly as a result. I feel it would be better to have hard questions, or
|> questions about material on briefly covered subjects, for take-home exams.
|> Leave timed exams to verify the ability to work simple problems which test the
|> competence of the student.
|>
|> GEH (for what its worth)
Interesting ... in addition to bad memory, how about correlations between
intelligence and "laziness". By laziness, I mean trying to avoid doing things
that one does not find intrinsically interesting. I firmly believe that
laziness and a bad memory have been instrumental in developing whatever
intellectual facilities I have.... my motto: Laziness is the mother of
all invention!
And I like the take-home exam thing too ... kind of like shooting fish in a
barrel ... if all my exams had been take-home I'd have a 4.3 gpa ...
Seriously though, I think the idea of a combination of timed tests with
straightforward problems, and take-homes with very hard problems (hard because
they require substantial insight into the material, not just because just they
take a long time to do) is a good one.
Larry Edwards
George Hrabovsky
>laziness and a bad memory have been instrumental in developing whatever
>intellectual facilities I have.... my motto: Laziness is the mother of
>all invention!
>
>And I like the take-home exam thing too ... kind of like shooting fish in a
>barrel ... if all my exams had been take-home I'd have a 4.3 gpa ...
>
>Seriously though, I think the idea of a combination of timed tests with
>straightforward problems, and take-homes with very hard problems (hard because
>they require substantial insight into the material, not just because just they
>take a long time to do) is a good one.
>
>Larry Edwards
>
>
I had the same idea in mind, difficulty based on the depth of the
understanding of the material, instead of depth of calculations.
I also think that involving students in an occasional major project
is useful in showing them the kinds of things they will be doing
when they get out of school.
GEH
Vicky Hansen
: Seriously though, I think the idea of a combination of timed tests with
: straightforward problems, and take-homes with very hard problems (hard because
: they require substantial insight into the material, not just because just they
: take a long time to do) is a good one.
Too idealistic. I knew more than one student who partially paid for their
education by doing homework and take homes for others.
George Hrabovsky
Some people may do this, but if the take-home exam requires lots of work I
do not know too many students who would be willing to answer someone elses
test while needing to do their own. Of course, the test would have to be
changed every time (this gives the professor something to do with their
spare time, ha, ha, ha).
GEH