Date: Mon, 20 Feb 1995 15:05:16 -0500 Reply-To: calc-reform@e-math.ams.org Originator: calc-reform@e-math.ams.com Sender: calc-reform@e-math.ams.org Precedence: bulk From: Robert Megginson (meggin@math.lsa.umich.edu) To: Multiple recipients of list (calc-reform@e-math.ams.org) Subject: [CALC-REFORM:2003] Darko's note on Murli Gupta's paper X-Comment: From the CALC-REFORM discussion list. Darko's comment: >Don't let's forget that I'm still looking forward to hearing one anecdote that supports the reformed axiom "GCs are good." ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I must protest this drastic oversimplification of a complicated issue. There is no such axiom, and I would challenge anyone making that statement to find one individual who is willing to make the unqualified statement that "graphing calculators are good." I believe that graphing calculators can be a useful educational tool IF PROPERLY USED; I will also be the first to assert that they can be badly misused by a teacher who does not understand their proper role. For example, if the teacher shows the students how to use the graphing calculator to locate local extrema of functions, then devotes a large portion of an hour test to seeing if the students have learned this skill, then the teacher has missed the point of having the technology available. On the other hand, the teacher can use the calculator to have the students explore the graphs of the functions f_n defined by the formulas f_n(x)=x^n, where n is a positive integer, then have the students make some conjectures about the shape of such graphs for different values of n, then finally justify their conjectures. It is my experience that this sort of exercise is very useful in aiding the students' understanding. If graphing calculators can be misused as a teaching tool, does this make them dangerous? No more so than, for example, the standard differentiation formulas. Many calculus teachers forget that these are also just tools rather than the main mathematical content of a course, and give hour tests whose main purpose is to see if the student has learned these formulas. (How many times have you seen calculus tests loaded with questions whose only purpose is to see if students have memorized these rules and can apply them to functions that require their repeated application in complicated combinations? A colleague of mine here at Michigan calls such exercises "feats of calculus," and he is not being complimentary when he does so.) A teacher who emphasizes this is just as guilty of teaching mechanical skills as is the one who emphasizes the learning of sequences of buttons to be pushed on a calculator to solve optimization problems. In short, graphing calculators are not inherently good or bad, but are either useful or counterproductive depending on the uses the teacher chooses to make of them. So perhaps the request made above should be for an anecdote that shows how graphing calculators can aid in the students' understanding, rather than the impossible request for an anecdote that supports the notion that graphing calculators are an unqualified good. I will stick my neck out by offering one. During the summer, I teach a mathematics program for high school students on the Turtle Mountain Indian Reservation in North Dakota. One of the topics last summer involved trigonometry. I gave the students a program for their TI-82 graphing calculators that did the following. They would enter a number, then the TI-82 would draw a unit circle on the screen and also draw the terminal side of an angle in standard position having radian measure equal to the entered number. The students could see where this terminal side intersected the unit circle and then obtain the location of that point (using either the TRACE or INTERSECT feature of the calculator) and from that the sine and cosine of the entered number. Of course, if the only point of this were to find these values, then the students could do so much more easily with a few keystrokes involving the trig keys on the calculator. The actual point, of course, is to reinforce the students' understanding of the unit-circle definitions of the trig functions. Having taught this topic for years, and having watched past students cling to the right-triangle definitions much longer than is appropriate, I can confidently say that this exercise gave my Turtle Mountain students a much better and more immediate understanding of the unit-circle definitions than students I have previously had. (Of course, textbooks perform much the same exercise with illustrations, but having the students participate in the exercise rather than just observe it happening on paper seems to enhance their understanding immensely.) Bob Megginson University of Michigan at Ann Arbor Date: Mon, 20 Feb 1995 23:12:08 -0500 Reply-To: calc-reform@e-math.ams.org Originator: calc-reform@e-math.ams.com Sender: calc-reform@e-math.ams.org Precedence: bulk From: dkuhlman@IDEA.uml.edu (DougKuhlmann-PhillipsAcademy-Math) To: Multiple recipients of listSubject: [CALC-REFORM:2004] Megginson on GC's X-Comment: From the CALC-REFORM discussion list. Bob Megginson is on target about the proper use of GC's. I would hope more or us would post how they have used the GC in class. Using it as an exploratory tool, as Bob described with f_n_(x)=x^n, or using a program to let students find the intersection of the unit circle with the terminal side of an angle are both good ideas. I first realized how GC's changed things when in a precalculus class we were studying the effects of transformations on graphs of functions. Students usuually have an easy time with g(x)=2f(x), g(x)=(1/2)f(x), g(x)=f(x)+2 and g(x)=f(x)-2 as they can easily mentally compute what happens to the y-coordinate. However, f(x+2) and f(x-2) always slows things down, as their (incorrect) generalization doesn't work, i.e. +2 should shift in the positive direction, hence right. In the past, before GC's (BGC) the students would initially disbelieve me and I would have to spend some time convincing them. Now, AGC, they aske me WHY the graphs shift the way they do. They can graph several functions and see that f(x+2) shifts to the left. Instead of being their adversary, I am their assistant helping them understand what they can already see. It was a pleasant change. Thanks again, Bob, and I hope others post their favorite uses of the GC. Doug -- Doug Kuhlmann Phillips Academy Andover, MA 01810 (508) 749-4242 dkuhlman@idea.uml.eduDate: Tue, 21 Feb 1995 06:09:42 -0500 Reply-To: calc-reform@e-math.ams.org Originator: calc-reform@e-math.ams.com Sender: calc-reform@e-math.ams.org Precedence: bulk From: Dick Beldin To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [CALC-REFORM:2006] Re: Megginson on GC's X-Comment: From the CALC-REFORM discussion list. With reference to the "loss of authority" teachers have suffered, I beg to differ. Teachers suffer a loss of credibility, just like other authority figures who want to be accepted without question. If my students have the temerity to challenge me, that is just a sign that they are good students. All too often they have been cowed into silence by some vindictive authoritarian in junior high or high school. Education is a by-product of the conflict between values and ideas with personal authority having very little (at least in theory) to contribute to the resolution. I teach my students that math is a language devoted to persuasion that one's ideas are sound. Without vigorous challenges, there is no need for such persuasive power. The quest for "authority" is the antithesis of "empowerment". If one knows his or her own capabilities, then challenges are welcomed, not feared. First we must know ourselves before we can teach others. Dick Date: Tue, 21 Feb 1995 10:23:36 -0500 Reply-To: calc-reform@e-math.ams.org Originator: calc-reform@e-math.ams.com Sender: calc-reform@e-math.ams.org Precedence: bulk From: Lou Talman To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [CALC-REFORM:2009] Re: Megginson on GC's X-Comment: From the CALC-REFORM discussion list. On Mon, 20 Feb 1995, Doug Kuhlmann wrote: >Students usuually have an easy time with g(x)=2f(x), g(x)=(1/2)f(x), >g(x)=f(x)+2 and g(x)=f(x)-2 as they can easily mentally compute what >happens to the y-coordinate. However, f(x+2) and f(x-2) always slows >things down, as their (incorrect) generalization doesn't work, i.e. +2 >should shift in the positive direction, hence right. Their generalization is less likely to be incorrect if one treats the equations y = 2f[x], y = f[x]/2, y = f[x] + 2, and y = f[x] - 2 as y/2 = f[x], 2y = f[x], y - 2 = f[x], and y + 2 = f[x], respectively. --Lou Talman Metropolitan State College of Denver Date: Tue, 21 Feb 1995 07:30:05 -0500 Reply-To: calc-reform@e-math.ams.org Originator: calc-reform@e-math.ams.com Sender: calc-reform@e-math.ams.org Precedence: bulk From: dkuhlman@IDEA.uml.edu (DougKuhlmann-PhillipsAcademy-Math) To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [CALC-REFORM:2007] Re: Megginson on GC's X-Comment: From the CALC-REFORM discussion list. >Doug, >Two quick points: >1) I believe that the graphing calculators should NEVER be used as >an objective authority to "settle" student-teacher "disputes". If I cannot convince my students that MY sketch of g(x) = f(x + 2) is correct, then I really don't know how to teach the material, do I? TTeachers have suffered tremendous losses of authority in the classroom over the years, and to freely give up the role of a higher academic authority is a grave mistake. Dick Belden has responded to this better than I could. See his recent posting. I was thinking of an exploratory exercise where the sudtents graphed severel examples like f(x+2) and then asked WHY. >2) The graphing calculators do not answer the student questions WHY >the functions shift in such a way---they only demonstrate THAT they shift that way. If you have to answer their questions WHY (AGC), how do the calculators really save much time? If the students understand WHY, after you explain it (that's your job, not the calculator's), then they will accept your sketches as authoritative. They will not need (and, IMHO, neither do you) a higher classroom authority. >John I agree that the GC's do not answer WHY. I thought that was clear in my first posting. I never expect the GC to explain why. How could it? I would hope that some of my students would be moved to think about the WHY after seeing some examples. I suspect that both BGC and AGC many sudents merely memorized a rule and ignored our explanations. (Finally, I'm up early this morning and a little dense--what does IMHO stand for?) >On Mon, 20 Feb 1995, DougKuhlmann-Phillips wrote: >>I first realized how GC's changed things when in a precalculus class we were studying the effects of transformations on graphs of functions. Students usuually have an easy time with g(x)=2f(x), g(x)=(1/2)f(x), g(x)=f(x)+2 and g(x)=f(x)-2 as they can easily mentally compute what happens to the y-coordinate. However, f(x+2) and f(x-2) always slows things down, as their (incorrect) generalization doesn't work, i.e. +2 should shift in the positive direction, hence right. In the past, before GC's (BGC) the students would initially disbelieve me and I would have to spend some time convincing them. Now, AGC, they aske me WHY the graphs shift the way they do. They can graph several functions and see that f(x+2) shifts to the left. Instead of being their adversary, I am their assistant helping them understand what they can already see. It was a pleasant change. >>Thanks again, Bob, and I hope others post their favorite uses of the GC. Doug -- Doug Kuhlmann Phillips Academy Andover, MA 01810 (508) 749-4242 dkuhlman@idea.uml.edu Date: Tue, 21 Feb 1995 20:11:12 -0500 Reply-To: calc-reform@e-math.ams.org Originator: calc-reform@e-math.ams.com Sender: calc-reform@e-math.ams.org Precedence: bulk From: walter spunde To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [CALC-REFORM:2017] Re: Megginson on GC's X-Comment: From the CALC-REFORM discussion list. Extracted from DougKuhlmann-PhillipsAcademy-Math >... I was thinking of an exploratory exercise where the sudtents graphed severel examples like f(x+2) and then asked WHY. >>2) The graphing calculators do not answer the student questions WHY the functions shift in such a way---they only demonstrate THAT they shift that way. If you have to answer their questions WHY (AGC), how do the calculators really save much time? ... and someone else wanted to classify calculators as either good or bad. Of course, they are good when you know how to handle them and bad when you do not. For students having problems with functional notation, and they may be upper year engineering students dealing with the Seconding Shifting Theorem, nearly all graphing packages are bad because they hide what in truth they are doing. They are not "graphing formulae" as students may be forgiven for thinking, since the input to these packages is a formula. They are in fact plotting a sample of points and joining them with a sequence of dots roughly in a straight line. When students are asked to obtain their own sample of x values, increment them by 2, apply an executable function f to these values to get y and then plot y vs x with a package that accepts only points, there is no confusion about f(x+2) or the direction of the shift. To save time, one must have the right tools for the job. % ______________________________________________________________________% % W.G.Spunde, Mathematics Department, USQ, Toowoomba, Australia, 4350 % % ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~% Date: Wed, 22 Feb 1995 17:01:57 -0500 Reply-To: calc-reform@e-math.ams.org Originator: calc-reform@e-math.ams.com Sender: calc-reform@e-math.ams.org Precedence: bulk From: Bradford R Findell To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [CALC-REFORM:2031] Re: Megginson on GC's X-Comment: From the CALC-REFORM discussion list. On Tue, 21 Feb 1995, Forrest - John B. wrote: >1) I believe that the graphing calculators should NEVER be used as an objective authority to "settle" student-teacher "disputes". If I cannot convince my students that MY sketch of g(x) = f(x + 2) is correct, then I really don't know how to teach the material, do I? TTeachers have suffered tremendous losses of authority in the classroom over the years, and to freely give up the role of a higher academic authority is a grave mistake. By 'convincing your students' do you mean 'keep explaining it in different ways until they agree'? If they then agree, can we conclude that they understand? I would argue that NO amount of explanation will promote understanding unless it somehow connects with the student's experience, and aren't we interested in understanding rather than just agreement? A GC exploration can provide experience which doesn't depend on the deep algebraic understanding that a purely algebraic explanation would require. And perhaps the GC exploration can help them make more sense of the algebra. >2) The graphing calculators do not answer the student questions WHY the functions shift in such a way---they only demonstrate THAT they shift that way. If you have to answer their questions WHY (AGC), how do the calculators really save much time? If the students understand WHY, after you explain it (that's your job, not the calculator's), then they will accept your sketches as authoritative. They will not need (and, IMHO, neither do you) a higher classroom authority. I am concerned, too, about the 'authority' issue, but I am not sure what you mean by authority. If you mean 'conviction' or 'source of belief' then I would argue that real understanding is based on an internal authority, arising through connections with other knowledge. Thus, I hope that each student is his or her own final authority. If, on the other hand, you mean 'control of the classroom' and other discipline issues, then I offer no argument. It seems from your post that you believe that the teacher's mission is to get students to accept the truth, and that he or she should be the final authority on all truth, at least in mathematics. Am I misinterpreting your view? brad findell Univeristy of New Hampshire Date: Tue, 21 Feb 1995 05:41:50 -0500 Reply-To: calc-reform@e-math.ams.org Originator: calc-reform@e-math.ams.com Sender: calc-reform@e-math.ams.org Precedence: bulk From: "Forrest - John B." To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [CALC-REFORM:2005] Re: Megginson on GC's X-Comment: From the CALC-REFORM discussion list. Doug, Two quick points: 1) I believe that the graphing calculators should NEVER be used as an objective authority to "settle" student-teacher "disputes". If I cannot convince my students that MY sketch of g(x) = f(x + 2) is correct, then I really don't know how to teach the material, do I? Teachers have suffered tremendous losses of authority in the classroom over the years, and to freely give up the role of a higher academic authority is a grave mistake. 2) The graphing calculators do not answer the student questions WHY the functions shift in such a way---they only demonstrate THAT they shift that way. If you have to answer their questions WHY (AGC), how do the calculators really save much time? If the students understand WHY, after you explain it (that's your job, not the calculator's), then they will accept your sketches as authoritative. They will not need (and, IMHO, neither do you) a higher classroom authority. John On Mon, 20 Feb 1995, DougKuhlmann-Phillips wrote: >I first realized how GC's changed things when in a precalculus class we were studying the effects of transformations on graphs of functions. Students usuually have an easy time with g(x)=2f(x), g(x)=(1/2)f(x), g(x)=f(x)+2 and g(x)=f(x)-2 as they can easily mentally compute what happens to the y-coordinate. However, f(x+2) and f(x-2) always slows things down, as their (incorrect) generalization doesn't work, i.e. +2 should shift in the positive direction, hence right. In the past, before GC's (BGC) the students would initially disbelieve me and I would have to spend some time convincing them. Now, AGC, they aske me WHY the graphs shift the way they do. They can graph several functions and see that f(x+2) shifts to the left. Instead of being their adversary, I am their assistant helping them understand what they can already see. It was a pleasant change. >Thanks again, Bob, and I hope others post their favorite uses of the GC. >Doug >-- >Doug Kuhlmann >Phillips Academy >Andover, MA 01810 >(508) 749-4242 dkuhlman@idea.uml.edu