Error! Failed to query database!
Re: Do you think calculators with computer algebra systems should be allowed on standardized tests?

elcobbola
(Web Page)

The algebra used on tests (the SAT anyway) is never above algebra 1. They always word it in weird ways, thus making it harder than it really is. The real test is if can reason through the garbage they throw in there to see the real problem (a simple one at that.) A calculator can't do that logic, so use it all you want. Besides, if you can't do algebra 1 without a calculator, you are hurting...

Reply to this comment

28 February 2000, 22:55 GMT


Re: Do you think calculators with computer algebra systems should be allowed on standardized tests?

Miquel Burns
(Web Page)

After reading most of the commits, I noticed that the number of people woting went from close to one sided. I wonder which will win win.
By the way, did you know the 86 can solve a system of equations the form below?
a(1,1)x1+a(1,2)x2+...a(1,n)xn=b1
a(2,1)x1+a(2,2)x2+...a(2,n)xn=b2
.
.
.
a(n,1)x1+a(n,2)x2+...a(n,n)xn=bn
It labeled as "Simult" look on pgs 208210,354 of you manual if you still have it.

Reply to this comment

29 February 2000, 00:08 GMT


Re: Do you think calculators with computer algebra systems should be allowed on standardized tests?

MikeW
(Web Page)

I beleve the TI89, 92 and 92+ should be allowed on standerdized tests for this reason: A person With one these Calculators knows what the calculator can do and how to do it, if people can figure out what the question is asking and how to plug it in and why this answer is right over an other answer, Then these Calculators should be allowed.
(This Problem From ICTM Reganals 2000 Written Competiton Algebra I)
EG.
Factor completely over the real numbers into 4 linear factors:
(x^4)(2x^3)(6x^2)+(6x)+9
Which if pluged into the calculator as factor((x^4)(2x^3)(6x^2)+(6x)+9)
Would return:
(x3)(x+1)(x^23)
But pluged in as: factor((x^4)(2x^3)(6x^2)+(6x)+9,x)
Would Return:
(x3)(x+1)(x+*3)(x*3)
Which is the correct answer?
In this Case (x3)(x+1)(x+*3)(x*3) is the correct answer
I think i Rest my Case...

Reply to this comment

29 February 2000, 02:18 GMT


Re: Do you think calculators with computer algebra systems should be allowed on standardized tests?

TheMadTickler

I voted "no." I did not spend three years of my education stuck in math classes a year above my fellow sophomores so that they can buy a fancier calculator and do better than me on the SAT. They should have to work for a math score of 800 just like I will.

Reply to this comment

29 February 2000, 03:24 GMT


Re: Do you think calculators with computer algebra systems should be allowed on standardized tests?

Rgb9000

YEAH!? I dont believe you people. Why are you using a computer? Some of your friends dont have computers, so maybe you shouldnt either.That gives you an advantage in school. And thats not fair. BAh! What GARBAGE! Of course you should have a calculater. I agree with the post near the top that says why send palentoligist without a pick. We are going to have these in our professional careers, and we should be able to utilize them. And I would like to see 1 person do the 3d graph of the ripple and trace it on paper as fast as the calculater. TI makes them to aid us, not to brain drain us. All games aside, the calculater alone is an excellent math source. Smarter than you in some things, and faster too. Embrace technology, or it will embrace you. Dont be afraid we are being replaced with technology. No need to fear. Because we are and you cant help it or stop it. And it is a good thing. But that is another argument. You can do so much with even an 81! you could store notes and do graphing, and all sorts of neat stuff you CANNOT do in your head. ("Ok, class. Calculaters away. Take out a peice of paper and graph 33x^2209x+7809. Evaluate X at 765, then find where it intersects 7000.You have five minutes.This will be a major grade.For 1 point bonus, divide 4972610834 by four.") Yeah, right. You cant do it. You would fail. If only ti had a brain implant that COULD do it, that would be neat. One day that will exist, making smarter, more effiecient humans. So: Vote YES for calculaters on tests.
Thank you...
R
Ronnie B.

Reply to this comment

29 February 2000, 03:45 GMT





Re: Re: Do you think calculators with computer algebra systems should be allowed on standardized tests?

Laura Thompson

I agree, all this BS about unfair advantages is crap! If you have a better tool USE IT! The point most people fail to realize is that ...
1) If you already know how to do something, why continue to tediously do it on paper, its slower and more error prone than the calculator. Doing it by hand is necessary to learn, memorize, and understand mathematical concepts, the calculator comes in after you already understand it.
2) You should be able to use something despite 100,000 people not having it. That's like saying rich people should live in ghettos because poor people have to. If only you could hear the ridiculousness of what you are saying.
3) Calculators are mathematical aids, not the main power supply, that is the human brain. People are saying that we should reject calculators because they brainwash people and make them dependent on them are hypocrites pure and simple. The Radio was condemned as the end of literacy. The TV was met with equal scorn. So was the computer. History repeats like a river. Calculators are still relatively new and a few guardians of the past may find it hard to swallow, but calculators are here to stay, like it or not. Soon they will become an integral part of our life and we will be dependent on them, just like were dependent on 100,000,000 other technological devices that were once ridiculed and condemned like cars, radios, TVs, movies, wrist watches, trains, steam boats, trains, and computers.
Face it, calculators are here to stay.

Reply to this comment

29 February 2000, 05:03 GMT











I have a name for you as well

TheMadTickler

First of all, that is like the millionth time you insulted me because of my opinions. Its fine you don't agree with me. I respect that. Lets not get nasty about it, though. Kindly just shoot down my arguements and leave it at that. Now, to the "point" he was making. Perhaps you can enlighten me on it because I didn't see it. What it seemed like to be was that he was trying to think of a long and tedious question to advocate the use of graphing calculators. I agree with him that on a test with questions like those, one would want as high powered calculator as possible. The SAT and other standardized tests like it, however, does NOT have questions like that. This brings me to another point. If graphing calculators become standard use on these tests, two things will happen. First, the math scores will go up. Second, the tests will become harder because so many people are bringing the average up. Who knows, they might implement questions similar to our friends previous problem. That makes it that much harder for those who are trying to take the test without a graphing calc. (Maybe they aren't poor; lets say they have one but their batteries are dead, it get stolen and/or it breaks (happy now Laura?!?)).

Reply to this comment

3 March 2000, 04:12 GMT














Re: I have a name for you as well

Russell Howes

I'm afraid that some clearing up is necessary. I didn't write the equation. I responded to the guy who did. If you did come across a problem like that, you would be justified in using a graphing calc. However, that <B>doesn't happpen</B>. That was MY point. As for Laura, I KNOW he was making a point. I was ATTACKING it. The point of going to school, taking tests, etc. is not to learn how to operate a graphing calculatorit is to learn how to do the problem, or, put another way, to know how the calculator does the problem. That is exactly why this guy's example wouldn't exist. Try filling out a resumè and in the 'Special Skills' portion putting that you know how to use a TI89. Nobody cares. There are millions of people, for example, that know how to load up Internet Explorer. They are sitting at their computers playing bridge with somebody from Turkey. There are also some people that actually know how IE works. They are doing something a bit more constructive than cards, and they are likely getting paid for it too. Knowing how to use the technology is never a fair substitute for knowing how to NOT use the technology. By taking a test with a calculator that is too advanced for that test, you hurt yourself because you don't know what counts, and you hurt everybody else taking the test with your artificially inflated grade.

Reply to this comment

4 March 2000, 05:35 GMT


YEAH!!!!!

FSB

I don't see too many dumbasses using these calc's... not only do u have to be smart in general to use them, u must know what u are doing and how to enter the equation, formula, whatever to get the answer.

Reply to this comment

29 February 2000, 05:10 GMT





Re: YEAH!!!!!

Patrick Davidson
(Web Page)

Actually, there are cases in which having a programming calculator is a substitute for knowing what you are doing. Suppose you were given the following math problem:
Find a perfect number larger than 8,000.
As long as you know what a perfect number is, it's quite trivial to write a calculator program that will test all the numbers from 8,000 and up to get an answer e.g. (8128).
However, if you actually knew much about math, you could do this without a calculator (though a simple 4function calculator would be helpful for the arithmetic) because you would be able to determine (and prove) that (2^(N+1)1)*(2^N) is a perfect number wherever (2^(N+1)1) is prime. This way you would only need to test whether 3, 7, 15, 31, 63, and 127 were prime, and then you'd know that 8128 is perfect.

Reply to this comment

29 February 2000, 08:12 GMT


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
You can change the number of comments per page in Account Preferences.
