- #1

- 12

- 0

I am espescially interested in hearing younger posters feelings as opposed to those of older posters.

- Thread starter alphy
- Start date

- #1

- 12

- 0

I am espescially interested in hearing younger posters feelings as opposed to those of older posters.

- #2

- 28

- 0

I will quite simply say "yes" to that, theres just no doubt about it.

- #3

Hurkyl

Staff Emeritus

Science Advisor

Gold Member

- 14,916

- 19

But more importantly, I don't think the population in general

- #4

- 12

- 0

What about when kids stop learning the basics of math and just crunch numbers on a calculator?Originally posted by Hurkyl

But more importantly, I don't think the population in generalunderstandscomputers enough.

- #5

Hurkyl

Staff Emeritus

Science Advisor

Gold Member

- 14,916

- 19

What about it?

(Note: I'm not condoning the possibility, but I think you're sensationalizing)

(Note: I'm not condoning the possibility, but I think you're sensationalizing)

- #6

russ_watters

Mentor

- 20,130

- 6,650

That is almost exactly what my first reaction was to the title of the thread.Originally posted by Hurkyl

But more importantly, I don't think the population in generalunderstandscomputers enough.

They won't. Thats just not relevant to the question.What about when kids stop learning the basics of math and just crunch numbers on a calculator?

I spent a month in calculus class learning to differentiate using limits and let me tell you, I was

- #7

- 40

- 0

I disagree. I think the population in general understands computersOriginally posted by Hurkyl

But more importantly, I don't think the population in generalunderstandscomputers enough.

Besides, how can you say the general population understands computers enough when this sort of thing happens?

Calculators - so the kids aren't coached to crunch numbers in their heads, but they're definitely shown the process behind the buttons. Personally, I think it'd be good to have a "sharp-minded" population that can count mentally (and who can use calculators/computers proficiently when they can be beneficial), but I suppose educators have better things to waste their time on...

- #8

- 28

- 0

Yes they do, its called giving out detentions :POriginally posted by abhishek

...but I suppose educators have better things to waste their time on...

- #9

megashawn

Science Advisor

- 435

- 0

How do you disagree. You start out by stating you are in disagreement, but then make almost an identical statement to that of Hurkyl's.quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by Hurkyl

But more importantly, I don't think the population in general understands computers enough.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I disagree. I think the population in general understands computers more than they used to, but certainly not enough.

And no, the population IMO is getting worse and worse as computers get more "User Friendly". Back when everything was command prompts and guis running on dos, you had to know your stuff. Now a 6 year old kid with a year or two of gameboy time could learn how to make animated cartoons with relative simplicity.

But even still I think the majority of people are still greatly confused by computers. I've been through Computer tech training, and about half way through the class, some of the people with the best grades in the class still knew nothing about the workings and operation of a computer.

I work with a lady who when started here had no computer knowledge. She has been here for over a year now, has memorized "Menu paths" to do her job, and has learned how to open internet explorer and go to the local news website. If something like a warning dialog pops up, it totaly ruins her day, and unless someone is around to fix it, will cause her to not mess with the cpu anymore in fear of breaking it.

No, people are horrible when it comes to computers.

To the note of kids not knowing math, well, if a machine knows it all and is better at, only requiring input from the user, whats the problem? The computer is supposed to be an extension of human capability. As such, the human user should still have a general understanding of the basics, like say, Ohms Law. But having a program designed to calculate the current when V and R is giving isn't taking away from the user, but saving him/her time.

This is why we are capable of doing more work in our lifetime as opposed to earlier generations. My children will probably atleast double my lifelong productivity in their own, largely inpart to computers, and better understanding of them.

- #10

- 156

- 2

Some of my classmates spend 24 hours a day on a computer and the socialization that goes on is via a chat room.

Me? I'm not too computer savvy and I pretty much use my computer to type of papers for class. For communication, chatting is fine but I need to get out and see people face to face.

And it's not just one classmate, or just me. A majority of people I'm in contact with fit either of the descriptions (or a healthy balance in between).

About the calculator issue: When I signed up for Calculus I my freshman year, the classroom was crammed and everyone had their TI-89 graphing calculators out and were like "I'm going to breeze my way through this class." Then the teacher walks in, props her books on the table, and goes "oh, you're not allowed to use any graphing calculators" and people's jaws dropped to the ground.

After that day, there was always enough place to sit because a good number of people had dropped the class.

Those who stayed and still had a dependence on their TI-89 would sometimes perform horribly on exams because of not being able to factor or FOIL.

For once, I was glad that I was behind in utilizing available technology (My TI-89 spent most of its time in the back of my closet).

- #11

- 40

- 0

d'oh, I misread Hurkyl. I didn't pick up the "don't". So I don't disagree then.Originally posted by megashawn

abhishek, I'm confused. Don't feel bad, I woke up too early, maybe its me.

How do you disagree. You start out by stating you are in disagreement, but then make almost an identical statement to that of Hurkyl's.

hmm, I don't know about that (assuming I haven't misread you too ). I think intuitive, usable, human-centric interfaces are definitely a good thing. But what I fear is that the gap between those who know (and produce) and those who don't (and use) is widening, which is probably not too good. If the principles behind, say, computer animation were taught at some level, but the "user-friendliness" was also used, then we might have a good solution. That is, make a product with an effective and efficient interface without dumbing down the user.Originally posted by megashawn

And no, the population IMO is getting worse and worse as computers get more "User Friendly". Back when everything was command prompts and guis running on dos, you had to know your stuff. Now a 6 year old kid with a year or two of gameboy time could learn how to make animated cartoons with relative simplicity.

- #12

- 91

- 0

As for calculators, that's just silly. The same arguments were introduced when the slide rule was invented, and obviously, kids still had to learn how to count. The concepts have to be understood, before a calculator can be utilized.

I remember a Calculus class, much the same as Sting's (except we were using Ti-86s). And Graphing calculators were used to the fullest, BUT they were used in aid to teaching. The problem with these classes won't be that the students can't learn how to do the calculations because they have a calculator, it's that the teachers don't know how to use the calculators! A recent trend in public schooling has had uper-level math classes (especially Trig) taught by people in the computer department.

The same arguments always come along whenever a new technology is put in place, simply because humans are naturally afraid of change. But in the end, it's all overblown. We integrate it into our lives, it may even change our lives, but any knowledge we lose is a good riddance.

Who wants to memorize logarithm tables anyway? Just a waste of brainspace.

- #13

- 28

- 0

- #14

- 28

- 0

If ignorance is bliss, you must be orgasmic :POriginally posted by liljediboi

ignorance is bliss

Personality, I embrace technology and change. Without it, where would we even be today?

- #15

- 156

- 2

I really don't know how to respond to this comment. I understand exactly where you are coming from, but just a personal example:As for calculators, that's just silly. The same arguments were introduced when the slide rule was invented, and obviously, kids still had to learn how to count. The concepts have to be understood, before a calculator can be utilized.

I got my TI-89 my senior year of high school. A month later I learned how to switch it on. Then I decided to goof off with it and so I tried the integrating function (remember, I took my first Calculus course in college). The only thing I knew about integration was that it was with respect to some variable. I plug in a equation, the variable (following the syntax), and (to quote Emeril) BAM! It popped out an equation.

What I'm trying to get at is that I was able to use my calculator to solve for an integral (but at the same time, I knew nothing about integrals and how to solve for them by hand).

Do you see what I'm trying to get at here?

I work in the Math Lab at my school and I was helping one kid with his Calculus homework. There was a point where he had to factor out a really simple second-degree equation and so he reaches into his backpack and takes out a TI- eighty something. The time he spent trying to find the calculator, he could have factored it out easily.

Please don't get me wrong. I'm not against calculators or technology. However, I feel that SOME people have a dependency on their calculators.

Okay, I know this was off-topic but oh well

- #16

selfAdjoint

Staff Emeritus

Gold Member

Dearly Missed

- 6,786

- 8

- #17

- 91

- 0

Originally posted by selfAdjoint

That..was my point. All the arguments came to nothing, as kids still had to learn what the theory behind the numbers were.

Hm.. and in response to Sting's question, that made me think. I'm seeing less and less evidence of your example now, but it is worrysome. A lot of math teachers have come up with the "you can use calculators for everything but tests" rule, which means kids do learn how to do the calculations, but use the calculators on homework to speed it up. (Probably not the best way to do things, as you don't get much practice by hand). I'm sure there is some degrading of ability to do calculations by hand, but most students (and almost all teachers) will teach the kids how to do things by hand. As teachers learn how to better and better teach with the calculators, things should even themselves out.

- #18

- 156

- 2

Before you guys think some anti-technology advocate, let me stress that I'm not against technology.

In my Differential Equations class, we use Maple or our TI-89's to go through all the grunt work (it is assumed you can perform integration techniques like partial fractions and trig substitution).

- #19

- 57

- 0

There are some people that should not even touch one!!!

- #20

- 156

- 2

lol. That's like some people who arrive in the Math Lab. But the problem with some of the Math Lab people is that they don't bother reading the directions and then they go crazy when something doesn't work (which I assume is on the same lines as your problem).YES WE DO!!!!I work in technical support for a software company and ohhhh man.. the second someone computer does not work you would think that someone was going to die!!! I think it is rediculus...

- #21

ShawnD

Science Advisor

- 668

- 1

Calculators are not some kind of cheating tool. If you don't know how math works, you can't use a calculator. If I gave you a calculator and something like log[x/5] = 856 and you had no prior knowledge of how a log works, would you be able to solve this question? A calculator is just a tool to help you speed up doing stuff you already know.

Calculators have really really helped improve the ability to learn new things. Look at chemistry. Chemistry involes a lot of log functions, many of them base e. Now how the hell do you solve log functions with a base of e when you don't have a calculator? It would take like an hour to do 1 simple log calculation. You can either spend an hour doing 1 question without a calculator or you can spend an hour doing 50 questions with a calculator. Now which of the two helps you learn more? Doing 1 example of doing 50 examples? I get the feeling that doing 50 helps you remember a lot better.

When my dad went to tech school to learn electrical engineering, the program was 3 years long. Now, the program is 2 years long and they learn the same stuff. Instead of using a slide rule - which sucks, they use a calculator. Instead of drafting with a pencil, they use computers. I can tell you from first hand experience that using the computer is at least 50x faster than using a pencil. With CAD I can dimension something in like 5 minutes. Doing the same thing with a pencil will easily take a good 2 hours.

Computers rock

- #22

- 11

- 0

So I suppose I think that on average the people who should rely on computers do so often enough.

- #23

- 156

- 2

If I may direct you to an earlier post:Calculators are not some kind of cheating tool. If you don't know how math works, you can't use a calculator. If I gave you a calculator and something like log[x/5] = 856 and you had no prior knowledge of how a log works, would you be able to solve this question? A calculator is just a tool to help you speed up doing stuff you already know.

I'm not some anti-technology advocate. I think calculators are great and they save a lot of time (and after a class like Statistics, I'm grateful for mine). However, I think that some people have a ever growing dependency on calculators to perform very simple arithmetic.I got my TI-89 my senior year of high school. A month later I learned how to switch it on. Then I decided to goof off with it and so I tried the integrating function (remember, I took my first Calculus course in college). The only thing I knew about integration was that it was with respect to some variable. I plug in a equation, the variable (following the syntax), and (to quote Emeril) BAM! It popped out an equation.

What I'm trying to get at is that I was able to use my calculator to solve for an integral (but at the same time, I knew nothing about integrals and how to solve for them by hand).

- #24

- 1

- 0

- #25

ShawnD

Science Advisor

- 668

- 1

limcalicious said:For example, in one of my math classes, a problem called for dividing two fractions. The professor asked us to do it by hand, and nobody could.

That's classic. Wait until those people try to learn the factor unit method of doing chemistry calculations. They'll be in big trouble.

:rofl:

- Last Post

- Replies
- 3

- Views
- 2K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 27

- Views
- 6K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 3

- Views
- 2K

- Replies
- 2

- Views
- 970

- Last Post

- Replies
- 13

- Views
- 3K

- Replies
- 6

- Views
- 1K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 6

- Views
- 2K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 3

- Views
- 3K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 5

- Views
- 3K

- Replies
- 16

- Views
- 5K