Is this way of teaching the quadratic solutions really anything new?

In summary, the conversation discusses a new technique for solving quadratic equations, which involves finding the sum of the roots and saying that they are equidistant from half the sum. This technique is similar to completing the square and has benefits such as connecting it to the axis of symmetry and introducing substitution of variables. Some participants have used this technique in the past and find it helpful, while others prefer the traditional algebraic method.
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I think its a step beyond or between factoring in the traditional sense and using quadratic formula. It brings out a symmetry in the roots that isn't immediately obvious.

The is not unlike a similar symmetry found in complex roots of a polynomial being equally spaced about a circle in the complex plane aka DeMoivre’s theorem.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Moivre's_formula

i remember using the symmetry in a test because i couldn't remember the formula but did have one real root of the 5th order polynomial and we were to graph the solution.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes berkeman and mcastillo356
  • #3
It looks to me like a disguised process of completing the square, which is (IMO) an intuitive way to solve it or to develop the quadratic formula.
 
  • Like
Likes jedishrfu
  • #4
The difference I see though is going to the sum and saying the roots are equidistant from half the sum.

When I learned to factor they didnt teach that instead you were looking for two numbers which summed correctly and when multiplied got the c term. It seems that root summing symmetry gets you to an answer more quickly.
 
  • Like
Likes berkeman and FactChecker
  • #5
jedishrfu said:
The difference I see though is going to the sum and saying the roots are equidistant from half the sum.
The technique described is not really all that different from what happens in the technique of completing the square. Let's look at an example, such as solving the equation ##x^2 - 4x - 5 = 0##

If we approach this using completing the square, we have
##x^2 - 4x = 5##
##x^2 - 4x + 4 = 5 + 4##
##(x - 2)^2 = 9##
So either x - 2 = 3 or x - 2 = -3, producing the solutions x = 5 or x = -1.
The only difference I see is the substitution of ##u## for ##x - 2##, so ##u^2 = 9 \Rightarrow u = \pm 3##.

Undo the substitution, and you get the same solutions I showed.
 
  • Like
Likes SammyS, jedishrfu and FactChecker
  • #6
Mark44 said:
The technique described is not really all that different from what happens in the technique of completing the square.
It seems like a geometric interpretation of the algebraic process of completing the square. I find the algebraic process to be direct enough that a geometric interpretation is only distracting. But people who are not as comfortable with the algebraic process might benefit from a geometric interpretation.
 
  • Skeptical
  • Like
Likes symbolipoint and jedishrfu
  • #7
I can see some benefits for early students in terms connecting it to the parabola axis of symmetry (-b/2a), and also some good practice with difference of two squares expansion/factorization. Also could be useful in introducing students to the concept of substitution of a variable in an equation.

I wouldn't want to fully replace teaching completing the square though, as that's also very useful for things other than solving quadratics. For example putting an integral like this one into a more amenable form.
[tex] \int \frac{1}{x^2 - 2x + 10} \, dx = \int \frac{1}{(x-1)^2 + 3^2} \,dx[/tex]

BTW. I've used this technique many times in the past. Usually in the context of students first learning to factorize simple integer coeff quadratics in the form [itex]x^2 + bx + c[/itex] with the old "sum = b and product = c" method.

After giving the usual simple exercises like [itex]x^2 + 8x + 15\,[/itex] or [itex]x^2 + 5x + 6[/itex], better students will sometimes ask, "what if you just cannot find any two such numbers with the required sum and product?". The answer I give is that either no such numbers exist (no real roots) or that they exist but are surds and hence more difficult to find. I give an example like [itex]x^2 + 6x +7\,[/itex] and tell them to try (-3+s) and (-3-s), where "s" is the surd to be determined. I never realized I'd found a "new process". :wink:
 
  • #8
FactChecker said:
I find the algebraic process to be direct enough that a geometric interpretation is only distracting. But people who are not as comfortable with the algebraic process might benefit from a geometric interpretation.
I found the simple geometric method to be extremely helpful, to ME at least, if not to other people.
 
  • Like
Likes FactChecker and jedishrfu
  • #9
symbolipoint said:
I found the simple geometric method to be extremely helpful, to ME at least, if not to other people.
I'll buy that.
 

1. What is the quadratic formula and how is it used in teaching?

The quadratic formula is a mathematical equation used to find the solutions of a quadratic equation. It is often taught in algebra classes as a way to solve equations with a squared variable. It can also be used to graph parabolas and solve real-world problems.

2. Is the quadratic formula the only way to teach quadratic solutions?

No, there are other methods for solving quadratic equations such as factoring, completing the square, and graphing. However, the quadratic formula is a reliable and systematic approach that can be used for any quadratic equation.

3. How is teaching the quadratic formula different from traditional methods?

Teaching the quadratic formula involves memorizing the formula and understanding its components, such as the coefficients and the discriminant. It also requires practice in plugging in values and simplifying the equation to find the solutions. Traditional methods may focus more on factoring or graphing, but the quadratic formula allows for a more direct and efficient solution.

4. Is the quadratic formula still relevant in modern education?

Yes, the quadratic formula is still a fundamental concept in mathematics and is used in various fields such as engineering, physics, and economics. It is also a building block for more advanced concepts in algebra and calculus.

5. How can teaching the quadratic formula benefit students in the long run?

Teaching the quadratic formula not only helps students solve quadratic equations, but it also strengthens their problem-solving skills and critical thinking abilities. It also introduces them to the concept of complex numbers, which is a fundamental concept in higher-level math courses.

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
728
  • STEM Educators and Teaching
2
Replies
36
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
794
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • General Math
Replies
2
Views
840
  • General Math
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • General Math
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
10
Views
1K
Back
Top