- 391
- 0
Main Question or Discussion Point
It's by far the best way to give out homework relevant to lectures
i give it a 10/10
how many people have used masteringphysics?
i give it a 10/10
how many people have used masteringphysics?
It must've changed since you last used it,Yea, I also think that it is terrible and ridiculous from time to time.
For instance, it accepts say, 4.51, for answer but not 4.512
And I am not sure how it works for others, but personally I think it is more of plug in the number type, which somehow I don't really like.
Is Mastering Physics something that is available with the purchase of certain textbooks?It's by far the best way to give out homework relevant to lectures
i give it a 10/10
how many people have used masteringphysics?
It comes with Knight's "Physics: for scientists and engineers", a 1st year uni book.Is Mastering Physics something that is available with the purchase of certain textbooks?
I just finished my 1st year physics course , we used this book, and thank god we did not need to use mastering physics...online programs may give quick feedback but I do not believe they are a great learning tool, more of a way for TAs to slack.It comes with Knight's "Physics: for scientists and engineers", a 1st year uni book.
I used it last year, it was OK, although most of the questions were formulaic. There was one or two questions that were conceptually difficult. It certainly made it far quicker to get feedback on assignments.
I think it could be made to work for these types of questions, using a trick one of my profs liked to use: He would ask questions like "What would this (well known result) be if we lived in 5 (or n) dimensions?" or "What would this (known result) be if this (fundamental constant) were different (where the change could change some of the approximations)?" With questions like these you can ensure that the students understand the derivations, and haven't simply looked them up (which is a problem even for "normal" homework assignments).But Mastering physics, on the other hand, was ill suited for some type of questions. For instance, you know the final result, say, the energy shift due to the electron magnetic dipole moment, but the professor want you to derive it by hand. It would be hard to do the derivation on the mastering physics. Also, the proof base homework. In general, those hws that emphasize more on the procedures rather than the results would be hard to be used as mastering physics problems.
Isn't that the general goal of commercial software? To take money from someone?Pen and paper is the best way to master physics not some fancy computer program that is designed to take money from poor undergrads.
when I paper graded, I would mark people down for putting 4.512 for not paying attention to significant figures. They wouldn't get the whole problem wrong though, just a point off.Yea, I also think that it is terrible and ridiculous from time to time.
For instance, it accepts say, 4.51, for answer but not 4.512
And I am not sure how it works for others, but personally I think it is more of plug in the number type, which somehow I don't really like.
Not true. It is easier to manipulate answers. In the end, you wouldn't be solving things by hand and I think it is not productive to do everything by hand if you understand how to solve the problem.ive noticed that when you use matematica to check your integral is gives in a way that u wouldn't get by coming up with it by hand .
I would be horrified if my mathematical software integrated like an average undergrad calculus student. Mathematica should generally be used to DO integrals, not just check them. If you're in an applied mathematics course and required to integrate manually, that is screwed up.ive noticed that when you use matematica to check your integral is gives in a way that u wouldn't get by coming up with it by hand .