NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #16/NN_1992_16.iso/spool/sci/math/9655

Text File | 1992-07-29 | 1.8 KB | 39 lines

Newsgroups: sci.math
Path: sparky!uunet!usc!sdd.hp.com!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!news.cso.uiuc.edu!uxa.cso.uiuc.edu!das50852
From: [e-mail] (dan)
Subject: Re: Computational aids. Was: Re: An interesting limit problem.
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (Net Noise owner)
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 05:45:18 GMT
Lines: 27

[e-mail] (Mike Hosea) writes:

>This question pops up from time to time, and the strongest reactions
>occur when someone suggests a total abandonment of hand calculation
>or a total abandonment of modern computational tools (in the context
>of education).  Either extreme is a poor choice IMO.  Why must we
>go to an extreme?

Yes, this is true.  I never meant to imply that there were only two
ways to teach Calculus.  In my own personal opinion as a professional
student (aren't I though?) concepts are learned best, when they're
read, heard, and written.  This in no way implies that Mathematica
(or whatever) is a poor tool, since my rational for it's use would be
it's ability to illustrate more complex concepts than a textbook ever
could, and the ability for students to experiment with more complex
ideas.  However, since these are really quite powerful there are problems
which require ingenuity/patience to solve by "hand" (as if the hand were
doing the thinking), that Mathematica reduces to a burp and a "Out[15] =".
It's the power that makes it both so attractive as an education tool, and
yet so dangerous to the student.

                    dan simms

Note: I in no way am trying to flame the "Calculus&Mathematica" series;
    ...it just looks that way.
-----
[e-mail]