![calculator-01[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/CyOfhaW.jpg "calculator-01[1].jpg")
For what reason are programmable calculators still not allowed?
We live in a world with goddamn internet enabled phones and tablets now and forever.
Why don't they just force us to use an abacus?
Because you're being tested on your ability to do something that could be programmed into a programmable calculator, obviously.
>>7735828
What the point?
We don't need that ability anymore.
slide rule precision was enough to get to the Moon
>>7735851
How does one actually use this for calculations? I only know how to multiply on one
They're probably just too inept to think up a new testing method.
Might as well cripple everyone back to the 70's.
>>7735839
>We don't need that ability anymore.
Yes we do. You need to understand the math, not just push buttons. Why are you even studying math if you don't want to know? Are you still in middle school?
>>7735839
No-one forces you to go to school, bad boy.
>>7735839
>whats the point
To develop your critical thinking skills you daft fuccboi
>>7735893
log(a*b)=log(a)+log(b)
log(a/b)=log(a)-log(b)
>>7735949
>Empirical research has shown people in 70s had the best critical thinking ability.
citation needed
>people thinking doing plain number crunching develops anything
Kek, do you still believe 1950s cheap psychology?
>>7735999
It develops plain number crunching skills.
>>7736005
Which is not math skill and also pretty boring considering the mass of things we can teach at an early age.
>>7735949
>people in 70s had the best critical thinking ability
but then new educational directives were mandated
now machine worship is the order of the day
who needs a brain when we have computers
why be able to walk when we have cars
>>7736010
I'm glad I learned how to do arithmetic in my head as a child.
>>7736014
So you like to do linear and boring tasks? Well if that's your cup of tea...
Most kid's do not like it, that the problem.
>>7736024
I like being able to do it, yeah. My life would be shittier without that skill.
>>7736013
What's the source of that pic?
>>7736028
Why? Are you retarded?
>>7735815
Are programmable calculators the same as scientific calculators? Because if so, we're allowed them in UK school and college examinations
>>7736030
John Taylor Gatto by the looks of it, no idea what book though.
If programmable calculators are allowed and everyone uses them to solve their math problems, eventually no one will understand the math behind it (since all they have to do is chop the problem into the calculator without thinking).
How the fuck is progress then going to happen if no one understand the basics (and algorithms) behind it? How is new and more advanced technology contructed if nobody even knows how the old shit works?
>>7736057
Elite will still know, don't worry.
>>7736030
longer excerpt
>>7736068
He has some good points but OTOH everything sounds bad if you put it in absurdist language like that.
>>7736057
Those are calculators reserved for people who actually know the concepts and fundamentals, were talking about fucking letting calculators in a calc exam so students don't have to fucking multiply x digit numbers by paper and pencil.
>>7736082
It encourages you to give more general answers, before using any numbers at all, so you can get almost all points.
When I came to the US for grad school I was surprised how most undergrads just plug in all numbers before they even start solving the problem. In Russia we were taught not to do that in 9th grade.
>>7736076
>absurdist
We appreciate your cooperation.
>>7736096
Depends on the problem.
Usually you try to simplify it as far as possible before proceeding to the next step. Sometimes it just isn't simple. Sometimes you get a huge term that is a pain in the ass to rewrite or rearrange. Then we just plug in the numbers for that term and continue on using the number. In engineering specially since most of the time the terms are in themselves meaningful values, so we can check each term individually to see if it makes logical sense before throwing it into the full equation.
But generally it's best practise to avoid putting in values until the last step, especially when the intermediate terms are relatively meaningless.
>>7736096
Same here.
General solution whenever possible.
First the equation - then the numbers.
Programmable calculators are reasonable so long as:
The ram is very limited (100s of bytes)
All memory is cleared and checked before the test.
It helps prevent stupid mistakes during things like numerical integration, you end up memorizing algorithms for these things anyway why not make it machine readable?
>>7736082
>were talking about fucking letting calculators in a calc exam so students don't have to fucking multiply x digit numbers by paper and pencil
Is the word "programmable" invisible to you or something?
programable calculators are just crap, IRL you will never use one thats why matlab and other high level languages exists.
>>7735851
I have met many old engineers who can out compute just about anyone with a good slide rule, and aren't bad with just their fingers.
It speak volumes to the power of mental math and practical application.
Things we seem to be lacking today.
I say train with out such tools, so one does not become one.
>>7735815
At graduate level it should be allowed.
You have to make sure you know if your answer makes sense though, so at that level no calculator.
No -3 apples or a hundred molecules in a gram.
>>7738484
So put octave on a dollar store android and let the students use that.
