Sobre o uso de Calculadoras Gráficas


Date: Mon, 20 Feb 1995 15:05:16 -0500
Reply-To: calc-reform@e-math.ams.org
Originator: calc-reform@e-math.ams.com
Sender: calc-reform@e-math.ams.org
Precedence: bulk
From: Robert Megginson (meggin@math.lsa.umich.edu) 
To: Multiple recipients of list (calc-reform@e-math.ams.org) 
Subject: [CALC-REFORM:2003] Darko's note on Murli Gupta's paper 
X-Comment: From the CALC-REFORM discussion list. 

Darko's comment:

>Don't let's forget that I'm still looking forward to hearing 
one anecdote that supports the reformed axiom "GCs are good." 
                              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I must protest this drastic oversimplification of a complicated issue.
 There is no such axiom, and I would challenge anyone making that
 statement to find one individual who is willing to make the unqualified
 statement that "graphing calculators are good." I believe that graphing
 calculators can be a useful educational tool IF PROPERLY USED; I will
 also be the first to assert that they can be badly misused by a teacher
 who does not understand their proper role. For example, if the teacher
 shows the students how to use the graphing calculator to locate local
 extrema of functions, then devotes a large portion of an hour test to
 seeing if the students have learned this skill, then the teacher has
 missed the point of having the technology available. On the other hand,
 the teacher can use the calculator to have the students explore the
 graphs of the functions f_n defined by the formulas f_n(x)=x^n, where
 n is a positive integer, then have the students make some conjectures
 about the shape of such graphs for different values of n, then finally
 justify their conjectures. It is my experience that this sort of
 exercise is very useful in aiding the students' understanding.

If graphing calculators can be misused as a teaching tool, does this
 make them dangerous? No more so than, for example, the standard
 differentiation formulas. Many calculus teachers forget that these
 are also just tools rather than the main mathematical content of a
 course, and give hour tests whose main purpose is to see if the
 student has learned these formulas. (How many times have you seen
 calculus tests loaded with questions whose only purpose is to see
 if students have memorized these rules and can apply them to
 functions that require their repeated application in complicated
 combinations? A colleague of mine here at Michigan calls such
 exercises "feats of calculus," and he is not being complimentary
 when he does so.) A teacher who emphasizes this is just as guilty
 of teaching mechanical skills as is the one who emphasizes the
 learning of sequences of buttons to be pushed on a calculator
 to solve optimization problems. In short, graphing calculators
 are not inherently good or bad, but are either useful or
 counterproductive depending on the uses the teacher chooses
 to make of them.

So perhaps the request made above should be for an anecdote that
 shows how graphing calculators can aid in the students'
 understanding, rather than the impossible request for an anecdote
 that supports the notion that graphing calculators are an
 unqualified good. I will stick my neck out by offering one.

During the summer, I teach a mathematics program for high school
 students on the Turtle Mountain Indian Reservation in North Dakota.
 One of the topics last summer involved trigonometry. I gave the
 students a program for their TI-82 graphing calculators that did
 the following. They would enter a number, then the TI-82 would
 draw a unit circle on the screen and also draw the terminal side
 of an angle in standard position having radian measure equal to
 the entered number. The students could see where this terminal
 side intersected the unit circle and then obtain the location of
 that point (using either the TRACE or INTERSECT feature of the
 calculator) and from that the sine and cosine of the entered number.
 Of course, if the only point of this were to find these values,
 then the students could do so much more easily with a few keystrokes
 involving the trig keys on the calculator. The actual point, of
 course, is to reinforce the students' understanding of the
 unit-circle definitions of the trig functions. Having taught this
 topic for years, and having watched past students cling to the
 right-triangle definitions much longer than is appropriate, I can
 confidently say that this exercise gave my Turtle Mountain students
 a much better and more immediate understanding of the unit-circle
 definitions than students I have previously had. (Of course,
 textbooks perform much the same exercise with illustrations, but
 having the students participate in the exercise rather than just
 observe it happening on paper seems to enhance their understanding
 immensely.)

Bob Megginson
University of Michigan at Ann Arbor

Date: Mon, 20 Feb 1995 23:12:08 -0500
Reply-To: calc-reform@e-math.ams.org
Originator: calc-reform@e-math.ams.com
Sender: calc-reform@e-math.ams.org
Precedence: bulk
From: dkuhlman@IDEA.uml.edu (DougKuhlmann-PhillipsAcademy-Math)
 To: Multiple recipients of list 
 Subject: [CALC-REFORM:2004] Megginson on GC's
X-Comment: From the CALC-REFORM discussion list. 


Bob Megginson is on target about the proper use of GC's. I would
 hope more or us would post how they have used the GC in class.
 Using it as an exploratory tool, as Bob described with
 f_n_(x)=x^n, or using a program to let students find the
 intersection of the unit circle with the terminal side of an
 angle are both good ideas.

I first realized how GC's changed things when in a precalculus class
 we were studying the effects of transformations on graphs of
 functions. Students usuually have an easy time with g(x)=2f(x),
 g(x)=(1/2)f(x), g(x)=f(x)+2 and g(x)=f(x)-2 as they can easily
 mentally compute what happens to the y-coordinate. However, 
f(x+2) and f(x-2) always slows things down, as their (incorrect) 
generalization doesn't work, i.e. +2 should shift in the positive 
direction, hence right. In the past, before GC's (BGC) the students 
would initially disbelieve me and I would have to spend some time 
convincing them. Now, AGC, they aske me WHY the graphs shift the 
way they do. They can graph several functions and see that f(x+2) 
shifts to the left. Instead of being their adversary, I am their 
assistant helping them understand what they can already see. 
It was a pleasant change. 

Thanks again, Bob, and I hope others post their favorite uses of the GC. 

Doug

--
Doug Kuhlmann
Phillips Academy
Andover, MA 01810
(508) 749-4242 dkuhlman@idea.uml.eduDate: Tue, 21 Feb 1995 06:09:42 -0500
Reply-To: calc-reform@e-math.ams.org
Originator: calc-reform@e-math.ams.com
Sender: calc-reform@e-math.ams.org
Precedence: bulk
From: Dick Beldin  
To: Multiple recipients of list  
Subject: [CALC-REFORM:2006] Re: Megginson on GC's 
X-Comment: From the CALC-REFORM discussion list. 

With reference to the "loss of authority" teachers have suffered,
 I beg to differ. Teachers suffer a loss of credibility, just 
like other authority figures who want to be accepted without 
question. If my students have the temerity to challenge me, 
that is just a sign that they are good students. All too often 
they have been cowed into silence by some vindictive authoritarian 
in junior high or high school. Education is a by-product of the 
conflict between values and ideas with personal authority having 
very little (at least in theory) to contribute to the resolution. 
I teach my students that math is a language devoted to persuasion 
that one's ideas are sound. Without vigorous challenges, there is 
no need for such persuasive power.
The quest for "authority" is the antithesis of "empowerment". 
If one knows his or her own capabilities, then challenges are 
welcomed, not feared. First we must know ourselves before we 
can teach others. Dick

Date: Tue, 21 Feb 1995 10:23:36 -0500
Reply-To: calc-reform@e-math.ams.org
Originator: calc-reform@e-math.ams.com
Sender: calc-reform@e-math.ams.org
Precedence: bulk
From: Lou Talman 
To: Multiple recipients of list  
Subject: [CALC-REFORM:2009] Re: Megginson on GC's 
X-Comment: From the CALC-REFORM discussion list. 

On Mon, 20 Feb 1995, Doug Kuhlmann wrote: 

>Students usuually have an easy time with g(x)=2f(x), g(x)=(1/2)f(x), 
>g(x)=f(x)+2 and g(x)=f(x)-2 as they can easily mentally compute what 
>happens to the y-coordinate. However, f(x+2) and f(x-2) always slows 
>things down, as their (incorrect) generalization doesn't work, i.e. +2 
>should shift in the positive direction, hence right. 


Their generalization is less likely to be incorrect if one treats
 the equations y = 2f[x], y = f[x]/2, y = f[x] + 2, and 
y = f[x] - 2 as y/2 = f[x], 2y = f[x], y - 2 = f[x], and 
y + 2 = f[x], respectively. 

--Lou Talman
Metropolitan State College of Denver
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 1995 07:30:05 -0500
Reply-To: calc-reform@e-math.ams.org
Originator: calc-reform@e-math.ams.com
Sender: calc-reform@e-math.ams.org
Precedence: bulk
From: dkuhlman@IDEA.uml.edu (DougKuhlmann-PhillipsAcademy-Math) 
To: Multiple recipients of list  
Subject: [CALC-REFORM:2007] Re: Megginson on GC's 
X-Comment: From the CALC-REFORM discussion list. 


>Doug,
>Two quick points:
>1)	I believe that the graphing calculators should NEVER be used as
>an objective authority to "settle" student-teacher "disputes". 
If I cannot convince my students that MY sketch of g(x) = f(x + 2) 
is correct, then I really don't know how to teach the material, do I? 
TTeachers have suffered tremendous losses of authority in the 
classroom over the years, and to freely give up the role of a 
higher academic authority is a grave mistake.


Dick Belden has responded to this better than I could. See his 
recent posting. I was thinking of an exploratory exercise 
where the sudtents graphed severel examples like f(x+2) and 
then asked WHY. 


>2)	The graphing calculators do not answer the student questions WHY
>the functions shift in such a way---they only demonstrate THAT they 
shift that way. If you have to answer their questions WHY (AGC), how 
do the calculators really save much time? If the students understand 
WHY, after you explain it (that's your job, not the calculator's), 
then they will accept your sketches as authoritative. They will not 
need (and, IMHO, neither do you) a higher classroom authority. 

>John

I agree that the GC's do not answer WHY. I thought that was clear in 
my first posting. I never expect the GC to explain why. How could 
it? I would hope that some of my students would be moved to think 
about the WHY after seeing some examples. I suspect that both BGC 
and AGC many sudents merely memorized a rule and ignored our 
explanations. (Finally, I'm up early this morning and a little 
dense--what does IMHO stand for?) 

>On Mon, 20 Feb 1995, DougKuhlmann-Phillips wrote: 

>>I first realized how GC's changed things when in a precalculus 
class we were studying the effects of transformations on graphs 
of functions. Students usuually have an easy time with g(x)=2f(x), 
g(x)=(1/2)f(x), g(x)=f(x)+2 and g(x)=f(x)-2 as they can easily 
mentally compute what happens to the y-coordinate. However, 
f(x+2) and f(x-2) always slows things down, as their (incorrect) 
generalization doesn't work, i.e. +2 should shift in the positive 
direction, hence right. In the past, before GC's (BGC) the students 
would initially disbelieve me and I would have to spend some time 
convincing them. Now, AGC, they aske me WHY the graphs shift the 
way they do. They can graph several functions and see that f(x+2) 
shifts to the left. Instead of being their adversary, I am their 
assistant helping them understand what they can already see. It was 
a pleasant change. 

>>Thanks again, Bob, and I hope others post their favorite uses of the GC. 

Doug

--
Doug Kuhlmann
Phillips Academy
Andover, MA 01810
(508) 749-4242 dkuhlman@idea.uml.edu


Date: Tue, 21 Feb 1995 20:11:12 -0500
Reply-To: calc-reform@e-math.ams.org
Originator: calc-reform@e-math.ams.com
Sender: calc-reform@e-math.ams.org
Precedence: bulk
From: walter spunde  
To: Multiple recipients of list  
Subject: [CALC-REFORM:2017] Re: Megginson on GC's 
X-Comment: From the CALC-REFORM discussion list. 

Extracted from DougKuhlmann-PhillipsAcademy-Math 

>... I was thinking of an exploratory exercise where the sudtents 
graphed severel examples like f(x+2) and then asked WHY. 

>>2) The graphing calculators do not answer the student questions 
WHY the functions shift in such a way---they only demonstrate 
THAT they shift that way. If you have to answer their questions 
WHY (AGC), how do the calculators really save much time?

... and someone else wanted to classify calculators as either 
good or bad. Of course, they are good when you know how to handle 
them and bad when you do not. For students having problems with 
functional notation, and they may be upper year engineering 
students dealing with the Seconding Shifting Theorem, nearly 
all graphing packages are bad because they hide what in truth 
they are doing. They are not "graphing formulae" as students 
may be forgiven for thinking, since the input to these packages 
is a formula. They are in fact plotting a sample of points and 
joining them with a sequence of dots roughly in a straight 
line. When students are asked to obtain their own sample of 
x values, increment them by 2, apply an executable 
function f to these values to get y and then plot y vs x 
with a package that accepts only points, there is no 
confusion about f(x+2) or the direction of the shift. 

To save time, one must have the right tools for the job. 
% ______________________________________________________________________% 
% W.G.Spunde, Mathematics Department, USQ, Toowoomba, Australia, 4350 % 
% ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~%

Date: Wed, 22 Feb 1995 17:01:57 -0500
Reply-To: calc-reform@e-math.ams.org
Originator: calc-reform@e-math.ams.com
Sender: calc-reform@e-math.ams.org
Precedence: bulk
From: Bradford R Findell  
To: Multiple recipients of list  
Subject: [CALC-REFORM:2031] Re: Megginson on GC's 
X-Comment: From the CALC-REFORM discussion list. 



On Tue, 21 Feb 1995, Forrest - John B. wrote: 

>1) I believe that the graphing calculators should NEVER be used as 
an objective authority to "settle" student-teacher "disputes". If I 
cannot convince my students that MY sketch of g(x) = f(x + 2) is 
correct, then I really don't know how to teach the material, do I? 
TTeachers have suffered tremendous losses of authority in the 
classroom over the years, and to freely give up the role of a 
higher academic authority is a grave mistake.

By 'convincing your students' do you mean 'keep explaining it in 
different ways until they agree'? If they then agree, can we 
conclude that they understand? I would argue that NO amount of 
explanation will promote understanding unless it somehow connects 
with the student's experience, and aren't we interested in 
understanding rather than just agreement? A GC exploration can 
provide experience which doesn't depend on the deep algebraic 
understanding that a purely algebraic explanation would require. 
And perhaps the GC exploration can help them make more sense of 
the algebra.

>2) The graphing calculators do not answer the student questions 
WHY the functions shift in such a way---they only demonstrate THAT 
they shift that way. If you have to answer their questions 
WHY (AGC), how do the calculators really save much time? If 
the students understand WHY, after you explain it (that's your 
job, not the calculator's), then they will accept your sketches as 
authoritative. They will not need (and, IMHO, neither do you) a 
higher classroom authority. 

I am concerned, too, about the 'authority' issue, but I am not 
sure what you mean by authority. If you mean 'conviction' or 
'source of belief' then I would argue that real understanding 
is based on an internal authority, arising through connections 
with other knowledge. Thus, I hope that each student is his or 
her own final authority. If, on the other hand, you mean 
'control of the classroom' and other discipline issues, then 
I offer no argument.

It seems from your post that you believe that the teacher's 
mission is to get students to accept the truth, and that he or 
she should be the final authority on all truth, at least in 
mathematics. Am I misinterpreting your view?

brad findell
Univeristy of New Hampshire


Date: Tue, 21 Feb 1995 05:41:50 -0500
Reply-To: calc-reform@e-math.ams.org
Originator: calc-reform@e-math.ams.com
Sender: calc-reform@e-math.ams.org
Precedence: bulk
From: "Forrest - John B."  
To: Multiple recipients of list  
Subject: [CALC-REFORM:2005] Re: Megginson on GC's 
X-Comment: From the CALC-REFORM discussion list. 

Doug,

Two quick points:

1)	I believe that the graphing calculators should NEVER be used as
an objective authority to "settle" student-teacher "disputes". 
If I cannot convince my students that MY sketch of 
g(x) = f(x + 2) is correct, then I really don't know 
how to teach the material, do I? 
Teachers have suffered tremendous losses of authority 
in the classroom over the years, and to freely give up 
the role of a higher academic authority is a grave mistake.

2)	The graphing calculators do not answer the student questions WHY
the functions shift in such a way---they only demonstrate THAT 
they shift that way. If you have to answer their questions 
WHY (AGC), how do the calculators really save much time? 
If the students understand WHY, after you explain it 
(that's your job, not the calculator's), then they will 
accept your sketches as authoritative. They will not need 
(and, IMHO, neither do you) a higher classroom authority. 

John


On Mon, 20 Feb 1995, DougKuhlmann-Phillips wrote: 

>I first realized how GC's changed things when in a precalculus 
class we were studying the effects of transformations on graphs 
of functions. Students usuually have an easy time with 
g(x)=2f(x), g(x)=(1/2)f(x), g(x)=f(x)+2 and g(x)=f(x)-2 as 
they can easily mentally compute what happens to the 
y-coordinate. However, f(x+2) and f(x-2) always slows 
things down, as their (incorrect) generalization doesn't 
work, i.e. +2 should shift in the positive direction, 
hence right. In the past, before GC's (BGC) the students 
would initially disbelieve me and I would have to spend 
some time convincing them. Now, AGC, they aske me WHY the 
graphs shift the way they do. They can graph several 
functions and see that f(x+2) shifts to the left. Instead 
of being their adversary, I am their assistant helping 
them understand what they can already see. It was a pleasant change. 

>Thanks again, Bob, and I hope others post their favorite uses of the GC. 

>Doug

>--
>Doug Kuhlmann
>Phillips Academy
>Andover, MA 01810
>(508) 749-4242 dkuhlman@idea.uml.edu

Voltar ao inicio


VOLTAR AO PRINCíPIO DE TUDO