From: kolstad@cae.wisc.edu (Joel Kolstad)
Subject: Re: Using programmable calcs in exams
Organization: U of Wisconsin-Madison College of Engineering
Date: 19 Dec 92 21:40:32 CST

I told myself I wasn't going to get drawn into this little debate again,
but here we go...

In article <BzIyMw.LI3@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca> gsdlee@babbage.uwaterloo.ca (G. Lee) writes:
>
>Just recently (this Fall) the EE department at the University of Waterloo 
>has decided to ban the use of all 'Programmable Calculators' during the exams.

Well, this sounds nice and short-sighted on the part of the department.

>One of the issues that prompted this action by the EE department was the
>fact that some students have programmed their calculators to do some of the
>calculation automatically. During the exams they simply use the program
>and write the final result on the exam paper without showing any intermediates
>steps. The prof who taught that course did not appreciate it, and did not give 
>them the full mark, but this incident has prompted the EE department to
>examine its policy on the use of Programmable calculators during exams.

I have to agree that, on an exam, YOU BETTER SHOW YOUR WORK!  If I were a
Prof, I'd want someone to show the relevant parts of a derivation on the
exam too, and I would mark someone down if they didn't do it.  Derivations
and calculations that relate _to the coursework_ should always be shown on
exams.  Using a calculator when you're done to check your work is fine, I
think, but you had better show your work to start with!  (On my own work, I
often even up with something like
The_Answer=Some_God_Awful_Looking_Equation_With_Half_A_Million_Variable,
and then just say, "Plugging in the given parameters gives The_Answer=foo"
-- your ECE courses are not trying to teach you algebra or calculus, so
this is a perfectly reasonable thing to to.

>Some of the arguments used by the EE department about this decision of banning
>'ALL' programmable calculators are:
>
>1) It's impractical to keep up to date with a list of what calulators are
>   permissible and what others aren't considering that the maufacturers
>   of calculators come out with new models every few months.

This is true.

>2) Some students use the programmable calculators as crib sheets, although 
>   the prof could go through all students and erase the memory of their 
>   calculators before the exams (don't laugh, I heard one prof actually
>   did it :) ), it's impractical.

Yes, it is impractical.  Not to mention that it's not a very nice thing to
do!  (Hmm... do you mind if I come erase your hard disk before you write
that presentation, Professor?  I wouldn't want you plagerizing other
people's papers that you might have on your hard disk, you know.  Too bad
if you also have other non-related information on that hard disk -- back it
up!)

>3) With the use of Programmable calculators, some students lose the concepts
>   of basic knowledge and rely on the programmable calculators.  

This can occur in "core" courses, I suppose.  Your HP-48 could
differentiate x^2 with respect to x, and you might never learn how to do so
yourself.  This is why I don't mind a ban of all calculators in such
"core" courses.

>4) The students who own a programmable calculator have an advantage over
>   students who only have simple basic function calculators in term of 
>   time. eg. In a Calculus course, a student who owns a graphic calulator
>   can use his calculator to draw a graph, which will give him at least
>   5-10 minutes advantage over another student who doesn't have one 
>   calculator and do it manually.

You shouldn't have to actually draw graphs with point-to-point accuracy on
exams.  That's a pretty dumb question... "Plot the graph of this function."
Given an equation, students _should_ be able to roughly sketch what the
function looks like, and then sketch things like how the graph changes when
variables change.  (Something like, "Show the change in minority carrier
concentration in a diode when the bias voltage is raised...")  In these
cases, people who actually try to plot graphs from the governing equations
will spend MORE TIME on them than those who have a qualitative sense of
what the equation represents.

I actually don't think that it's too much to _require_ all students to have
"super calculators" for all of their courses (HP-28's, -48's, TI-81's,
-85's, the Sharp line, etc.)  Or at least required as much as you're
required to have the books for a given course.  Really... if you invest
$300 in a HP-48SX at the beginning of a 4 year college program, it gets to
be pretty cheap over those 8 semesters compared to all your other
expenses.  (And I'd be willing to bet that HP would provide a discount for
departments that made _their_ calculators the "official" calculator and
recommended them to their students.)

>Personally, I think the programmable calculators should be allowed during the 
>exams, but I also realized that some students have been abusing it and 
>used it as crib sheet. However, I don't think that the majority should
>be punished because of the misuse by the minority.  

Yes, I agree.  (And remember that I do think people ought to show relevant
derivations on their exams!)

							---Joel Kolstad

Newsgroups: comp.sys.hp48