Even then I prefer mental gymnastics compared to calculators. Any person can multiply two, two digit numbers by foiling. And 3+ digit numbers aren't far off, depending on short term memory. Though it always takes me awhile.
As for the title, my first instinct was to pull out the 17, add the two numbers together, split them into two tens, distribute the 17, and then add to get the final answer.
If you do that, if you change the state of the brain for advanced learning, the human brain -- indeed probably most animal brains -- adapt in one very predictable manner. They become excellent learners in the new state, and stop learning entirely in the old state.
Which means you'll learn great in the classroom, and you'll learn absolutely nothing from normal experiences -- when you're off the juice.
Which is crazy dangerous, since it'll basically erase the expertise part of experience.
Again, and as usual, this is a great idea for immediate safety-related stuff. Teach CPR this way, train soldiers this way. But normal learning is a different animal. Slower learning isn't usually a lack of learning skill -- it's often a stubborness to stick with existing knowledge, and that is most often a very good thing. You don't want to lose that in general.
Do you have any evidence to support said claim that "normal" experiences somehow differ in learning than "classroom" learning? While "street smarts" and "book smarts" are accepted differences, they refer to knowledge, rather than learning.
Why do we let them use graphing calculators in the first place, even for exams. You don't/need/ a graphing calculator for any but the most insane of math, which can easily be done using Mathematica or similar equipment. And none of that math is anything you'll see in high school.
Scientific calculators are useful, and that's about it. I am not gifted at math and I can imagine functions in my head even though I'm not even a visual learner. I think graphic calculators are like providing kids with a crutch for their math. Instead of teaching them to be literate and sure of the math I see high school seniors who still can't distribute in basic algebra.
Right now I'm taking accelerated multivariable calculus in college. I still don't need a graphing calculator and very rarely must I pull out a regular calculator.
Slashdot Mirror
Even then I prefer mental gymnastics compared to calculators. Any person can multiply two, two digit numbers by foiling. And 3+ digit numbers aren't far off, depending on short term memory. Though it always takes me awhile. As for the title, my first instinct was to pull out the 17, add the two numbers together, split them into two tens, distribute the 17, and then add to get the final answer.
If you do that, if you change the state of the brain for advanced learning, the human brain -- indeed probably most animal brains -- adapt in one very predictable manner. They become excellent learners in the new state, and stop learning entirely in the old state.
Which means you'll learn great in the classroom, and you'll learn absolutely nothing from normal experiences -- when you're off the juice.
Which is crazy dangerous, since it'll basically erase the expertise part of experience.
Again, and as usual, this is a great idea for immediate safety-related stuff. Teach CPR this way, train soldiers this way. But normal learning is a different animal. Slower learning isn't usually a lack of learning skill -- it's often a stubborness to stick with existing knowledge, and that is most often a very good thing. You don't want to lose that in general.
Do you have any evidence to support said claim that "normal" experiences somehow differ in learning than "classroom" learning? While "street smarts" and "book smarts" are accepted differences, they refer to knowledge, rather than learning.
Why do we let them use graphing calculators in the first place, even for exams. You don't /need/ a graphing calculator for any but the most insane of math, which can easily be done using Mathematica or similar equipment. And none of that math is anything you'll see in high school.
Scientific calculators are useful, and that's about it. I am not gifted at math and I can imagine functions in my head even though I'm not even a visual learner. I think graphic calculators are like providing kids with a crutch for their math. Instead of teaching them to be literate and sure of the math I see high school seniors who still can't distribute in basic algebra.
Right now I'm taking accelerated multivariable calculus in college. I still don't need a graphing calculator and very rarely must I pull out a regular calculator.
I shall not be satisfied until I see Minecraft support :
Sorry, I can't seem to hear you over my mining, I'm busy building giant golden cock & balls.