Now available on iTunes: HP Prime Graphing Calculator iOS app

[dbbotkin]

(01-18-2016 11:46 AM)Kevin Wrote:  

(01-17-2016 08:30 AM)sbergman27 Wrote:  It's been available for $19.99 for a while on Android now. And I might even use it as the standard calc app on my Galaxy Note 4 if you could save your work, and if the app didn't waste so much space on borders that the usable area of the app is tiny. But of course, HP wants you to buy their hardware. So the $20 - $25 app had to be severely crippled. Especially since dedicated calculator hardware is basically "dead man walking" in this world of large cell phones and tablets, except in the education market, where the curriculum requires silliness like machines that blink LED codes to assure the teacher that they are running in crippled mode. So much silliness that we didn't used to have to deal with.

As a UK exam invigilator (and HP calc enthusiast), I know our awarding body - JCQ - are doing their best to ensure that no candidate has an unfair technological or functional advantage over those who are adhering to the published rules. This might mean using standard scientific, graphics and even programmable calculators are ok but it might not for a given exam. It usually means symbolic machines that can directly handle integrals and differentiation are not permitted.

While the HP Prime is mostly not yet accepted in UK exams (blinking lights or otherwise), spare a thought for invigilators who are having to remind current students to take off their Apple (or other smart) watches...

Worth remembering too that any student that simply writes down a result without showing the method is unlikely to gain many marks...

"no candidate has an unfair technological or functional advantage over those who are adhering to the published rules"

It is a good thing that this dogma was not in effect during the earlier stages of human evolution or we would not be having this internet conversation.

While it is acceptable in an Art class to limit the use of media or technique to foster creativity (as a creative photographer, I will sometimes limit myself to one lens or use a film camera to 'see' things from a new perspective); to constrain STEM education to the lowest common denominator in technology can only be justified by a very limited budget or an even more limited understanding of the role of technology in human progress.

Does that mean that 'the answer' is more important than the underlying principles? Of course not! If a class involves "integrals and differentiation" it is likely that the job opportunities for students in that class will NOT require them to work them out from memory or use a slide rule.

The problem is that teachers do not keep up with technology and therefore limit the use of tools during testing to the ones they understand.

It might be argued that the latest tools actually favor the brilliant but financially disadvantaged student. Unlike the 'family-connections' that favor the rich, the cell phone tech and low-cost apps give an advantage to the diligent and clever student. We need more of the latter.

Lest anyone think this is a recent problem, consider these:
1900--lookup tables versus slide-rule;
1971--slide-rule versus h/p 35.

Now we have a tech-tool that puts the power of a big computer in the hand of science student. Why not let them use it?

The internet is rife with examples of poorly thought-out reasoning and failure to grasp basic science methodology; I cannot accept that an "everyone is equally disadvantaged" approach to STEM education will improve the quality of thought.