GRADES are important. They reflect intelligence, interest in material, dedication and, of course, how expensive your calculator was. Calculators can give students an unfair advantage, but these advantages could be greatly minimized or downright eliminated if departments took steps to combat the problem. It is up to individual departments to properly address the use of calculators in their classrooms to ensure an even playing field.
Calculators these days have some sophisticated features. They can solve complex derivates and integrals, systems of equations and they can expand or reduce many expressions. The TI-89 can even take limits. Even more prevalent, graphing calculators can store information and run many different kinds of programs.
Professors handle calculators in their own way. Calculus I and II (Math 121, 131, 122, and 132), for example, prohibit the use of calculators on exams and quizzes. Other classes, however, abide by a policy that reads as follows: "The use of calculators is only permissible to solve arithmetic. Any other use of calculators is an honor violation."
This policy is a terrible application of the honor code. No matter what your feelings are about the honor code, the use of calculators in classrooms should not fall under the jurisdiction of honor. The honor system functions (or does not function, depending on your perspective) because it can be enforced by students and faculty.
But students cannot monitor other students around them while focusing on taking an exam. A professor cannot be expected to monitor every student individually. Students who misuse their calculators on examinations don't come with a big red flag over them -- they appear to be using their calculators just as any other student.
There seems to be great confusion about use of calculators throughout the math department, even from professors within it. When I asked Mathematics Prof. Lawrence Thomas about the above policy, he stated he could not see anybody taking such a stand.
This policy does exist in the department, such as in Calculus III (Math 231). He also stated he did not see differences in calculators as an issue -- an oversight that ignores the wide variety of functions of sophisticated calculators.
Dinko Pocanic, the Department of Physics chairman, stated in an interview that he was unaware of any calculator that could give an advantage. He also stated that a good physics student could do calculations faster than a calculator. "I don't think there is an advantage. If there is, it's minimal." While a calculator in physics does not give the same advantages as a calculator in mathematics, solving systems of equations or even a complicated one-variable equation can prevent simple mistakes and saves a student time. Finally, students easily could store important equations in their calculators.
Clear policies must be established by professors in writing on their syllabi that are fair to all. There are a number of ways this can be done. Simply, calculators can be barred from exams and quizzes. This is the most effective measure that can be taken but requires the professor use simple numbers to avoid time-consuming arithmetic. If a professor wants more flexibility in creating exams, he or she can allow a simple scientific calculator. However, graphing calculators should be banned.
It seems much more appropriate for students with graphing calculators to be forced into buying a scientific calculator than to allow some students to gain an advantage by using their graphing calculators against the rules specified by the professor.
These policies should extend to any department where a calculator is used. For example, there are many complicated equations to memorize for a chemistry exam. Students can store equations in their calculator to gain an advantage.
For classes that absolutely require graphing calculator use, professors should specify what calculators are required by model number. Just as a book is required for a course, a calculator can become a requirement on the syllabus. The syllabus for the Introduction to Financial Accounting, which requires the time value of money function, mentions several models of calculator that are acceptable for use.
Clearly, professors are not keeping up to date with the calculators out on the market and their capabilities. These calculators pose problems for a variety of departments at our University.
Unfortunately, it seems, these departments seem content with grades that reflect a student's calculator as much as it reflects knowledge of the material.
Rajesh Jain is a Cavalier Daily associate editor. He can be reached at rjain@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | 4 days agoThe University must rethink its approach to education beyond traditional major-specific requirements and mandate personal development courses.
EDITORIAL: Commercialization threatens U.Va.’s educational mission
By Editorial Board | 5 days agoAfter all, measuring the University’s worth in terms of accrued capital, operational efficiency and numerical rankings molds this space into just another cookie-cutter institution.
YOUNIS: Why every U.Va. student should say yes to English
By Ayat Younis | January 9, 2025Every student at the University, regardless of their primary field of study, can professionally and academically benefit from engaging with the English department.
