| 288 | 43% | 43% - 40 | ||||
| 2 | 56% | 56% - 51 | ||||
| Total: 91 | ||||||
lolStimey wrote:
http://www.math.mcmaster.ca/childsa/1zb3/sampleexam.pdf
Read the last sentence of the first paragraph.
I think the point is that we're supposed to do the thinking instead of the machines.Jay wrote:
lolStimey wrote:
http://www.math.mcmaster.ca/childsa/1zb3/sampleexam.pdf
Read the last sentence of the first paragraph.
Right. I had a professor who felt it was more pure to do it that way. Most people failed his class and ended up learning nothing. You get so caught up on doing complex algebra problems that you lose the forest for the trees.Stimey wrote:
I think the point is that we're supposed to do the thinking instead of the machines.Jay wrote:
lolStimey wrote:
http://www.math.mcmaster.ca/childsa/1zb3/sampleexam.pdf
Read the last sentence of the first paragraph.
Last edited by Jay (2011-04-09 15:08:54)
And that too. I was always required to 'show all work'.Hurricane2k9 wrote:
Nah, we don't use calculators on exams for my calc class either. They give you numbers you can actually work in your head and on paper. That way you really learn the process instead of just knowing what to punch in the calculator.
...Stimey wrote:
Our math tests are multiple choice.
that looks horrifyingStimey wrote:
um, no.
take a look at the practice exam I posted a page back.
I can't blame you at all, not sure what level of econ they're taking but I know that introductory microeconomics has no hard math (taking it this semester).Stimey wrote:
my roomates always complain about their "economics" math being so hard
and every time they do, I just die a little more inside
I had 2 math students as housemates. They could not use calculators, and it made sense - after all someone has to program that thing, being the guys who study math.Stimey wrote:
I think the point is that we're supposed to do the thinking instead of the machines.Jay wrote:
lolStimey wrote:
http://www.math.mcmaster.ca/childsa/1zb3/sampleexam.pdf
Read the last sentence of the first paragraph.
MBa wtf, is that the same as what we call an MBA in the US?Stimey wrote:
I'm taking a double degree, B.Eng and MBa at the same time.
Took Microeconomics last semester (easy as fuck), and Macroeconomics this semester (harder but not as difficult as any of the core engineering classes).
Well, in Math class we aren't allowed to use a calculator, but in many of the other classes we are.Shocking wrote:
I had 2 math students as housemates. They could not use calculators, and it made sense - after all someone has to program that thing, being the guys who study math.Stimey wrote:
I think the point is that we're supposed to do the thinking instead of the machines.Jay wrote:
lol
An engineer doesn't have to do that sort of stuff, why in hell would they disallow you from using a proper calculator? It's all about efficiency in this field of work, not using the calculator is inefficient. Are you disallowed from using Excel as well because it would be deemed too easy? lol
That's what MBA means here too. But you have to get a bachelor's degree first, unless it's like those 5 year BS/MS Engineering programs we have.Stimey wrote:
Masters of Business administration
Most math books adopted by the schools I went to had a horrible habit of inserting trick questions instead of simply showing you how to do something. I mostly used my own materials to figure shit out, but a lot of people took to simply copying the answers in the back of the book and skimming by on great assignment scores, but dismal test scores.Hurricane2k9 wrote:
Nah, we don't use calculators on exams for my calc class either. They give you numbers you can actually work in your head and on paper. That way you really learn the process instead of just knowing what to punch in the calculator.
Last edited by Backupwayback (2011-04-09 17:41:00)