Are you allowed to use khicas and ndless?

[BiggestVCESweat]

Seeing as the ti nspire default cas is pretty weak (it can't even find the integral from -1 to 1 of sqrt(1-x^2)) are we allowed to use ndless and khicas to get a better cas?
I know you are allowed to program your calculator, but are you allowed to "jailbreak" it?

[MaiSakurajima]

Seeing as the ti nspire default cas is pretty weak (it can't even find the integral from -1 to 1 of sqrt(1-x^2)) are we allowed to use ndless and khicas to get a better cas?
I know you are allowed to program your calculator, but are you allowed to "jailbreak" it?

[BiggestVCESweat]

I must have been remembering it not working for arcLen, however the point still stands.

[MaiSakurajima]

I must have been remembering it not working for arcLen, however the point still stands.

Hot take
So you want to do math methods CBE? The complete failure of a subject which incorporates the use of Mathematica that is not suited to high school level maths at all.

You can read more on a certain school's situation on the inclusion of Mathematica for methods, which I presume is John Monash. https://mathematicalcrap.com/2019/10/20/vcaas-sac-of-roaming/
All those 3 - 4 mark questions on exam 2 are made trivial as it can simply be done with few lines of code which does not test a student's ability, and is simply an uneven playing field. Quite literally methods CBE is testing a person's ability to code preprogrammed code to apply.

There's no need for a stronger CAS when the current technology already does what it needs to do.

[BiggestVCESweat]

Hot take
So you want to do math methods CBE? The complete failure of a subject which incorporates the use of Mathematica that is not suited to high school level maths at all.

You can read more on a certain school's situation on the inclusion of Mathematica for methods, which I presume is John Monash. https://mathematicalcrap.com/2019/10/20/vcaas-sac-of-roaming/
All those 3 - 4 mark questions on exam 2 are made trivial as it can simply be done with few lines of code which does not test a student's ability, and is simply an uneven playing field. Quite literally methods CBE is testing a person's ability to code preprogrammed code to apply.

There's no need for a stronger CAS when the current technology already does what it needs to do.

Nah bud, I've had trouble with many a exam problem because the CAS simply wasn't good enough.
One example that I find to be particularly irking: 2013 Insight Exam 2 Extended response Q2.d

The question requires you to solve this equation:

https://imgur.com/a/ghhoXUe

The cas can solve the equation (to decimal places) just fine.
However, if the bounds are factorised, it can't.
(The bounds when factorised respectively are (√(p+1) -2)^2 and (√(p+1) + 2)^2)
(Khicas can even find the exact answers to these questions.)

Also the cas often gives results in very strange forms, like -5(3√3 - 7) instead of 35 - 15√3.

[S_R_K]

All this is reason why technology should be eliminated from VCE maths, and we should go back to pencil and paper (and perhaps compass + straightedge), and nothing else.

Worrying about whether your technology is powerful enough to deal with (possibly poorly vetted and written) exam questions is a distraction from what should be the primary focus.

[BiggestVCESweat]

All this is reason why technology should be eliminated from VCE maths, and we should go back to pencil and paper (and perhaps compass + straightedge), and nothing else.

Worrying about whether your technology is powerful enough to deal with (possibly poorly vetted and written) exam questions is a distraction from what should be the primary focus.

I agree, but we don't have the option to change VCE maths; we must deal with it as it is.
As it stands a large portion (I'd dare say the majority) of vce math methods is knowledge of the cas--so it stands that we should worry about these things.

[colline]

All this is reason why technology should be eliminated from VCE maths, and we should go back to pencil and paper (and perhaps compass + straightedge), and nothing else.

Worrying about whether your technology is powerful enough to deal with (possibly poorly vetted and written) exam questions is a distraction from what should be the primary focus.

Hm. I'd say that with the rising importance of technology and how our lives now literally depend on it, it would be beneficial for us to learn through the CAS.

I agree that they can in some ways be used to 'cheat' but ultimately your marks in methods come from your working out, not the answer. Not to mention, we do have a tech-free exam 1.

[S_R_K]

Hm. I'd say that with the rising importance of technology and how our lives now literally depend on it, it would be beneficial for us to learn through the CAS.

Without wanting to come across as overly aggressive (because you are essentially repeating VCAA talking points), that is an exceedingly vague argument: "Technology is important so students should use technology when learning maths".

I would have thought that the primary goal of studying maths is to learn maths. VCAA's idea is that by including technology, students will learn maths with the incidental benefit of learning how to use technology; the effect has been that students are learning how to use technology, with the occasional incidental benefit of learning maths.

Anyway, this is all OT.

[undefined]

Hot take
So you want to do math methods CBE? The complete failure of a subject which incorporates the use of Mathematica that is not suited to high school level maths at all.

You can read more on a certain school's situation on the inclusion of Mathematica for methods, which I presume is John Monash. https://mathematicalcrap.com/2019/10/20/vcaas-sac-of-roaming/
All those 3 - 4 mark questions on exam 2 are made trivial as it can simply be done with few lines of code which does not test a student's ability, and is simply an uneven playing field. Quite literally methods CBE is testing a person's ability to code preprogrammed code to apply.

There's no need for a stronger CAS when the current technology already does what it needs to do.

Yep, did CBE and it is outright ridiculous how much of an advantage you get. It essentially turned into a programming subject - we had commands to graph functions, see their turning points, asymptotes and inflection points all in one go and could find the area (complex or not) between relations with one command, trivialising 4+ mark questions. I would say the execution of the subject was a failure as students learned to game the system through getting better at programming rather than actual maths. Then again, the nspire in general is pretty bad but levels the playing field by giving no one an advantage - a disadvantage for everyone essentially.

[colline]

Without wanting to come across as overly aggressive (because you are essentially repeating VCAA talking points), that is an exceedingly vague argument: "Technology is important so students should use technology when learning maths".

I would have thought that the primary goal of studying maths is to learn maths. VCAA's idea is that by including technology, students will learn maths with the incidental benefit of learning how to use technology; the effect has been that students are learning how to use technology, with the occasional incidental benefit of learning maths.

I didn't realise VCAA and I are on the same page. That's a first!

I can see where you're coming from - I did average in methods throughout year 11 and first half of year 12 and only saw a spike in my results after I devoted myself to learning various commands on the CAS which my teacher didn't teach as well as writing UDFs. I guess you can argue I wasn't doing "actual mathematics", but despite how helpful the CAS was you'd still actually need to know exactly what you're doing and all the concepts behind it to actually do the questions. The CAS just sped things up a little.

I'd say your statement of "students should be learning maths" is just as vague as "students should learn technology". How would you define "learning maths"?