
Re: Does anybody actually use graphing calculators to do something useful?
Posted:
May 24, 2009 11:54 AM


In article <708a6d26cfde4cbfa719a43151a8c880@x3g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>, michalchik <michalchik@aol.com> wrote:
. . .
> Recently, I have again become a fan of Casio Calculators. No graphing > but good editing and replay capabilities as well as symbolic > processing (very useful). It is very nice to enter problems in, in > terms of fractions, radicals, pi, e, etc.. and see the answers come > out in the same terms. I particularly like this in teaching where it > helps students visualize the structure of fractions and ratios, see > cancellations, and maintains the relationship of constants instead of > crunching everything down to intuitively barren decimal > approximations. Without, the overhead of graphing these calculators > can put more useful things in easy to access places and squeeze in > things like definite integrals. Finally, nongraphing calculators are > a hell of a lot cheaper. My Casio fx155 es cost me about 20 dollars > while my TI84 plus, silver edition cost me about 100. I use the Casio > all the time and use the TI only when i have misplaced the Casio or > want to play a game. I am recommending the Casio to all my students. > . . .
The calculator sitting next to my keyboard is a Casio fx7400G PLUs POWER GRAPHIC. Yes, Casio makes graphing calculatorsat least they used to. A quick Google search shows they still do, several models, including mine. The list price for today's version of mine (the picture looks slightly different) is $39.99, and I'm pretty sure I could find if for substantially less.
But I have to agree with the OP about one thing: I was thrilled with the prospect of getting a graphing calculator, but I don't use that capability very much. Not very much doesn't mean never, however. It is sometimes very handy to see a plot of data points, and in some cases functions. What I use it more for (other than simply as a calculator) is to run a few SIMPLE programs.

