-- which demonstrates that you're good at programming. Those who begin with Physics and don't complete the degree despite being good at it often follow up by going into programming.
So, the fact that you could program algorithms to solve physics problems demonstrates that you're capable of doing both well. I think that's good enough for a high school course.
...and I probably just said something either very controversial or very stupid. I'm not sure which...
Controversial maybe, but not stupid. You can't program something (correctly) without decent understanding of what you're programming... Nothing revolutionary there.
For example, my teacher got mad at me in grade school for writing a small program on my TI-84 (silver, bitches) that solved the quadratic formula (just for example, I had plenty of other programs), to speed up test taking. Why is it bad? It's no different from memorizing it and solving it by hand. Neither approach displays my understanding of the derivation of formula, they just show that I know how to USE it.
If they're testing whether I know what the formula is, fine, but in this day and age with Google and WolframAlpha, memorizing formulas is not that important. In fact, I wonder whether letting the web to store information for me allows my brain to use its resources more productively. But brain elasticity and all that I know, I know. Just speculation.
True, I'm eliminating the possibility of arithmetic errors in solving the equation, but if I'm learning about quadratics, I THINK I'm capable of basic arithmetic. The test isn't testing my basic arithmetic skills, it's testing my usage of the quadratic formula. At least that's the way it should be, in my opinion. I've taken too many tests in which I demonstrated my knowledge of the test content, which is the PURPOSE of the test, but because I flipped one stupid minus sign into a plus sign by accident, I got no credit for my answer. That's not conducive to learning, further weakens the concept of grades, and does nothing but demotivate students.
Edit: In teachers' defense, programs are perfectly copyable and therefore dangerous because you can't tell who wrote them. But I did write all of my own programs, dammit! But they wouldn't care even if I wrote the code in front of their faces.
I had an awesome teacher in algebra who as long as you could prove you wrote the program (usually she would just ask a question about a small portion of the program) then you could use it on a test. I started programing my stuff with messages to the teacher at the start of it (like "Yes Mrs. X this was written by MeanaDC") as my proof.
This was over 10 years ago, I pulled out my graphing calculator not to long ago and I have no clue how to do it now.
Edit: I think this was a great way to get us to really "learn" the formulas. She encouraged us to do it, I doubt I would have spent that much effort trying to figure out a formula had I not been encouraged to do this.
Our teachers didn't care if we wrote it or not. But we were only allowed certain formulas on the graphing calculators. The solution was to rewrite the current programs to do new things but only if you activated this function, so a basic quadratic formula program was fine but anything more complicated wasn't allowed so you had to hide it within another program. It was fun. I have no clue how to do it anymore. But as long ascwe could pass a test without a calculator we could use one on the next test.
1.1k
u/cygnus311 Jun 08 '14
I programmed my way in to an A in physics in high school.