Re: A better calculator, for what?
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: A better calculator, for what?
hmmmmmm, the TI-89 IS allowed on the SAT and AP tests.
http://www.ti.com/calc/docs/faq/89faq015.htm
ToddEStan wrote:
> Usually you can't go wrong with what the class recommends. If they
> recommend and 83, get the 83, and you'll be fine. If you get anything
> else, be prepared to learn the manual, because most teachers are trained
> only for the calculator they teach with. Many people in my school with
> 85's or 86's have learned this the hard way.
>
> If you do want to learn the manual, then go ahead and get a more
> advanced model, but choose carefully, because some of the lower ones
> contain functions higher ones don't. The only time I would recommend
> getting a different calc than what your school recommends is if they
> still recommend a 82/85. Then you should get the 83/86, respectively.
>
> Here are some pros and cons of the different calculators:
>
> 73 - A middle school calculator. Should be about $90. Realtively new,
> and based heavily on the Math explorer. It has flash rom like the 89,
> but I still don't see the point in this calculator (but maybe middle
> schools do?). I would recommend an 83 over the 73. I don't think a 73
> will do you much good in high school/college
>
> 80 - A stripped down 82 without a linkport. Limited ram, a budget
> calculator at $50. I have never seen any of these being used by
> anybody, or anybody recommending them for a class.
>
> 81 - TI's first. Has the honor of being the only discontinued graphing
> calculator so far. Probably will be joined by the 82/85 soon. It is
> crude, has no linkport and limited ram. I still see them floating
> around though, and the local Best Buy still has one for sale for $99
> (get a clue!). The 83 is a much better choice.
>
> 82 - Early 83. Still sold, same price as an 83. I don't recommend
> buying one. No strings vars for you programmers.
>
> 83 - Simple to use, classroom standard. Probably easiest to use.
> Doesn't have more powerful features like the Poly solver and base
> conversions. If you are going into an advanced stats class, this calc
> is a must. It has the best stats of any TI calculator. It is the only
> one with built-in finance features too.
>
> 85 - I would avoid this one. It is past it's prime. Crude stats, no
> table, no deep recall. It is only the 2nd graphing calc TI made.
>
> 86 - A newer 85 with a 3x the avialable memory. Has all the features of
> the 85, and 83 style list/stat/matrix editor. Also has more 83
> refinements, such as a table, deep recall, and graph styles. However,
> the stats are not as good as the 83, and no finance functions. There is
> a stats upgrade avialable. It makes the 86 more like the 83, but it
> still lacks things like a normal probability plot. It is also somewhat
> unstable, but I think TI is working on that. There is also an upgrade
> to give you finance, but I have never used that. The 86 is also slower
> than te 85, due to the increased memory being paged. It is about $25
> more expensive than an 85, but worth it if you are looking at the 85.
>
> 89 - This is the newest TI calculator. It it a lot like the 92+,
> lacking only a bigger screen, a QWERTY keyboard, and Geometry. The 89
> also has a ton of ram, 512k. I have never used an 89/92, but they have
> 3d graphing, and some advanced calculus features. They also have a very
> nice looking OS, and seem hard to use to me (and would be very diffucult
> to follow along in a class made for a 83/86). They also have a very
> powerful Motorola processor, when compared to a 82/83/85/86's Z80. The
> 89 is about $30 more expensive than a 86, and about $50 more than a
> 83/86. It is a lot cheaper than a 92/92+. The stats are not as good as
> the 83 though. Upgradeable through flash rom.
>
> 92 - This calculator is very large, and has a QWERTY keyboard. It is
> predecessor of the 89. It has some powerful calculus, but lacks things
> like base conversions. The 92+ upgrades the calc's ram, and adds some
> more features. It is banned on the SAT, ACT, and many teachers won't
> let you use one either. 92 fans like the 89 because teachers never
> suspect a calculator that looks like 83 :) The 89 is banned from the
> SAT, but allowed on the ACT BTW. The 83/86 are accepted on both. The
> 92 is very expensive, and the 92+ module adds about $75.
>
> Hope this clears things up for ya.
> Todd
>
> Ladnor Geissinger wrote:
> >
> > I have just been on the CALC-TI mail list for a few weeks, but I'm
> > struck by the number of questions about what calculator should you buy,
> > and should you upgrade to a 85,86,89,92 etc. Also there are those who
> > proclaim with certainty that you should get an 89,or ... These
> > exchanges are curious because there is almost no context provided,
> > except sometimes the statement that you are taking calculus or precalc,
> > and there are no reasons given (something more than a word or two, a
> > thoughtful argument with enough details to be understandable if not
> > believable) for why certain calculators are being recommended. I have
> > used an 81, 82, and 83, but not a lot, and I don't see why I should
> > suggest to my calculus students that they really should have an 86 or 89
> > or whatever. For the occasional need for more power or bettter graphics,
> > or to use interactive math workbooks, of course one turns to a computer
> > algebra system with a reasonable size monitor.
> >
> > I would like to hear from those who make strong recommendations in favor
> > of the 86 or 89 or 92 - and not just one-liners, but carefully thought
> > out, detailed responses. And don't tell me about games, I'm only
> > interested in arguments about calculator use for learning and doing math
> > in school and college. (Well, I might listen if you spin a serious
> > thesis about the role of certain kinds of games.) What more is it that
> > you want that the 82 or 83 doesn't provide, and why? And why wouldn't
> > this "more" be better provided by a CAS on a PC?
> >
> > --
> > Ladnor Geissinger, Prof of Mathematics
> > Mathematics Dept, CB 3250 Phillips Hall
> > Univ of North Carolina, Chapel Hill NC 27599 USA
>
> --
>
> Spam filters in place. If you are accidently blocked, remove nospam.
Follow-Ups:
References: