MIT calculus

by Rishi Fri Dec 14, 2012 12:25 am

http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/mathematics/18-01-single-variable-calculus-fall-2006/video-lectures/lecture-3-derivatives/

I thought the kids who go to MIT knew trigonometry and Calculus I in and out.

Hard to believe some of them do not know the concept of unit circle and that an arc of length theta radians will subtend an angle of theta radians.

Watch the segment beginning at 28:00

by MaxEntropy_Man Fri Dec 14, 2012 8:12 am

mit's reputation is due to its faculty and its graduate students. i know lots of mit undergrads who are very ordinary. it is the exact opposite of the situation that prevails at the IITs.

by indophile Fri Dec 14, 2012 10:12 am

It's always a mix anywhere. I come across many IIT graduates in this country who are very ordinary also. I am somewhat pleased to see them because they represent hope for some of my relatives kids in India (to get into IIT).

by Rishi Fri Dec 14, 2012 12:10 pm

The typical IIT freshman may have the math and science fundamentals drilled into him by the coaching centers and his high school teachers. That is where it stops.

Whereas, the typical MIT or Caltech freshman who was raised here in North America possesses a curiosity about how the physical world works. He or she would have done many science projects in high school, built gadgets at home and tinkered with electronics. A couple of days ago, I came across a couple of ABCD kids who were building a model of a bridge using toothpicks. I do not know how many high schools in India teach physics that way.

Places like MIT not only produce engineers and scientists but also science journalists who can help foster scientific temperament among the general public.

MIT is more holistic.

by Hellsangel Fri Dec 14, 2012 12:19 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:mit's reputation is due to its faculty and its graduate students. i know lots of mit undergrads who are very ordinary. it is the exact opposite of the situation that prevails at the IITs.

Even people who only make it into metallurgy?

by MaxEntropy_Man Fri Dec 14, 2012 12:36 pm

yes snoopy "even" metallurgy.

by MaxEntropy_Man Fri Dec 14, 2012 12:39 pm

Rishi wrote:

MIT is more holistic.

didn't say anything about MIT's curriculum, but i stand by what i said earlier about why MIT is MIT -- the faculty and its graduate students, not the undergrads.

by Kumarg Fri Dec 14, 2012 12:50 pm

Rishi wrote:http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/mathematics/18-01-single-variable-calculus-fall-2006/video-lectures/lecture-3-derivatives/

I thought the kids who go to MIT knew trigonometry and Calculus I in and out.

Hard to believe some of them do not know the concept of unit circle and that an arc of length theta radians will subtend an angle of theta radians.

Watch the segment beginning at 28:00

Wow the thing that caught my attention was not the questions that the students were asking, but the fact that the teacher is so amazingly patient, well behaved and humble, answering any and all questions with so much patience. I would love to go to this class. That is what makes US different from India - its amazing teachers, not the students.

by Jeremiah Mburuburu Fri Dec 14, 2012 12:51 pm

Rishi wrote:The typical IIT freshman may have the math and science fundamentals drilled into him by the coaching centers and his high school teachers. That is where it stops.

Whereas, the typical MIT or Caltech freshman who was raised here in North America possesses a curiosity about how the physical world works. He or she would have done many science projects in high school, built gadgets at home and tinkered with electronics. A couple of days ago, I came across a couple of ABCD kids who were building a model of a bridge using toothpicks. I do not know how many high schools in India teach physics that way.

Places like MIT not only produce engineers and scientists but also science journalists who can help foster scientific temperament among the general public.

MIT is more holistic.

that's good analysis.

by MaxEntropy_Man Fri Dec 14, 2012 1:14 pm

Rishi wrote: I do not know how many high schools in India teach physics that way.

i don't know the answer to that, but for all the vaunted curiosity about how things work, college freshmen taking physics even at the best schools are not doing very well. blabberwock posted an article here by sanjoy mahajan (who incidentally used to be at MIT) which has some deep insights into how freshmen think; let me see if i can find it (http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0512158). the problems lie in middle and high school science teaching. clearly american schools for all their hands on science projects, curious students, and tooth pick bridge building (btw i am aware of all this as a parent) are not teaching physics very effectively.

by Petrichor Fri Dec 14, 2012 1:51 pm

I think most educational failures can be traced to mass-assembly model.

With so many MOOC's (massive open online course) around, a clear differentiator is probably the tutorial system -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tutorial_system.
and for a detailed look, get the first link at http://oxcheps.new.ox.ac.uk/MainSite%20pages/papers.html titled "The Oxford Tutorial"

This is reminiscent of the gurukula system and would be clearly superior to the other credentialing models.

by Sponsored content

MIT calculus

MIT calculus

Re: MIT calculus

Re: MIT calculus

Re: MIT calculus

Re: MIT calculus

Re: MIT calculus

Re: MIT calculus

Re: MIT calculus

Re: MIT calculus

Re: MIT calculus

Re: MIT calculus

Re: MIT calculus