I’ve bought several of these near mandatory scientific calculators (TI 83 & 83+) over the years for my kids and replaced more than one that went mysteriously astray , and I’m always surprised at how their price has stayed in the$85-$100 mark year, after year, after year. The TI-83 was introduced in 1996 and upgraded to the 83+ version in 1999. With the continual decreasing price of chip horsepower you’d think by now some competitor would have come up with some “do more cost much less” version, but it still heads the list of must have calculators for high school *& college students. Everything else is a distant also ran.
Why is normal technological competition between scientific calculator manufacturers (seemingly) not operating efficiency in this case, vs the ever ascending way competition operates between PC manufacturers?
The Mysterious Cloaked Rulers of the Universe will be along shortly to delete this thread and any trace of its existence/memory from those who have been exposed to it. Continue at your own risk.
I graduated High School in 1995, at the time it was the TI-81 that was “required”. I put that in quotes because although the TI was listed as a requirement I used a Casio graphing calculator an no teachers or administrator’s complained. The Casio was $25-$30 cheaper than the TI at the time which was no small consideration at the time.
When I went off to college the Casio died and I replaced it with an HP-48GX and was able to do far more than the “required” TI calculators ever could. The HP was more expensive, but at that point I planned to use it for years and in fact got nearly 8 years of use before it died.
So even if your kid’s school says that the TI is required you may check to see if there is a better/cheaper option that would be acceptable.
The teacher will be using a TI-83, as will the textbook. It’s not necessarily “kickbacks” or the fact that TI will provide to schools various supplemental materials, instructions, calculator-specific assignment plans, etc. (which they will).
It’s that teachers cannot be expected to know how to do whatever fancy function on five different brands of calculator when they’re already working ten hour days between instruction, planning, grading, office hours, covering other teachers classes, etc., nor can (some, perhaps most) kids be expected to figure out the equivalent way to perform the same function on their different calculator and not fall behind the rest of the class. Standardization makes everything more efficient for everybody. It’s TI’s luck or skill that established them as the standard calculator, and their promotion among math departments and book publishers as well as inertia keeps the TI-83 as the standard. And standardization plus patents equal a virtual monopoly. Monopoly keeps the prices up.
This is pretty much the essence of it. The reason why the TI-83 is the one that we (and by we, I mean high school math teachers) have all adopted as the favorite is that Texas Instruments is a BIG partner with NCTM (The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics), so it’s pushed at all of our workshops and national conventions.
The reason why schools and kids are not able to adopt higher models like the TI-89 for instance is that exams like the AP Calculus test do not allow it (it performs symbolic computations and integrals). Shame, since in my brief textbook writing stint this summer, we used the TI-89 in writing the book to make factoring polynomials not as difficult as far as computations go so students could delve deeper into the math behind the factors.
I’ve probably lost track of the OP, but that’s my thoughts on Texas Instruments.
I’m shocked as well. What stops somebody from making a ripoff with a similar interface? Do they have patents for “this button does this and that button does that?”
Not only that, they “sell” (at relatively low prices) learning aids like overhead-projector calculators and books with recommended programs that are made specifically for the TI-83s. Rather like kickbacks, but with less cigar smoke.
Wow, the last time I took maths was way back in 1998 or so at a big, famous Michigan state university – have things changed that much? I absolutely loved my TI-92 (which I still have and love and regret that it’s serial only) and the owner’s manual was enough. We were certainly not taught how to use a calculator; we were taught how to do the problems.
Have math courses become calculator courses, or am I reading too much into the above responses?
Yeah, I never got this “required” stuff either. I did take some classes late in high school (say 1999-2001) where a graphing calculator was needed, and of course it came in handy in calculus, but my TI-86 has done the job for seven years now. Nobody cared if you had any version made by TI or any Casio or HP. It was up to you to learn how to work the thing. And in classes like calculus or p. chem, we used Maple a lot instead.
You sure about this? TI claims that the TI-89 is “…the most powerful TI graphing calculator allowed for use on the AP* Calculus, AP Statistics, AP Physics, AP Chemistry, PSAT/NMSQT**, SAT® I , SAT II, and Math IC & IIC exams.”
I might get me one of these when my 86 bites the dust. I don’t need the really advanced calculus functions of the 89 these days, but the built-in periodic table would be nice, especially since it’d have more info than my wallet one. For that matter, I don’t really need to graph anything, but there are times where the interface is easier to use than the one for my scientific.
Not true. I have a TI-89 Titanium (and I loves me calculator, has helped oodles and oodles on countless problems in school AND practical situations). They do do symbolic manipulation (aka most algebra and calculus), but ARE allowed on the SAT, both AP Calc exams, AP Physics, and pretty much anywhere else a TI-83 is allowed. The only exceptions (that I know of) are the ACT and IB HL Math exams. My calculator has probably been the most helpful school supply I’ve ever bought. Please note that there are sections of the AP Calc exams where NO calculators are allowed, same thing on the AP Physics. In addition, the tests are designed so that any graphing calculator (that you know how to use properly, natch) gives the same amount of help.
Well, I graduated in 1997. Scientific calculators were “required” (not really, but just try finishing a test in the alloted time without one!).
Graphing calculators were definitely not required - I took advanced math, including calculus, and never had a graphing calculator. However, they were becoming more popular at that time, and at least 1/3 of my class had a graphing calculator.
I think my old school board updated the curriculum and reorganized the difficulty level/sequence of math classes. When I went, most people took Math 10, Math 20 and Math 30 (grade 10, 11, 12). There was a lower level Math 13, 23, 33 stream for the non-post-secondary bound students. Advanced students at my school took Math IB.
Now there’s:
Math 13, 23, 33
Math 10, 20, 30 (Applied) - more word problems, accounting, statistics, etc…
Math 10, 20, 30 (Pure) - generally for students going into science in post-secondary, or who aren’t sure but want to keep their options open
Math 10, 20, 30 (IB) - more advanced than the Pure math stream
I’m pretty sure that graphing calculators are now required for the Pure and IB streams (my brother’s in high school right now, and only uses a non-graphing scientific calculator, but he’s only in grade 10 - he’ll probably upgrade next year).
Waenara, could you specify what school system you’re talking about. Almost none of the nomenclature you’re using is familiar to me. And I’ve never encountered a system in the United States that has separate streams for those planning to study scientific subjects in college and those who aren’t.
I don’t really understand why calculators would be needed when learning math. Surely, the concepts that are taught in algebra, geometry, trignonometry, calculus, etc., haven’t changed. Why would students today need calculators in order to finish a test when we were prohibited from using them? Brain, paper, pencil. Sure, there’s arithmetic to be done, and that’s easier on a calculator, but how hard can the arithmetic have gotten that you wouldn’t be able to finish a test without one?
