1. What was the most difficult part of the reading for you?
The proof of the division algorithm, definitely. I'm sure it's just because it's kind of late and my brain isn't fully functioning anymore, but I'm going to have to come back to that 2-page proof another day. It makes logical sense to me, but that thing is pretty intense. I also think that reading/understanding it WILL be important, but it sure is scaring me right now. Similarly, the use of "F[x]" Didn't make the most sense in the world to me.
2. Explore F[x]
Okay, I'll start by restating what the book says about F[x]: ...x is given a meaning similar to "[x sometimes doesn't seem to stand for any particular number but is treated as if it were a number in simplification exercises]", then the polynomials with coefficients in a field F form a ring (denoted F[x]) whose structure is remarkably similar to that of the ring Z of integers. So, I'll try to restate that: F[x] is a RING of the polynomials with coefficients that came from a different ring (in this case, F). So, and they may have said this already, but they are saying that F is a subring of F[x], right? And the reason F is a subring of F[x] is that F[x] which will have the same elements (the coefficients) of F will also have X in it? Is that right? I feel like that is what I understood from that, but wow, I'm not quite sure. I guess we'll see in class tomorrow and when I try to do the homework for this section...
Sunday, January 30, 2011
Thursday, January 27, 2011
...So Far...
1. How long have you spent on the homework assignments? Did lecture and the reading prepare you for them?
I have usually been spending 2 to 3 hours on the homework assignments. I work full time, and sometimes I start homework at 11 or 12 at night, so the times that I haven't finished my assignments were because I chose sleep over finishing an assignment. I do feel like the reading and lecture help me prepare for the assignments, but as I stated before -- sometimes I struggle with the creativity of some proofs. A couple of times I've just had to not finish my homework because I couldn't think of an answer or way to do the proof until I had slept on it, but then I'd have to rush to get it done before class (since I work right after class, so I don't really have until 4:00). I'm not meaning to complain, I'm just saying that I struggle with the creativity and sometimes it's helped me to walk away and then come back to it. Ya know?
2. What has contributed most to your learning in this class so far?
This is the first time when I have read the material this consistently. I know it is important to do so before class, and for the first time I've actually been doing it (though all classes say they want you too, I rarely ever have.) I will say that I hate blogging about my reading, but it has made me more accountable for the reading, and that is good. (Mostly, my slight OCD would KILL me if I had a missing section or a section out of order on here.)
3. What do you think would help you learn more effectively or make the class better for you?
Something that is a difficult line to walk is the repetition between the reading and the lectures. Sometimes I find myself getting pretty bored because as the lecture is happening I keep thinking to myself, "I already read and understand this." I'm sure the repetition is helpful when it comes time for doing the homework, but when a lot of the examples used in class are the same as in the book, it can just feel tedious (which is usually why I stop reading in other classes). However, that being said, I'm sure that that repetition and some of the questions asked in class (that I usually consider stupid, since I actually did the reading the night before) do help me when it comes time for the homework. Does that make sense?
P.S. Sorry this is a little late. I was having internet connection problems tonight and just got it up and going...
I have usually been spending 2 to 3 hours on the homework assignments. I work full time, and sometimes I start homework at 11 or 12 at night, so the times that I haven't finished my assignments were because I chose sleep over finishing an assignment. I do feel like the reading and lecture help me prepare for the assignments, but as I stated before -- sometimes I struggle with the creativity of some proofs. A couple of times I've just had to not finish my homework because I couldn't think of an answer or way to do the proof until I had slept on it, but then I'd have to rush to get it done before class (since I work right after class, so I don't really have until 4:00). I'm not meaning to complain, I'm just saying that I struggle with the creativity and sometimes it's helped me to walk away and then come back to it. Ya know?
2. What has contributed most to your learning in this class so far?
This is the first time when I have read the material this consistently. I know it is important to do so before class, and for the first time I've actually been doing it (though all classes say they want you too, I rarely ever have.) I will say that I hate blogging about my reading, but it has made me more accountable for the reading, and that is good. (Mostly, my slight OCD would KILL me if I had a missing section or a section out of order on here.)
3. What do you think would help you learn more effectively or make the class better for you?
Something that is a difficult line to walk is the repetition between the reading and the lectures. Sometimes I find myself getting pretty bored because as the lecture is happening I keep thinking to myself, "I already read and understand this." I'm sure the repetition is helpful when it comes time for doing the homework, but when a lot of the examples used in class are the same as in the book, it can just feel tedious (which is usually why I stop reading in other classes). However, that being said, I'm sure that that repetition and some of the questions asked in class (that I usually consider stupid, since I actually did the reading the night before) do help me when it comes time for the homework. Does that make sense?
P.S. Sorry this is a little late. I was having internet connection problems tonight and just got it up and going...
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
3.3
1. What was the most difficult part of the material for you?
Something that worried me during the reading was something that was addressed during the reading. I am pretty sure that I understood the concepts as they were explained in the reading, but it made me nervous to think about HOW to figure out what f was. It reminded me of those word puzzles in the newspaper that I suck at so badly -- you know, the one with the letters all mixed up and one letter stood for another letter and you have to figure out the code to get the message? It seems to me that that is exactly what is going on here, and I am so bad at those puzzles. But, the good thing is that it seems like it won't always be necessary to define f, but rather to understand if your two fields/rings are isomorphic/homomorphic or not.
2. Remembering injections and surjections
One issue I've had that go back years and years is remembering what it is to be injective and surjective. Like, I understand the two different definitions, and I know the two different words, but I struggle to remember which is which. So, tonight I am trying to think of a way to remember which is which. As far as I can remember, an injection is the 'one to one' thing where each element of R is going to be 'transformed' to an element of S (f(R)=S). The way I plan to remember that is by imagining "1-1" which looks like an "I" sideways, so "I"njection means "one to one". Then, a surjection (or 'onto,' which still sounds so stupid to me) means that each element of S comes from exactly one element of R. In other words, if it is surjective it would not be true that f(3)=5=f(2). The lame way I plan on remembering that is by remembering that a surjection doesn't look like this: f(S)=U=f(R). You know? If I knew how on this blog, I'd just write a "does not equal" sign and remember that as being a surjection, but we have to use what we've got.
Something that worried me during the reading was something that was addressed during the reading. I am pretty sure that I understood the concepts as they were explained in the reading, but it made me nervous to think about HOW to figure out what f was. It reminded me of those word puzzles in the newspaper that I suck at so badly -- you know, the one with the letters all mixed up and one letter stood for another letter and you have to figure out the code to get the message? It seems to me that that is exactly what is going on here, and I am so bad at those puzzles. But, the good thing is that it seems like it won't always be necessary to define f, but rather to understand if your two fields/rings are isomorphic/homomorphic or not.
2. Remembering injections and surjections
One issue I've had that go back years and years is remembering what it is to be injective and surjective. Like, I understand the two different definitions, and I know the two different words, but I struggle to remember which is which. So, tonight I am trying to think of a way to remember which is which. As far as I can remember, an injection is the 'one to one' thing where each element of R is going to be 'transformed' to an element of S (f(R)=S). The way I plan to remember that is by imagining "1-1" which looks like an "I" sideways, so "I"njection means "one to one". Then, a surjection (or 'onto,' which still sounds so stupid to me) means that each element of S comes from exactly one element of R. In other words, if it is surjective it would not be true that f(3)=5=f(2). The lame way I plan on remembering that is by remembering that a surjection doesn't look like this: f(S)=U=f(R). You know? If I knew how on this blog, I'd just write a "does not equal" sign and remember that as being a surjection, but we have to use what we've got.
Sunday, January 23, 2011
3.2
1. What was the most difficult part of the reading for you?
Let me start by saying 2 things. 1: I know I'm cutting it close. It's 11:48 and I am trying to hurry. 2: I realized the day after typing my last blog how silly I was for not catching that a "field" was mentioned in the reading for the class period before. I guess I was just sleepy and not thinking as well as I should have.
Anyway, to answer this questions, I'll say that something that concerns me for homework and a test is how much detail I need to worry about for these proofs. There were several times in the reading (like in proving Theorems 3.3, 3.4, 3.5...etc) when I was thinking to myself: Duh. It seems like these proofs are stating such silly and basic things with a lot of detail to get from point A to point B. I guess I can see why they are using that amount of detail, but I get worried that I won't know what I can use and what I shouldn't use when it comes to my proofs.
2. What can you do to overcome the thing you mentioned above?
I'm truthfully not exactly sure. I guess, as I've mentioned a couple of times in this blog, the important thing is to write down 1) the hypothesis, and the information you know because of that, 2) Your objective, or the thing you're trying to get to, and 3) fill in the stuff in between making logical connections that, though they seem obvious and silly, are important in proving your case. Doing this more on the homework will help me prepare for the test, so I'm going to try to be more detailed and a little more careful when it comes to stuff that I fell is silly.
Let me start by saying 2 things. 1: I know I'm cutting it close. It's 11:48 and I am trying to hurry. 2: I realized the day after typing my last blog how silly I was for not catching that a "field" was mentioned in the reading for the class period before. I guess I was just sleepy and not thinking as well as I should have.
Anyway, to answer this questions, I'll say that something that concerns me for homework and a test is how much detail I need to worry about for these proofs. There were several times in the reading (like in proving Theorems 3.3, 3.4, 3.5...etc) when I was thinking to myself: Duh. It seems like these proofs are stating such silly and basic things with a lot of detail to get from point A to point B. I guess I can see why they are using that amount of detail, but I get worried that I won't know what I can use and what I shouldn't use when it comes to my proofs.
2. What can you do to overcome the thing you mentioned above?
I'm truthfully not exactly sure. I guess, as I've mentioned a couple of times in this blog, the important thing is to write down 1) the hypothesis, and the information you know because of that, 2) Your objective, or the thing you're trying to get to, and 3) fill in the stuff in between making logical connections that, though they seem obvious and silly, are important in proving your case. Doing this more on the homework will help me prepare for the test, so I'm going to try to be more detailed and a little more careful when it comes to stuff that I fell is silly.
Thursday, January 20, 2011
3.1 Part 2
1. What was the most difficult part of the material for you?
The most difficult part of this reading for me was the part that talked about subrings and subfields. I'm still not exactly sure what the difference is between the two. I mostly think I got confused with the example on page 49 where it says "Z is a subring of the ring Q of rational numbers and Q is a subring of the field R of all real numbers. Since Q is itself a field, we say that Q is a subfield of R." It could be because I'm not exactly sure what a "field" is that they are referring to here. Is it like a vector field? I'm not sure. I'm also confused why they aren't just saying that Q is a subring of R..... you know? I'm confused.
2. Find out what the heck a "field" is here, and write about it :)
I found a site on the internet that said the following: "A field is a ring, such that for any a that is not equal to 0, there is an element b that is inverse to a with respect to multiplication: ab=1." So, I'm guessing that since in Q we could say that a=2, and then b=1/2 and they are both in Q and ab=1. So, I guess that answers my questions, but I don't know why they don't just call it a ring and make my life easier.
The most difficult part of this reading for me was the part that talked about subrings and subfields. I'm still not exactly sure what the difference is between the two. I mostly think I got confused with the example on page 49 where it says "Z is a subring of the ring Q of rational numbers and Q is a subring of the field R of all real numbers. Since Q is itself a field, we say that Q is a subfield of R." It could be because I'm not exactly sure what a "field" is that they are referring to here. Is it like a vector field? I'm not sure. I'm also confused why they aren't just saying that Q is a subring of R..... you know? I'm confused.
2. Find out what the heck a "field" is here, and write about it :)
I found a site on the internet that said the following: "A field is a ring, such that for any a that is not equal to 0, there is an element b that is inverse to a with respect to multiplication: ab=1." So, I'm guessing that since in Q we could say that a=2, and then b=1/2 and they are both in Q and ab=1. So, I guess that answers my questions, but I don't know why they don't just call it a ring and make my life easier.
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
3.1 Part 1
1. What was the most difficult part of the material for you?
Oh man, I can tell that we're about to venture into something pretty darn complicated. You can tell just by the set up that this is headed somewhere scary. The thing that is the most difficult is being able to remember the different axioms and which part of the definitions they belong to. I feel worried that I won't be able to just look at something and know that it is a "ring," a "commutative ring" or a "ring with identity". I know that I'll probably have to write down the different axioms, similar to what's in the book, and just work off of that until I get the hang of things, but I guess I'll just wait until that homework assignment to know for sure.
2. How are you going to keep it straight?
Because I'm nervous about venturing into this unknown world or 'rings' and whatever, I've really been trying to read things carefully, and, on my own, think of examples/counter examples to what they are talking about. For example, as I was reading and they were talking about the set E (even numbers) and how it was a commutative ring, I stopped a moment and asked, "would the set of odd numbers also be a ring?" and doing this helped me kind of run through the axioms and stuff. I also asked, "would this be a ring with identity" before the book even talked about it! (yea me!) and knew it couldn't be, because 1 is odd. Similarly, before the book even mentioned matrices, I asked myself about what would be a ring but not a commutative ring, and instantly I thought about how most matrices are not commutative. So, I felt excited when the book later talked about it. So, the moral of the story is: the best way to keep things straight is to ask yourself a lot of questions, and not move on until you know the answer. You know?
Oh man, I can tell that we're about to venture into something pretty darn complicated. You can tell just by the set up that this is headed somewhere scary. The thing that is the most difficult is being able to remember the different axioms and which part of the definitions they belong to. I feel worried that I won't be able to just look at something and know that it is a "ring," a "commutative ring" or a "ring with identity". I know that I'll probably have to write down the different axioms, similar to what's in the book, and just work off of that until I get the hang of things, but I guess I'll just wait until that homework assignment to know for sure.
2. How are you going to keep it straight?
Because I'm nervous about venturing into this unknown world or 'rings' and whatever, I've really been trying to read things carefully, and, on my own, think of examples/counter examples to what they are talking about. For example, as I was reading and they were talking about the set E (even numbers) and how it was a commutative ring, I stopped a moment and asked, "would the set of odd numbers also be a ring?" and doing this helped me kind of run through the axioms and stuff. I also asked, "would this be a ring with identity" before the book even talked about it! (yea me!) and knew it couldn't be, because 1 is odd. Similarly, before the book even mentioned matrices, I asked myself about what would be a ring but not a commutative ring, and instantly I thought about how most matrices are not commutative. So, I felt excited when the book later talked about it. So, the moral of the story is: the best way to keep things straight is to ask yourself a lot of questions, and not move on until you know the answer. You know?
Thursday, January 13, 2011
2.3
1. What was was the most difficult part of the material for you?
I think the most difficult thing for me with this reading is going to be the different techniques for proving. As I mentioned before, I'm bad at proofs, and there is a creativity required that I don't really have. So, thinking about proving 2.11 makes me want to puke. Also, keeping the different theorems and corollaries makes me nervous when it comes to these prime integer modules.
2. What was helpful in this reading?
I found the two basic techniques for proving statements involving Z_n kind of helpful. I guess we'll see how the homework goes.
I think the most difficult thing for me with this reading is going to be the different techniques for proving. As I mentioned before, I'm bad at proofs, and there is a creativity required that I don't really have. So, thinking about proving 2.11 makes me want to puke. Also, keeping the different theorems and corollaries makes me nervous when it comes to these prime integer modules.
2. What was helpful in this reading?
I found the two basic techniques for proving statements involving Z_n kind of helpful. I guess we'll see how the homework goes.
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
2.2
1. What was the most difficult part of the material for you?
Because I feel like I have a pretty good grasp on classes, this section felt pretty natural to me. There is one thing that does make me nervous, and it is the "new notation." I feel worried that they are dropping the brackets and by saying 4+1=0 should be enough indication to know we're in Z_5. I kind of understand wanting to make it simple, maybe it's too much work to write [4]+[1]=[0], but you don't even need to press the shift button to make the bracket, so I think that if there is too much back and forth between integers and classes I'll get annoyed and probably make silly mistakes.
2. What is the most interesting to you?
I'm not going to lie, I think the addition and times tables are pretty fascinating. At first I was curious why they were different sizes between Z_3, Z_5 and Z_6, but then I laughed when I woke up and realized why. So, I like that they are "limited" and not infinite, and I think the patterns are pretty interesting. But also, I love the idea of additive and multiplicative inverses and how they translate from integers into classes here.
Because I feel like I have a pretty good grasp on classes, this section felt pretty natural to me. There is one thing that does make me nervous, and it is the "new notation." I feel worried that they are dropping the brackets and by saying 4+1=0 should be enough indication to know we're in Z_5. I kind of understand wanting to make it simple, maybe it's too much work to write [4]+[1]=[0], but you don't even need to press the shift button to make the bracket, so I think that if there is too much back and forth between integers and classes I'll get annoyed and probably make silly mistakes.
2. What is the most interesting to you?
I'm not going to lie, I think the addition and times tables are pretty fascinating. At first I was curious why they were different sizes between Z_3, Z_5 and Z_6, but then I laughed when I woke up and realized why. So, I like that they are "limited" and not infinite, and I think the patterns are pretty interesting. But also, I love the idea of additive and multiplicative inverses and how they translate from integers into classes here.
Saturday, January 8, 2011
2.1
1.What was the most difficult part of the material for you?
I feel like doing Congruence and Modular Arithmatic is like speaking Spanish for me. I understand the rules of Spanish, I can speak it and understand a lot of it (I served a Spanish speaking mission), but it takes me a little longer than speaking and listening to English. I understand this section, but when it comes to doing these types of problems, I feel like I have to take a little extra time to write the congruence whatever into the equation that I can understand a little better. Also, the 'classes' aren't completely clear to me. Again, I kind of understand what they are, but it takes me a little extra time to process the problems. I think it will be helpful to talk about this stuff at the beginning of the semester so hopefully I can see why this concept is useful at all, because I still don't get it.
2. A little more clear this time around....
The last (and first) time I learned about these modulo things I struggled understanding what was going on. Reading though this section, I was able to visualize things a little. For example, for mod3, I imagined a long number line where starting at zero there was a mark for every number that was a multiple of 3. (...,-6,-3,0,3,6,....). Then, if I think of [2] in congruence modulo 3, I imagine those same intervals of 3 shifted to the left 2 numbers (...,-4,-1,2,5,8...) which is why [2]=[-1] in congruence modulo 3. Does that make sense? It makes sense to me.
I feel like doing Congruence and Modular Arithmatic is like speaking Spanish for me. I understand the rules of Spanish, I can speak it and understand a lot of it (I served a Spanish speaking mission), but it takes me a little longer than speaking and listening to English. I understand this section, but when it comes to doing these types of problems, I feel like I have to take a little extra time to write the congruence whatever into the equation that I can understand a little better. Also, the 'classes' aren't completely clear to me. Again, I kind of understand what they are, but it takes me a little extra time to process the problems. I think it will be helpful to talk about this stuff at the beginning of the semester so hopefully I can see why this concept is useful at all, because I still don't get it.
2. A little more clear this time around....
The last (and first) time I learned about these modulo things I struggled understanding what was going on. Reading though this section, I was able to visualize things a little. For example, for mod3, I imagined a long number line where starting at zero there was a mark for every number that was a multiple of 3. (...,-6,-3,0,3,6,....). Then, if I think of [2] in congruence modulo 3, I imagine those same intervals of 3 shifted to the left 2 numbers (...,-4,-1,2,5,8...) which is why [2]=[-1] in congruence modulo 3. Does that make sense? It makes sense to me.
Thursday, January 6, 2011
1.1-1.3
1. What was the most difficult part of the material for you?
Well, this reading assignment was probably easier than any future assignment we'll have, since 2/3 of it was already covered in class. Also, it seemed pretty basic because it was the first reading. However, as someone who just managed to not fail Theory of Analysis and is pretty nervous about this class, I will point out what I think will be difficult for me from here on out. I, like a lot of people, really don't like proofs. I imagine that the proofs will be the hardest thing for me in this class, and the reason why I find them difficult is that they are so darn imaginative. As I was reading these sections, and after Wednesdays class, I just kept thinking to myself, "Who would think to do it that way?!?"
For example, Theorem 1.11 just seems so basic to me. Of course every number is prime or made up of a unique combination of primes. And, as I follow the book it all makes sense, but I don't think I would ever think to write that proof using a contradiction (mostly because I am afraid of contradiction proofs).
The creativity astounds and intimidates me. Sure, when a proof is shown to me I can usually follow it, but I am so bad at thinking of them on my own. Even if I think I might have a good idea to write a proof, I get very intimidated by the wording of it, and usually mess it up in that way. So, I think that is what is going to be hard for me with this material in the future. Being intelligent and creative enough to be able to write reasonable proofs.
2. What can I do to overcome my Creative Proof Shortcoming (CPS)?
My best friend is in a basic algebra class at UVU and was asking me for help with proof by induction. I always try to help when I can, and was nervous when he asked me to help him with proofs. However, I remembered something about proof by induction that I shared with him. I remember sitting down with him and saying, "Okay, write what you know," which was usually your basic n formula. Then I told him to write what he wanted his equation to look like at the end (the n+1 formula). Then, I explained to him that the trick was to get from the n formula to the n+1 formula using only what you know to be true. I told him that the key was that you can't look at that as a 'restriction' but rather as a guideline showing you how to write the proof. Since the n formula was given, I explained that he would definitely be using THAT formula somewhere in the proof, and it would usually be somewhere in the middle. The hypothesis wasn't restricting him, it was pretty much giving him the answer. I realize that this is very similar to how I need to be thinking to be successful at writing proofs. Not that it will always be as easy as induction proofs, but hypotheses (?) are worded very carefully, and if I actually use the information given, getting from point A to point B should be easier, because the tools are usually given, you just have to put them in the right place. So, whenever I get stuck, I will do the same thing and ask, "Where am I? Where do I want to go? And what have they already given to me to get me there?"
Well, this reading assignment was probably easier than any future assignment we'll have, since 2/3 of it was already covered in class. Also, it seemed pretty basic because it was the first reading. However, as someone who just managed to not fail Theory of Analysis and is pretty nervous about this class, I will point out what I think will be difficult for me from here on out. I, like a lot of people, really don't like proofs. I imagine that the proofs will be the hardest thing for me in this class, and the reason why I find them difficult is that they are so darn imaginative. As I was reading these sections, and after Wednesdays class, I just kept thinking to myself, "Who would think to do it that way?!?"
For example, Theorem 1.11 just seems so basic to me. Of course every number is prime or made up of a unique combination of primes. And, as I follow the book it all makes sense, but I don't think I would ever think to write that proof using a contradiction (mostly because I am afraid of contradiction proofs).
The creativity astounds and intimidates me. Sure, when a proof is shown to me I can usually follow it, but I am so bad at thinking of them on my own. Even if I think I might have a good idea to write a proof, I get very intimidated by the wording of it, and usually mess it up in that way. So, I think that is what is going to be hard for me with this material in the future. Being intelligent and creative enough to be able to write reasonable proofs.
2. What can I do to overcome my Creative Proof Shortcoming (CPS)?
My best friend is in a basic algebra class at UVU and was asking me for help with proof by induction. I always try to help when I can, and was nervous when he asked me to help him with proofs. However, I remembered something about proof by induction that I shared with him. I remember sitting down with him and saying, "Okay, write what you know," which was usually your basic n formula. Then I told him to write what he wanted his equation to look like at the end (the n+1 formula). Then, I explained to him that the trick was to get from the n formula to the n+1 formula using only what you know to be true. I told him that the key was that you can't look at that as a 'restriction' but rather as a guideline showing you how to write the proof. Since the n formula was given, I explained that he would definitely be using THAT formula somewhere in the proof, and it would usually be somewhere in the middle. The hypothesis wasn't restricting him, it was pretty much giving him the answer. I realize that this is very similar to how I need to be thinking to be successful at writing proofs. Not that it will always be as easy as induction proofs, but hypotheses (?) are worded very carefully, and if I actually use the information given, getting from point A to point B should be easier, because the tools are usually given, you just have to put them in the right place. So, whenever I get stuck, I will do the same thing and ask, "Where am I? Where do I want to go? And what have they already given to me to get me there?"
Wednesday, January 5, 2011
Introduction
- What is your year in school and major?
I'm a super-senior... I've been here for 8 years and I'm not even a doctor. Instead I'm still an undergraduate studying Math Education.
-Which post-calculus math courses have you taken?
Foundation Mathematics (290), Elementary Linear Algebra (313), Multivariable Calculus (314), Ordinary Differential Equations (334), Theory of Analysis (341)
-Why are you in this class?
So I can graduate and finally get out of school!!!! Oh yeah, and change the lives of the kids who I'm sure are dying to know what I know about abstract algebra...
-Tell me about the math professor or teacher you have had who was the most and/or least effective. What did s/he do that worked so well/poorly?
Oh man, honestly it's hard to even tell them apart at this point. I don't feel like I've had any stellar math professors, but I did have an incredibly negative experience with one. For my Multivariable Calculus class I remember specifically that I worked my butt off that semester, studied any chance I got, did my homework and never missed a class period. I have never complained about any grading issue, and I don't even mind getting bad grades because it shows exactly what I need to improve on. However, on one test I studied particularly hard on I got a 0/30 points on a specific question because I copied 1 number down incorrectly at the very very very beginning of the problem. I did all of the steps correctly (it was a 3 part question that was 10 points for each part) and know that I knew what I was doing, I just happened to copy down "15" instead of "13" and got zeros on all 3 parts. I decided to talk to the professor (the first and only time I've ever done that in my 8 years here) to see if he could work with me since I thought zero points was a little extreme. He wouldn't even agree to set an appointment with me. He just looked at the test and said, "You got the answer wrong, and there's nothing I can do about it." That really ticked me off and I stopped caring the rest of the semester. Luckily I did well enough for the first half of the semester that my sour attitude didn't completely kill my grade by the end. Anyway, I felt the teacher didn't acknowledge my general efforts and didn't care about me as a person and that was poor teaching to me.
-Write something interesting about yourself
Well, on Christmas Eve Eve (Dec 23, 2010) around 2 AM I was admitted into the hospital for an emergency appendectomy. It wasn't the worst thing ever. I was released on Christmas Eve and since I am a full time manager at FYE (a movie store) I got to miss the two busiest/crappiest days of the year. I would do it all over again next year if God would only bless me with a second appendix.
-If you are unable to come to my scheduled office hours, what times would work for you?
Since I work full time and come to school part time, I don't think I have ever in my entire life used a professor's office hours, so though they aren't the best for me, I really don't think I'll ever use them, so no worries. If I'm in dire need of help, I'll contact you and maybe we can schedule something.
The End.
I'm a super-senior... I've been here for 8 years and I'm not even a doctor. Instead I'm still an undergraduate studying Math Education.
-Which post-calculus math courses have you taken?
Foundation Mathematics (290), Elementary Linear Algebra (313), Multivariable Calculus (314), Ordinary Differential Equations (334), Theory of Analysis (341)
-Why are you in this class?
So I can graduate and finally get out of school!!!! Oh yeah, and change the lives of the kids who I'm sure are dying to know what I know about abstract algebra...
-Tell me about the math professor or teacher you have had who was the most and/or least effective. What did s/he do that worked so well/poorly?
Oh man, honestly it's hard to even tell them apart at this point. I don't feel like I've had any stellar math professors, but I did have an incredibly negative experience with one. For my Multivariable Calculus class I remember specifically that I worked my butt off that semester, studied any chance I got, did my homework and never missed a class period. I have never complained about any grading issue, and I don't even mind getting bad grades because it shows exactly what I need to improve on. However, on one test I studied particularly hard on I got a 0/30 points on a specific question because I copied 1 number down incorrectly at the very very very beginning of the problem. I did all of the steps correctly (it was a 3 part question that was 10 points for each part) and know that I knew what I was doing, I just happened to copy down "15" instead of "13" and got zeros on all 3 parts. I decided to talk to the professor (the first and only time I've ever done that in my 8 years here) to see if he could work with me since I thought zero points was a little extreme. He wouldn't even agree to set an appointment with me. He just looked at the test and said, "You got the answer wrong, and there's nothing I can do about it." That really ticked me off and I stopped caring the rest of the semester. Luckily I did well enough for the first half of the semester that my sour attitude didn't completely kill my grade by the end. Anyway, I felt the teacher didn't acknowledge my general efforts and didn't care about me as a person and that was poor teaching to me.
-Write something interesting about yourself
Well, on Christmas Eve Eve (Dec 23, 2010) around 2 AM I was admitted into the hospital for an emergency appendectomy. It wasn't the worst thing ever. I was released on Christmas Eve and since I am a full time manager at FYE (a movie store) I got to miss the two busiest/crappiest days of the year. I would do it all over again next year if God would only bless me with a second appendix.
-If you are unable to come to my scheduled office hours, what times would work for you?
Since I work full time and come to school part time, I don't think I have ever in my entire life used a professor's office hours, so though they aren't the best for me, I really don't think I'll ever use them, so no worries. If I'm in dire need of help, I'll contact you and maybe we can schedule something.
The End.