zlacker

>>lewisf+(OP)
I am always surprised in hearing that American students need a programmable, graphing calculator. In most of Asia such is not required, only a much cheaper 'scientfic' calculator, even for graduate courses in science and engineering.

Some disciplines even in sciences/engineering, for example Computer Science, does not require any sort of calculator usually.

>>billfr+Od
It's a relatively recent development. I majored in physics, and made it through differential equations in the 1990s without one. It's a requirement for my daughter's high school math class.

>>harold+We
It does does raise the question. Why do American highschoolers need it, and why not them in the rest of the world. Why saddle students and parents with an additional 100$+ expense, when very possibly it isn't strictly pedagogically necessary.

>>billfr+Bh
For the most part "graphing calculator" seems to be a catch all term for "scientific calculator with the features we need" in that little actual graphing is done. But I have seen problems in my son's "Algebra 2" class that require plotting polynomials on the calculator then describing their roots, shape etc. As a way to build intuition about the geometric interpretation of functions, that seems like a reasonable approach although Wolfram alpha would do a decent job too.

>>dboreh+jm
In the UK we have similar questions of plotting and describing geometric functions, however we were simply taught how to plot them by hand, or just directly interrogate the equation to spot where an asymptote might be, roots etc.

IMO this gives a much better inherent understanding of equations, rather than just plugging in some numbers into a calculator and reading what comes out.