Frank, >This is quite long, but I'm posting it anyway, because I think >there is a bigger picture than the one Derek paints.
There is several bigger pictures. I was only attempting to correct the painting on a small piece of them. > The >quoted article posits a better design for calculators, >with the implication of likely improvements in their >usability, and concomitant knock-on effects on numeracy. If one defines numeracy as the ability to manipulate numbers using calculators, then yes this research is applicable to numeracy. Being old fashioned I define numeracy as the ability to manipulate numbers without external aids. >> The example given: "... 4 x -5 is, people tend to key in 4 x - 5, and >> so end up with the result -1." Several calculators I have tried work >> this way, but isn't that intentional? > >Only insofar as it's how poorly designed calculators >happen to work; a lot of design features like this >are accidental rather than deliberate. My point is that this particular feature is not poor design. It makes sense in a world where pressing a different operator key to correct an earlier mistake is a more common operation than the second operand of a multiply being negative. >> Somebody accidently hits the wrong >> key, then presses the correct one and gets the expected answer. >> 4 x (-5) delivers the expected result. > >The trick is knowing that you got the wrong answer the >first time, especially if you're under 30, or if you don't >have an inherent sense of how numbers work. Under 30? Frank, I think you are turning into a grumpy old man. How long before you start saying under 40 ;-) >But I won't do it, because it would be a waste of time. >Why? Because no-one would make it, since the current >horrible devices are unfortunately good enough for >most people, and those of us who want better would >turn to our computers rather than pay the $500 price tag. Isn't being good enough the aim of all product development? Satisficing is something we humans do all the time. derek -- Derek M Jones tel: +44 (0) 1252 520 667 Knowledge Software Ltd mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Applications Standards Conformance Testing http://www.knosof.co.uk ---------------------------------------------------------------------- PPIG Discuss List (discuss@ppig.org) Discuss admin: http://limitlessmail.net/mailman/listinfo/discuss Announce admin: http://limitlessmail.net/mailman/listinfo/announce PPIG Discuss archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/discuss%40ppig.org/
