Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Algorithms by Jeff Erickson

jeffe.cs.illinois.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 162 posts

Re: Algorithms by Jeff Erickson

#111

Post by KallDrexx »

unishark wrote: post #58
dkfjs wrote: post #49

Not proving solutions to textbooks seems to be a common theme in mathematics and theoretical computer science. It makes it difficult for those outside of the traditional classroom to learn the material. Instead textbook writers seem to have this adversarial approach against readers, thinking they’ll “cheat themselves” if they look up solutions or attempt to verify their work. Experts make mistakes, beginners would pr…

> Instead textbook writers seem to have this adversarial approach against readers, thinking they’ll “cheat themselves” if they look up solutions or attempt to verify their work. I agree that worked problems make a text much more valuable and useful; even students in a class may spend a lot of time doing self-study. And for self-study, without worked problems the book is only useful as a reference while working proble…

Can't you (as a teacher) just, not assign homework that's static problems from a textbook and instead make your own problems?

The problems in the text book aren't meant for homework, they are meant for practice. This is just the teacher not wanting to make their own problem set and instead use the ones they got for free in the textbook imo.

Re: Algorithms by Jeff Erickson

#112

Post by skrtskrt »

tmotwu wrote: post #102
skrtskrt wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In college, cheating on the homeworks was quite literally the only way to get all the work for 4 engineering classes done on time. We still learned it all for exams, and received our exam grades accordingly, which are generally >60% of the full grade for the class. But we were putting in 80+ hours a week on engineering classes and it simply wasn't enough for the obscene amount of work professors assigned. Students cr…

Unless you were planning to graduate in 3 years or less, I've personally never seen anyone experience this. Advisors should have worked with you to make sure your semester workload floats at around 40-50 hours a week, 60 hours at most during a bad semester. Some people actually care about retaining the material they're learning - taking 4 engineering classes a semester is a waste of time and likely detrimental to lea…

It was absolutely detrimental to learning and retention.

We were on a quarter system (really trimesters, since one quarter is the summer quarter), with 48 classes required to graduate from engineering, which is 4 classes per quarter for 4 years assuming you don't have any AP credits. Only a handful of the 48 are allowed to be non-engineering, econ, or math.

Most classes that would be a 14 weeks in a semester system were not broken up differently - they were crammed into 10 weeks to fit into the quarter system.

Re: Algorithms by Jeff Erickson

#113

Post by karpierz »

KallDrexx wrote: post #111
unishark wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Instead textbook writers seem to have this adversarial approach against readers, thinking they’ll “cheat themselves” if they look up solutions or attempt to verify their work. I agree that worked problems make a text much more valuable and useful; even students in a class may spend a lot of time doing self-study. And for self-study, without worked problems the book is only useful as a reference while working proble…

Can't you (as a teacher) just, not assign homework that's static problems from a textbook and instead make your own problems? The problems in the text book aren't meant for homework, they are meant for practice. This is just the teacher not wanting to make their own problem set and instead use the ones they got for free in the textbook imo.

Would you rather your teacher spent time writing problems or spent time coaching students through problems in person?

Re: Algorithms by Jeff Erickson

#114

Post by unishark »

musingsole wrote: post #107
unishark wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know what you mean by stealing. In college you are generally supposed to devote twice as many hours outside of class as in class. It's probably stated in your student handbook. That is why 12 to 16 credit hours is called "full time". In a problem-solving discipline the best way to spend that study time is solving problems. As a bonus you can get personalized feedback when it is graded.

I'm going to call that stockholm syndrome. Many people throw around the idea of spend twice as much time in class as out. That's a fine idea for some, but many don't need it. Forcing a student to fill out problems to satisfy the instructor's concept of enough time spent is completely tangential to purpose of an education. There isn't a requirement for the amount of time a MMA fighter spends in the gym. They set their…

Let's face it, the average student won't do anything on their own till the night before the exam, which is a recipe for failure in any class that can't be memorized in an evening or two. If school was tailored towards the most elite self-motivated students, your analogy would apply. But something like half of gym members don't even go.

Why do you think professors give homework? It would be so much easier to just point students at study materials and leave the responsibility to them. But it's frustrating for everyone when students fail.

Re: Algorithms by Jeff Erickson

#115

Post by ohdannyboy »

dkfjs wrote: post #49

Not proving solutions to textbooks seems to be a common theme in mathematics and theoretical computer science. It makes it difficult for those outside of the traditional classroom to learn the material. Instead textbook writers seem to have this adversarial approach against readers, thinking they’ll “cheat themselves” if they look up solutions or attempt to verify their work. Experts make mistakes, beginners would pr…

While I agree that this book isn't very useful for self learning, I have to defend the model you describe as adversarial. I took CS473 at UIUC (it's CS374 now) so I can tell you firsthand the course is brutal -- easily the hardest course in the CS program. You're given a LOT of resources through office hours and everyone uses them. The TAs are good at leading you down the right path instead of just showing you the answer and making you feel like you connected the dots (you probably didn't). Most of the answers are on Chegg if you want that, although I think Chegg is the worst thing ever for actual learning.

Unfortunately I don't have a good solution for the self learner here... There is no way in hell I would have gotten through that class without the TAs and workgroups. Just being able to peek at the answers would have been terrible.

Re: Algorithms by Jeff Erickson

#116

Post by avgDev »

chasd00 wrote: post #104
skrtskrt wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In college, cheating on the homeworks was quite literally the only way to get all the work for 4 engineering classes done on time. We still learned it all for exams, and received our exam grades accordingly, which are generally >60% of the full grade for the class. But we were putting in 80+ hours a week on engineering classes and it simply wasn't enough for the obscene amount of work professors assigned. Students cr…

I remember two breakdowns while going through Computer Science and Engineering at UTA ( far from a top-tier school, we liked to call it "UT Almost" ) in the late 90s 1. a student in physics broke down sobbing during the final, like uncontrolled wailing. The TA helped her get up and walk out 2. in the discreet structures course a student got up, walked to the front of the room in tears, tore up their final in front of…

This reminds of my DS class at a normal state uni. We started with about 30 students, 7 showed up for the final exam. 2 walked out during the exam.

Re: Algorithms by Jeff Erickson

#117

Post by abdullahkhalids »

musingsole wrote: post #107
unishark wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know what you mean by stealing. In college you are generally supposed to devote twice as many hours outside of class as in class. It's probably stated in your student handbook. That is why 12 to 16 credit hours is called "full time". In a problem-solving discipline the best way to spend that study time is solving problems. As a bonus you can get personalized feedback when it is graded.

I'm going to call that stockholm syndrome. Many people throw around the idea of spend twice as much time in class as out. That's a fine idea for some, but many don't need it. Forcing a student to fill out problems to satisfy the instructor's concept of enough time spent is completely tangential to purpose of an education. There isn't a requirement for the amount of time a MMA fighter spends in the gym. They set their…

The idea is not "thrown around". It is called the Carnegie Unit: A course should be designed so that for each unit there should be 1 contact hour and 2 hours of outside-class work. This is the standard way courses are implemented in North American universities.

Re: Algorithms by Jeff Erickson

#118

Post by abdullahkhalids »

skrtskrt wrote: post #100
unishark wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Instead textbook writers seem to have this adversarial approach against readers, thinking they’ll “cheat themselves” if they look up solutions or attempt to verify their work. I agree that worked problems make a text much more valuable and useful; even students in a class may spend a lot of time doing self-study. And for self-study, without worked problems the book is only useful as a reference while working proble…

In college, cheating on the homeworks was quite literally the only way to get all the work for 4 engineering classes done on time. We still learned it all for exams, and received our exam grades accordingly, which are generally >60% of the full grade for the class. But we were putting in 80+ hours a week on engineering classes and it simply wasn't enough for the obscene amount of work professors assigned. Students cr…

This situation probably did not happen overnight. It was probably a long process driven by feedback loops. Some students started cheating, so profs made classes harder or assigned more work to ensure that students learn enough to get jobs/scholarships/grad school admissions.

More students started cheating. Profs responded the same way because of organizational pressure. Ten years later, courses involve obscene amounts of work.

Re: Algorithms by Jeff Erickson

#119

Post by mcguire »

karpierz wrote: post #113
KallDrexx wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't you (as a teacher) just, not assign homework that's static problems from a textbook and instead make your own problems? The problems in the text book aren't meant for homework, they are meant for practice. This is just the teacher not wanting to make their own problem set and instead use the ones they got for free in the textbook imo.

Would you rather your teacher spent time writing problems or spent time coaching students through problems in person?

I'd like my teacher to spend some time trying to understand and address the problems that students have with exercises. In practice, that seems to mean spending time writing problems.

Re: Algorithms by Jeff Erickson

#120

Post by carapace »

nickkell wrote: post #50

I'm a developer, but don't have the foggiest idea of how to prove something by induction. Is this the kind of book I should look at? Or is there something that should be taken as a prerequisite?

Try playing through the Natural Number Game by Kevin Buzzard and Mohammad Pedramfar. https://wwwf.imperial.ac.uk/~buzzard/xena/natural_number_gam...
Post reply on HN