Today I got not just one but THREE teaching compliments!
After the stats class: "my brother has Down Syndrome. Thank you for speaking out so clearly against eugenics and racism"
After the first-year calculus class: "I audited your class today to see what the university was like and couldn't have gotten a better impression"
After the second-year calculus class and a rather technical lecture: "that was an awesome lesson, thank you!"
RE: https://mastodon.gamedev.place/@shana/116526661413699845
I teach them exactly like this 😎
Looking for nice examples for Chi-squared tests, I am annoyed yet again that SO MANY are about testing whether this or that is independent of a random variable called "gender" which can only have two values.
🙄
aaah the Lagrange-Legendre weakness stroke again!
*edits exam*
No idea why I always mix these two up.
Teaching wins of the day:
- nice connections between different chapters in this class, tools being re-used in different contexts. "Same equations, same solutions" is something I really love💙
- wearing my e^{\pi i} +1 = 0 t-shirt to the appropriate class 😎
Queering calculus for engineering first-years: casually using neopronouns in a problem ✓ 🏳️🌈
Kill your darlings, lecture note style:
There's this super neat example that's just too complicated and difficult to explain to fit into this class 😭
There's a really common mistake in this exam that I didn't anticipate. It's "integration by parts of wishful thinking":
The students integrate by parts, then "solve" the second integral (which can, in fact, be done by a second integration by parts) by wishful thinking.
This textbook gets worse. Also gives a short bio of Francis Galton* which only states he was pioneering research into human intelligence.
Yeah. And he believed Black people were inherently inferior. And that "the weak" should live in celibate communities. And he made a map showing where the most beautiful women of Britain lived (beauty as defined by the very scientific standard of... himself).
Oh, this German (!) stats textbook gives a short bio of Karl Pearson* which completely fails to mention his racist and sexist views while neutrally noting he was a professor of eugenics and wrote on "women's issues".
<sarcasm> Lovely. </sarcasm>
Jules
