The Tutor period

My first paid tutoring session in a long time was tonight.  My student said that an hour with me helped her more than 5 hours with her GSI.  That’s probably a bit of an exaggeration, as her GSI probably didn’t devote his/her full attention to her.

Firstly, it’s nice to do a good job.  It’s also nice to have something teaching-related on my resume rather than an empty space while I look for a job.  It’s also nice to be paid so I don’t go homeless.

Secondly, Danny is ambivalent, leaning toward antagonistic, about paid tutoring.  I can see the point: the people who make their living as tutors have an incentive to make their students dependent on them.  They want to be useful enough to satisfy the customer, but not so useful that the student can afford to be without their services.  Meanwhile a good teacher will cultivate students to the point that they become independent thinkers.  This is what I aim for when tutoring as well, like I do in office hours, although it means putting myself out of a job.

Within the education ecology, from the students’ perspective, tutors are symbiotic: students learn more (or at least get better grades), and the tutors get paid.  As Danny points out, this exacerbates the inequality gap because it means students (or parents) with more resources can buy a better education.  From the teachers’ perspective, tutors can be parasitical: reinforcing bad student behavior (especially students who just want the answers, so the tutoring is basically cheating) while taking the students’ money.  On the other hand, some schools use in-house tutors with struggling students so they can keep up with the class, which helps the tutoree, the teacher, and the class as a whole.  The difference is that a tutor with a stake in the school has a different objective than a for-profit tutor: the former sympathetic, the latter antagonistic.

Anyway, hopefully I’ll soon leave this for a less ambiguous position within the education ecology.

As an aside, I think the relationship of the testing services to the education system has moved from symbiotic to parasitic.  I don’t think the constant testing has much value.  The country is addicted to the standardized exams to the point that it has warped the national dialogue on education around it like a large gravity well.  Meanwhile, testing companies make money hand over fist on tests and prep materials and has given rise to a whole test prep industry.  If I ever gain power within a higher education department, I’m going to campaign for eliminating the SAT/ACT/GRE requirement.  Load of tosh.

In other news, a lady in Albany contacted me in regards to tutoring her kid.  Who goes to school at UCLA.  1) Who looks for a tutor 400 miles away from the student?  2) Why can’t a college student find her own tutor?  My guess is this is an azian parent interfering with her daughter’s life/education because her grades aren’t high enough.

Newton’s Method and mental math square roots

(This is a post aimed more at high school students or young college students.)

This is a neat mental math trick I learned from television.  Let’s start easy and have one of your friends find a 4-digit perfect square (i.e. square any integer between 32 and 99, inclusive).  This trick will allow you to find the square root almost immediately.  For example, let’s use 3136.  Call it S.

  1. Estimate the square root to the nearest ten.  50 squared is 2500 and 60 squared is 3600, so the square root is between 50 and 60.  I’m going to pick 50 because it’s easier to divide by.  Let X = 50.
  2. Divide S by X, ignoring the remainder.  3136 / 50 = 62-point-something.  Let W = 62.
  3. Average X and W.  That is the square root!  So for our example, the average of 50 and 62 is 56.  You can check that this is right.

However, your friends who are on the ball might not be that impressed since, because it is known that 3136 is a perfect square, we would have guessed that the units digits is either a 4 or a 6 since that is the only way to get a 6 in the units’ digit of 3136.  So let’s up the ante: we will now compute the square root of any 4-digit number to one decimal point.  For this, I asked a random number generator and got 5389.

  1. 70 squared is 4900, 80 squared is 6400, so we’re somewhere between there.  Let X = 70, since 4900 is closer, and like most iterative algorithms, Newton’s Method works better when we start closer to the endpoint.
  2. S / X is almost exactly 77.  Let W = 77.
  3. The average of X and W is 73.5.  Because this method tends to overestimate, let’s call this 73.

Now let us repeat steps 2 and 3, but with X equal to the number found in step 3.

  1. (again): S / X is a bit trickier with X = 73.  I have a mental math trick for this (which I’ll explain later): the answer is 73 + (5389 – 4900 – 420 – 9) / 73 = 73 + (489 – 420 – 9) / 73 = 73 + (69 – 9) / 73 = 73 + 60 / 73, or about 73.8.
  2. (again): The average of 73 and 73.8 is 73.4.  To check this, the square root of 5389 is 73.4098086…

Before I explain how it works, I find the student learns more when they try it for themselves.  So here are some questions:

  1. Show how this algorithm is derived from Newton’s method.  Hint: use y(x) = x^2 – S.  Why does this algorithm tend to overestimate?
  2. Explain the mental math trick used in step 2 (again).  Hint: use algebra.

WARNING: Try the problems posted in part 1 before reading this post.  It took me some minutes, but mostly because I had to rederive Newton’s Method and tried the wrong y(x) first.  I find that students do not really learn when answers are just handed to them; you have do it for skills to sink in.  Do you think basketball stars got that good by listening or reading about how to play?  They go onto the court and practice their skills.  Math is the same.

1) I have a confession: I have a really bad memory for formulas.  However, this is not a problem in math if you know what you’re doing.  This is the formula for Newton’s Method that is easiest for me to remember:

y(x_i) = (x_i – x_{i+1}) [dy/dx evaluated at x_i]

where x_i is the current guess (i.e. the X in Step 1) and x_{i+1} is the next guess (i.e. the number found in Step 3).  This is easiest to see if I could include a diagram in this blog.  Since I can’t, I’ll just have to describe it to you: imagine the diagram of Newton’s Method.  We have a right triangle formed by the points (x,y) = (x_i,0), (x_i, y(x_i)), and the point where the tangent line meets the x-axis.  The right angle is at (x_i,0).  The slope of the tangent line is y(x_i) / (x_i – x_{i+1}), but calculus also tells us that the slope is dy/dx evaluated at x_i, hence the equation above.

dy/dx evaluated at x_i is 2x_i.  Solving for x_{i+1} (I’ll spare you the algebra) gives

x_{i+1} = x_i / 2 + S / 2x_i

which is the average of x_i and S / x_i.  Now why does this algorithm always overestimate?  Draw y(x) = x^2 – S.  With positive square roots, we’re always on the right half of the parabola.  Because y(x) is concave up, the next iteration of Newton’s method is always a little higher than the actual root no matter if x_i is too high or too low.  This is why we always round down.

2) If S = 5389 and X is 73, how do estimate S / X?  Well think about it this way: we’re looking for some number d such that (70 + 3)(70 + 3 + d) = 5389.  Expand these terms: 70^2 + 2*70*3 + 3^2 + 73d = 5389.  Therefore d = (5389 – 4900 – 420 – 9) / 73.  Easy peasy lemon squeezy.

If I may make a commentary, the ability to do square roots in your head will not get you a job.  There’s a reason why calculators were invented.  However, to many people, the fun of a magic show is trying to figure out how the magician did it.  And now you know why this trick works.  It’s not magic, it’s math, which is way more powerful.  This is a good way of understanding Newton’s Method, which is a powerful tool which is still used today.