calc 1 vs calc 2 vs calc 3

[Artdogg]

[ QUOTE ]
I hope to god everyone's calc professors allowed a cheat sheet, because you have to know all this nonsense

[/ QUOTE ]

My calc 1 teacher allowed a cheat sheet, my current calc 2 teacher doesnt allow a cheat sheet and doesnt curve, BUT 25% of the grade in the class is homework "quizzes" which basically force you to thoroughly do your homework to do well, so Im hoping the memorization comes with that. Good thread guys, looks like everyone agrees that Taylor Series' are what I should look forward to.

[Wyman]

[ QUOTE ]
post got tldr; in a nutshell, "techniques" =/= "concepts". calc 2 is techniques. calc 1 and calc 3 and deq are concepts. u substitution is not a concept. integrating to calculate a velocity is a concept.

[/ QUOTE ]

I figured my post would be tl;dr. I am fortunate that my school tends to emphasize application more than anything else. For instance, you'd never have an exam question such as: Compute the following integral: "blah". You'd have an elaborate word problem (I'll stop short of saying "real-world", but we try). You'd get points for setting up the integral (ie formulating the problem mathematically), points for solution, and points for translation of the solution back to the terms of the problem. It is heavily application-based. This is in contrast to many other undergrad calc classes I've seen/taught/attended/tutored.

Anyway, you are correct that techniques =/= concepts. I think that the notecard (as you mentioned) allows the techniques to move into the background rather than be the focus of the course, which helps me (as an instructor) tremendously, since I can now focus more on the "why" rather than the "what".