
Math General Math Forum  For general math related discussion and news 
 LinkBack  Thread Tools  Display Modes 
August 11th, 2016, 05:57 PM  #11 
Math Team Joined: Dec 2013 From: Colombia Posts: 7,675 Thanks: 2655 Math Focus: Mainly analysis and algebra  One problem with this approach is that without defining definite integrals in terms of the area under a curve (usually via Riemann sums) and the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, you have no justification for calling that quantity the area under the curve. This is a serious flaw when "the area under the curve" has such a strong natural meaning that we can verify answers against (given the right tools).

August 24th, 2016, 06:37 AM  #12 
Senior Member Joined: Dec 2012 From: Hong Kong Posts: 853 Thanks: 311 Math Focus: Stochastic processes, statistical inference, data mining, computational linguistics 
In Hong Kong, Riemann summation is not usually taught until the first course in analysis. Teachers tend to start from indefinite integration, then teach the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus without proof.

August 24th, 2016, 08:20 AM  #13 
Senior Member Joined: Jun 2015 From: England Posts: 915 Thanks: 271 
One thing forgotten by most teachers is that They are (I hope) familiar with the subject and its ramifications and development, whilst students are not. So looking at it from the point of view of a student, everything is new and unfamiliar. This doesn't apply only to calculus, it is pretty general. So when new material is presented the student glosses over much of the subtlety to get some much needed experience under his belt. When I first learned calculus both differentiation (first) and later integration were presented as limits. Then we quickly moved on in both cases to get familiarity with some examples / manipulation. This provided both comfort and motivation for pursuing the subject. Then still later the formal development of both procedures was revisited and connected. I don't think it really matters which comes first. 
August 24th, 2016, 08:26 AM  #14 
Newbie Joined: Aug 2016 From: Viet Nam Posts: 1 Thanks: 0 
I think 1 is better. Despite the fact that i was first introduced to integration as in 2

August 24th, 2016, 12:06 PM  #15 
Newbie Joined: Jul 2016 From: Switzerland Posts: 4 Thanks: 2 Math Focus: graph theory 
I was also introduced using method 2. I remember my teacher back then made us cut pieces of paper and try to fill an arbitrary shape with ever smaller pieces. Then we moved through the successive theorems up to the fundamental integral theorem. I think we saw only later the application of the integral as inverse of the derivative, or maybe in parrallel as exercises. I think if you go with method 2 first, you have to present things through an application in geometry or physics else the students won't relate. 
September 9th, 2016, 07:17 AM  #16 
Senior Member Joined: Aug 2016 From: morocco Posts: 273 Thanks: 32 
The best way to teach integration is to start by historic introduction : archimedes, Newton, Leibnitz, Cauchy and Riemann.


Tags 
antiderivative, area, curve 
Thread Tools  
Display Modes  

Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Area under Ph curve?  philip  Physics  0  February 12th, 2014 05:22 AM 
area under a curve  ehh  Calculus  11  January 27th, 2013 07:53 PM 
Area under curve  Ter  Calculus  6  October 8th, 2012 10:50 AM 
area under curve  forgot_it_all  Calculus  1  October 28th, 2010 09:53 PM 
area under the curve  Aurica  Calculus  1  May 23rd, 2009 10:40 AM 