How I Teach Calculus: A Comedy (Natural Exponent)
This post is a part a larger series documenting the changes I am making to my calculus course. My goals are to implement standards-based grading and to introduce genuine applications of the concepts being taught. I’m not suffering any delusions that any of this is all that ground-breaking, I just want to log the comedy that ensues:
Ah, the number e. Mystical, silly, and sublimely ubiquitous in math and science. Euler had his way with this number, and now we get to reap the benefits of the progeny. How do I teach about it to my calculus students that have absolutely no concept of this magic number and its monolithic importance? Well, I sure as hockey sticks don’t start off with the mysticism. That’s a sure fire way to make something seem inaccessible.
My goal is to present exponential functions as a separate beast from the polynomials these kids already know and love. The difference really stems from the following differential equation. I’m going to work the whole thing out for those of you who are here to learn content:
**DON’T START THERE ^
The solution to this equation is the natural exponential function. What does this mean? There’s more to that original diff eq than meets the eye. It’s actually a robot! No, wait, it says something very important in English, actually. It says, “The more of something I have, the faster that something gets bigger (or smaller).” Or, every politicians favorite phrase, “A slippery slope.” That’s quite different from any polynomial. That simple sentence describes a whole slough of physical phenomena. It is also the hardest for kids to grasp. This is where I must begin.
They want to say that anything that is increasing and concave up is “exponential.” This is just not the case. Things that go faster because there are more of them are exponential. Things like bacteria, things like radioactive nuclei, things like rabbits. There’s a fundamental connection between this idea and the real world here that cannot be ignored in a calculus course (but often is, sadly).
Do I begin with that derivation I just presented? No. Hell no. I believe you’d get your ass kicked for sayin’ something like that.
I believe in hooks. I believe in motivation (link). I believe in comedy. The process of teaching about e is pretty messy, and I’m having a hard time organizing it into a blog post. So, I’m just going to shotgun it at you guys and you can pick out what you like, or just keep making fun of me from your mom’s basement, whatev.
Ball Drop, Yo!
Here’s the first thing we did. This was inspired from the cover of an old physics book that looked like this:

The kid asked, “How high is each bounce?” I tucked this one away for the moment that my HIGH SPEED VIDEO CAMERA arrived:
We spent a decent amount of time doing some video manipulation. We put grids on things. We measured fingers for scale. I have another version of the video with a meter stick and a stopwatch in frame, but I think that it takes away from the thought necessary to extract data from the video. An exponential function can fit the max heights of the bounces in time. Why? I’m not totally sure, but I bet it has something to do with the fact that the amount of energy lost per bounce is directly related to how much energy is in system at any given time (see diff eq above).
How Dead Is It?
I spent a week in the high Wyoming desert plateaus a few summers ago, and I found this:
Carbon dating experiment ensues. I’m perfectly aware that getting a good read on the amount of C14 left in an object requires a giant pile of lab equipment. But all we’ve got is a Geiger counter and some bones. C14′s main decay mode is through beta decay which creates inert N14. Setting up this experiment and learning about Carbon dating took about 3 days.
Taking data from our bones was even worse. We set up a giant metal box and put as much lead and bricks around it as possible. We measured for a few days in order to try and figure out the number of counts coming from our bones. The data was fairly worthless, but the exercise itself was quite valuable. I’m sure you’re already teaching Carbon dating in calculus, so I won’t belabor this point. I would suggest picking up a Geiger counter on the cheap via ebay.
In the end I teach the natural exponent just like everyone else. (… the only base that gives a slope of 1 at x=0…) Some good solid board work and comedy. The calculus comes in when we attempt to discuss how the rate of a change of these phenomena behave. The answer can take you a couple of different places:
The Graphical
This is probably the easiest way for kids to get this. Draw Exp[x] and put some tangent lines on it:
Now make a graph of those slopes as a function of x:
The same graph! Therefore,
Infinite Series:
If you teach calculus, you’ve probably taught about infinite series. Here’s the most fun one:
Carry that out for a few terms. Now take the derivative of it. Yup, the same thing. This must be Exp(x). (OMG!)1 This one blows their minds a bit. It’s a bit Mr. Wizardy, but remember I’m an opportunist when it comes to instruction. There’s no pedagogical dogma here. Kids need direct instruction? Do it. Kids need inquiry that day? Do it. Whatever grabs a kid and makes their learning extensible is what I’m going to do.
Cut Your Teeth:
I use these as bell-ringers <digress>I wish there were a less teachery word than that. “Warm Up” maybe? “Stretches”, “Exposition”</digress> These get at the concept of lograithmic differentiation, too. Which is a separate concept I leave until later so as not to muddle the tykes.
Find the extrema of the following functions (these aren’t new; they are under the sun after all):2
1. This also results in a sweet discussion about factorials. They represent how many times you can arrange that many unique objects. That explains why 0! = 1. You can order zero things in precisely one way! I didn’t know this until embarrassingly late into my education.
2. Answers: x=1/e. x=e.
Surreality: Cornally.profDev(you); Can O’ Worms: Eat It, Salary Schedule
Comments are disabled.
8 thoughts on “How I Teach Calculus: A Comedy (Natural Exponent)”




I really enjoy your blog. I’m not a teacher (so I’m in no position to evaluate), but I think what you are doing with SBG is excellent. It certainly makes a lot of intuitive sense to me. Hopefully the data over the long haul agrees.
I saw one thing in your post I’m not sure about. You asked for the absolute maximum of x^x. I think x^x has no abs. max. 1/e looks like a root or stationary point for the function but I think x^x gets bigger forever with increasing x.
@luke: nice catch, I meant to write “extrema” implying mins and maxes. post edited. Thanks!
You wrote: “An exponential function can fit the max heights of the bounces in time. Why? I’m not totally sure, but I bet it has some thing to do with the fact that the amount of energy lost per bounce is directly related to how much energy is in system at any given time (see diff eq above).”
Actually, the same fraction of drop height (i.e., energy) becomes the rebound height. If you drop a ball from many heights and graph Rebound Height vs. Drop Height you will get a straight line whose slope is this fraction. Different balls have different slopes.
In other words, if the rebound-to-drop ratio was 0.8, then dropping the ball from 2 meters yields:
Initial drop: 2*(0.8)^0 = 2
1st bounce: 2*0.8 = 2*(0.8)^1 = 1.6 m
2nd bounce: 1.6*0.8 = 2*(0.8)^2 = 1.28 m
3rd bounce: 1.28*0.8 = 2*(0.8)^3 = 1.02 meter
nth bounce: 2*(0.8)^n
@Frank: Word. Nicely put, Thanks!
A thought to add. Something like this might already be part of what you’re doing. But defining e was always a favorite lesson for me when I taught calculus, so I gotta throw in my little bit.
Having brought out the fact (familiar to most of my kids) that exponential functions (with any base) are what you get when your rate of growth is controlled by your amount (population growth is my favorite example because you can talk about more people making more babies and the kids can snicker about the subtext without anything inappropriate actually being said), I have the kiddies calculate derivatives for 2^x, 3^x and 4^x, manually from the difference quotient, getting answers like 2^x * lim (2^h-1)/h and then manually estimating the limit with small values of h on a calculator. We make a table of function vs. derivative. Maybe we go up to 5^x, maybe not. I ask kids to relate the table to what we were saying about population growth and they see that in each case, the function’s rate of change is a constant multiple of itself.
Me: “Oh, so the derivative is a lot like the original function, huh?”
Them: “Yeah.”
Me: “Is it bigger or smaller?”
You can see where this is going. They see that for f=2^x, f’ is smaller than f whereas for f=3^x, f’ is bigger, and for f=4^x it’s “more bigger.”
Me: “Oh, that’s interesting.”
One time, this was enough to get some kid to wonder aloud if there was a number between 2 and 3 that would make f and f’ exactly equal. The other times I had to do a little more prodding to get this question out.
Ben: That’s awesome. Thank you!
=shawn
In TN we have to teach a bit about e in Algebra 2 (at least via the compound interest bit). Do you do anything in that vein when you’re doing limits?
Also, a teacher at our school calls the “bell-ringers” PRIMETIME! Then the rest of the class is SHOWTIME!
@CalcDave: Yup, we talked about it with limits, but I always feel weird teaching about that considering there aren’t any real accounts that compound continuously like that. Bank accounts are definitely one of our talking points, for sure though. I love PRIMETIME and SHOWTIME. That’s awesome.
=shawn