The Anja S.

Greer Conference on Mathematics, Science and Technology

Tuesday June 24, 2014
CWIC Session 4: Julia Graves Quadratic Models Without Quadratic Regression
Diana Tunnell for MA901A2

Ms. Graves began the presentation by pointing out that given limited data sets that students
can work with in a class period, it may often be challenging to determine the true nature of a
function. For example, Could the piece of the curve seen be part of a Sin curve or maybe an
exponential function or even a quadratic? In general, our secondary students are still
novices in their experiences working with these more advanced functions and are not as
familiar with their characteristics. However, linear functions are introduced in middle school
and students are generally quite familiar with the relationships associated with these
functions. This workshop provided an alternative approach to identifying the equation of a
quadratic without using quadratic regression but rather using the more familiar linear
regression.
Attendees went through one sample with Ms. Graves guiding the way on the TI-84. Our data
set contained six points and produced the graph below.

One might rightly assume that this is a section of the characteristic parabola graph of a
quadratic function but cannot be certain. We approached the problems by utilizing the
generalized vertex form of a quadratic equation y = a (x-h)^2 + k. The ordered pair (h,K)
represents the vertex of the parabola and was the first point we addressed in finding the
components of this equation. It was not readily apparent from the data set what the vertex
was.
From looking at our graph, we could see that the change in the vertical or y values were
decreasing in value. The vertex is either found at the highest or lowest point of the parabola
and therefore is the point where the y values will change from positive to negative and where
the change in the y values would be zero. The LIST/OPS file offered a command that allowed
us to calculate the delta y values which we then stored in a list to graph. Because we only had
5 differences but 6 original X values the dimensions did not match and we were unable to
graph. The method Ms. Graves suggested as a reasonable work-around was to then find the
average of the successive data points which we did and allowed a proper dimensional match

in the number of X and Y values in our list. We then ran a linear regression to find the
equation of the line.
The resulting graph produced a line with the regression equation is y = -2.5x + 10.75 Setting
that equation equal to zero, we solved to find x = 4.3. One component of our desired vertex
form of the quadratic was now determined. y = a (x-4.3)^2 + k.
We now needed to find the new set of x values by taking each original x value and subtracting
the 4.3 and then squaring that difference [(x-4.3)^2 for each of the original six X values]. We
ran a second linear regression on this to obtain the equation y= -2.5 x + 28.4. Here, although
presented as a line, we really needed to take the slope (-2.5) and set that as the value of the
leading coefficient A in our vertex form. The y intercept of 28.4 is the K value in the
quadratic.
We have now obtained a reasonable quadratic equation y = -2.5 (x-4.3)^2 +28.4. We graphed
that to obtain the missing view of our parabola which matches beautifully with our original
plotted points.


Although, a bit cumbersome in the process, the extra steps above simply having the calculator
complete the quadratic regression, allows the student to make deeper meaning of how all the
pieces relate. This would be an exercise worth doing a few times within an Algebra 2 course.