I was having this debate with a colleague. The check we need to use has actually a difficulty where it claims the slope there is no units simply a number value. It likewise gives the horizontal distance with units. The problem asks to uncover the vertical distance yet does not point out the units.

You are watching: What are the units of slope

My colleague argues that because slope is a ratio units room not needed and that means the systems must complement at the end.

I argue that you do require the units since the vertical systems are never specified. No to mention we want to be clear in ours message. Friend wouldn't go approximately someone and also say the slope is .25. You would say something prefer you advanced .25 ft vertically for every 1 ft. Horizontally. I realize this means the units mitigate out but the paper definition matters.

Thoughts? The units for slope are the units for the vertical axis split by the systems for the horizontal axis. For example, if the horizontal axis to represent time and the upright axis represents street traveled, climate the slope has units of distance per time, i.e. Velocity. This adheres to from the fact that the slope is the change in the y-value divided by the change in the x-value.

In the instance where the horizontal and vertical axes have the same units, i.e. If both stand for distance, climate the slope is a dimensionless quantity.

For those of united state that have been learning and also doing math for such a long time ns feel favor that is less complicated for them to infer. Because that students despite it is this sort of subtle stuff the confuses the crap out of them. As soon as we can just be straight forward and also express it.

When would certainly you ever say "feet every foot" in conversation? A unitless presentation matches natural language and is the finest mathematical interpretation.

How execute we understand that the upright axis is not in inches? The slope could be 3 in./ 2 in.. The math interpretation would certainly be 1.5. But our horizontal is given in feet.

At which allude you could argue that the paper definition is combined up and also units don't match. I beg your pardon is really what my argument is about. How do we recognize for sure the units of the slope are feet.

I think that the context is very important. I think it help to solidify the idea that a graph isn't separate from one function, however a visual depiction that can help understand the behavior of a function. Whether it's feet per second or customs per inch. The easiest I've ever before thought the it to be still climb over run for contextless bookwork and also that's tho a unit of distance per distance.

When i taught slope I never taught the basic mathematical proportion first. I would always introduce the ide by allowing the students to just describe the rise and run in English; this necessitated making use of units and clarifying horizontal or vertical.

At some point in this process we would talk about how saying "feet vertical" / "feet horizontal" deserve to be simplified to simply saying rise/run (dimensionless) as lengthy as we're using the exact same units for the two dimensions (as we have to in a unit Cartesian plane). We just state just how this is easier and also move on. Eventually, the idea that "slope" is now a proportion with devices implied but not stated simply out of convention of gift easier.

As such, ns think the answer to your question is less about "are devices needed" but an ext of "can the student answer the question asked?" I would certainly say this way that in the context of a "physical" problem, we must make certain students recognize that the idea the slope and also other mathematical principles are simply abstractions, no the answer.

See more: Convert 28 Inches Equals How Many Feet, 28 In To Ft

To the end, I'd speak units room required since (a) the trouble specifies units, and (b) slope is a rate of change of one dimension vs another, and also has units implied because that both dimensions... And also we must make certain the student knows that.