Does Foerster's Algebra I cover more material than Lial's Introductory?

[Stacy in NJ]

We're using Foerster, but I had a look at the TOC of Lial's yesterday, and at first blush, it looks as if Foerster covers a broader scope. Is this true? Or is it just a differing sequence that makes it appear so?

 

Thanks, Stacy

[Jann in TX]

Different texts/publishers will group concepts together differently--and the TOCs will just give you a 'rough' idea about what topics will be addressed--but NOT how deep they go into them.

 

Lial's, Foersters and Larson were all 'made' to the same set of standards. They cover the same essential material--what they tack on to the end in the last chapter or two may be different--but most likely that part is just an INTRODUCTION to a topic that is covered from scratch in the Algebra 2 text.

 

I teach out of Lial's and this year I have a few students who used Foerster for Algebra 1 (I'm teaching them Algebra 2). The only difference I could see between these students and the ones who used Lial's for Algebra 1 was the way word problems were worked. All of the students prefered the way Lial teaches the 'chart' method... conceptually both groups were in the SAME place.

 

There is a bit more difference between Lial's Algebra 2 and Foersters Algebra 2. Lial's does not teach the graphing calculator and Foersters does. Lial does teach concepts like Matrices in a way that will be EASY for the students to translate into a graphing calculator format. I prefer linear functions worked by hand at this level so in reality my Lial students are not missing anything by not using the graphing calculator. I do have them using a multi-line display calculator (TI 30 or 34) and those key in everything else like the graphing calculator but cost only $15... my former students have had no issue with begininng graphing calculator use in Pre-Calc.

[Stacy in NJ]

Thanks for the explanation, Jann. My algebra knowledge is a milimeter deep and a centimeter wide, so I'm glad to get an experienced opinion.