Geometry on ACT/SAT: TT or LoF?

[Tardis Girl]

OK, I am hesitant to even bring this up because I feel like I'm beating a dead horse here (what a terrible expression!), but my dd is asking me if Teaching Textbooks Geometry OR Life of Fred Geometry will better prepare her for the geometry math portion on the ACT/SAT. Does anyone know?? Does it even matter? Some of her friends have said things about the tests like "it was all geometry" -- but who knows what that really means in real terms.

 

For those who have heard my math woes in the past week, this is the dd who is switching geometry math books halfway through because the old one is just deplorable for an independent learner. The thought of going through more theorems and postulates is NOT a happy thought for this girl, but she is prepared to stick it out. Of course, postulates and theorems are not on the ACT/SAT, as far as I know.

 

She started last week on LoF Advanced Algebra (and is loving it!), and I think will also be using Lial's Alg2 (which we are still waiting to receive). But she still needs more time with Geometry. <sigh>

[Tardis Girl]

I meant to make "doesn't matter" one of the poll options -- but I don't think I can edit a poll. :( Sorry about that. And yes, I know I just need to make a decision and move forward. Aargh!! :001_unsure:

[Luckymama]

I can't help with specifics of the different books because my two used traditional textbooks in their geometry classes. If youngest is home with me for geometry, she will use one of the textbooks we own since we didn't sell the kids' books back.

 

Do you own the TT and LoF? Can you look at the contents/material?

 

This is straight from the College Board's Official SAT Study Guide (aka the blue book):

 

Concepts you need to know:

-geometric notation

-points and lines

-angles in the plane

-triangles (incl special triangles)

--equilateral

--isoceles

--right and Pythag. theorem

--30/60/90

--45/45/90

--3-4-5

--congruent

--similar

--triangle inequality

-quadilaterals

--parallelograms

--rectangles

--squares

-areas and perimeters

--areas of squares and rectangles

--perimeters of squares and rectangles

--area of triangles

--area of parallelograms

-other polygons

--angles in a polygon

--perimeter

--area

-circles

--diameter

--radius

--arc

--tangent to a circle

--circumference

--area

-solid geometry

--solid figures and volumes

--surface area

-geometric perception

-coordinate geometry

--slopes, parallel lines and perpendicular lines

--the midpoint formula

--the distance formula

-transformations

 

The SAT doesn't include

-formal geometric proofs

-trigonometry

-radian measure

 

After the listing, the blue book goes through a review of the concepts listed above. You might want to get a copy of the blue book (good to have anyway) to help you and your dd make the decision.

[Teachin'Mine]

I'm not familiar with the ones you mentioned, but I think any good geometry course should be fine. As has been mentioned, there is nothing related to formal proofs on the SAT. It's all about area, volume, angles, circles, etc.. To get a better idea, get a study book from the library. It will show you the breakdown of how many questions on the test cover algebra, how many geometry, etc.. No matter what math program you choose, I think the best way to study specifically for any of the tests is with the test specific study guides. But I also think that 95 percent or more of what's in those books should be review of what's already learned. It's more about becoming familiar with the wording of the questions, and learning how to avoid the "looks good but it's wrong" answers. :)

[Tardis Girl]

Thank you SO much for your thoughts and encouragement. We don't own either LoF or TT, although we did just receive LoF AdvAlg and Trig with the HCs. But the ToC are online for both of those books.

 

You know, I've never paid much attention to standardized tests, and we've always had this mindset of just "lifelong learning" and having a joy of learning, etc. But with those darn ACT/SATs looming only months away, it's sparked this bit of panic in me! lol Both my older DDs took the PLAN test (like a pre-ACT taken sophomore year), and it suggests they will do fairly well on the ACT, but math just gets these guys more than anything. And of course, a couple of colleges on their "short lists" are fairly competitive and say the avg ACT score is 28-30, plus there are scholarship considerations, etc. So I guess I'm just freaking out a bit. lol Thank you for calming me down.

 

Breathe. Breathe. :coolgleamA:

[Mandy in TN]

Do an ACT practice test and see what you think. IMHO, any mediocre proofless geometry text should do. The only geometry that my 16yo who is about to start 11th grade has had and will have is MUS Geometry. It is fairly painless and very proof light, but it covers what is on the ACT.

 

Mandy

[HeatherInWI]

We were just doing an ACT geometry review today. Only the basic concepts seem to be included, not proofs and the like, so either one would work. (We're using LOF for our math-lover an TT for our non-math sort.)

[Tardis Girl]

Thank you, to all! I am encouraged by hearing more about the ACT, too. I went ahead and got the TT Geometry for her. Although is really enjoying LoF Adv Alg, and I could see her sticking with it beyond, she is just sooo ready to be done with geometry after dealing with this other text for so long. So after much discussion together and comparing contents and samples and such, I think TT will be much easier for her to just jump into midstream -- she'll go through the earlier chapters faster for review and see if there are any sticky spots, then dig in and finish. I think she would really enjoy LoF, but right now she just needs to "get it over with" (not the best attitude, I know, but once in a while I guess that's just life).

 

Again, thank you! :D

[Tiramisu]

I haven't voted yet, but I'll share my thoughts anyway. We used TT Geometry and it was fine, but there were lots of theorems and proofs. In your situation, I think MUS would be a better choice. Since MUS is a mastery program, it just seems like it would be easier to locate the specific areas that your dd needs to work on and focus on those. The rest you could use as review if you felt she needed to. She could go through quickly. On these boards you hear of families that go through it in a few months or so. It just seems so much easier to adjust it to your needs than TT would be.