Sunshine State Sue Posted August 17, 2010 Share Posted August 17, 2010 We are finishing Jacob's Geometry (3rd edition) Chapter 1. I have a degree in math, and Geometry was the only math class I hated. I can tell already that I don't like this teacher's guide. I'm missing Foerster's already. So, can anyone explain to me why Ch. 1 Review page 36 #9 has an answer of 9? The TM is absolutely no help. It says: The following pattern can be used to form a cube. There is a picture that I will attempt to describe. It is 6 squares arranged in a cross 4 down, 3 across, 1 in common. The question is: In how many lines do the edges of the pattern lie? The answer is 9. This is not the first time that I have been stumped by some of the answers in the TM, and we are only on Chapter 1. If anyone has any hints, I'd be happy to hear them. I want a solutions manual. :crying: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swimmermom3 Posted August 17, 2010 Share Posted August 17, 2010 Sue, you have my sympathy. This is what we came up with when my dd did it earlier this year. You have the following lines: LM, JP, WQ, UT, JW, LU, MT, OR, and PQ. I put them in order so hopefully they will make sense visually. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EKS Posted August 17, 2010 Share Posted August 17, 2010 The only hint I have is to try the 2nd edition as it is more linear and doesn't have the crazy real-world overlay for most of the problems. As for the particular problem, I can see where he gets 9, but I don't think I could explain it without pointing at the figure, so I won't try. This type of problem is the reason we moved away from Jacobs altogether, even though we both loved him for algebra. My son simply couldn't understand what he was asking the majority of the time and I didn't have the time to explain (nor did it think it was appropriate for me to have to explain) practically every problem. We ended up moving to TT Geometry. Not my first choice, but it did cover everything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunshine State Sue Posted August 17, 2010 Author Share Posted August 17, 2010 Lisa, you are a lifesaver! Ds did figure it out, but there is no way that we would have ever come up with that answer ourselves. I'll keep the TT Geometry in mind. I have a negative opinion of TT in general, but it is my understanding that the Geometry is better than the rest. I also know that if we stumble through Geometry, it won't matter in the long run. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swimmermom3 Posted August 17, 2010 Share Posted August 17, 2010 Sue, as a math teacher, what do you think of how Saxon incorporates geometry into their curriculum from the very start and until recently did not have a separate geometry course? The reason I ask is because of a couple of observations over the last two years of our home schooling. Geometry has been the bane of my teaching existence for the last 18 months since my dd decided to take math at home instead of at her ps hs. In order to have the geometry credit count with her hs, we had to go through Keystone National High School which uses a horrible Glencoe geometry text for which I can't get a teacher's guide. She has just crawled through that program struggling all the way. Simultaneously, she is working in the 3rd edition Jacob's book which she finds easy. That would be encouraging except that she can't translate what she has learned there and apply it to Keystone.:tongue_smilie: Swimmer Dude, who has worked his way through Saxon the last couple of years, actually helps her with basics that don't involve proofs. He has a good grasp of many geometric concepts and is very comfortable with it. Do you think we do our kids a disservice by separating geometry out as a single course? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swimmermom3 Posted August 17, 2010 Share Posted August 17, 2010 Lisa, you are a lifesaver! Ds did figure it out, but there is no way that we would have ever come up with that answer ourselves. I'll keep the TT Geometry in mind. I have a negative opinion of TT in general, but it is my understanding that the Geometry is better than the rest. I also know that if we stumble through Geometry, it won't matter in the long run. Is TT the visual program with the DVDs? I ask because I have Glencoe Goemetry with no teacher's manual, Jacob's Geometry with the highly unsatisfactory enhanced teacher's guide, Life of Fred Geometry (jury is still out) and Patty Paper Geometry which I swear my kids learn more from in a once a week session than they do from the texts. I'm still not happy.:tongue_smilie:My kids do not like to learn math with anything except books. If I have to buy the Saxon geometry book to make it through the next two kids, I'll cry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunshine State Sue Posted August 17, 2010 Author Share Posted August 17, 2010 Sue, as a math teacher, what do you think of how Saxon incorporates geometry into their curriculum from the very start and until recently did not have a separate geometry course? Lisa, I'm not a math teacher. I have a degree in math and computer science and I work as a programmer. I am not fond of Saxon, but I know many who are. My evaluator was a math teacher, homeschooled 5 kids, and used Saxon for high school with all of them. At least 1 went on to be a CC math teacher as well. My bil (BS in Math and Economics) used Saxon in high school with his dd. Saxon has been used in public school for probably longer than any other math program. I'm sure it's fine. I imagine that if they only created a separate Geometry course recently that it was due to requests (or more $$$) rather than necessity. Do you think we do our kids a disservice by separating geometry out as a single course? Since Geometry was separated out in the stone age when I was in school, I imagine that's the best way to keep it. But, I've been known to be wrong before. Is TT the visual program with the DVDs? TT does have DVDs. It's my understanding that the lessons are on there and they work through every problem on the DVD as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LuvingLife Posted August 17, 2010 Share Posted August 17, 2010 I like this post. I was wondering of TT covers everything in geometry for the SAT and ACT, and Saxon does work for a lot of kids, even though it is unique! I have heard the new Saxon goemetry is good, what about TT? Does this work? I can't stand Jacob's geometry!:tongue_smilie: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ma23peas Posted August 17, 2010 Share Posted August 17, 2010 I'm counting on all of you math moms to FIND the answer by December!! I HATED geometry...9th grade Mrs. Leatherwood....oh my...in four years, I only made one B...it was Geometry, have no idea how I made A's the other sessions....and we're finishing up Algebra from last year and hope to start Geometry in January, I'm trying to add another Algebra book in (using LOF/Saxon) b/c I just don't feel he's gotten a complete program yet....thinking of buying Foerster's Algebra 1 but have no clue which edition to get.... aaargh, not liking this consensus on bad geometry texts! Tara Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunshine State Sue Posted August 17, 2010 Author Share Posted August 17, 2010 I'm trying to add another Algebra book in (using LOF/Saxon) b/c I just don't feel he's gotten a complete program yet....thinking of buying Foerster's Algebra 1 but have no clue which edition to get.... What are you using for Algebra now? We used 1999 Foerster's Algebra. ISBNs here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
annabanana1992 Posted August 17, 2010 Share Posted August 17, 2010 Well, I am a mathy person, and I teach high school math. I have used many texts (Forester, Larson, Chicago, and LOF and Saxon.) This may be a controversial opinion, but I don't really think geometry hugely figures into the whole math progression to Calculus. Now, I think everyone should take it and endeavor to get and the proofs help develop thinking skills. Practically speaking, you need it for the SATs. However, higher math doesn't build on it to a large degree. So that being said, we are taking the "let's get through it without blood and tears" (sweat is ok - I like hard work for my kids :001_smile: ) approach and using LOF. It is designed to be self-taught. I spoke with the author, and he said that if DS gets stuck have DS call him! FWIW, I feel very differently about Algebra! DS is being "forced" to take it twice using two different texts. So... there you go... one (probably meaningless) mathy opinion.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunshine State Sue Posted August 17, 2010 Author Share Posted August 17, 2010 (edited) Well, I am a mathy person, and I teach high school math. I have used many texts (Forester, Larson, Chicago, and LOF and Saxon.) This may be a controversial opinion, but I don't really think geometry hugely figures into the whole math progression to Calculus. Now, I think everyone should take it and endeavor to get and the proofs help develop thinking skills. Practically speaking, you need it for the SATs. However, higher math doesn't build on it to a large degree. So that being said, we are taking the "let's get through it without blood and tears" (sweat is ok - I like hard work for my kids :001_smile: ) approach and using LOF. It is designed to be self-taught. I spoke with the author, and he said that if DS gets stuck have DS call him! FWIW, I feel very differently about Algebra! DS is being "forced" to take it twice using two different texts. So... there you go... one (probably meaningless) mathy opinion.... :iagree: with the Algebra/Geometry assessment. OTOH, LoF Algebra didn't work well for us. Edited August 17, 2010 by Sue in St Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murphy101 Posted August 17, 2010 Share Posted August 17, 2010 Well, I am a mathy person, and I teach high school math. I have used many texts (Forester, Larson, Chicago, and LOF and Saxon.) This may be a controversial opinion, but I don't really think geometry hugely figures into the whole math progression to Calculus. Now, I think everyone should take it and endeavor to get and the proofs help develop thinking skills. Practically speaking, you need it for the SATs. However, higher math doesn't build on it to a large degree. So that being said, we are taking the "let's get through it without blood and tears" (sweat is ok - I like hard work for my kids :001_smile: ) approach and using LOF. It is designed to be self-taught. I spoke with the author, and he said that if DS gets stuck have DS call him! FWIW, I feel very differently about Algebra! DS is being "forced" to take it twice using two different texts. So... there you go... one (probably meaningless) mathy opinion.... What about the ACT? Is it just as heavy on there as the SAT? I'm very nervous about this. Lials algebra is working great for us and I'm seriously considering going straight to alg 2 and then doing LoF geometry. Would that mess my boys up fir life or what? Jann? Your opinion on that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jann in TX Posted August 17, 2010 Share Posted August 17, 2010 While it is not a 'requirement' for college maths, it is a requirement for graduation in most states--and something that colleges expect to see on a transcript. The FORMULA work is the most important part as far as higher math goes. It is a great way to practice Algebra 1 skills while the student matures one more year before they get to the more abstract concepts of Algebra 2. I did graduate my oldest dd without having her take Geometry--but she has learning differences and it was all she could do to get through Algebra 1 and Algebra 2 in 4 years... she DID learn Algebra and she aced her college math course at the CC last year... she is an 'artsy' person and that was the LAST math class she ever needs to take--and she is THRILLED! If you take Geometry after Algebra 2 then you have more than one calendar year to forget Algebra 2 skills because they are not practiced in Geometry--most Pre-Calc classes do not offer enough review for these students... (I also took this route in high school and deeply regretted it!). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murphy101 Posted August 17, 2010 Share Posted August 17, 2010 Well toot. Alright then, I'll suck it up and figure out something for geometry then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
annabanana1992 Posted August 17, 2010 Share Posted August 17, 2010 While it is not a 'requirement' for college maths, it is a requirement for graduation in most states--and something that colleges expect to see on a transcript. The FORMULA work is the most important part as far as higher math goes. It is a great way to practice Algebra 1 skills while the student matures one more year before they get to the more abstract concepts of Algebra 2. I did graduate my oldest dd without having her take Geometry--but she has learning differences and it was all she could do to get through Algebra 1 and Algebra 2 in 4 years... she DID learn Algebra and she aced her college math course at the CC last year... she is an 'artsy' person and that was the LAST math class she ever needs to take--and she is THRILLED! If you take Geometry after Algebra 2 then you have more than one calendar year to forget Algebra 2 skills because they are not practiced in Geometry--most Pre-Calc classes do not offer enough review for these students... (I also took this route in high school and deeply regretted it!). :iagree: I am definitely in the Geometry b/w Alg I and Alg II camp.... I have had too many young students fail Alg II because they need that extra year to mature that geometry provided. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teachin'Mine Posted August 17, 2010 Share Posted August 17, 2010 Sue I feel for you. :grouphug: It sounds like Jacobs geometry is similar to HM geometry. The "solutions manual" was little more than an answer key. I was never so happy to be done with a math course as I was with that geometry course. :tongue_smilie: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ma23peas Posted August 18, 2010 Share Posted August 18, 2010 What are you using for Algebra now? We used 1999 Foerster's Algebra. ISBNs here. Exactly what I needed!!!! Thanks!!! Tara Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MyThreeSons Posted August 18, 2010 Share Posted August 18, 2010 I use Key Curriculum's Discovering Geometry, 3rd edition. It has many hands-on explorations which I think helps most students to better understand the concepts. You can see samples here: http://www.keypress.com/x5367.xml It has lots of great teachers resources, and there are links to animations and such. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swimmermom3 Posted August 18, 2010 Share Posted August 18, 2010 Well, I am a mathy person, and I teach high school math. I have used many texts (Forester, Larson, Chicago, and LOF and Saxon.) This may be a controversial opinion, but I don't really think geometry hugely figures into the whole math progression to Calculus. Now, I think everyone should take it and endeavor to get and the proofs help develop thinking skills. Practically speaking, you need it for the SATs. However, higher math doesn't build on it to a large degree. So that being said, we are taking the "let's get through it without blood and tears" (sweat is ok - I like hard work for my kids :001_smile: ) approach and using LOF. It is designed to be self-taught. I spoke with the author, and he said that if DS gets stuck have DS call him! FWIW, I feel very differently about Algebra! DS is being "forced" to take it twice using two different texts. So... there you go... one (probably meaningless) mathy opinion.... No, this is a great opinion in my book with regards to Algebra. This is what 8Filltheheart suggested I do. We had already started playing with Life of Fred Beginning Algebra as a break from Saxon 8/7. We'll finish it in the first two months of this school year and then move on to Foerster Algebra 1. Thanks for the heads-up on the LofF Geometry. Now that I don't have to worry about the accreditation issue for my dd, we can probably just use that and do some review with Kahn Academy and call it all good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.