Jump to content

Menu

What Dolciani do I have?


Recommended Posts

I received a book "Modern school mathematics Structure & Method, course 2 new edition". It is the teacher's edition.

 

What grade level would this book be for?

 

The isbn is 039513773x copyright 1972.

 

All of these old textbooks have me confused, intrigued, but confused.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is a middle school textbook, probably grade 8. I did a google search and found a study comparing the difficulty of probability problems in math books of various eras, from New Math onward. It stated that Modern School Mathematics: Structure and Method was considered one of the most popular middle school texts of the New Math period. (They also include Saxon in their comparisons, as part of the Problem Solving, 1984-1993, group, just as a point of interest.) I imagine it was meant to lead into the algebra Structure and Method books.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks so much, both of you. Kimber, I was hoping it was Algebra 2 when I ordered it. I got it from paperbackswap so it was basically free. I did think it looked too easy for Alg 2, IOW I understood it :001_smile:.

 

Forty-two thanks for linking the report, I'll have to check that out. I did find an inexpensive student text I may just go ahead and order. That way we could jump into this book before heading straight into the algebra. Thank you, thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been reading over the study, and I'm not sure what I think of it. The authors are using constructivist standards (straight from a '98 NCTM publication) to judge the cognitive load of each problem, and so naturally the only constructivist series has far more problems at high cognitive loads (which the study considers to be good) than all the rest. Said series, Connected Mathematics, received an F from Mathematically Correct for its 7th grade text (though it did receive its only good marks for the section that most pertains to probability). I'm deeply skeptical about the efficacy of constructivist math, and, as the authors of this study have the superiority of contructivist standards as one of their underlying assumptions, I'm skeptical about their results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Once again, I skimmed it. And I couldn't get the jest of what they were trying to prove too well. But it didn't seem overly positive on the new math.

 

Kimberly

 

But thank you immensely for the link. I've been looking for New Math type pre-algebra books and evidently these are the ones I was searching for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am assuming that they don't do proofs as that level. Proofs basically mean the students must explain or justify their mathematical operation. For instance, if they multiply 2 times everything in the parentheses then must write down next to that operation that they can do this because of the distributive law of multiplication.

 

I am wondering, however, whether or not the book you have found asks students to give an example of terms such as the distributive law of multiplication. Are they expected to memorize terms like addend, subtrahend, dividend, etc.... Basically, are they required to write out or give examples of simple equations that demonstrate mathematical laws and be able to write definitions for them.

 

Like these for example

 

Commutative law of addition: m + n = n + m . A sum isn’t changed at rearrangement of its addends.

 

Commutative law of multiplication: m · n = n · m . A product isn’t changed at rearrangement of its factors.

 

Associative law of addition: ( m + n ) + k = m + ( n + k ) = m + n + k . A sum doesn’t depend on grouping of its addends.

 

Associative law of multiplication: ( m · n ) · k = m · ( n · k ) = m · n · k . A product doesn’t depend on grouping of its factors.

 

Distributive law of multiplication over addition: ( m + n ) · k = m · k + n · k . This law expands the rules of operations with brackets (see the previous section).

 

Modern day middle school books use the terms but don't require students to memorize them. At least as far I know. Foersters may be one that does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...