From what I read in previous posts: 6. Teaching Textbooks can take a student from Algebra 1 to PreCalc, but I understand that some of the PreCalc topics are actually Algebra 2 topics. 7. Jacobs for Algebra 1 and Geometry, and Foerster for Algebra 2 and PreCalc. (Jacobs doesn't have an Algebra 2 text, and he himself recommended Foerster for Algebra 2) 8. Math Without Borders, which uses Foerster for Algebra 1 and 2, and Geometry: A Guided Inquiry, by Chakerian/Crabill/Stein. (No PreCalc course, though) 9. Lials for Algebra 1/Algebra 2/PreCalc, but something else for Geometry. (Lials does have a book for Geometry but I'm told it's not as good as the others) I'm sure that there are others. Looking at the Foerster and Larson (Chalkdust) books, it seems that both are for strong math students. The Pearson catalog states that Foerster would be good for honors-level classes. 69

I remember reading a question very similar to this. IIRC Harold Jacobs himself recommended Foerster for Algebra 2/Trig. 69

Singaporemath.com's website explains the differences between the series here: http://www.singaporemath.com/FAQ_Secondary_Math_s/16.htm (Also, scroll down to see a table summary.) IIRC within the geometric content there aren't any proofs. If you use NEM or NSM you can use "New Syllabus Additional Math," either in conjunction with, or after NEM/NSM: http://www.singaporemath.com/New_Syllabus_Add_l_Math_Textbook_p/nsamt.htm 69

If I were a homeschooling parent (interesting enough, I don't even have kids yet), I probably would follow this sequence: 1st year: World History 2nd year: Government (sem.) & Economics (sem.) 3rd year: US History 4th year: "Social Science" (an intro. to sociology, anthropology, and psychology) 69

Neither am I. I'm not even a parent. I joined this forum because I'm interested in hearing the homeschooling parents talk about textbooks and curriculum, particularly in math. 69

I think there is a little confusion here. Certainly students going into Geometry should be able to solve quadratic equations, as Caroline said. But the bulk of Chapter 10 is on solving quadratics using different methods, as ondreeuh posted. At the very least, I think students should be able to solve quadratic equations by factoring and by taking square roots (equations in the form ax^2 = d). I don't think average students need to be able to solve by completing the square or by using the quadratic formula. (I'm actually not a homeschooling parent, but a high school math teacher. In my honors Algebra 1 class, I do cover material that is in most of chapter 10.) ondreeuh, you must be using an older version of CD's Algebra 1 book, because the contents don't match up the book I'm thinking of (Larson, Elementary Algebra 5th ed is the book that CD uses now). Looking at your list of topics from chapter 10, you definitely need to cover section 10.1. I don't know where they would cover solving quadratic equations by taking square roots -- maybe it's also in 10.1? If not, maybe it's in the chapter on radicals? 69

I'm not sure about that. Larson has another book from the same publisher titled "Precalculus with Limits," which has twelve chapters. There is a cumulative test for Chapters 10-12 and Chapter 12 is on limits. Also, the newer Larson book that CD uses, "Precalculus Functions and Graphs: A Graphing Approach," has eleven chapters, with a cumulative test for Chapters 10-11 (Chapter 11 is on limits). As it is, I (mostly) agree with your earlier suggestion to skip Chapter 10. I would suggest, though, that at the very least the OP's daughter see go through 10.1, "Solution by the Square Root Property." 69

You could stick with Lial for Algebra 1 & 2. It seems that lots of people here like them. Note that there are two different versions for each by Lial. The hardback is now in its 10th edition and the titles are "Beginning Algebra" and "Intermediate Algebra." The paperback is now in its 9th edition and the titles are "Introductory Algebra" and "Intermediate Algebra." I don't think there's much difference between the versions, though on this board more parents prefer the paperback version. I myself have the paperback version ("Introductory Algebra") and I will be getting a sample copy of the hardback version (I'm actually not a HS-ing parent, but a math teacher interested in textbooks) so I can compare the two. Another thing to note is that it is recommended to get an earlier edition (like the 7th or 8th) of the paperback version, because they're of course cheaper. I'm going to punt regarding Geometry. There IS a geometry book by Lial, but it is not as well regarded by users as the other books in her developmental math series. 69

Thank you for mentioning this book, Jackie. I found a copy in pdf format online (please don't ask me where -- I don't think this was a legal copy :blush:). I have been looking for a basic textbook that touches all of the main branches of science, to read for my own personal enrichment -- I pretty much forgot everything I learned in science classes at school! This book fits the bill pretty nicely. 69

When I was a math major in college, we were required to take a year of programming in PASCAL plus a semester (albeit a one-credit course) in Fortran. We were the last graduating class to have those requirements, I think. Afterwards, the programming classes changed to C, then C++, then Java. I think at the school I attended they still require a year of programming courses. In middle school & high school I remember having fun with Applesoft BASIC (remember the Apple IIe anyone?). I was also a comp. sci. minor in college, so after Pascal, I ended up learning C, Assembly (yuck, yuck, yuck!), Prolog, ml, scheme, C++... I never learned Java. Ah, the memories... ;) 69

This thread reminds me of a blog post I saw where a teacher proposed that Geometry come before algebra: http://continuities.wordpress.com/2008/07/24/geometry-before-algebra/ (I'm not sure it's a good idea, though.) As for TT, my thought is that one should follow the sequence that the program "assumes." It sounds like that the creators of TT prefer the Algebra 1 -> Algebra 2 -> Geometry -> Precalculus sequence, so if I was using TT I would just follow that sequence. If that's a problem for the OP I guess the student could (1) Algebra 2 and Geometry simultaneously, or (2) try to finish Algebra 2 before the end of the school year and then study Geometry for the end of the school year and during the summer. 69

My preference would be for a high-school student to be exposed to each of what I consider to be the main branches of science - biology, chemistry, physics, geology and astronomy - in four years. Of course, with five branches in four years, I would lump geology and astronomy together and call it "earth/space science". As for order, I would go for the (conceptual) physics -> chemistry -> biology -> earth/space sci. sequence. It make sense, to go from the very small to the very large. Other sequences exist; I've seen biology -> chemistry -> physics -> earth/space sci. and earth/space sci. -> biology -> chemistry -> physics in other high school course catalogs. In social studies, there are also four "subjects" that I think a high school student should be exposed to: world history U.S. history government & economics (1 semester each) other social sciences (anthropology, sociology, psychology, combined into a year course) ... but I don't know if the order matters. A friend of mine teaches at a private high school where they follow this sequence: world hist. -> govt./econ. -> U.S. hist. -> other social sci. I myself went to a public high school eons ago and took went through this sequence: govt./econ. -> world hist. -> U.S. hist. -> other social sci. I know that we followed this sequence because at my old high school, English students took world lit. in sophomore year and american lit. junior year, so having the corresponding social studies classes match up allows for interdisciplinary activities. 69

You've got three of what I consider to be the four major branches of science listed. The missing one is earth/space science, so that's what I vote for in 9th grade. I believe some high schools follow the earth/space sci - bio - chem - physics sequence. 69

TT (Teaching Textbooks) Chalkdust Foerster - for Algebra 1, Algebra 2, PreCalculus, Calculus (no Geometry) Jacobs - for Algebra 1 & Geometry Lial - BCM or Prealgebra, Introductory or Beginning Algebra, Intermediate Algebra... Singapore Math - New Elementary Mathematics (NEM), books 1, 2, 3A, 3B, 4A, 4B (there are other series, but NEM is the most rigorous IIRC) Life of Fred BJU 69

I agree with Melinda and ITGWN's comment that going from Alg2 to PreCalc is easier than going from Geom to PreCalc. I teach PreCalc at my high school, and because we still use the Alg1->Alg2->Geom sequence I'm getting students who forgot their Algebra 2 skills, so at the end of the year after I find out who my students will be the following year, I meet my new students and given them a summer assignment reviewing Algebra 2. Having said all of that, I've thought that someone here recommended that if a student started Alg1 in 8th grade or earlier than the Alg1->Alg2->Geom sequence is better. Though the reason escapes me... I've also read from someone here that some 11th graders may not be ready for PreCalc, and it may be a better option to make PreCalc a two year course. This makes sense to me -- I'm seeing more colleges offer PreCalc as two semester courses (one for College Algebra and one for Trigonometry/Analytic Geometry), and if you go by the idea that a semester course in college = a year course in high school, then two years for PreCalc in high school sounds about right. Maybe the OP's son can handle PreCalc in one year, and maybe he'll need two. Who knows? 69

I got a chance to look through the 9th edition of Lial's Introductory Algebra text, and I agree with Jann's comments. I too like how the text is laid out. The only problem with Jann's post is that the OP stated that she doesn't like Lial. So my question to the OP is, why? Please don't take this as an attack. I'm actually not a homeschooling parent, but a HS math teacher, and one of my searches on Algebra textbooks led me to this forum. I haven't found any posts yet of someone diskliking Lial, so I'd to hear the OP's opinion, because I want to hear everything, good and bad, about Lial. I'm considering changing the textbook for my Algebra I Honors class to the Lial. (The Introductory Algebra text is also available as a hardback, and I'm not talking about the BEGINNING Algebra text by the same author.) 69

Regarding Teaching Textbooks -- my understanding is that neither the Algebra II book or the Precalc book covers all of their respective topics. This may not be an issue if your son isn't going into a math/sci.-related field in college. I've read positive + negative comments on Chalkdust. I actually have the book used for their Algebra I -- it's a book usually used for remedial students in college taking elementary Algebra. 69