Jump to content



  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


33 Excellent
  1. I suspect it'll be OK if you supplement it with a prep book at the end. Our dc read Campbell's high school level book (with lizard's eye on the cover), made notes, did some experiments, and went through Princeton for a month, and scored well enough. There were a few things Campbell's book didn't cover, so she concentrated on those in the prep book, and consulted with Daddy Campbell when needed. Your mileage might vary, but if you are aiming for mid-700s, I feel that your plan (along with a prep book) will be sufficient. HTH, Midori
  2. I used to have both, and I prefer (and kept) WEM. For self study, I think WEM is far more user-friendly and just plain good reading. If you liked Susan's humor in the little footnotes in "The History of the Ancient World", you'd like WEM. I love it that WEM gives me an excellent array of questions for each genre and level. Not only do they serve as great conversation starters, but I can also choose the type of questions according to the student's level of comprehension. (One cannot always reach the rhetoric level of understanding of every single book…) When one of the questions sparks interesting responses or observations, I ask my student to write a short essay on them. HTRAB might be good as a reference, but certainly not as a tool for self-study. As with any how-to book we tweaked it after going through one book her way, so I feel like a cheater for saying this, but it is a gem! You might want to do a search and find what Nan in Mass did with it. Her posts are inspirational, and will give you a clearer idea as to what WEM can offer. HTH, Midori
  3. We tried that. My dc scored a bit short of 700 on SAT Physics Test. But we didn’t just use Hewitt’s and she was strong in math. Our biggest dilemma was that we wanted to use just the conceptual approach and be happy, but as homeschoolers (and without any other outside validation), dc had to score well enough on the Subject Test. When I found out dc needed the Physics test, I panicked and switched to Apologia (just the first book, not the Advanced), which had more math than the Conceptual did. Apologia was a good book, but not a great fit for dc. She scored mid-600s with somewhat shaky conceptual understanding. Since she was hoping to go into STEM and needed a better score, I then had her comb through Hewitt’s Conceptual Physics (High School version), concentrating mostly on Think & Explain and Think & Solve. We solved problems in the Appendix F, “Problem-Solving Practiceâ€, and supplemented with “Problem Solving in Conceptual Physics†(College version supplement) authored by Hewitt himself. This problem-solving book, as well as its equivalent for the high school version, “Problem-Solving Exercises in Physics†(authored by somebody else) has a section for trig, and obviously, problems requiring using it. So the absence of trig shouldn’t necessarily exclude Conceptual Physics as basic textbook. Because of time constraints, our dc couldn’t even finish the last Unit in Conceptual Physics (Quantum Physics, etc.) and instead wrapped up with SparkNotes. But she managed to improve her score enough in our eyes to send it to colleges. (We were not looking at Ivies or anything -- just State Uni’s honors and some “Colleges That Change Livesâ€. I explained in our School Profile why we chose this Conceptual approach, and dc was still offered the highest scholarships and so on.) So my totally anecdotal view is that it is possible, as long as you thoroughly master what’s in it (incl. footnotes, Appendices, and supplements), go over test prep material, and are not aiming for high 700s. Physics is not my forte and I don’t know about other science tests, but as far as Physics was concerned, it looked mostly conceptual. I vaguely recall (possibly in that one real Physics test in the blue book) that even though the numbers were provided (= you can crunch #s to solve it if you like), sometimes you could deduce the answer without depending on them. BTW, when I looked for the same kind of information a few years ago, the closest I got was on this board somewhere about the boy scoring very well after the first Apologia book. What struck me was that his mom was wondering if his high score had something to do with the fact that he had lots of experience in solving physics-related problems in math at that time. Maybe math made the difference. The second time dc took the test, she was in Integral Calculus; she was enjoying solving physics-type problems in her Calculus class and loved “how everything fit together.†Even though SAT Physics test was algebra-based, maybe such exposure to Calculus helped. Who knows. Well, I’ve written a novel. I hope some of it was helpful. Good luck!
  4. Might I suggest SWB's "Well-Educated Mind"... It has everything you asked for. She kindly includes some samplings for each genre, but you are in no way confined to use them for your literary analysis for that specific genre. You can chose whatever you want. It is most definitely college-level, and along with a dictionary, a thesaurus, and a MLA style book, this is the one I'll send my dc to college with. Regards, Midori
  5. Yes, exactly the same thing happened to me. FYI, our computer is a slightly older Mac. I didn't catch it until after hitting "Submit" button, so it was all too late. (I only noticed it when I looked at the printout I made for later use.) I guess you could contact CA if it bothers you too much, because obviously it has something to do with their software. Midori
  6. Wow… thank you so much! I printed this out to dc, and she thinks she's finally got it. Looking at them as populations and in terms of potential energy really helped. Again, thanks. I hope someday I'll be able to give back to this forum that's given me so much. :grouphug: Midori
  7. We are self-studying the Ecology part of Campbell's "Biology: Exploring Life", and we're stuck. A generalized energy pyramid shows plants at the bottom w/ 10,000 kcal, then a grasshopper as primary consumer that gets 1,000 kcal, then a mouse as secondary with 100 kcal, and finally, a snake as tertiary with 10 kcal at the top. We do understand that only 10% gets to be used by the next consumer, meaning the snake gets the least calories. But come to think of it, (my dc says) it doesn't make sense. It seems to follow that the snake gets only 100 kcal if he eats the mouse, but gets 1,000 kcal if he chooses to eat the grasshopper. We must be missing something obvious!!! I did internet search, but no satisfactory answer. Would anybody on the board help us, please? :blushing: Midori
  8. :grouphug: I'm so glad he just ran away. Hopefully you dc can sleep better once the alarm is set. Midori
  9. Thank you for your responses! Cosmos, thanks for the reminder. I did that for the undergrad requirements, and they told her Integral is the highest she needs to go. I checked the State U's website, but they don't publish the requirements for a geology grad degree. So we can't look ahead to see what math will be needed in grad school. Kiana, thank you so much for taking the time to check it. Our dc did ask the Integral professor, but she couldn't give her any advice beyond undergrad level. We probably should have contacted a geology professor, but I'm beginning to think even they might not have a clear-cut answer, depending on their (or our dc's intended) specialty. I think I will follow your recommendation. I noticed that the "series" covered in 253 is included in AP Calculus BC, and while I wonder if AP's coverage is as thorough as that in an 11-week 4-credit college course, the lack of exposure to this topic might cost her later. Besides, if Integral is all she needs for undergrad, delving into Vector as high schooler might backfire -- meaning, she might forget most of it when she does need it for grad school or something. I'm probably over-thinking, but at this point, it looks like going for 253 is the way. How can I do without this forum? Thank you very much for all you do. Midori
  10. You know, that's what I thought when I was internet searching. Some schools do split Diff + Int + Vec into four courses instead of three. But then, both Differential and Integral are equivalent to 4 credits each at State U's catalog (although CC's catalog that I linked to below says 5 credits somehow). It's really weird. Could this mean dc has to do up to #3 in order to cover the same material as AP Calculus BC? In any case, here are the links. Hope they work. The #3 is http://sis.linnbenton.edu/sis/prod/lbw_sched.P_DrawCRNDetail?v_CRN=20191&v_Term=201402&v_Role= The #4 is http://sis.linnbenton.edu/sis/prod/lbw_sched.P_DrawCRNDetail?v_CRN=20192&v_Term=201402&v_Role= Another point: I checked the math sequence for engineering majors for State U (not because it's dc's intended major, but because I thought it might be the most applied math-heavy arena), and depending on what kind of engineering you major in (like environmental, ecological, computer, electrical…), some proceed from Integral to #4 in the first year, then #3 in the 2nd, and some, vice versa. For my untrained eyes, it almost looks like the choice is made at random (but certainly isn't, I'm sure). I wish I knew what's needed for good foundation for a geology career. Thank you for your comment, Midori
  11. Our dc is taking Integral Calculus now, so the next step is Vector Calculus -- or so I thought. The Community College has four courses in calculus: Differential, Integral, "Calculus" (equivalent to "Infinite Series and Sequences" in the State University's catalog that it has partnership with), and another "Calculus". At first glance, it seems the #3 "Calculus" is what follows Integral, because in the catalog they say it's the third in the calculus sequence. But the #4 "Calculus" has integral as prerequisite too, so it looks as if the student gets to choose either one after Integral. I know very little about calculus, but the #4 looks like traditional vector calculus, whereas the #3 may be something specific to engineering programs, as they say it satisfies not only the aforementioned "Infinite Series and Sequences" but also the State U's MTH306 "Matrix and Power Series Methods" requirement for engineering major. (I don't know how, but that's what they say on the course description.) I wish I could cite their descriptions, but since I can't, would any math-savy people help me the difference between the #3 and #4 "Calculus"? (Oh, should I say "Calculi?") FYI, our dc is going to major in geology, hoping to pursue a graduate degree, specializing in glaciology. We are already told by State U that Integral is all you need for undergrad degree for geology major. Well, then should our dc just drop after Integral and do something like statistics instead? I did internet search, but it looks like Cal 1 = Differential, Cal 2 = Integral, Cal 3 = Vector everywhere. Since dc is not a full-time student at CC or State U, we can't get any advising. Could anybody please help? Thank you, Midori
  12. Thank you so much for the replies. I will use the header when dc's name is not explicitly mentioned. And we are almost done, thanks to you ladies. Midori
  • Create New...