The first four are different editions of the same book, it looks like. "Modern Algebra and Tigonometry Structure and Method Book 2", was published in 1973, so that would be the best match for your Algebra I book. The last title, "Modern School Mathematics Structure and Method Book 2," is for middle/junior high school math (Grade 8). I agree its confusing trying to figure out the different editions of the Dolciani books. What complicates things is that the earlier editions don't have ISBN's. Hope this helps. 01

Technically, I was still 15 when I myself took the AP Music Theory and AP Chemistry exams. (Exams are given in early May, and I turned 16 at the end of May. ;)) The AP Music Theory was easy, because I had studied music outside of school since I was 8, so I got a 5. But I don't even know why I took the AP Chem -- I was way over my head and had only taken the required chemistry course in HS (ie. I didn't take 2nd year of chem), and of course, I got a 1. :D 01

The reviews that I've seen were quite negative; check the links below. http://www.amazon.com/Integrated-Mathematics-Book-1/product-reviews/0395855020/ref=cm_cr_dp_all_summary?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1&sortBy=bySubmissionDateDescending http://mathematicallycorrect.com/integrat.htm If we're talking about the same series, then I'd stick with any of the math programs recommended here (Jacobs/Foerster, Dolciani, Lial, etc., etc.). 01

Another vote for "no." While there is some overlap in topics between Algebra 2 and Precalc, such topics are covered in Precalc with more depth. Furthermore, in the Precalc books I've seen they assume knowledge of certain Algebra skills that come from Algebra 2 but not from Algebra 1 -- dealing with fractional exponents and complex numbers are two skills that come to mind. (I never have taught fractional exponents and complex numbers even in my Honors Algebra 1 course.) Heck, I know of some schools where Precalculus is taught in two years, with College Algebra in the first year and Trigonometry + Analytic Geometry in the second year. I sometimes wonder if other schools should follow suit, because to me the Precalc textbooks are getting thicker, and as a teacher teaching Precalculus at a private school now, I really can't cover all of the chapters in one year. But I digress... As for your concern about your son WRT physics... The usual math sequence for the first 3 years of HS is Algebra 1, Geometry, and Algebra 2, and the usual science sequence is Biology, Chemistry, and Physics. (At least, in many public and private schools.) So some students take Algebra 2 and Physics the same time. Maybe you can consider a physics "lite" course first ("Conceptual Physics"?) and then an AP-caliber physics course the following year? 01

There really should be a sticky on the question about math sequence. It sure gets asked often here. ;) I'm teaching at a school where the sequence is Alg1-Alg2-Geom, and I'm leading the charge to get that changed to the normal Alg1-Geom-Alg2 sequence. You can see the stuff I collected that supports my argument here: http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/showthread.php?t=67580 Anyway, to answer the OP's question another vote for Geometry here. 01

Actually, it's a department meeting. Well, I had my meeting, and we're going to meet again next week do decide on the matter. Apparently admin has been following the math dept's lead on the sequencing matter in the past. (Multiple times admin asked the previous math dept head about changing the sequence to Alg1-Geom-Alg2 and she said no. She's now retired BTW.) And so what we decide, admin will support. ATM I know one vice-principal is for it. There are 7 of us in the dept. The current dept chair didn't think that changing the sequence would make a difference, but during the discussion she took no sides, as a good dept chair normally does. Our long-time geometry teacher is against it. Another teacher who teaches mostly lower-level students is also against it, for reasons I mention below. Our stat/regular pre-calc teacher is totally for it. (In fact, afterwards she thanked me for making the proposal. Earlier this year she had informally asked about changing the sequence to the dept chair and was shot down.) Two other teachers I don't know what they're thinking, but one of these two made comments that mostly support my arguments. I hope the "vote" next week will be favorable. Wish me luck! I've been posting this on a teacher-centric forum as well. One of the posters there said the following: The teacher of mostly lower-level students (the "adapted" version of Algebra I & II) doesn't agree with this. She thinks it would be worse for the lower level students for remembering Algebra I material if Geometry was in the middle. My rebuttal was mostly what the poster said above, and that many students could benefit from taking a "break" from Algebra by putting Geometry in the middle. What do you think about this teacher's concerns? 01

Thank you, Sharon, for your response, and thank you, Karin, for the bump. Interesting enough, originally I didn't think which sequence that was used mattered, but I've now seen the light. ;) Unfortunately, I don't think that I'm going to get far with my proposal. My department head stated that she thinks that using one sequence versus another doesn't change student performance or something like that. But she said that I can state my case at the department meeting. Our department also has one teacher who's been teaching geometry for over 30 years, and I don't she'll like the idea of teaching sophomores instead of juniors. Nevertheless, I'm going to submit my proposal and see how it goes. 01

I teach math part-time in a small all-girls catholic high school. Unfortunately, we use the Algebra 1 - Algebra 2 - Geometry sequence. I would like to submit a proposal at the next department meeting to change the sequence to Algebra 1 - Geometry - Algebra 2. I did some informal research and came up with some rationales to make this change. I know that this is a homeschool forum, but some of the parents here are/were math educators. Those of you who are, can you look at my list of rationales and see if there is anything I should change? I apologize for the formatting below - I was using a word processor. My department meeting is Tuesday, so I would appreciate your responses! TIA! 01 I. PSAT/SAT Preparation A. SAT Content 1. Number and operations (20-25%) Arithmetic word problems (including percent, ratio, and proportion); Properties of integers (even, odd, prime numbers, divisibility, and so forth); Rational numbers; Sets (union, intersection, elements); Counting techniques; Sequences and series (including exponential growth); Elementary number theory 2. Algebra and functions (35-40%) Substitution and simplifying algebraic expressions; Properties of exponents; Algebraic word problems; Solutions of linear equations and inequalities; Systems of equations and inequalities; Quadratic equations; Rational and radical equations; Equations of lines; Absolute value; Direct and inverse variation; Concepts of algebraic functions; Newly defined symbols based on commonly used operations 3. Geometry and measurement (25-30%) Area and perimeter of a polygon; Area and circumference of a circle; Volume of a box, cube, and cylinder; Pythagorean theorem and special properties of isosceles, equilateral, and right triangles; Properties of parallel and perpendicular lines; Coordinate geometry; Geometric visualization; Slope; Similarity; Transformations 4. Data analysis, statistics, and probability (10-15%) Data interpretation (tables and graphs); Descriptive statistics (mean, median, and mode); Probability B. Comments 1. There are more Algebra questions than Geometry questions on the SAT. 2. Students may not be remembering their Algebra. Students at our school take Algebra 2 sophomore year and most take the SAT for the first time the spring of their junior year. Many students take the SAT again during the fall of senior year, over a year and a half after taking Algebra 2. 3. Switching to an Alg1-Geom-Alg2 sequence doesn't put students at risk of forgetting Geometry. a. The SAT provides geometric formulas b. Proofs are not on the SAT 4. PSAT content is similar to SAT content. a. Sophomores haven't taken Geometry yet b. Juniors have just started their Geometry courses c. Sophomores and Juniors may not be able to do the geometry questions on the PSAT. II. Textbooks A. Most textbook series assume that schools follow the Algebra 1 – Geometry – Algebra 2 sequence: 1. McDougal Littell – Larson/Boswell/Kanold/Stiff 2. McDougal Littell – Brown/Dolciani (Alg 1/Alg2) and Brown/Jurgensen (Geom) 3. Prentice Hall Mathematics 4. Holt, Rinehart & Winston B. Geometry textbooks contain algebra reviews, but on Algebra 1 topics III. Alignment with Other Schools/School systems A. The following schools or school systems use the Algebra 1 – Geometry – Algebra 2 sequence: (I list 4 public school systems and 10 catholic high schools in our area.) B. I was not able to determine which sequence is used in the following schools: (I list 2 catholic high schools in our area) C. (another public school system) is a special case 1. Standard program: Algebra 1 – Geometry – Algebra 2 2. Honors/GT program: Algebra 1 – Algebra 2 – Geometry IV. Other A. Precalculus students need a significant amount of Algebra review under the current sequence. Changing the sequence would reduce the amount of review or eliminate it entirely. B. Although having Geom in between Alg1 and Alg2 puts students at risk of forgetting their algebra, incorporating algebra reviews in the geometry course, and covering the first couple of chapters of Algebra 2 (which is mostly review) should minimize the problem.

I'll try the last two. When you solve a quadratic equation by factoring, like this: x^2 - 6x + 8 = 0 (x - 2)(x - 4) = 0 You set each factor equal to zero and get x = 2 and x = 4 In your problem, you have to go backwards. If (4 + i) is a solution, then the step before would have been x - (4 + i) = 0. Same for (4 - i) -> x - (4 - i) = 0. These are the two factors you multiply together, like this: [x - (4 + i)][x - (4 - i)] = 0 FOIL, treating the complex numbers as a single number and get this: x^2 - x(4 - i) - x(4 + i) + (4 + i)(4 - i) = 0 Distribute, and FOIL the (4 + i)(4 - i): x^2 - 4x + ix - 4x - ix + 16 - 4i + 4i - i^2 = 0 Some terms can cancel: ix and -ix, and -4i and 4i: x^2 - 4x - 4x + 16 - i^2 = 0 Combine the x's: x^2 - 8x + 16 - i^2 = 0 Remember that i^2 = -1: x^2 - 8x + 16 - (-1) = 0 x^2 - 8x + 16 + 1 = 0 x^2 - 8x + 17 = 0 <- ANSWER (I hope) The rational zeros test say that you can get possible rational roots (or zeros) of a polynomial by dividing each factor of the constant term by each factor of the leading coefficient. Our constant term is -3 and the leading coefficient is 1. So, set up like this: Factors of -3 ------------ Factors of 1 In the numerator, it's ±1, and ±3. In the denominator, its ±1: ±1, ±3 ------ ±1 Your possible rational zeros are each factor in the numerator divided by each factor of the denominator. Since the denominator is just 1, you can drop it: ±1, ±3 The possible rational zeros are 1, 3, -1, and -3. This is Algebra II? Feels like PreCalc to me. :001_smile: 01

You mean like plotting points on the real-imaginary plane? (In other words, the point (a,b) would correspond to a+bi.) I didn't think that that was possible. When you select the a+bi mode you are telling it to display results on the normal calculator screen in complex number form. I don't think the a+bi mode is used for graphing. Someone correct me if I'm wrong. 01

Are there any precalculus books that you do like? Just curious. 01

Respectfully, I disagree with burdeesrule. I do not consider burdeesrule's pros to be pros at all. Homework should usually be done at home. If homework gets done regularly during class, then maybe there is too much free time? Maybe the teacher isn't using class time efficiently? If you mean in a single period, than of course this is correct. However, if you mean for the whole year, I've heard that in many instances there is less class time than if one had a 7-period daily schedule. It's hard for kids to stay focused for 75, 80, 90 minutes or longer. As others have stated, block schedule is good for science and phys. ed. classes, but bad for math and foreign language. I apologize if I come across as harsh (in my first post, of all places :D) but block-scheduling is something that I have strong feelings about. Here is one site that states the case against block-scheduling: http://www.jefflindsay.com/Block.shtml 01