Math question - Pre-Algebra

[Meriwether]

I'm planning on having Dd do Pre-Algebra next year. She is close to finishing her main math program for this year and will spend the next few months finishing up some extra programs we've started. I decided to look over some possibilities for next year so I'd know what we are working toward. I currently have AoPS Pre-Algebra, Jacob's Elementary Algebra, and several Dolciani textbooks.

 

Dd is generally a strong student. She doesn't particularly love math, but she doesn't hate it either. She has typically prefered direct instruction, so I thought AoPS wouldn't be the best fit for her.

 

After reading through the first third or so of the book last night, I think she'd be fine with it. I do want to use a secondary text, though, that uses direct instruction. My first choice was Jacob's Elementary Algebra. I spent some time looking through it last night. The topics don't line up particularly well with AoPS Pre-Algebra although there is, of course, some overlap. Jacob's seemed to have more actual Algebra in it. I realize that the name of the book is Jacob's Elementary Algebra, but I was under the impression that it was not a full algebra course. Is that not correct?

 

Is there something that would be more appropriate to pair with AoPS? I don't think Dd will have trouble understanding AoPS, but I want her to have some direct instruction (since that has always been her preference) and additional problem sets. I'm not in a hurry to get through Pre-Algebra. It is okay if it takes more than 1 school year.

[dereksurfs]

There are many options for Pre-A with AoPS probably being the most challenging even for the naturally gifted, math loving students. So I don't blame you for looking into secondary supplements. Many including AoPS fans have found the AoPS Pre-A text to be overly complicated for this level of study. See this recent thread discussing the issue: http://forums.welltr...for-aops-users/

 

There are a couple of things you mentioned which sounded like red flags to me, or at least something to be aware of. AoPS uses a completely different discovery method. And if your dd prefers direct instruction this wouldn't be the most logical 'first' choice for her, especially to introduce new algebraic concepts. You also mentioned she neither likes nor dislikes math. AoPS is geared more toward those who love spending longer periods of time struggling over the most difficult problems like those used in math competitions.

 

I would consider Dolciani's Pre-A text which is well generally regarded. I'm not sure if you have that one or not. Derek Owens PreA is another great choice. ds11 is good with math, not genius level or anything, but good at it. He is going through TabletClass Pre-A right now and we are *very happy* with the course. Though it is a challenging program which has more algebraic content than most Pre-A programs. We've supplemented TC with AoPS Pre-A at times to gain a different perspective on difficult new concepts such as linear equations. He is reaching the end of the course now and has learned more in this past year than any other year prior. He is grasping many algebraic concepts now and as a consequence his confidence has grown leaps and bounds. Overall this was a perfect fit for him. I am planning on introducing AoPS Algebra to him next year along with TC. I think he's more ready now for that level of challenge whereas before I think AoPS Pre-A would have crushed his spirit as it was just too much too soon. I'm not saying it couldn't work for you as a spine next year. But maybe you could combine it with something else and then bring in AoPS along side or even after another somewhat gentler intro to these new algebraic concepts.

[Meriwether]

Thanks, Derek, for your thoughtful response and the link. I don't want to sell Dd short. It is true that she doesn't love math, but she is capable and she is a willing student. If I give her a stack of work that will take two hours, she'll buckle down and get to work. If I give her a stack of work that will take 8 hours, she'll buckle down with virtually the same attitude. I've heard all the things you mentioned about AoPS before. I didn't seriously consider it for Dd before because she does prefer direct instruction. I bought it to look over thinking it would be a good fit for Ds in a few years. After looking at it more closely last night, I think I will give it a go with Dd. She is very good at reading for understanding. I don't consider her to be mathy, but she will be able to understand all the concepts presented in Pre-Algebra without too much trouble. I do think there will be some frustration with some of the problems. I actually want her to feel frustrated. School generally comes very easily to her. I want her to struggle a bit. I don't know that I will continue to use AoPS with her, but most of the concepts in AoPS Pre-Algebra will be review. I think this will be my chance to stretch her a bit.

 

I did sit down with a Dolciani Pre-Algebra and the AoPS Pre-Algebra today. They matched up very well. I think I've pretty well decided on covering the concept first with the AoPS and then let her work through the corresponding chapters in the Dolciani. I think it will take her 3 semesters, which will be fine.

[dereksurfs]

Well, since you already have both texts it wouldn't hurt to give them both a try together. If you hit a portion of AoPS which gets too difficult you could easily take a break and work in Dolciani. Then you could return to AoPS after developing the concepts further from other sources. Khan academy is another great resource for supplementation which we've used this year for Pre-A. Also I don't know if you've seen them yet but the AoPS videos are very good which can be used with the text as well.

 

Let us know how things are going once you get started.

[Trish]

Jacobs is not a full algebra course? Huh. Well I guess we'll find out when I do our end of year testing.

 

I was counting on this being a full year of algebra for my 8th grader.

 

Anyone else used it that can speak to this?

[wapiti]

Jacobs is full. I don't remember anyone suggesting it wasn't.

[Chrysalis Academy]

Yeah, I've never heard anyone questioning that Jacobs is a full Algebra course. The first several chapters review PreAlgebra, which is one reason I think that it's considered a gentle introduction to Algebra for younger students - you get that built-in review at the beginning. But it covers all of Algebra 1.

[AngieW in Texas]

Jacobs is most definitely a full Algebra I course. It covers all the typical topics you would expect to find in an Algebra I course.

 

Kinetic Books goes a little deeper than Jacobs, but by covering some topics at greater depth, not by having completely new topics. Jacobs covers systems of 2 equations with 2 unknowns (like most Algebra I programs), but KB also does systems of 3 equations with 3 unknowns. Jacobs covers inequalities and systems of inequalities, but KB covers optimizing systems of inequalities.

 

Programs that do NOT cover everything you would typically expect to be in an Algebra I program are Teaching Textbooks and Math-U-See. They both push some Algebra I topics into their Algebra II course (and push some Algebra II topics into their Precalculus course). Even Key to Algebra now covers quadratic equations, so it is now considered a full Algebra I course.

[Meriwether]

Jacobs is not a full algebra course? Huh. Well I guess we'll find out when I do our end of year testing.

 

I was counting on this being a full year of algebra for my 8th grader.

 

Anyone else used it that can speak to this?

 

 

 

I don't know where I got that impression. I know I've had that idea for several years, because I had it on my list of Pre-Algebra possibilites. I'm happy to hear it is a full Algebra course.

[AimeeM]

Jacobs is most definitely a full Algebra I course. It covers all the typical topics you would expect to find in an Algebra I course.

 

Kinetic Books goes a little deeper than Jacobs, but by covering some topics at greater depth, not by having completely new topics. Jacobs covers systems of 2 equations with 2 unknowns (like most Algebra I programs), but KB also does systems of 3 equations with 3 unknowns. Jacobs covers inequalities and systems of inequalities, but KB covers optimizing systems of inequalities.

 

Programs that do NOT cover everything you would typically expect to be in an Algebra I program are Teaching Textbooks and Math-U-See. They both push some Algebra I topics into their Algebra II course (and push some Algebra II topics into their Precalculus course). Even Key to Algebra now covers quadratic equations, so it is now considered a full Algebra I course.

I thought I heard that TT's updated Algebra 1 was now considered a "full" algebra 1 course?

[AngieW in Texas]

The quadratic formula is now in the TOC for TT Algebra I, but notice that it is a grand total of just 5 pages in the textbook and there is only one lesson after that (using a graphing calculator). Also, each lesson is supposed be just 1 day, so the formula is certainly introduced, but a student isn't going to learn much about it in that short of a time period.

 

For comparison, Jacobs has three lessons and a review using the quadratic formula. The three lessons (and they do all use the quadratic formula) cover a total of 20 pages.

 

I'm not against TT at all. I would far rather use TT with my 14yo than MUS, but she won't use a math program that's on the computer.

 

MUS doesn't even touch the quadratic formula in Algebra I.

[dereksurfs]

The quadratic formula is now in the TOC for TT Algebra I, but notice that it is a grand total of just 5 pages in the textbook and there is only one lesson after that (using a graphing calculator). Also, each lesson is supposed be just 1 day, so the formula is certainly introduced, but a student isn't going to learn much about it in that short of a time period.

 

For comparison, Jacobs has three lessons and a review using the quadratic formula. The three lessons (and they do all use the quadratic formula) cover a total of 20 pages.

 

I'm not against TT at all. I would far rather use TT with my 14yo than MUS, but she won't use a math program that's on the computer.

 

MUS doesn't even touch the quadratic formula in Algebra I.

 

Thanks Angie for this more detailed explanation of how quadratics are now covered in TT. I have heard the new version was improved and it sounds like it has from no quadratic coverage in Algebra 1. I also appreciate the comparison with Jacobs which is a pretty standard Algebra 1 text. One of the reasons we left MUS for ds11 after Pre-A was its limited S&S including leaving this topic out among other things. For our dds I'm not sure yet as they are not as mathy as ds. I know they won't go back to MUS since it didn't work for them. I'm glad its working dd14 even if not your first choice for her. Getting the math done is better than not at all! Do you also supplement MUS or are you just planning to address certain areas later in the program?

[AngieW in Texas]

My 14yo really struggles with algebra (although geometry is going well). She is not at all interested in science either. I am going to get her through what she needs to have and hopefully that will be enough for her to be able to get through a regular college algebra course without problems.

 

The supplementing that I am doing is just adding in a lot of algebra I review while we are doing geometry. This is on top of the Algebra I review built-in to geometry.