Looking for printable mixed revision for Algebra 1

[lewelma]

Hi all,

I have a student who has finished all the algorithmic work for Algebra 1 (she used Kumon for many years).  She and I are now working through algebraic word problems and proofs.  She has a year before the NZ national exam, and it will take us that long to get through all this higher end algebra content as she wants to earn a top grade.  But I am finding that she needs to keep fresh with things like simultaneous equations, quadratics, complex factoring, exponential equations, fractional expressions etc. Does anyone know of a good site where I can print off daily/ weekly worksheets for her to do that are pre-made review for a year's content? 

Thanks!

Ruth in NZ

ETA:  Looks like I need Honors content. And I am looking for end-of-the-year test prep. So all of algebra 1 mixed up on revision sheets.  Also, shipping is taking about 3 months right now, so it needs to be available online. I'm happy to purchase it as long as I can print it.

Edited August 30, 2020 by lewelma

[NewIma]

Not a website, but what about Critical Thinking Company's Understanding Algebra 1? My DD is doing Forester's Algebra 1 now, and is using Critical Thinking's Prealgebra book as review to keep things fresh. 

[MamaSprout]

https://www.mathmammoth.com/worksheets/algebra_1.php
 

Not spiral, but I think pretty complete.

 

[lewelma]

Thanks for the ideas!  Unfortunately, I can't do any shipping because it is currently taking 3 months from the USA, so it does need to be online.  And I've looked through mathmammoth just now, and it is too easy. I guess I need honors Algebra 1, and I need sheets with algebra for the whole year mixed together. 

Any other ideas?  Happy to purchase -- it does not need to be free. 

[mathnerd]

You could print off some of the Alg 1 exams from NY Regents and have her try them in a timed manner:

https://www.nysedregents.org/algebraone/

There are also worksheets at kuta software, but, definitely not enough for a year's worth of practice!

https://www.kutasoftware.com/free.html

 

ETA: you could download an out of copyright edition of Schaum's series Elementary Algebra which is free. That would contain enough problem sets.

 

Edited August 30, 2020 by mathnerd

[lewelma]

Fascinating the difference in exams.  Here is last year's NZ national exam.

https://www.nzqa.govt.nz/nqfdocs/ncea-resource/exams/2019/91027-cat-A-2019.pdf

[lewelma]

I'll take a look at these suggestions. Thanks! 

This kid just needs a lot of drill, but it needs to be mixed. She has already learned all the algorithmic content. What do you guys think about Saxon?  

[lewelma]

So this kid can do all the basic manipulation, but needs to build up her word problem skills over the year.  So while I'm helping her with the word problems, she needs to be practicing the basic content that she has already learned.  Mixed revision for an entire year of content.  That is what I need. It must be mixed, because she struggles to recognize which technique to use when.  I'm starting to think I'm going to have to write work for her to do, but then she won't have answers so can't self correct over the week as she works without me.  

[8filltheheart]

THinkwell Honors Alg is an online course that has "More than 100 course notes and worksheets."  Homeschoolbuyer's coop has it on sale through tomorrow: https://www.homeschoolbuyersco-op.org/thinkwell/thinkwell-algebra-1-honors/

[LJPPKGFGSC]

Maybe try Teachers Pay Teachers.  My favorite teacher-author for high school math is "All Things Algebra".  You could look at the semester exams and the final exams for Algebra I.  But some of those harder topics might be also contained in Algebra II.    You might also look at her Escape Room puzzles.  The warmups are also good, but they are just one topic at a time.

https://www.teacherspayteachers.com/Store/All-Things-Algebra

I have also used the spiral review from "One Stop Teacher Shop".  That was lesser quality, but it may be more what you are looking for.

[lewelma]

Any one know if the last 1/3 of the Saxon Algebra book might be mixed revision. Isn't that they way Saxon works?

[Zoo Keeper]

4 minutes ago, lewelma said:

Any one know if the last 1/3 of the Saxon Algebra book might be mixed revision. Isn't that they way Saxon works?

Here is a pdf of the 4th edition of Saxon Algebra 1.... this is from a school website, so you could at least look at it and see if it might work for you.

The second edition of Saxon 1 is available to check out on Archive.org... https://archive.org/details/algebraiincremen00saxo

[lewelma]

6 hours ago, square_25 said:

What techniques is she mixing up? Algebra doesn’t have so many techniques, in my opinion.

She just needs to review it all.  She more forgets rather than mixes things up.  She just needs to review for a year while we work through the harder word problems and proofs.  These will take me a long time to help her with (like a year), and if she doesn't keep practicing her algorithmic skills, she will forget them. NZ has integrated maths in 10th grade, so we are prepping Algebra, Graphing, Geometry, and Statistics.  (She is good with Numeracy and Trig). She is currently in 9th grade

Here is the test paper we are currently working on (algebraic graphing), which is pretty tricky to get it all right (her goal is an excellence). She needs to be continuing with reviewing algebra in her own time while we focus on this unit.  

https://www.nzqa.govt.nz/nqfdocs/ncea-resource/exams/2018/91028-exm-2018.pdf

Edited August 31, 2020 by lewelma

[lewelma]

Yes, I'm working on that, but she has learned with a Japanese approach through Kumon. Which is a drill approach of algorithmic content which doesn't align with the NZ system.  So she has as a 9th grader gotten up through some precalc algorithmic content, while not being able to do 8th grade word problems.  So my goal is to focus all my time on word problems, using the math, proofs, etc, while at the same time making sure she does not lose all the technical skill she developed over 4 years with Kumon.  It is tricky to align the two systems, and I don't want her to lose what she has done.  She understands the conceptual ideas behind what she is doing, but so much of the way she has been taught through Kumon has been drill, so she falls back on her set knowledge, rather than understanding which she does have.  I cannot change this quickly, and if I focus my efforts on the computational skills from a conceptual basis, she will not be ready for the word problems and proofs required for next year. Kumon did not do any of that content so she is quite behind in word problems/proofs while ahead in the algorithmic manipulation. 

[lewelma]

Ah, Kumon. Drill and kill. So stuff she forgets: How to do a 2 bracket factor when their is a coefficient in front of the x^2. Or how to add two fractions when the denominators are like xy^2 and yx^2 by getting the lowest common multiple.  Or how best to decide between substitution vs elimination in simultaneous equations.  Or how to complete the square for making a vertex formula for parabolas.  or exponential equations where you need to get a common base etc. Just basic algebra, but the more complex variety of algebra 1. She knows how to do all these things and she generally understands conceptually (so no upsidedown picnic table method!)  But if I don't have her practice while I'm doing graphing and geometry, in 6 months time, she will be quite rusty.

[lewelma]

I'm thinking I will just need to write up 20 questions for her to do each week, all mixed up.  It just means that she can't check her work as she goes and that then I have to check everything.  Not a particularly good use of my time.  

[lewelma]

1 minute ago, square_25 said:

That’s what I used to do. Could you find old test questions somewhere instead and mix them up? 

The NZ tests are only about 20% easy, the other 80% is what we are working on together.  So I just don't have enough problems for her to do some each week on her own.  I am thinking Saxon might be a good choice. She knows all the content, so could just do the mixed revision sections.  Problem is getting a book here cheap.  Might take 3 months! 

[lewelma]

9 minutes ago, square_25 said:

I wonder if you can do graphing of things that will require using those skills? That might help as well.

Go look at the graphing test I posted above.  It is definitely not American in style.  The thinking required is quite deep and requires a comfort with mathematical investigations.  So we are working through this kind of mathematical thinking, which is not stock standard graph the function kind of work.

Edited August 31, 2020 by lewelma

[lewelma]

Well here is the thing.  I need to give her work that she can do alone at home. I'll look at the SAT prep books but I think they are off target.  I was just hoping for "100 days of algebra 1 review - your homework book."  But looks like it doesn't exist. I need mixed revision for the year with answers.

[lewelma]

6 minutes ago, square_25 said:

Just looked at the NZ test. I’m seeing plenty of parabolas 😉 . It looks like a reasonable and not super hard test.

It is when you realize you have only 1.5 hours and you do it back to back with Geometry.  Even trying to make the graphs without knowing the axes is tricky and time consuming. I've tried to do this test with students in 1.5 hours and it is basically impossible. Especially because they are required to use a PEN. 

[lewelma]

15 minutes ago, square_25 said:

Sure, but she can definitely have graphs that use this stuff come up. Graphs that come with word problems can have parabolas or complicated fractions of factoring, no?

Not enough that she can do independently. Her skill set through kumon is very targeted and narrowly focused.  She can't do a lot on her own unless it looks like what kumon looked like.

[lewelma]

15 minutes ago, square_25 said:

Hmmmm. Well, I’d build scaffolding, but that requires writing questions.

Yeah, I know. Sigh.  I was hoping to avoid that.  But there you go.  

I've got her working through a revision book but they cluster all the question types, so a page of factoring.  I've tried to get her to do one question per page each week, but she can't seem to coordinate that. 

[lewelma]

22 minutes ago, square_25 said:

I really really would focus on working forwards before backwards. Have her distribute things before she factors. See if she can notice patterns. 

She factors fine.  It is just practice she needs with the number in front of the x^2.  She understands the concepts, but she just needs to keep if fresh while we are doing a detour into investigations, proofs, and word problems.

The whole problem revolves around how Kumon teaches.  From a "levels of thinking" point of view that NZ uses when testing, Kumon does Achieve level content (regurgitation, manipulation, etc) all the way through 12th grade work, before they loop back around to Merit content (relational thinking) and then excellent content (abstract thinking, generalizations, insight).  NZ does Achieve, Merit, and Excellence level thinking at each stage and each grade, rather than saving up the merit and excellence until far into the future.  

[lewelma]

And there is another piece of the puzzle.  NZ does not stream (at least most schools don't).  Regular, honors, and AP students all take the same national exam here. Which means most schools keep all the students in one class.  This means that most of the class time will be spent on mastering lower level thinking because 60% of students are at that level.  If she wants to do higher level thinking, it will need to be with me. So my thought is to let her class time next year drill the basics, while we continue on abstraction, generalizations, and insight.  

[lewelma]

4 minutes ago, square_25 said:

Yeah, I think the NZ method works best. 

So, she'd have trouble with something like 2x^2 - 3x + 1? Am I understanding correctly? But she wouldn't have trouble with (2x - 1)(x -1)?

Harder than that. More like 10x^2 -27x -9

That was on the exam last year.  No calculator allowed.  

So really, she just needs to drill to get more comfortable seeing how to do it. 

Edited August 31, 2020 by lewelma

[lewelma]

2 minutes ago, square_25 said:

Oh, I'm not arguing with you here. I'm just sharing observations with what I found, which is that I had much more likely with forwards thinking before backwards thinking, at least unless I was sure the kid was going to be willing to do their backwards by simply spending their time TRYING and experimenting and working forward anyway (I do try to get my kids into the mode of being willing to do that.) And I do think of factoring as backwards thinking -- pattern-matching to the distributive property. 

I have kids expand, then cover it, factor, then cover it, expand, then cover it, etc.  I've had kids take 6 rotations of expanding and factoring the same expression to actually understand how they were connected. That is not this kid.  She is way higher level than you are picturing.  When I got her, she has done up to imaginary numbers with kumon but no word problems at a 8th grade level. 

[lewelma]

8 minutes ago, square_25 said:

Well, this one doesn't factor, lol. But generally, I don't think there's anything better than guess and check here, as long as you understand how it's supposed to match up. In my experience, kids struggle with this because they don't understand what multiplies to what. 

haha. It does (x-3)(10x+3)

The way we teach it here is to split up the middle term

10x^2 - 30x +3x -9   (so that they add to -27x and -30*3=the product of first and last term -90)

Then one bracket factor first 2 and second 2 terms

10x(x-3)+3(x-3)

(x-3)(10x+3)

Edited August 31, 2020 by lewelma

[8filltheheart]

Ruth, if you are looking for problems that teach students how to set up word problems and incorporates lots of great word problems, I would look at Foersters.

[lewelma]

19 minutes ago, square_25 said:

Hah, see, I don't like this kind of shortcut. It makes you feel like you can't do it if you don't remember it. 

And lol, my bad. I think I tried to do it with the +9 and failed and gave up. This does rather damage my credibility! 

(Well, I didn't factor it on the first try, then decided to check using the quadratic formula whether it works, and subtracted instead of adding, sigh.) 

I don't think it is a shortcut at all.  I link it to expansion.  It is expansion backwards as long as you don't add up the two middle terms. 

[lewelma]

9 minutes ago, square_25 said:

But it's very specific. You don't NEED to do that. I don't think it's even a faster way than just pattern-matching. 

Haha.  I just stick it in a calculator.  🙂   

I'm very much about *using* math.  If factoring is a mess to do, trial and error or by specific technique, why bother?  Just use a tool as a tool to open you up for higher level thinking.  

[kbutton]

36 minutes ago, lewelma said:

haha. It does (x-3)(10x+3)

The way we teach it here is to split up the middle term

10x^2 - 30x +3x -9   (so that they add to -27x and -30*3=the product of first and last term -90)

Then one bracket factor first 2 and second 2 terms

10x(x-3)+3(x-3)

(x-3)(10x+3)

Could you find used copies locally of Singapore Dimensions Math workbooks (no instruction)? You might have to mix up the problems yourself via assigning problems that are scattered throughout the book, but they will provide quite a lot of practice in all these concepts and be ready made. They include geometry and some probability. There are two per grade level. You'd want 7A, 7B, 8A, and 8B, I think. 

Here is a link to one of them, and you can take a look at the .pdf samples for the various books. https://www.singaporemathshop.com/Dimensions_Math_Workbook_7A_p/dmw7a.htm  I have the books and would be happy to PM you details about the books if you have questions.

I am nearly positive they teach factoring the way you demonstrated too in their textbooks, lol! 

[lewelma]

27 minutes ago, kbutton said:

Could you find used copies locally of Singapore Dimensions Math workbooks (no instruction)? You might have to mix up the problems yourself via assigning problems that are scattered throughout the book, but they will provide quite a lot of practice in all these concepts and be ready made. They include geometry and some probability. There are two per grade level. You'd want 7A, 7B, 8A, and 8B, I think. 

Here is a link to one of them, and you can take a look at the .pdf samples for the various books. https://www.singaporemathshop.com/Dimensions_Math_Workbook_7A_p/dmw7a.htm  I have the books and would be happy to PM you details about the books if you have questions.

I am nearly positive they teach factoring the way you demonstrated too in their textbooks, lol! 

ARRRGH!  I had those books and gave them away!

[lewelma]

28 minutes ago, square_25 said:

I haven't found higher-level thinking to be divorced from being flexible about methods. Kids who aren't flexible about methods tend to have more confidence issues, in my experience, because they think there are right and wrong ways that are prescribed. 

Well, here is the thing.  I don't want to spend any more time working on algorithmic skills.  She has enough conceptual knowledge to not be rote, and as she practices she will gain insight on her own.  What we need to focus on is higher level level thinking -- taking the basic algebra and *using* it.  So during her 1.5 hours with me, we are doing investigations and word problems, focusing on setting them up.  She can solve them on her own, so I send her home with that work to do.  I am also having her wait 2 weeks, and then reset up the word problems on her own, so that the exact details have faded, but she has still seen them before.

I think that this situation is a good example of our two differing approaches.  You focus on deep theoretical understanding of the mathematics itself. Whereas I focus on the using of the mathematics in practical and insightful ways.  We each recognize and value both areas, but with limited time, there always must be choices. I think this goes back to our training. Your PhD is in math, and mine is in mathematical science. 

[lewelma]

2 minutes ago, square_25 said:

I have found that it sticks better the way I'm suggesting, that's all. This is about the final product, not about my philosophy. 

Yes, I can see that.  I think it depends on the kid.  From my point of view, the best outcome is when a kid is motivated.  If theory motivates them, then that is the best approach.  If real life motivates them, that that is the best approach.  Motivated kids work harder and get better outcomes no matter the philosophical approach used. 

All I was saying is that each of us are more likely to see things within our own paradigm. 

[kbutton]

23 minutes ago, lewelma said:

ARRRGH!  I had those books and gave them away!

Oh, no. You are confirming the worst nightmare we all have--we'll need it after we get rid of it. 😅

[lewelma]

5 minutes ago, square_25 said:

I know you don't necessarily agree with me, but I've found kids REMEMBER things better the way I'm suggesting. I focus on working forwards because it makes the working backwards later much better. I suggest guess-and-check because it makes the kids less likely to forget things. 

My goal is ultimately to have the kids be able to do the homework in my precalc. All of my experiments were with that goal in mind. 

I also think in general I work with lower end kids than you do.  I had a kid who could not subtract 10-7 at the age of 17, and when she tried, it took her 2 minutes with a tally chart to get 2. I got her through 12th grade statistics with a calculator.  She is just one example of many.  If I can get a kid succeeding, they will be motivated.  If they are motivated, they will *try*. Success cannot always mean going back to basic conceptual understanding, sometimes it means moving forward from where they are at and cleaning things up as you go.

[8filltheheart]

20 minutes ago, lewelma said:

Well, here is the thing.  I don't want to spend any more time working on algorithmic skills.  She has enough conceptual knowledge to not be rote, and as she practices she will gain insight on her own.  What we need to focus on is higher level level thinking -- taking the basic algebra and *using* it.  So during her 1.5 hours with me, we are doing investigations and word problems, focusing on setting them up.  She can solve them on her own, so I send her home with that work to do.  I am also having her wait 2 weeks, and then reset up the word problems on her own, so that the exact details have faded, but she has still seen them before.

I think that this situation is a good example of our two differing approaches.  You focus on deep theoretical understanding of the mathematics itself. Whereas I focus on the using of the mathematics in practical and insightful ways.  We each recognize and value both areas, but with limited time, there always must be choices. I think this goes back to our training. Your PhD is in math, and mine is in mathematical science. 

I really do think Foerster's fits what you are describing.  I'd be happy to take some pictures with my phone and post them if you'd like to see some examples.

[lewelma]

3 minutes ago, square_25 said:

I'm not a highly theoretical person, period. I am a problem solver first and foremost. So I'm relating what I've found, trying to solve the problem of how to communicate this stuff 😉 . 

Ah, I think you underestimate your theoretical nature.  🙂 I've seen how your daughter thinks, and I doubt the apple falls very far from the tree. 

I also think that I am cleaning up messes in much older kids. I cannot take a year to sidestep and build a foundation no matter how much I might want to.  The kids have to keep with the class. I have only once been able to convince a family to hold their kid back a grade in math. They just are not willing, no matter how dire. So I march forward, and work like the dickens to give conceptual understanding.

[lewelma]

5 minutes ago, square_25 said:

I did that work with my sister, you know. I had to take what I had and worked with her. I don't have zero experience with that. She was MUCH further ahead than that kid, but she also had serious conceptual gaps and still does, because we had to move forward.

I didn't say basic conceptual understanding. I said to have her multiply going forwards and guess and check for factoring. It sounds like that matches where she is. 

Oh dear, I think I've upset you.  Sorry about that!  Obviously, conceptual understanding is key.  Luckily for me, this kid has it.  Her knowledge base is just misaligned to what she will be tested on.

[lewelma]

6 minutes ago, 8FillTheHeart said:

I really do think Foerster's fits what you are describing.  I'd be happy to take some pictures with my phone and post them if you'd like to see some examples.

Thanks for that.  Let me go look at it on Amazon when I get home, and I'll see if your kind offer is required.  🙂 

[lewelma]

She really can factor. 🙂  She doesn't use the method I showed above, those are the NZ taught kids and she did Kumon.  She does trial and error for factoring, just needs more practice.  So I ran this thread not to try to teach her algorithmic skills better, but to just get her practice because she already knows it all she just needs to keep it fresh. She and I are focusing on word problems and investigation and baby proofs.

One of my most interesting kids was dyslexic, and he couldn't learn is math facts (which is common for dyslexics).  Because of this he could not keep up with his class because he really just could break numbers apart and put them together (NZ does not teach computational algorithms, only mental maths in primary school).  At age 15, he did not know that 1/10 = 0.1.  So no place value. No fractions. No understanding about how numbers could be broken up.  But what he did have was "kiwi ingenuity." He hid his ignorance for year by coming up with clever ways to figure stuff out when he couldn't do what the teacher was teaching.  When I got him, it took 1.5 years to catch up his algorithmic work, but his problem solving was superb because of all these years fighting to not look like an idiot. I got him from no place value to passing calculus in 3 years.  He now plans to be a math teacher.  🙂  So yes, I completely agree that flexible thinking can drive mathematics whether it is learned through proofs or through real world experience. 

[lewelma]

5 hours ago, square_25 said:

 

But if she's totally fluent and just needs more drill to do it QUICKLY, then I'm sorry to interfere with the thread 🙂. 

Never interfering.  Always fun to talk maths with you.  🙂 

It is just so hard to discuss the ins and outs of a kid with just brief texts.  We just need you to fly on over and meet me for a cuppa (after 2 weeks in quarantine of course  😜). Then we could really kick things around.  We could also have a great time disparaging Kumon. 🙂 

In good news, my younger boy actually wrote a 3 hour exam in maths both yesterday and today!  Actually physically wrote it. 

[mom31257]

Here are some free resources online I've bookmarked.

Workbook 

http://glencoe.mheducation.com/sites/dl/free/0078884802/633197/alg1hwp.pdf

Video lessons along with worksheets, quizzes, and tests

https://mastermath.info/lessons#algebra-1

Resources to go with Holt 2007 Alg 1

https://go.hrw.com/gopages/ma/alg1_07.html

[lewelma]

5 hours ago, mom31257 said:

Here are some free resources online I've bookmarked.

Workbook 

http://glencoe.mheducation.com/sites/dl/free/0078884802/633197/alg1hwp.pdf

Video lessons along with worksheets, quizzes, and tests

https://mastermath.info/lessons#algebra-1

Resources to go with Holt 2007 Alg 1

https://go.hrw.com/gopages/ma/alg1_07.html

Thanks for these!  I'll bookmark them too. 

[daijobu]

I wonder if Kumon means something different in the US than in NZ.  I'm actually not that familiar with Kumon since we never used it, but I think it's an after-schooling program where students can...I don't know really... learn their multiplication facts?  But it sounds like this student of yours studied Kumon exclusively instead of being enrolled in a NZ public school?  Was she homeschooled and the parents used 100% Kumon for math?  I'm just wondering how she missed years of NZ math curriculum?  

[daijobu]

On 8/31/2020 at 2:10 PM, lewelma said:

It is when you realize you have only 1.5 hours and you do it back to back with Geometry.  Even trying to make the graphs without knowing the axes is tricky and time consuming. I've tried to do this test with students in 1.5 hours and it is basically impossible. Especially because they are required to use a PEN. 

 

I think I remember you mentioning this before and I was fairly astounded then and continue to be now.  How do you coach them through problem solving with a pen, especially if they need to graph?  Does time allow for them to work out the problem entirely on scratch paper and then rewrite it perfectly on their test paper?  Or can they line out errors and continue on?  What if they improperly size their axes?  (I'm always guilty of not leaving enough space for my y axis, which ends up shooting through previous lines of text.  Or not enough space to the left of the y axis...because negative x values never happen!)  

I admire the NZ tests except that part about requiring pen.  It appears they are graded by humans as well, so partial credit is an option?  

[lewelma]

That is part of what I have to teach -- how to lay out an axis with a pen.  There is extra graph paper at the back so they can do another go.  Basically, I get them to make a trial axis and think through the variables before making the main axis.  They need to *think* before they start. 

These tests are graded by the teachers during our 6 week summer holidays. The reason for the pen is if you need to contest the grading.  You can only contest it if you have done the work in pen (obviously so you can't correct your mistakes and resubmit.  They do snail mail your tests back to you). My younger, with dysgraphia, will be using an erasable pen so he will be unable to contest if the markers get it wrong.  But I figure if he can't do the exam because of the writing instrument, it won't really matter if he can't contest it because he will have failed it!

You also might find it interesting that in the test paper that I linked to above, you only have to get ONE of the 3 questions correct to get an Excellence.  And only about 12% of students get an excellence.  So 1) the test is *very* hard, 2) the test is very forgiving as you can pick your best choice and do that one, and just dabble in the others.  Also, 30% of students fail this test and another 30% get a C. No grade inflation here.  

[lewelma]

Oh, I will also add that NZ does not have a 'percent correct' grading system.  It has a 'levels of thinking' grading system.  So yes you get partial credit, but the credit you gain depends on the thinking you demonstrate.  Memory/Manipulation/Understanding Concepts = C ; Relational thinking = B, Generalizaions/abstraction/insight = A.

So if a student can do all the algebraic manipulation, that is only worth a C.  So the work that this student I've been talking about needs to practice is just C level work.  Even if she gets 100% correct right, it is still only a C because she has not shown higher level thinking skills. She and I are working on her getting a B or even an A. That is one of the reasons I don't want to put even *more* time into manipulating algebra.  She needs to be able to *use* it to get a good mark.

Definitely a different system than America and I have taught in both systems.

Edited September 2, 2020 by lewelma

[lewelma]

As for showing your work (nice image you posted!), the assessment criteria requires 'mathematical statements.'  So you can't just put crap out of your head down on the paper and expect it to be ok.  You must actually write math correctly.  

[3andme]

I have used these Math Mate workbooks for mixed review. They follow the Australian curriculum and have one page per day of problems. They do include word problems and geometry but I'm not sure if they go high enough for what you are looking for.

 

Edited September 5, 2020 by 3andme