Why are the older Dolciani algebra books supposed to be better?

[klmama]

I've read several times here that people prefer the older editions of Dolciani's Algebra: Structure and Method Book 1, but I've never read a reason why people find them better than the updated editions. Does anyone know?

[Jane in NC]

I've read several times here that people prefer the older editions of Dolciani's Algebra: Structure and Method Book 1, but I've never read a reason why people find them better than the updated editions. Does anyone know?

 

The older volumes open with sets, move to axioms--all clearly defined. In my opinion, the problems in the older books ('60's and '70's) are more challenging from a mathematical point of view, including some abstraction not usually presented in other books of this level.

 

The first major change that I have seen to the Dolciani's came in the early '80's. Granted, I don't think that the '80's books are bad but they seemed to have swapped out some of the more challenging questions for the sake of BASIC programming.

 

Hope this is helpful.

Jane

[klmama]

So, if I have a 1979 edition printed in 1980, do you think it would still be good? Have you seen the newest editions (the ones K12 uses now) to see how they compare?

[Jane in NC]

So, if I have a 1979 edition printed in 1980, do you think it would still be good? Have you seen the newest editions (the ones K12 uses now) to see how they compare?

 

Sorry, I am not acquainted every edition of every Dolciani text.

 

Nor have I sought out the newest editions which I believe were written by math educators, not mathematicians. This is the strength of the older books authored by mathematicians Mary Dolciani and Edwin Beckenbach.

[Storm Bay]

My understanding is that the best Dolciani texts date from 1965-1975. At least for the Algebra 1's. There's a new edition or revision about every 5 years in there.

 

Of the half dozen we've had hear, that one is dd's favourite, and it's tied for mine along with Gelfand's, but that one has no solution's guide and Charon's has disappeared.

[dragon_horse_0002]

So, if I have a 1979 edition printed in 1980, do you think it would still be good? Have you seen the newest editions (the ones K12 uses now) to see how they compare?

 

I got Algebra and Trig II 1963 and revised edition 1980. They are almost the same. They start with anxioms of addition and multiplication in R, and then make proofs from those axioms. I like the revised edition better, for the exercises are more interesting. I think the new one covers more material. One of the coauthors of the revised edition is Eckenback.

 

Hope it help.

[Gwen in VA]

My Dolcianis (prealgebra, algebra 1 & 2) are all from the early 90's.

 

I believe what everyone says about the early ones being better, but I inherited the prealgebra and just bought the newer ones without researching which edition would be better. (I bought them years before I found these boards!)

 

I think ANY Dolciani would make a great textbook! :001_smile: We are impressed with the rigor of our textbooks, even though they are later editions. The proofs and thorough teaching found in those textbooks certainly thoroughly prepared my kids for all the later math that they have met.

 

Earlier may be better, but ANY Dolciani is much better than no Dolciani! :)

[In The Great White North]

Earlier may be better, but ANY Dolciani is much better than no Dolciani! :)

 

I disagree. Dd (in school) is using a newer Dolciani Algebra I (copyrights 1988-2000) that is mostly pre-algebra, with a little polynomials thrown in. The final chapter is quadratic equations. There is a lot of overlap with Lial's BCM. It covers far less than my 1988 Foerster Algebra I and is an easier reading level.

 

When ds started homeschooling in 9th, we had to redo algebra I with Foerster, before he could do algebra II.

[Gwen in VA]

I am sorry your experience with the newer Dolciani books wasn't positive.

 

I have used the newer Dolciani with great success. My older two kids both got 800's on the SAT2 math level 1 and on the math section of the SAT. They both took both calculus 1 & 2 at a local college while in high school and both got A's. We believe the newer Dolciani books provided them with an outstanding background in math.

 

If the older books are even better than the new ones, they must be really something!

 

Different kids do well with different programs. The newer Dolciani books worked for us. It is too bad that they didn't work for you.

Edited March 23, 2009 by Gwen in VA

[klmama]

Thank you for the input! I appreciate you all explaining what you see in the various editions.

[Storm Bay]

I got Algebra and Trig II 1963 and revised edition 1980. They are almost the same. They start with anxioms of addition and multiplication in R, and then make proofs from those axioms. I like the revised edition better, for the exercises are more interesting. I think the new one covers more material. One of the coauthors of the revised edition is Eckenback.

 

Hope it help.

 

 

Good to know. We checked out 1970 & 1975 editions (library, for one of them). The order is different from 1965 to 1975, but both are excellent. We made our choice based on what dd prefered, not because the last was better. I haven't looked at any newer editions.

 

What was interesting was that we were visiting a friend's home (known him for years, but only dh had been to his house before that). He's a ps teacher and collects Algebra books--all of them are from the 1970s and 1970s. When I pointed out that he had the same Dolciani edition we have, he said that he doesn't like any of the newer Algebra programs. However, I doubt that he's seen every Algebra text that's out, and don't know if he's seen Foerster's or Lial's, particularly since Lial's is written for university/college students.

[dragon_horse_0002]

The 1963 one is Modern Algebra and Trigonometry Structure and Method of Modern Math Series. Authors are Dolciani, Berman, and Wooton. The back has only answers of the odd problems.

 

The 1980 Revised Edition is Algebra2 and Trigonometry. It is revised from the 1974, 1978 edition of Houghton Mifflin. Authors are Dolciani, Beckenback, Sharron, and Wooton. ISBN 0395279267. The back has the answers of all problems.

 

Here is some opinions from what I scan thru the 2 books.

If you are math majors, you would like the 1963 better. For reading the 1963, I feel like I read beginning chapters of math major textbooks (the language and the presentation).

The language in 1980 is more "relax". feel it is more a textbook for students in junior and highschools. May be that is the reason why some think the newer Dolciani are not "rigorous" as the older ones.

I think both are good. The 1963, IMO, is more for mature kids. For less mature kids, the 1980 may be better.

 

Hope it help.

[Storm Bay]

Here is some opinions from what I scan thru the 2 books.

If you are math majors, you would like the 1963 better. For reading the 1963, I feel like I read beginning chapters of math major textbooks (the language and the presentation).

The language in 1980 is more "relax". feel it is more a textbook for students in junior and highschools. May be that is the reason why some think the newer Dolciani are not "rigorous" as the older ones.

I think both are good. The 1963, IMO, is more for mature kids. For less mature kids, the 1980 may be better.

 

Hope it help.

 

 

Well, I wouldn't call my 13 yo mature ;), nor does she want to major in math, but she's far mathier by nature than she likes, so that might be why she liked the older one. We have the Structure & Method 1 (Algebra), but the 2 is on the shelf already.