Algebra 2 and Trigonometry

Rating:
Summary: Generator of Math Phobias
Review: Generator of math phobias

This book deserves MINUS 5 stars.

I assume that this is the same book Algebra 2 and Trig by Dolciani, Graham, Swanson and Sharron inflicted on my child a decage or so ago. If not it is a later edition, the changes made after the demise of Mary Dolciani, but most likely written in the same style.

Algebra is easy. Unfortunately for our children, D (for Dolciani et al) presents algebra in a manner that makes it difficult for children to understand. The book has simple topics presented in unnecessarily difficult ways as well as difficult concepts which do not belong in a high school book. These unnecessary difficulties are important contributory causes as to why many pupils, even smart pupils, have difficulty with this course; these unnecessary difficulties mislead pupils into thinking that they are dumb or that math is not for them. Many pupils, even smart pupils, are guided away from the combined Algebra 2 / Trig course to the slow track two year sequence of the Algebra II course and the Trigonometry course in order to avoid the unnecessary difficulties of this book.

My view is that it is the job of teachers and textbook writers to simplify the material and present it in a manner that is easy to understand. It is also my view that it is the job of textbook to provide pupils with (i) understanding based explanations of the material, (ii) explanations as to how to use the material, together with (iii) motivation for and applications of the material. In addition, if a topic is presented in a textbook, it should be presented in a serious way. D completely disagrees with me. She was under no such obligations. Instead, D often presents algebra in a manner that is unnecessarily complicated and confusing, devoid of motivation and applications. This textbook presents many topics in superficial ways which must result in the pupils gaining superficial understanding. No wonder students forget most of it over the summer. The Pre-calculus textbook authors realize this; this is why they repeat much of the Algebra 2/ Trig material in the Pre-calculus textbook.

The best analysis I have seen of the state of math education in the public schools was the report "The Underachieving Curriculum" This international survey concludes that the main problem with precollege math education in the U.S. is the overly fragmented, overly repetitious, underachieving curriculum. Dolciani's book both fits and perpetuates this description all too well. There is less algebra material taught in 3 quarters in the "fast" track Algebra II/Trig course today than was taught in the 2 quarter Intermediate Algebra course in the early 1950's. Many students take Chemistry along with Algebra II/Trig, but the mathematics from Dolciani's books is not sufficient for high school chemistry courses. This is why the chemistry teachers have to teach math in the Chemistry course.

A contributory factor to the failure of many students in college calculus classes is that the students do not read their textbooks (other than reading the prototype examples). Dolciani's unreadable books have probably inculcated this habit of not reading math books in millions of students.

At the request of the Prince George's county public school system (in Maryland), a series of discussions were held by college faculty members on the topic: What contributes to the failure of college freshmen? The participants in the initial discussions were faculty members (who have much connection with freshmen) from 10 departments on my campus (Univ. of MD, College Park, MD), together with high school teachers and college freshmen). The main conclusion was that: "The overemphasis on testing, skill development, and fact content, etc. [in high school] seems to have inhibited [student] interest in learning, motivation, ability to work with and enjoy ideas, use creativity and attain satisfaction from an educational experience." Dolciani's book both fits and perpetuates this description all too well.

Dolciani was the chief author of a set of high school mathematics textbooks --The "new math" of the 1960's. Her books have been the best selling texts of the past 35 years. Most of the other texts written in the 70s and 80s were semi-clones of her books. As such these books deserve much of the blame for American high school pupils learning less mathematics than pupils all over the world. The wide spread use of this book for a 35 years reminds me of the story of the emperor's new clothes.

These books have generated math anxiety and math phobia and loss of self-confidence in millions of American pupils during the past 35 years. Pupils' low level of learning algebra from these books resulted in teachers, guidance counselors, parents and the pupils themselves greatly underestimating the pupils' ability to learn math. This has resulted in many college students unnecessarily avoiding engineering and science courses.

If, back in the 1960's, an "evil empire" had succeeded in smuggling a "mole" into the U.S. with the task of sabotaging the mathematics education of our children, it is hard for me to imagine what he/she might have done that would have been more damaging than Dolciani's set of mathematics books.

Rating:
Summary: Excellent Algebra book for high school
Review: I had an earlier (1980) edition of this book during my high school days. I remember the class fondly. I still occassionally reference the book now 20 years later and it still seems well written, cogent, and an excellent book to cover the subject matter. I do agree that this is not spoon feeding material, but for teachers who really want to convey the subject matter and for children who have the prerequisite math skills and any interest in math, I think this book is right on target.

Rating:
Summary: This book is great
Review: I think this book was great and i am just a high school freshman. (...) It is not at the fault of the book if children do not study it becuase if you did in a matter of moments you would undertsand evything, yet they don't it is there lost and no one else's!

Rating:
Summary: Excellent, solid math foundation
Review: Mary P. has done it again. I'm a homeschooling Dad with degrees in computer science and mathematics. My dad is a high school math teacher of 30 years experience. Neither of us has ever seen a better treatment for high school of this subject. My daughter was confused by Saxon's methods and explanations, went over to the Dolciani book, and says "Oh, that's how you do it!". Also a more rigorous and in depth treatment than Abeka's Algebra 2. My only complaint/wish was that the computer programming aspects of the exercises were done for C rather than Basic or Pascal, but that's easily fixed by anyone that knows C.