No worries. I was just trying to explain the likely circumstances under which Coroneous's books were produced.
Last edited:
-
Finished your HSC? Check out our University Discussion, Non-School forums or help out next year's HSC students! -
YOU can help the next generation of students in the community! Share your trial papers and notes on our Notes & Resources page
Best 3U maths textbook for year 11 (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter marksgm
- Start date
ben factor
New Member
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2011
- Messages
- 3
- Gender
- Female
- HSC
- 2011
cambridge/fitzp
Im going to try make a detailed explanation of each textbook 
Cambridge-The derivations of formulae in this textbook is just simply great. It is clear and easy to read. If you want a textbook to help you understand the theory behind things then I recommend you get Cambridge (which you already have). In terms of the questions in the exercises...I recommend you do all of the 'foundation' and at least 80% of the 'development'. The questions are good for practice.
Fitzpatrick- The derivations of formulae in this textbook are mediocre. The explanations are not the best compared to other textbooks because the author has chosen to give "alot" of examples to illustrate how to use the formula rather than explanations. The questions from this textbook are very good but dives immediately into the difficult spectrum. I dont recommend you get this textbook, unless you have understood the topics well and require more questions to do for practice.
Coroneous- Simply one of the best textbooks for the past several decades. Explanations and derivations are easy to understand; the only drawback is the font :S. The questions are absolutely perfect because there is just enough questions for you to do within a day and yet it helps you master the concepts. I highly recommend you get this textbook to complement with the cambridge that you already have. The only drawbacks apart from its strange font is the lack of questions per exercise (particularly when your revising).
Math in Focus- Sort of a modern version of Coroneous but not as good. Very similar in style to coroneous but somehow lacks the quality. I havent used it during my time in high school but looking back at it now (im a pre-service teacher) it would've done the job.
Judging by your post, im guessing that you are after either the Coroneous or Math in Focus text. If you can bare the font in Coroneous, then i suggest you get it; if not Math in Focus is probably more suited to you. Hope this helps!
Cambridge-The derivations of formulae in this textbook is just simply great. It is clear and easy to read. If you want a textbook to help you understand the theory behind things then I recommend you get Cambridge (which you already have). In terms of the questions in the exercises...I recommend you do all of the 'foundation' and at least 80% of the 'development'. The questions are good for practice.
Fitzpatrick- The derivations of formulae in this textbook are mediocre. The explanations are not the best compared to other textbooks because the author has chosen to give "alot" of examples to illustrate how to use the formula rather than explanations. The questions from this textbook are very good but dives immediately into the difficult spectrum. I dont recommend you get this textbook, unless you have understood the topics well and require more questions to do for practice.
Coroneous- Simply one of the best textbooks for the past several decades. Explanations and derivations are easy to understand; the only drawback is the font :S. The questions are absolutely perfect because there is just enough questions for you to do within a day and yet it helps you master the concepts. I highly recommend you get this textbook to complement with the cambridge that you already have. The only drawbacks apart from its strange font is the lack of questions per exercise (particularly when your revising).
Math in Focus- Sort of a modern version of Coroneous but not as good. Very similar in style to coroneous but somehow lacks the quality. I havent used it during my time in high school but looking back at it now (im a pre-service teacher) it would've done the job.
Judging by your post, im guessing that you are after either the Coroneous or Math in Focus text. If you can bare the font in Coroneous, then i suggest you get it; if not Math in Focus is probably more suited to you. Hope this helps!
SpiralFlex
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2010
- Messages
- 6,960
- Gender
- Female
- HSC
- N/A
Reputation for your review for the four main texts used by Year 11 students.Im going to try make a detailed explanation of each textbook
Cambridge-The derivations of formulae in this textbook is just simply great. It is clear and easy to read. If you want a textbook to help you understand the theory behind things then I recommend you get Cambridge (which you already have). In terms of the questions in the exercises...I recommend you do all of the 'foundation' and at least 80% of the 'development'. The questions are good for practice.
Fitzpatrick- The derivations of formulae in this textbook are mediocre. The explanations are not the best compared to other textbooks because the author has chosen to give "alot" of examples to illustrate how to use the formula rather than explanations. The questions from this textbook are very good but dives immediately into the difficult spectrum. I dont recommend you get this textbook, unless you have understood the topics well and require more questions to do for practice.
Coroneous- Simply one of the best textbooks for the past several decades. Explanations and derivations are easy to understand; the only drawback is the font :S. The questions are absolutely perfect because there is just enough questions for you to do within a day and yet it helps you master the concepts. I highly recommend you get this textbook to complement with the cambridge that you already have. The only drawbacks apart from its strange font is the lack of questions per exercise (particularly when your revising).
Math in Focus- Sort of a modern version of Coroneous but not as good. Very similar in style to coroneous but somehow lacks the quality. I havent used it during my time in high school but looking back at it now (im a pre-service teacher) it would've done the job.
Judging by your post, im guessing that you are after either the Coroneous or Math in Focus text. If you can bare the font in Coroneous, then i suggest you get it; if not Math in Focus is probably more suited to you. Hope this helps!
My two cents
New Member
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2013
- Messages
- 19
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2015
Guys Terry Lee hands down lol
lol is correct
obliviousninja
(╯°□°）╯━︵ ┻━┻ - - - -
.........
enigma_1
~~~~ Miss Cricket ~~~~
Nooo omg don t get me started on my absolute hatred for maths in focus. It's the most retarded textbook out there - don't take this personally, those of you who use MIF. I'm simply sharing my experience.
Firstly, maths in focus is all about rote learning stuff. The thing that pissed me off the most for some reason was a concept where you had to integrate sin^2 (x) and in MIF there was a formula... The chic/ author derived it but she still gave you the formula to use. But isn't it so much easier deriving it? Like there's less to remember. And when I did some hsc question, the marking feedback thing said that people just chucked in the formula without deriving it and they lost marks.
I can go on and on about so many different things but you probs get the idea. I find that MIF does not require one to actually use their brain . It's really repetitive and after a while you forget how to do the questions . Whereas if you use cambridge , then you will pretty much be doing questions that are different and require knowledge from different topics too so the questions and at least interesting and challenging.
In conclusion, use cambridge. But if that's too hard you could always use MIF for picking some Easy questions and then cambridge for harder ones.
Firstly, maths in focus is all about rote learning stuff. The thing that pissed me off the most for some reason was a concept where you had to integrate sin^2 (x) and in MIF there was a formula... The chic/ author derived it but she still gave you the formula to use. But isn't it so much easier deriving it? Like there's less to remember. And when I did some hsc question, the marking feedback thing said that people just chucked in the formula without deriving it and they lost marks.
I can go on and on about so many different things but you probs get the idea. I find that MIF does not require one to actually use their brain . It's really repetitive and after a while you forget how to do the questions . Whereas if you use cambridge , then you will pretty much be doing questions that are different and require knowledge from different topics too so the questions and at least interesting and challenging.
In conclusion, use cambridge. But if that's too hard you could always use MIF for picking some Easy questions and then cambridge for harder ones.
Squar3root
realest nigga
terry lee as someone said before but the Corenous book is also good
Kurosaki
True Fail Kid
Imho Terry Lee is the best book for combinatorics, for the other topics it doesnt really matter, Fitzpatrick, Pender, Coroneos are all pretty decent.
enigma_1
~~~~ Miss Cricket ~~~~
Terry Lee's a guy. He tutors and also has his own textbook with worked solutions