Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
19 of 19 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
A delightful classic, August 30, 2002
This book covers classical Euclidian geometry. It has been around a long time. (The 1982 copyright date is just the last time the text was revised for printing. The pictures etc. date back to the 1940's.) The exercises are delightfully challenging.Amazon listed the book's reading level as "young adult". I have been teaching advanced HS geometry classes with this book for 6 years, and I can report that most bright students find the language challenging without someone to help them along. If you are homeschooling etc, you may want to investigate whether you can get the solution text from the publisher. I give the exercises in the book 5 stars. Again and again I find myself saying: wow I never would have thought of that. The text that accompanies the exercises gets only three stars.
|
|
|
4 of 5 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Geometry Book Review, April 12, 2007
To Whom It May Concern:
I totally agree with Mr. Richard Kleinschmidt "RichK" regarding the book not being more descriptive with their explanations regarding the examples, I would rank this book with Geometry for Enjoyment and Challenge by Milauskas et. al. Geometry for Enjoyment and Challenge gives better examples, but some of the exercises in this book are more challenging. Three-dimensional and solid geometry is covered extensively approximately 4 chapters are covered throughout this text. I thought this book was great, the exercises range from the level of difficulty (A-1, A-2, and B) This title does not truly describe the difficulty of the book A Course In Geometry, it should be titled An indepth course on Geometry because thats what it is, this book would definitely cater for an honors class.
The major gripe about this book is that in Ch.15 they mix two-dimensional geometry with three-dimensional geometry basically a square pyramid being broken down into 4 isosceles right triangles and a square and calculating the surface area and volume. Their is no general formula for calculating the lateral area like several books, such as calculating the slant height and the formula lateral area equals 1/2 times the perimeter times the slant height. The three-dimensional part should have been separate and not being merged in two-dimensional geometry and three-dimensional geometry.
My favorite part of the book are the congruent triangle proofs using the asa, sas, sss, and aas theorem, they are quite extensive some proofs take 12 steps. and the areas of segments of circles (hexagons incribed in circles, squares inscibed in circles, equilateral and isoceles triangles inscribed in circles) areas of composite figures (trapezoids and rectangles connected to each other, etc.) the area of six-shaped flower, I feel the authors intentionally on each chapter did not vgive that much examples in a descriptive manner, to make the teacher teach and force the student to learn to think critically by visualizing and using mathematical reasoning. If you want a challenge and get the most out of geometry, get this book. I enjoy reading and solving math problems for fun. I collect books for a living and do this on my spare time. Other positives are the explanation and derivation of three-dimensional theorems such as the surface area and volumes of spheres, cones, etc. There are problems of calculating the area of lune, a fraction of the area of a sphere, that is like calculating the area of a circle in 3-dimensions. That is what a sphere is a 3-dimesnional circle. No other book in high school will talk about lunars, until you hit calculus. This will really prepare an engineering, mathematics or anybody who is in the scientific discipline such as physics, geology, chemistry, economics (social science) or someone who wants a challenge in math and has a thirst for knowledge this is one of the best math books around to prepare to be ready for higher levels of math.
Overall, I give this book 4 stars I would have given 5 if the book was more organized.
|
|
|
|