Best Textbook for 4u? (1 Viewer)

[AKONS]

G'day guys

I'm starting 4u maths this term and I would really appreciate insight from the other BoS users on what textbook is the best.

I'm personally looking for a textbook that teaches me to a decent skill level so I can hit past papers straight afterwards.

I realise there are older threads on this topic but I can't find any talking about the update syllabus.

Thanks in advance guys and best of luck to the new HSC cohort!!!

 

[shashysha]

Cambridge + Terry Lee was a good combo for me (the latter carried me through integration lol), but after a point where I knew most of the content I hit up past papers only for more exam style questions and learnt from my mistakes there. Some of my friends who perform very well also used the FitzPatrick 4U book which is another alternative, and a teacher called Steve Howard released his own free textbook which you can find online alongside 1000 questions - essentially you have a large variety of options

 

[MrGresh]

Nelson (Maths In Focus) is great for a conceptual understanding, but questions are very easy.
Cambridge has shocking explanations but good questions.
Terry Lee is very hard. I have the book but i'm scared of it. But that's because I'm dumb.
Steve Howard one (FREE!) has decent explanations and a really good range of questions.

I would recommend getting the Maths in Focus one to learn concepts and apply them in easy situations. Then download the Howard textbook and 1000 revision questions and do those.

 

[po45gp]sedorgmjkpoerdjgf]

The terry Lee is probably the best overall just because of the worked solutions being the best imo. (definitely prefer them over howard)

Easier books like maths in focus are good for getting things like integration and mechanics burned into your head. The issue there is that MIF will not give proper guidance on how to do the questions, which is a problem with the harder integration and mechanics questions and particularly the recurrence relations in integration. I ended up learning recurrence relations directly from past paper solutions. Proofs is pretty much the same no matter what textbook you use but I think only Lee and Howard mention squeeze theorem. Be careful what you spend time on with vectors, because pretty much all textbooks are likely to have some useless content on them since they're new to the syllabus. At the end of the day, trial papers, sample papers and HSC papers are always your best bet, so do those primarily and textbooks if you have the extra time to put in.

Disclaimer: I did not use the fitzpack book for extension 2, I have only used it for prelim extension one, I personally found it difficult to learn from. I did not use Cambridge at all.

 

[B1andB2]

I did not use Cambridge at all.

wow, how come?

 

[idkkdi]

Nelson (Maths In Focus) is great for a conceptual understanding, but questions are very easy.
Cambridge has shocking explanations but good questions.
Terry Lee is very hard. I have the book but i'm scared of it. But that's because I'm dumb.
Steve Howard one (FREE!) has decent explanations and a really good range of questions.

I would recommend getting the Maths in Focus one to learn concepts and apply them in easy situations. Then download the Howard textbook and 1000 revision questions and do those.

Cambridge has the best explanations. everything else is too watered down in rigour.

 

[po45gp]sedorgmjkpoerdjgf]

wow, how come?

Just because the layout and lack of images and extra stuff made it hard to read for me, and it seemed to get a bit off syllabus in enrichment questions.

Colour, images, applications and random historical stuff may seem unimportant, but if you're going to spend hundreds of hours over a year going through a textbook, it definitely helps keep you (me at least) sane.

Keep in mind I was already using Howard, Lee and in focus when I got access to it, so I wasn't willing to use it unless it had content that "filled in the gaps", which it didn't seem to. I also had physical copies of MIF and Lee, but only a digital version of Cambridge.

 

[B1andB2]

Just because the layout and lack of images and extra stuff made it hard to read for me, and it seemed to get a bit off syllabus in enrichment questions.

Colour, images, applications and random historical stuff may seem unimportant, but if you're going to spend hundreds of hours over a year going through a textbook, it definitely helps keep you (me at least) sane.

Keep in mind I was already using Howard, Lee and in focus when I got access to it, so I wasn't willing to use it unless it had content that "filled in the gaps", which it didn't seem to. I also had physical copies of MIF and Lee, but only a digital version of Cambridge.

ah i see

 

[shashysha]

Just because the layout and lack of images and extra stuff made it hard to read for me, and it seemed to get a bit off syllabus in enrichment questions.

Colour, images, applications and random historical stuff may seem unimportant, but if you're going to spend hundreds of hours over a year going through a textbook, it definitely helps keep you (me at least) sane.

Keep in mind I was already using Howard, Lee and in focus when I got access to it, so I wasn't willing to use it unless it had content that "filled in the gaps", which it didn't seem to. I also had physical copies of MIF and Lee, but only a digital version of Cambridge.

bruh i feel you 3u cambridge looked so bright and colourful so when i first got 4u cambridge imagine my disappointment when it was all black and white text

 

[B1andB2]

bruh i feel you 3u cambridge looked so bright and colourful so when i first got 4u cambridge imagine my disappointment when it was all black and white text

Looks like im the only one who loves the 4u cambridge layout and design

it's so simple!

 

[MrGresh]

Cambridge has the best explanations. everything else is too watered down in rigour.

Sorry id rather understand it than have it be 'rigourous'

 

[idkkdi]

Sorry id rather understand it than have it be 'rigourous'

the logic in the book flows very well.

definitely understandable.

 

[MrGresh]

the logic in the book flows very well. just a bit terse i suppose.

definitely understandable.

Idk i could never stomach how ugly it was

also theres a bloody essay for every chapter. Just tell me what I need to know