Is the new Fitzpatrick book good? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Samario
- Start date
For Maths Ext 1 or Ext 2?
davidgoes4wce
Well-Known Member
Have purchased the Extension 2 Fitzpatrick book. In terms of presentation and content provided, its better than all of the rest. (Im comparing it to Patel, Terry Lee, Cambridge )
Have done a couple of the examples from the book and it is the best for mine.
Have done a couple of the examples from the book and it is the best for mine.
dan964
what
Ext 2 Fitzpatrick is alright, particular the latter half e.g. mechanics and the likewise, from about chapter 4 onwards (the first 3 chapters are rubbish in both versions. I wouldn't rely on the complex numbers section though as it is still bad, use Coroneous or even Terry Lee for the questions.).
It is an improvement from the old version, although I suspect it has been diluted and easier (as I have said elsewhere)* As a result wouldn't recommend doing the multiple choice questions either. (And I don't trust how the new ext 1 does mathematical induction either). Most of the questions however have been fixed from the old version and there are still mostly there without the errors that the old one sometimes had.
From school, I personally had the new Fitzpatrick for Ext 2 and the old one for Ext 1. The old Ext 1 is still very good in my opinion and still a top textbook for extension 1.
In the class I was in, we only used the older Fitzpatrick over the newer one in one instance only (even though the latter adds some diluting questions), and I suspect it was a couple of really good questions that got cut
But apart from that, yes, wouldn't recommend the older version of Ext 2; use the newer version, haven't seen the newer Ext 1, but the old Ext 1 is very decent stuff (Fitzpatrick Ext 1 + Cambridge and you are set for Ext 1), for Ext 2, NSM is probably your third or fourth best option, although I do like its summary thingy at the end, for notes/revision I'd recommend Patel (not for its exercises), which I like the format of. Terry Lee and Coroneous are the only two options better (not sure about ext 2 Cambridge as I've heard mixed reviews)
It is an improvement from the old version, although I suspect it has been diluted and easier (as I have said elsewhere)* As a result wouldn't recommend doing the multiple choice questions either. (And I don't trust how the new ext 1 does mathematical induction either). Most of the questions however have been fixed from the old version and there are still mostly there without the errors that the old one sometimes had.
From school, I personally had the new Fitzpatrick for Ext 2 and the old one for Ext 1. The old Ext 1 is still very good in my opinion and still a top textbook for extension 1.
In the class I was in, we only used the older Fitzpatrick over the newer one in one instance only (even though the latter adds some diluting questions), and I suspect it was a couple of really good questions that got cut
But apart from that, yes, wouldn't recommend the older version of Ext 2; use the newer version, haven't seen the newer Ext 1, but the old Ext 1 is very decent stuff (Fitzpatrick Ext 1 + Cambridge and you are set for Ext 1), for Ext 2, NSM is probably your third or fourth best option, although I do like its summary thingy at the end, for notes/revision I'd recommend Patel (not for its exercises), which I like the format of. Terry Lee and Coroneous are the only two options better (not sure about ext 2 Cambridge as I've heard mixed reviews)
Last edited:
davidgoes4wce
Well-Known Member
I haven't bothered looking at the Cambridge 4 Unit text. Not a fan of black and white, it does seem the questions are a tad harder and obviously no worked out solutions.
Terry Lee text would be the 2nd best text for students to use.
Terry Lee text would be the 2nd best text for students to use.
Carrotsticks
Retired
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2009
- Messages
- 9,494
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- HSC
- N/A
The updated Fitzpatrick book is MUCH better than the old one. Had a thorough read of it a few days ago.
In fact, I would go as far as claiming that it is the best publicly available textbook for Extension 2 at the moment.
Far from perfect, but the best of what is readily available.
In fact, I would go as far as claiming that it is the best publicly available textbook for Extension 2 at the moment.
Far from perfect, but the best of what is readily available.
96-MX2, 99-MX1 2012 HSC here my advice is legit. lol soz haven't seen a textbook for 4u since 2012 so i hav no idea about new fitz. the one mentioned below refers to the old one.
best MX1 book is fitzpatrick (green) perfect for all topics (notice they change publisher for 4u book because 4u fitzpatrick is pure trash (except for complex numbers locus stuff)
best 4u is terry lee hands down solid questions for all topics especially harder 3u and volumes with worked solutions. Also 100 integrals exercise from coroneos is worth a mention. Conics/Mechanics section of Patel is also very very good.
I don't know if its just me or not, but i found cambridge (2u/3u/4u) to be pretty bad. Its very overrated due to its name. I didn't like the questions as they usually require hardcore rote computations rather than the satisfying understanding related (deriving style) questions encountered in the other books mentioned above.
tip: To do well, that is get 95+ in 3u/4u. Firstly make sure u understand the topic throughly. Then do basic/intermediate exercises in textbook(s) (mentioned above). Once a bit more confident, attempt trial papers with the questions related to that topic in it, its okay to get them wrong first time. But try to note the tricks some unique questions use as they will pop up alot during ur HSC year.
best MX1 book is fitzpatrick (green) perfect for all topics (notice they change publisher for 4u book because 4u fitzpatrick is pure trash (except for complex numbers locus stuff)
best 4u is terry lee hands down solid questions for all topics especially harder 3u and volumes with worked solutions. Also 100 integrals exercise from coroneos is worth a mention. Conics/Mechanics section of Patel is also very very good.
I don't know if its just me or not, but i found cambridge (2u/3u/4u) to be pretty bad. Its very overrated due to its name. I didn't like the questions as they usually require hardcore rote computations rather than the satisfying understanding related (deriving style) questions encountered in the other books mentioned above.
tip: To do well, that is get 95+ in 3u/4u. Firstly make sure u understand the topic throughly. Then do basic/intermediate exercises in textbook(s) (mentioned above). Once a bit more confident, attempt trial papers with the questions related to that topic in it, its okay to get them wrong first time. But try to note the tricks some unique questions use as they will pop up alot during ur HSC year.
dan964
what
There are solutions, they are just separate.
dan964
what
davidgoes4wce
Well-Known Member
I didn't see them. Can you get at bookstores? Do you have to order it directly from the company?
I know with Fitzpatrick, they come in separate and/or packages.
I know with Fitzpatrick, they come in separate and/or packages.
The reason the old Fitzpatrick was not great is that he is Victorian. He was making textbooks in Victoria and thought he would dabble in the NSW course. He clearly had no feel for the course. Perhaps he has made more of an effort to familiarise himself with the content and the level of difficulty.
yellow and green book for 2u 3u was my bible back in yr 10/11. I think they are the best
Kaido
be.
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2014
- Messages
- 798
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2015
For Harder MX!, I really enjoy:
http://www.harderhscmaths.com/
A collection of some of the best Qs from all types of 4U exams
http://www.harderhscmaths.com/
A collection of some of the best Qs from all types of 4U exams