/sci/ - Science & Math

>>8243961
>Sure OP make them do proofs.
Definitely, but I gotta go beyond trite memorization of the steps of the proofs, which is how the presented proofs were when I was in algebra.

>Also make sure they know every trigonometric identity possible.
I'd be more interested in helping them establish a method for coming up with these identities themselves. I just want to make sure they actually understand why the identities work. My shitty precalc teacher made us recite the proofs out loud back to him when he taught us. Awful teacher, and a completely pointless exercise. Trig proofs are beautiful, and they need to intuitively understand how they work by talking about the geometric interpretations of them. Memorizing them comes easily after seeing what the proofs actually mean.

>why not introduce real analysis alongside algebra 2?
I don't know if you're joking or not, but I don't think it's a bad idea to touch upon some topics from real analysis. The introductory chapters of Spivak do a lot of nice algebra 2-level analysis that was completely foreign, but fascinating to me when I first encountered it.

>You can teach however u want. Fuck the strict regulations at public schools.
I probably will. I've always been good at getting away with doing things my own way. A lot of the way I think about math actually falls in line with a lot of the new common core stuff (not those shitty meme worksheets everyone always posts, but the standards themselves.)

http://www.corestandards.org/Math/Content/HSA/introduction/