But the difference is that AP Calc BC is just teaching Calculus. AA HL is teaching calculus plus statistics and other foundational math, and requires 240 instruction hours.
That’s why the integrated approach for advanced math classes sucks, and nobody else does it.
In two years of IB HL Analysis you’d do 55 hours of calculus and 33 hours of statistics. The rest is not advanced topics, it’s “foundational” concepts from precalculus, algebra and geometry that frankly should be mastered already.
Taking the AP route of Calculus BC and AP Statistics you get about 148 hours of instruction for each. The IB HL Analysis part of statistics only covers topics from the first half of AP Statistics, ie no sampling distributions or hypothesis testing etc.
People that plug the strength of the IB Math program should really look into it before giving advice to others. It is a bad curriculum.
? European schools do integrated math. Too many kids lack good foundational knowledge in math when they get up to higher level math.
In any case, OP's school doesn't have AP, so your post is moot.
I actually went to high school in an European country, integrated math is not as common as you claim.
Not clear to me why you need to do a lengthy review algebra and geometry in what is supposed to be a college level math class like IB HL AA that is equivalent to university calculus.
My spouse went to school in Europe, and they did integrated math. They were confused when we went over the math pathway here in the US for our kids.
Do you have a kid who did HL math? I'm guessing not. Do you think HL math has 2x + x2 algebraic type problems? LOL
There are no BC specific topics parametric calculus, the series portion is very weak.
Unfortunately in IB Analysis they do teach the likes of 2x+x2, check page 39, standards SL 2.6 and 2.7, related to the quadratic equations.
Needless to say no AP class is covering those topics which honestly should be understood in depth at that point.
The link I provided addresses ^PPs post about math path in European schools.
AP classes cover those classes, sure, I don't think people are debating that. But, IB HL math path can be pretty rigorous, too. In MCPS, IB math includes AP BC calc, so those students get both types of rigorous math courses.
Also, pg 39 is SL, math no HL, and is showing you an example, and also note that in IB math you are expected to know how to apply the math (see Connections).
What’s the point of taking Calculus BC with 148 instruction hours, then follow with IB HL Analysis with Calculus covering 28 hours of SL content and 27 hours of HL? Not sure why you don’t way to count the SL topics.
I get there are other areas in IB HL from precalculus, geometry and algebra, but for the student that knows that content well, he’s wasting one year of math just to get the IB diploma.
The point of IB is a well rounded education. So, yea, if you *only* want STEM, don't do IB, especially if you hate writing.
Most schools don't have MVC or above.
DC is doing great as a math major with an IBDP.
The question was why take Calc BC then IB HL, when it’s a repeat of prior coursework.
Congrats to your DC, not sure what else to say, hope he does well. I just don’t follow how BC to IB HL contributes to a well rounded education.
Not OP, but in some schools it’s just a way to get in Calc BC plus the IB sequence for the diploma. IB has very rigid rules on when courses and exams can be taken.
exactly... path was BC Calc > HL math + mvc/diffeq (which is designated at our school as IB)
Also, "well rounded" means they take a variety of challenging courses, not just math.
Why take APUSH when you studied history all through 3-8 grade? My sophomore DC is now in APUSH and said half the things they are "learning" they already learned in MS. Does that make APUSH redundant?
But the difference is that AP Calc BC is just teaching Calculus. AA HL is teaching calculus plus statistics and other foundational math, and requires 240 instruction hours.
That’s why the integrated approach for advanced math classes sucks, and nobody else does it.
In two years of IB HL Analysis you’d do 55 hours of calculus and 33 hours of statistics. The rest is not advanced topics, it’s “foundational” concepts from precalculus, algebra and geometry that frankly should be mastered already.
Taking the AP route of Calculus BC and AP Statistics you get about 148 hours of instruction for each. The IB HL Analysis part of statistics only covers topics from the first half of AP Statistics, ie no sampling distributions or hypothesis testing etc.
People that plug the strength of the IB Math program should really look into it before giving advice to others. It is a bad curriculum.
? European schools do integrated math. Too many kids lack good foundational knowledge in math when they get up to higher level math.
In any case, OP's school doesn't have AP, so your post is moot.
I actually went to high school in an European country, integrated math is not as common as you claim.
Not clear to me why you need to do a lengthy review algebra and geometry in what is supposed to be a college level math class like IB HL AA that is equivalent to university calculus.
My spouse went to school in Europe, and they did integrated math. They were confused when we went over the math pathway here in the US for our kids.
Do you have a kid who did HL math? I'm guessing not. Do you think HL math has 2x + x2 algebraic type problems? LOL
There are no BC specific topics parametric calculus, the series portion is very weak.
Unfortunately in IB Analysis they do teach the likes of 2x+x2, check page 39, standards SL 2.6 and 2.7, related to the quadratic equations.
Needless to say no AP class is covering those topics which honestly should be understood in depth at that point.
The link I provided addresses ^PPs post about math path in European schools.
AP classes cover those classes, sure, I don't think people are debating that. But, IB HL math path can be pretty rigorous, too. In MCPS, IB math includes AP BC calc, so those students get both types of rigorous math courses.
Also, pg 39 is SL, math no HL, and is showing you an example, and also note that in IB math you are expected to know how to apply the math (see Connections).
What’s the point of taking Calculus BC with 148 instruction hours, then follow with IB HL Analysis with Calculus covering 28 hours of SL content and 27 hours of HL? Not sure why you don’t way to count the SL topics.
I get there are other areas in IB HL from precalculus, geometry and algebra, but for the student that knows that content well, he’s wasting one year of math just to get the IB diploma.
The point of IB is a well rounded education. So, yea, if you *only* want STEM, don't do IB, especially if you hate writing.
Most schools don't have MVC or above.
DC is doing great as a math major with an IBDP.
The question was why take Calc BC then IB HL, when it’s a repeat of prior coursework.
Congrats to your DC, not sure what else to say, hope he does well. I just don’t follow how BC to IB HL contributes to a well rounded education.
Not OP, but in some schools it’s just a way to get in Calc BC plus the IB sequence for the diploma. IB has very rigid rules on when courses and exams can be taken.
exactly... path was BC Calc > HL math + mvc/diffeq (which is designated at our school as IB)
Also, "well rounded" means they take a variety of challenging courses, not just math.
Why take APUSH when you studied history all through 3-8 grade? My sophomore DC is now in APUSH and said half the things they are "learning" they already learned in MS. Does that make APUSH redundant?
Really? Your sophomore student claims half the APUSH content was learned in middle school? Come back in the summer and tell us how she did on the AP exam, trust me that writing and analysis at the middle school level won’t cut it.
Look up the percentage of students getting a 5 in APUSH, it’s the lowest among history and social science classes at 10%.
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}