The Student Room Group

Reply 1

Stay far, far away from the Heinemann (Edexcel) textbooks. They have decent practice questions for the most part with relatively accurate answers (except the M5 book), but the presentation of the material is horrible and they leave a lot of very interesting theorems unproven. Or prove a crippled version (a lot of the theorems relating to matrices are only proven for the 2x2 and 3x3 cases).

Other than that, I'm afraid I can't be of much help...

Reply 2

Sorry my post is useless. Can anyone vouch for what Fafnir has said? I'm planning on buying the Heinemann FP series...

Reply 3

Fafnir
Stay far, far away from the Heinemann (Edexcel) textbooks. They have decent practice questions for the most part with relatively accurate answers (except the M5 book), but the presentation of the material is horrible and they leave a lot of very interesting theorems unproven. Or prove a crippled version (a lot of the theorems relating to matrices are only proven for the 2x2 and 3x3 cases).

Other than that, I'm afraid I can't be of much help...


That because you dont need to know the proofs. For the matrices you only need to be able to do 2x2 and 3x3 inverses,determinants etc... its not like we're dealing with tensors :rolleyes:.

They have to have a cut off point. They cant teach you everything about differential equations, complex numbers and matrices. Theres a certain amount of theory of certain topics which are short enough to get through in a year without having to resort to teaching yourself most of it in your own time.

Ive always found the FP series quite a good set of textbooks. People always complain about not explaining things enough. They do..., you just have to think abit more about what youu're doing. But i guess thats the difference between A level and further.

If i wanted a textbook that was thorough and had all the proves in it id get a university textbook but considering the fact you dont need one in further maths why bother forking out?

Reply 4

In terms of studying for A-level exams I found the Heinemann books excellent.

Reply 5

Further Pure Mathematics by Brian Gaulter is a very good book for Further Maths. It’s a bit expensive, but is ideal for complementing your class textbook or self-study.

Reply 6

andrew.s
Further Pure Mathematics by Brian Gaulter is a very good book for Further Maths. It’s a bit expensive, but is ideal for complementing your class textbook or self-study.

yeah its pretty good... the only thing it doesnt have are vector spaces explained and a little bit of centroid bla bla... but i'm sure u can find material on that else where..
for mechanics and stats i'd say Advanced Level Statistics by bostock and chandler and Mechanics for advanced level by those guys too... i think they're girls... they might be out of print but the stats book is pretty good and the mechanics book has some stuff missing... but it depends on the modules u take..

Reply 7

I dont think the S2 book could explain continuous variables worse. The heinemann books are ok but just lack a bit in examples/explanation though.

The FP books are fine for self study.. theyve got loads of questions etc.

Reply 8

does it matter which exam board you're doing further maths in? i'm doing it next year and i was just wondering if there is a good book for specifically for AQA further maths or if it doesn't really matter. does anyone know?

Reply 9

goggin6
does it matter which exam board you're doing further maths in? i'm doing it next year and i was just wondering if there is a good book for specifically for AQA further maths or if it doesn't really matter. does anyone know?

If you go for a book like Introducing Pure Mathematics, Further Pure Mathematics, Introducing/Understanding Mechanics, Further Mechanics, or Introducing/Understanding Statistics, then it doesn’t matter which exam board you’re on.

There are books available for AQA Further Maths, such as Advanced Maths for AQA: Further Pure FP1 from OUP, however, as long as you get a decent textbook, then it doesn’t matter whether it’s specific to AQA or not.

Reply 10

surely it would, because different boards do different things under different modules. for example my board doesn't do 1st order differential equations till fp3, yet others do it at fp1

Reply 11

jcoatz
surely it would, because different boards do different things under different modules. for example my board doesn't do 1st order differential equations till fp3, yet others do it at fp1

I did say it wouldn’t matter providing you got a decent textbook. In reality there isn’t much difference when you compare C1-4 with AQA and Edexcel, or FP1-3/4 with AQA and Edexcel (and the other boards, of course).

Therefore providing you got a textbook which fully covered the core pure syllabus or further pure syllabus, it wouldn’t matter (i.e.: Introducing/Understanding Pure Mathematics, Further Pure Mathematics – these are usable under all boards).

Reply 12

right ok. thanks for that! :smile: i was worried about getting a book that didn't have a topic that would come up under the exam board. so i guess a generic one would work.

Reply 13

The MEI specific books are quite good (HOdder and Stoughton I think) They have the theory, worked examples, exercise questions and then summaries at the end of each chapter. I know that it's slightly different though to the other exams boards. For FP1 for example it does a small number of topics in detail whereas I think AQA based books cover a wider range but in less detail. Depends which board though but i think the MEI Structured Mathematics are really helpful.

Reply 14

This book is very good

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Further-Pure-Mathematics-L-Bostock/dp/0859501035

I also like the books by the Gaulter brothers.

The heinemann books are ok in places but there are mistakes, including mistakes in theory. I would use it though as the questions are generally good.
The other problems with the H books are the lack of rigor, and as mentioned the lack of proof/ some key concepts.

For example in the matrices section it informs us that the diagonlization of a symmetric matrix A is given by P(trans) A P, But it doesnt mention that the general diagonlization for a matrix A is P^-1 A P; which is the form that edexcel papers tend to use


Nor does it cover complex transformations very well.