<p>Although I read a lot, I have better grasp of syntax than vocab; I tend to know the general context a word can be used in, but not its true meaning (and occasionally there are two words used in a similar context). Writing and Math are both easy for me, for the most part. I do doubt my answers a lot if I’m not given enough time; but usually, the questions are easy enough that there isn’t much to doubt. </p>
<p>This reminds me of the STAR testing, really (California’s old state standardized tests); we’d all finish an hour early on the test and get 600s (the highest score possible; my last time taking them, I got a 600 on each of math, science, and english, and a 571 (meaning I got one wrong–that one was stuff I learned like 2 years before I took the test) on history–they were just really, really easy to BS).</p>
<p>@livelaugh7 I don’t think I did very good, but I didn’t really prepare because I’m not a junior yet. What irritated me though was that a lot of the math problems confused me, but I eventually understood them right after time was up. #-o Oh well, there’s still next year! Good luck to everyone else taking it. You will probably do better than me. </p>
<p>We’ve learned as much in the first two months of school in Precalc as I learned in the entire Alg II course last year… Maybe they should just cut Alg II out all together, or combine Alg II and Precalc. It would certainly help people advance through the math sequences faster.</p>
<p>@topaz1116 My school teaches some Pre-Calc stuff in Algebra 2 and calls it Algebra 2 plus, then we take Accelerated Pre-Calc which is the second semester of Pre-Calc and most of AP Calc AB. I actually thought Algebra 2 was pretty hard, mostly in first semester since the year previous I had taken Geometry and that class was way too easy. I wasn’t ready for math to be hard again.</p>
<p>Why is he teaching high school if he has a PhD in that from Cornell? Our precalc teacher is really smart, but not at that level of education lol. I agree, some of Precalc so far feels like review, but looking at the syllabus, I think that will change. </p>
<p>@livelaugh7 We basically just follow the Alg II textbook; our course is Alg II/Trig. We just have Honors Precalc; although at this rate, I’m assuming that we’ll finish the book early and go into some Calc AB stuff; our textbook has 11 chapters and we’re on the fourth at the moment. The last chapter is an introduction to Calculus anyways. However, all of the fourth and fifth chapters, a bit of the sixth chapter, and most of the eighth and ninth chapters look like review.</p>
<p>@ThatOneWeirdGuy I think it might be a retirement job of some sorts? I know that he actually worked places before he came to our school to teach.</p>
<p>@ThatOneWeirdGuy IDK what your referring to…</p>
<p>@topaz1116 At my school you are either one of 50 students who takes Honors Algebra 2 or one of the 250 who takes algebra 1. The Alg 2 curriculum is half of Alg 1, all of Alg 2 and a good amount of H Precalc. Honors Precalc is some of Calc AB, the actual Pre Calc curriculum and a review of Alg 2 curriculum. There is no order, it just depends on what we are learning. At my school, they look for depth not breadth. </p>
<p>Do you guys think I should do Catherine the Great or Stalin for my NHD project? It’s on Leadership and Legacies, and I’m having a hard time deciding.</p>
<p>On one hand, Catherine the Great was a great ruler with a HUGE legacy for Russia and she just affected the world a lot; but on the other, it would be fun to do an angle on how even a “villain” still had a legacy as a leader–albeit one that isn’t necessarily good.</p>
<p>I don’t know how many people will do Stalin, simply because he’s bad; I have a better idea of what I’d do for Hitler on the bad angle, but Hitler is just too cliche for a project on history. But then, a lot of people might do Catherine the Great.</p>
<p>Also, it might be harder to find sources for Catherine the Great because she ruled in the 1700s? I’m not sure.</p>
<p>@topaz1116 I think it would be kinda cool if you did a non-political/governmental leader. Like Henry Ford or some scientist or philosopher maybe, who indirectly led in an intellectual sense (definite legacies). It would also set you apart, with whichever leader you decide to write about, if you talked about some of their flaws or bad things they did rather than wholly paint them as perfectly benevolent people. </p>
<p>@ThatOneWeirdGuy Yeah, the only thing with non-political leaders is affirming that they were leaders. I wouldn’t necessarily consider Montesquieu a leader, but he certainly had a legacy.</p>
<p>Last time I did NHD, I did Gandhi’s Salt March (the topic was Turning Points in History; my friends and I did it in eighth grade) and we ended up becoming alternates to states (we were very close to making it to states, though).</p>
<p>I’m probably going to go to states this time because not many people compete in Individual Website, and not many people compete in the high-school division at regionals in general.</p>
<p>@topaz1116 I think a non-political leader would be a great project. Think about it. There are countless innovators and reseachers etc. who lead students and professionals towards a brighter goal. People like Emma Watson and her HeForShe speech (terrible example, but its the first thing that came to mind) got people think about equality. Leaders who fight outside of politics tend to help the common people towards a brighter future.</p>
</p>