<p>For your AP calculus, what textbook do you use? What's your opinion of the book you're using?</p>
<p>At my school, we use Foerster, but this year I've been using Stewart to brush up and to learn the BC topics. Foerster seems really geared for the AP exam, but Stewart is like a general calculus book. The problems, I've found, are harder in Stewart than Foerster, but again, less helpful for the AP exam. </p>
<p>Discuss!</p>
<p>My AP Calculus AB class uses Larson, Hostetler, and Edwards "Calculus of a Single Variable" Seventh Edition. It says on the back cover "Calculus I, II" and some kids in my class have this same book except it is bigger and says "Calculus I, II, and III" on the back. It's not geared toward the AP test, but my teacher just picks out the stuff we need to know for the AP exam.</p>
<p>Any Stewart's Calculus would do. Find one in amazon for less than $10 shipped.</p>
<p>My school uses Larson, Hostetler, and Edwards also named "Calculus 8th Edition".</p>
<p>So far, there is little difference in content and more on learning style.</p>
<p>Good luck</p>
<p>We also use "Calculus of a Single Variable, 8th ed." by Larson, Hosteler, and Edwards.</p>
<p>Anton, Biven & Davis Calculus Early Transcendentals Brief Edition 7th edition</p>
<p>no textbook, my teacher is pretty horrible.</p>
<p>i teach myself. for the most part.</p>
<p>Larson, Early Transcendental Functions, 3rd edition</p>
<p>i feel like this book teaches extra material that is not on the bc calc exam. makes me feel a little nervous that no one else has this book yet my calc teacher is an ap grader.</p>
<p>spazattack, does your school offer a course after the AP Calculus BC course?</p>
<p>The "Calculus of a Single Variable" texts, if I recall correctly, are just shorter smaller versions of the "Early Transcendental Functions" texts designed for use in AP Calculus courses. You probably won't cover more than the first 8-10 chapters in BC this year, and then if your school offers something post-Calculus BC, you'd probably do the remainder in a subsequent year.</p>
<p>But looking at the material in the "Early Transcendental Functions" text, you'll definitely hit the major BC topics. Although I'm not sure if the 3rd edition is recent enough to include slope fields or not. (It's pretty easily learnable through a worksheet if it's not in there.)</p>
<p>my teacher taught us slope fields without the book. it wasn't terribly difficult. I think I would prefer calculus of a single variable though.</p>
<p>also, my school doesn't offer a course after bc. although people who take bc their junior year usually go to the local community college to take calc 3.</p>
<p>Is it just me or does "Early Transcendental" sound like a caveman hand-calculating sines and cosines :)</p>
<p>agreed ^</p>
<p>my friend who isnt taking calc was like "what? is this caveman math?"</p>
<p>Larson, Early Transcendental Functions, 3rd edition</p>
<p>Calc doesn't seem too bad, but maybe i'm just a math person.
looking at percentages online, apparently 40-50% of takers get a 5 =o</p>
<p>in honesty, the concepts don't seem too hard. mostly algebra fail</p>
<p>Early Transcedentals Rogaswki i think thats how you spell his name...</p>
<p>My school uses Stewart single variable early transcendental. It does a horrible job of explaining things.</p>