I am a little disappoited in this book because of the selection of the works. Although there are 55 pieces selected, it does not contain such wonderful pieces like Fantasie-Impromptu, Op. 66, or Mazurka op. 68 Nr.2. Furthermore, most pieces are not fingered.

This book is an excellent resource for the trainer who has loads of training but little experience in tech-based training.

This book offers clarity, but industry-related terminology that will allow you to easily transfer current knowledge into this method of delivery. As a visual learner, this helped me to easily create a draft curriculum, applying the newly-suggested techniques.

However, as an improvement, I recommend more examples from diverse industries (occupational), especially training related to conceptual tasks.

I strongly encourage teachers/trainers of practical skills to include this book in their reference libraries.

Thank you.

Sylvia

Tucker and Hendrickson effectively communicate a criticism of American foreign policy during the Bush Administration. The book is interesting, readable and appropriate for any political science student interested in American foreign policy after the cold war. The arguments are well presented for the most part, but some are problematic. For example, the authors contend that NATO was established as a collective security stating that "NATO, however, was a pure application of collective security: 'It is directed against no one; it is directed solely against aggression.'"(65) While the statement in and of itself may have occurred in practice, the organization itself was designed to combat the spread of Communism, not aggression. In The Imperial Temptation, the authors evaluate the foreign policy of an administration based on a single event: the gulf war. Although this event may be characteristic of the administration, not enough evidence is presented to support that assertion. The Imperial Temptation is a valuable book for the curious and/or critical political science student interested in varying views regarding post-cold war American foreign policy, or simply the gulf war itself. It is an interesting book, and a fairly easy reader on American foreign policy after the cold war.

Looking in the Mirror is a book about the different size churches and different denominations and their sizes. This book really helped me understand more about the size of my church and more about how to self - appraise my church. Self-appraisal is critical in a church because it will basically meet almost everyones need in church service and attendance. I would highly recommend this book to anyone in search of finding out more about their churh.

Picking up a broadcast from Channel 400, the Doctor and Ace head to Blinni-Gaar to investigate how they received it. The natives of Blinni-Gaar are TV-addicted zombies, but the TV company has a very hidden agenda. As they investigate, Channel 400 announces its latest star - the Doctor himself!

Treading well-trodden ground ('Vengeance on Varos' is the best-known, but the novel 'Time of Your Life' is also up there), the novel takes a leaf out of the books of both 'The Truman Show' and 'Edtv', in the story it depicts.

Having said that, the book is a Doctor Who story, so there are alien menaces to be considered, threats to the lives and welfare of the inhabitants of Blinni-Gaar is a substantial consideration in the Doctor's plans.

This is Mike Tucker's first solo novel (his previous have been with co-author Robert Perry), and his style is confident. I would like to read another solo novel by him as I think this one lacked some of the zing the writing partnership had, but whether it is simply the nature of the story or Mr. Perry's absence remains to be seen.

The first impression this book gives is that it is very political. The artists' attempts to portray women in alternative roles is clear. Many of the pieces utilize shock value to bring to light roles women are traditionally forced into, and some pictures are quite graphic. Although it is not the case for all the photography, much of it repeats the feminist philosophies already brought forth over the recent decades and presents nothing new. This begs the question whether or not these images are truly art.

This book is a silly and self-congratulatory celebration of mediocrity. Ms. Windham had one book in her, and from there it's been the bottom of the barrel, the backside of nowhere.

Mrs. Windham does a wonderful job of giving us a look back at a fading rural lifestyle and a few of the people she has encountered.

Don't waste your money (and time) on that ancient book.

It's shame to offer a 70's book for regular sale! Although it reprinted again in 94, its content remain.

It is a very usefull book for an computer engineer.If you are in a first class of computer engineer you can have some difficulties about using the mathematical formulas in computer.This book makes you learn yery easy.It is for a starter.

Most of the other reviewers agree: This book is awful. I had to buy other books and always go on-line to find better explanations to do my homework. The authors forget to explain how to do the problems in the problem-sets. They do a couple examples then give about 50 problems or so that can't be solved using the methods in their example problems. Avoid this book when possible, if your instructor is using it, change sections.

...P>I don't have a Ph.D. from Harvard either, but I should be getting one next year.

I have had to teach an introductory calculus course at Harvard that follows the "Harvard Calculus" treatment that originated with this book (though the course did not use this book). It was awful. It is no easier to teach this course than it is to learn from it. Students need to learn calculus first *before* applying it to the various fields they will study.

My College Calculus professor uses this book as a suppliment to provide examples for the class use. Everyone hates the problems as they are vague and lack any explanation on how to solve the problem or even where to begin. It appears to me that someone wrote a book simply to create problems that cannot be solved by the book's explanations. Calculus requires a working understanding of the ideas and concepts of the base math before an sort of obscure application should be used. I would not recommend this book to anyone, unless they already have a good understanding of calculus and wish to delve further into the application of the math to the real world. In that case, buy the book. For the other 95% that are just wanting to learn calculus; go buy a different book that teaches you something first.

The book is a disaster. I had to suffer with it for 2 semesters. None of the other students in my Calc I and Calc II courses got anything from it either, as far as I can tell. I had to scramble and seek information from other calc books in order to understand what differentiation and integration was all about. The text in no way prepares one for the exercises. There's no connection between the text and the exercises. In the exercises there appear some inane, open-ended questions that seem to be trying to make some unfathomable point. This is not a book anyone can learn from. I would strongly advise any student who must use this book as their course textbook to CHANGE COLLEGES. There are many great calculus books out there, on all levels. For those who prefer a 'calculus reform' approach, I would recommend Calculus Lite, by Frank Morgan. For the more traditional approach, I got a lot out of Anton's classic.

Teaching with this text - which I've been doing for the past two semesters - is an uphill battle, to say the least. It's a text designed for non-majors; I teach business and social science students. Instructors of these sorts of students need to convince their pupils that they DO need to know how to reason mathematically, and that math IS relevant to their life plans - they can't just rely on their calculators to do all their work for them. When the textbook seems to disagree, our job is all the more difficult.

The authors of _Calculus_ don't seem to have made up their minds regarding whether or not it is necessary to introduce the notion of mathematical justification in this book. On the one hand, the examples feature sound arguments for why a curve looks the way it does, or why a critical point is a maximum or minimum - but on the other hand, alongside Newton's Method and the Bisection Method for estimating roots, is a "Using the Zoom Function on Your Calculator" primer on how to estimate the zeroes of functions. Offhand remarks about "and you can use your graphing calculator for this and that" serve to seriously undermine any attempt to explain to first-year students the concept of mathematical argument - which is unfamiliar to many.

The organization of the chapters is also somewhat questionable. Differentiation is broken up into two sections: one dealing with the concept of a derivative (complete with pictures), and the other pertaining to computing them. While the idea of introducing differentiation through a concrete example - measuring instantaneous velocity given a displacement function - is a good one, by the time students actually get to work with derivatives, they're no longer focused on what they actually represent. Curve sketching is introduced vaguely at the end of the second chapter - before the shortcuts to differentiation are mentioned - and then revisited only in chapter 4.

The section on integration is even worse: again, it's introduced in a concrete manner - this time, by asking how displacement can be computed from a velocity function. But for some bizarre reason, the authors don't take this opportunity to explain that the area under a velocity curve - the integral - is that same displacement function whose derivative was the velocity. It's a perfect opportunity to do so, as it's an interesting and surprising (to the beginner) result, and one that's accessible at this point in the course. But instead, the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus is relegated to a later section, long after the "integral as an area" idea has been abandoned and students are just working with integrals as antiderivatives. (Even more curiously, there's a section entitled "The Second Fundamental Theorem of Calculus", but none called "The First Fundamental Theorem of Calculus".)

I'd highly recommend James Stewart's _Calculus_ instead of this text for a first-year calc course: the material is far better explained, and there's even a section on the inadequacies of graphing calculators (which are expensive, and which most first year students don't have the mathematical background to use properly).

When I took Multivariable Calculus, we used "Multivariable Calculus" by James Steward in class. I personal like Steward's book very much because it made me understand without the help of my professor. With a supplement of this book, I found I understand Multivariable Calculus in a more comprehensive way. All in all, I like this book a lot.