Return to Summary Page

Francis A. Carey

Organic Chemistry, 4th Edition, McGraw-Hill, 2000

Ch 5/Ch 8 - Substitution/Elimination
Ch 12 - Aromatic Substitution
Ch 20 - Carboxylic Acid Derivatives
Ch 22 - Amines

Carey
Although Carey is a fairly good text, it didn't seem to have any particular features that made it stand out from any of the other texts. In this book, I reviewed Substitution/Elimination reactions and Aromatic Substitution. The textbook layout is similar to Brown and Foote. It did have better summaries, space-filling models, and illustrated the stereochemistry of compounds well. Features that I thought were lacking included mechanisms, and very little emphasis on physical properties of compounds. Another thing I disliked was the fact that Substitution/Elimination was not in the same chapter. Since these are frequently competing reactions, I find it confusing to split them into different sections in the book. Also, this book did not relate the topic of organicchemistry to the real world, though it did like to discuss (for many paragraphs) the historical significance of certain reactions, which isundoubtedly important and interesting, but seemed to bog the overall flow of the text down. Some historical significance is important,but in this text it was excessive. I was impressed however, that in the Aromatic Substitution chapter (chapter 12) this book discussed partial rate factors, which is not in Brown and Foote.

Carey
Liked:
1. Side (margin) notes useful (puts things said in text "in-other-words"
2. Good summaries. Goes by section and simply restates everything along with examples.
3. Summary tables are pretty good
4. Quite explanatory within the text.

Didn't like:
1. Would like to see more "real world" applications of concepts learned.
2. Graphics do not contribute significantly to understanding of material.
3. Since I did not view the cd-rom, I don't know how helpful it is, however, the text refers to its use in the margins, which B & F does not, so that part is helpful.
4. Doesn't do much with mechanisms, if I wasn't paying attention as I was going along, I might have missed them.
All in all, the text wasn't anything to write home about. It was a good text, but not great. Everything was laid out in a good order, but it all still seemed to run together. Important topics did not stand out,so it made it a little difficult to weed through. If I was given this text to use, and not to compare to others, I think it would suffice, but seeing as how I am comparing it, it's not great.

Carey
Like : There're also summary of all the reactions and new material that we have learned so far in each chapter, thus , a list of new words and their pages that help me easily to look at when I don't understand.
Don't like: not recommended.

Carey
1. aramatic chapter was before carboxlyic chapter, so it made more sense.
2. Got good problems, and really good mechanisms, and was really easy to follow
1. chapters were long , and I kind of liked the brown & foote better.

Carey
LIKES: Ahhhhh, saved the best for last! I love this book! When I opened this one it made me want to read it. It was colorful and had great graphics. These graphics were the 2-D versions of chem tv's 3-D images. It had a great layout! There were better explanations on spectroscopy, and it had "boxes" with reactions of previous chapters. That is great for me because it is hard to remember ALL THOSE RXN's!! There were easy to hard examples and answers in the back of the book. In the chapter, the author would re-iterate ideas or concepts previously learned in other chapters. That was a big plus, sometimes one doesn't get it the first time. And lastly, there were a lot of homework problems; fromeasy to hard which is good. B&F had lots of problems but they stopped at a certain level. This book went past that. Yippee!
DISLIKES: none :)

Carey
One feature I found especially helpful was the reintroduction of past reactions applicable to the current chapter rather than references to past pages. It seemed very disruptive to have to thumb through pages to find relevant equations in our current textbook. The one very helpful thing found in the Brown & Foote was the listing of all new reactions at the end of the chapter, which the Carey textbook lacked. The chapter summaries seem to be more useful in the Carey textbook. One could read the summaries and keypoints would be highlighted to help you remember to go back and reread a topic you might not remember. I did not find the Brown & Foote summaries to be useful at all.
Another feature of the Carey book that seemed to help clarify the reactions more, was the color coding of atoms in a reaction.
Overall, I am not sure which text I would prefer. If forced to chose, I might wnat to try the new textbook due to the fact that when reactions were introduced, differect catalyst were identified instead of just showing up in a problem later and having to interpret whether or not this was a new reaction or just a variation of an old one.

Carey
1. Layout
In this textbook I just loved the tables. For example:
Table 20.1 - it lists the stability of each carboxylic derivative in such a way that it gives you a sense of why one is more stable than the other just by looking at it.
Table 22.3 (p.874) - this table makes a student's life sooo much easier cause it gives you a short summary of all the reactions covered in previous chapters.
2. Clarity
I think the author was able to explain important concepts with simple sentences. One exmaple would be p. 799 quote " Amines, which are substitutes derivatives of ammonia, react ... ". This sentence shows how he pays attention to each definition and does not assume - although at chapter 20 he should - that every student knows all definition.
3. Logical organization
Well, this another area which clearly exceeds BROWN & FOOT. Example p. 877. In this page he presents azides, nitriles, cyanohydrins etc. all reacting with the same reagent, namely LiAlH4. I liked the summary too, very clear and easy to understand (p. 819)
4. Overall usefulness
I think this is a very good textbook. My only critique would be the problems given at the end of each section. Eg. PROBLEM 22.4 - they are not as well presented as in Brown & FOOT. Another thing is the compactness of the textbook. Although completely irrelevant to learning, it would be nice to have some nice pictures such as in Brown & Foot - I've always enjoyed "SOCRATES DRINKING HEMLOCK POISON" and the like. They were little "candies" to my eyes.

Carey
I did not like how the text split S and E mechanisms into different chapters.
It seems logical to keep them together.
The text was clear and straight forward. PE diagrams were excellent and were used often. Ch 20 showed excellect mechanisms. Ch 22 was a little light on nomenclature descriptions. Orbital representations as in ch 5 are helpful.:
Oen particular note about the text, the chapter summaries were much better than our current book.

Carey
The text in this book seemed too uniform. Text blocks were dense, long paragraphs, and it is somewhat difficult to differentiate problem questions from text. Tables were difficult to interpret and poorly organized. The diagrams were also overwhelming (the space-filled molecules were too colorful and over-powering).
Subst./Elim.:
Relatively good discussion, but these topics should be introduced more closely together. They are different mechanisms, but similar enough that they should be introduced close to one another.
Again, space-filled molecules difficult to interpret.
Arom. Subst.:
o-, m-, p- attacks explained well.
Friedel-Crafts Alkylation limitations were not discussed completely. No mention of limitation with electron withdrawing substituents.

Carey
Likes: aramatic chapter was before carboxlyic chapter, so it made more sense. Got good problems, and really good mechanisms, and was really easy to follow.
Dislikes: chapters were long , and I kind of liked the brown & foote better.

Carey (Ch 5/8)
Similar to Brown & Foote, but I think it's a bit clearer in presentation. Good summary info.

Carey (Ch 5/8)
WHAT I LIKED:
1) THE SPACE FILLING MODELS;
2) THE ORBITAL REPRESENTATIONS OF METHYL MIGRATION (P 189);
3) CHAPTER SUMMARY
WHAT I DIDN'T LIKE:
1) GROUPING OF FUNCTIONAL GROUPS INTO ONE CHAPTER;
2) I THINK THAT ALCOHOLS SHOULD BE DEALT WITH SEPARATELY;
3) THE CONCENTRATION SHOULD BE ON THE MECHANISMS OF SN1 AND SN2.

Carey (Ch 5/8)
Carey-Good chapter summary.
Carey-Tables too crowded, not easy to use.
Carey- When Sn2 mechanism discussed as pushing off a leaving group, he should use 3-D representations.
Carey-Potential energy diagrams not easy to read.
When showing an attack on stearically hindered molecules, need to show the actual attack taking place.
Carey needs a better discussion about carbocation stability when discussing Sn1
Carey-mechanism too divided by text to follow action of molecules.

Carey (Ch 5/8)
like:
easy to understand, explanation in simple terms
summaries make it easy to have an overview of chapters
very detailed
more and very good examples given in one field
don't like: no reaction page/summary not enough color in graphics, too grey no E1/E2 summary like B.F.
no chemistry in action section which help students to understand and become familiar with the use of Organic Chemistry in our everyday world
chapters too long (36 pages vs. 20 in F.B)

Carey (Ch 5/8)
Likes
-The fact the grouped characteristics of each reaction type together (i.e. SN1: substrate, leaving group, nucleophile, solvent, summary.)
-Layout of summary table 11.4
-Section on substitution reactions in biological systems
Dislikes
-Brief coverage of elimination reactions (~1 page each)
-Lack of overall extensive amount of information covered in Brown & Foote

Carey (Ch 12)
like:
good tables and summary
it gives general equations for reactions, then example, which makes it very easy to understand
good examples and exercises
don't like:
too plain in visuals

Carey (Ch 12)
Carey employs the same methods as Brown & Foote. Mechanisms are clear and detailed. Unlike Jones, readers do not have to surmise a mechanism or read through an incorrect one before the correct method. Carey is matter-a-fact, easy to read and thorough.
Things I like:
Unlike Brown & Foote, there was a mechanism for all reactions including the sulfur reaction, which our current text failed to show. Carey is very thorough about showing mechanisms no matter how similar.
Table 12.1 was a great introduction at the beginning of a chapter to introduce all electrophilic reactions right after the concept of electrophiles was introduced. It's easier to organize reactions as you read them because you already anticipate it from the table.
They introduce Clemmsen and Wolff-Kishner reductions here where there is a need to learn them as part of a synthesis step to reduce substituents on an aromatic ring. I agree with Carey instead of Brown & Foote. Granted it reduces carboxylic acids, but it makes more sense to introduce them in context with other reactions.
Carey's summary was written in a better format than Brown & Foote. Each section was summarized, so that it was easy to go back to the appropriate section in the book to review.
Things I don't like:
Not much to say here except for what I've already mentioned. I must have grown accustom to the graphical presentation of Brown & Foote, because every other textbook seems pale in comparison. Carey does use graphics and color to delineate sections of text and problems, yet it doesn't appear quite as distinguished as in Brown & Foote.

Carey (Ch 12)
Likes
-Summary table at end of chapter.
-Energy diagrams for reactions (fig 12.8 &12.9)
-Sections on directing effects of multiple substituents
-Reaction boxes
-The layout of table 12.2
Dislikes
Introduction of Clemensen & Wolf-Kishner reactions in this chapter

Carey (Ch 12)
I liked the use of its different colors, which were soft, and that there was plenty of room in the margins. This book's discussion of partial rate factors and substitution in naphthalene was excellent. It's layout and Tables 12.1 and 12.2 were great. The only downfall of this book was that it had no sample problems and had one minor problem with its layout: all of the mechanisms were presented in the next section. For example, while the mechanism for nitration was addressed under the section discussing nitration, it was presented under the discussion for another reaction.

Carey (Ch 12)
WHAT I LIKED -
1) THE POTENTIAL ENERGY DIAGRAMS FOR ELECTROPHILIC AROMATIC
SUBTSTITUTION;
2) THE MOLECULAR MODELS WITH COLOR CODED ELECTRON DENSITY;
3) THE CHAPTER SUMMARY.
WHAT I DIDN'T LIKE -
1) THE MECHANISMS ARE NOT AS CLEAR AS IN B&F, FOR EXAMPLE: THE BROMINATION OF BENZENE IS NOT SHOWN CLEARLY AS AN EXAMPLE OF
ELECTROPHILIC AROMATIC SUBSTITUTION. THERE IS NO HINT OF THE BROMONIUM ION IN THE MECHANISM. ILLUSTRATING THIS MECHANISM AS THE ENTIRE LEWIS ACID COMPLEX ATTACKING THE BENZENE RING IS MORE DIFFICULT TO COMPREHEND THAN ATTACK OF THE PI ELECTRONS OF THE BENZENE RING ON THE BROMONIUM ION.

Carey (Ch 20)
Very good tables e.g. preparation of esters to illustrate interconversions, though not as thorough as Jones, i.e. little molecular orbital theory. Good description of acid catalysis.
"Summary of reactions" discussed in earlier chapters is very helpful.
Excellent summary of key points and I like the spectrographic analysis last.

Carey (Ch 20)
WHAT I LIKED:
1) THE MOLECULAR MODELS WITH RED HOT SPOTS OF HIGH ELECTRON
DENSITY;
2) COLOR CODING OF FUNCTIONAL GROUPS OR SELECTED ATOMS IN MOLECULES WAS EXTREMELY CLEAR AND HELPFUL.
WHAT I DIDN'T LIKE:
1)WAY TOO MANY SECTIONS;
2) I PARTICULARLY LIKED THE GROUPING OF THE CARBOXYLIC ACID DERIVATIVES IN B&F. FOR EXAMPLE, HYDROLYSIS REACTIONS FOR ACID HALIDES, ACID ANHYDRIDES, ESTERS, AND AMIDES, ETC... ARE ALL IN ONE SECTION. I FEEL THAT THIS GROUPING PROVIDES A CONDUCIVE WAY TO
UNDERSTAND THE RELATIVE REACTIVITIES OF EACH GROUP AND THE PRODUCTS OF THE HYDROLYSIS IN EVERY CASE.

Carey (Ch 20)
The following are things that I did like:
1) Pastel colors were used throughout the chapter (and book). This made things not as busy as the bright colors in Wade did.
2) This author provided problems with sample solutions throughout the chapter. These are so important!
3) The mechanism boxes were very detailed and clearly laid out. They would provide great reference points for students.
4) The author used many electron density diagrams. I think that this would benefit students who learn better with visual aids.
The following are things that I did not like:
1) The tables had too much information and did not provide a "quick" reference as they should be.
2) The nomenclature sections were laid out as clearly as with Solomon and Brown and Foote.
3) The text was definitely not as interesting to read. It did not keep my attention as well as Solomon or Brown and Foote did.

Carey (Ch 20)
I really liked how this text highlights its mechanisms by placing them in boxes, and includes comments as well as a reference to which section that mechanism is in. I liked that this text had tables that provided a general equation as well as a specific example for each reaction. I really liked that the chapter summary had summarized each section separately. The fact that this book had sample problems and solutions was great. I really enjoyed the space filled molecules (like the ones Dr. Shusterman uses in the general chemistry courses) because they give an accurate idea of what each molecule looks like. Therefore, a student understands why certain reactions happen or do not happen, especially in cases where steric hindrance is involved. By observing the real models for molecules, a student understands what steric hindrance really means, rather than just blindly accepting that argument to be true.

Carey (Ch. 20)
1.Coloring labelings of the groups in a compounds is helpful in the process of following how the reaction is actually carried through.
2. Electron pushing arrows are much clearer than B & F because it points to where the electrons are going. All reactions presented are clear.
3.
4. The overall usefullness of the text for this course is a 9 on the scale of 10
______Things I like, things I dislike_______
I like the many more practice problems they gave. I think it is great while reading the chapter. The mechanisms are easy to read. They are very logical. I can follow it through with no trouble.

Carey (Ch 20)
Likes
-Summary of reactions at beginning of each section
-Review of pertinent reactions from earlier chapters
-Grouping by compound classes with physical properties, reactions, etc.
-Spectroscopy information at the end of the chapter
-Electron space filling model p.777
-Summary at end of chapter includes reactions
-Large detailed mechanism boxes.
Dislikes
-No IR graph
-Black colored electron pushing arrows, hard to notice
-Drab color scheme
-Incomplete listing of reactions in summary

Carey (Ch 20)
The table 20.3 is good info, but layout is too crowded.
Discussion of natural esters interesting, but seems out of place.
Mechanism in this chapter are better, especially with tracking important groups throughout the mechanism.
The text seems to bring up a subject and then dismiss it by referring to later chapters often (Both Carey chapters)

Carey (Ch 20)
Commentary:
Carey employs the same methods as Brown & Foote. Mechanisms are clear and detailed. Unlike Jones, readers do not have to surmise a mechanism or read through an incorrect one before the correct method. Carey is matter-a-fact, easy to read and thorough.
Things I like:
Carey displays multiple tables to introduce preparatory reactions for various functional groups as well as conversion reactions of the each functional group. I found this to be a very useful outline of the text. It was wonderful that it was consistently displayed throughout the chapter.
Thiols and heterocyclic reactions were discussed at the end to avoid confusion.
Brown & Foote's treatment of Mass Spec, IR and NMR always bothered me. This section was always placed in between nomenclature and reactions/physical properties. I'm glad that Carey placed this section at the end of this chapter after all the reactions have been discussed. To me, it flows better.
Things I don't like:
Because each functional group was presented in a segregated fashion, there should have been a table or section that integrated or drew similiarities between the functional groups as Brown & Foote explains in the "Interconversion" subsection.

Carey (Ch 20)
like:
gives very good hints on the side about what to look up again from previous chapters very good reaction page in this spectra section, it explains it better than F.B, does not give a bunch of numbers but rather explains what happens there
good exercises
don't like:
chapters are very detailed which is good, but they may be a little too long

Carey (Ch 22)
Structure and bonding figures are really unclear. Generally I don't like long "asides": I tend to view them as optional and not read them.
Methods for C-N bond formation discussed in earlier chapters is helpful.
Good section on preparation of amines by reduction.
Excellent tables summarizing the info. presented in the text.
Carey has some really strong points and some really weak ones. Not as consistently helpful or clear as Jones, though an improvement over Brown & Foote.

Carey (Ch 22)
1. Graphs and layout of reactions are well depicted.
2. Written parts are easy to read and understand.
3. tends to jump around alot.
4. This particular chapter is useful although I think it is a little lengthier than B and F with the same information that could be learned.

Carey (Ch 22)
Commentary:
Carey employs the same methods as Brown & Foote. Mechanisms are clear and detailed. Unlike Jones, readers do not have to surmise a mechanism or read through an incorrect one before the correct method. Carey is matter-a-fact, easy to read and thorough.
Things I like:
Brown & Foote's treatment of Mass Spec, IR and NMR always bothered me. This section was always placed in between nomenclature and reactions/physical properties. I'm glad that Carey placed this section at the end of this chapter. To me, it flows better. Additionally, the H-NMRs have labeled hydrogens not just the number but also the position on the molecule in question
Carey places biographical information as a footnote rather than incorporating as apart of the text. I like this approach as it doesn't divert the focus on anything other than the highlighted molecules.
Things I don't like:
Not much to say here except for what I've already mentioned. I must have grown accustom to the graphical presentation of Brown & Foote, because every other textbook seems pale in comparison. Carey does use graphics and color to delineate sections of text and problems, yet it doesn't appear quite as distinguished as in Brown & Foote.

Carey (Ch 22)
The following are the things that I did like:
1) Sample problems were included in the chapter.
2) Reviews and previews were included in each section. This was helpful for me since I tend to have short term memory! Therefore I need the reviews so that I can be reminded of the properties of amines and then I can apply them to the reactions.
The following are the things that I did not like:
1) The preparation of amines was not as clear as with Brown and Foote and Solomon.
2) The various types of reactions were not separated into their own sections. In other words, the reactions were very hard to keep track of.

Carey (Ch 22)
WHAT I LIKED:
1) NOMENCLATURE OF AMINES VERY CLEAR;
2) STRUCTURE AND BONDING WITH DIFFERENT MODEL REPRESENTATIONS;
3) TABLE 22.3 VERY HELPFUL IN REVIEW OF C-N BOND FORMATION, TABLE 22.4 VERY HELPFUL IN REVIEW OF AMINES;
4) SUMMARY WAS VERY HELPFUL.
WHAT I DIDN'T LIKE:
1) CAREY DID NOT GROUP EACH DIFFERENT KIND OF AMINE AND THEIR REACTION WITH HNO2.

Carey (Ch 22)
like:
good summary of basicity of amines
good mechanisms
good summary of reactions and glossary of chapter
good exercises

don't like:
nothing in this chapter other than the graphics with too little color

Carey (Ch 5/8 and Ch 12)
Likes - The graphics were very well done!
Dislikes - The cd didn't sound very helpful.

Carey (Ch 5,8 and Ch 12)
Comments
Of the three texts I have reviewed, Carey's text is the easiest to read. It doesn't have excessive colors and graphics like other texts. I think the reason I like this text is that the layout is similar to our text.
Since elimination was presented in an earlier chapter than substitution, I like the author's later emphasis that the two reactions are competing (Section 8.13).
The author does a good job of pointing out important ideas. For example, he states the important factors in deciding between elimination and substitution reactions (page 323) and does a good job of explaining substituent effects (463). Important points are highlighted or bulleted so that it isn't lost in the paragraph.
I like all the resonance structures that are shown in chapter 12. I don't think our book has enough.
I like the summary by sections (rarely found in other texts).

Carey (Ch 5/8 and Ch 12)
Chapter 5 & 8 in Carey described the subst./elim. topic very well. I felt that the book did an excellent job at laying out the mechanisms and showing more diagrams for a pictorial representation. The pictures made the chapter much easier to read and grasp. Tables such as 8.1 & 8.9 were very informative and helpful at organizing all of the topics. The flow of the chapter was very logical for me. I felt like the chapter built on itself very well, and it incorporated issues that I have been using throughout the class. For me, I felt that Brown & Foote's (B&F) text was better than this book. However, the tables and graphics were better in Carey. Futhermore, the summaries at the end of the chapter was great because it gave a detailed overview of each section. Chaptr. 12 was about the same as chaptrs 5 & 8. The tables, such as 12.1 were VERY helpful to organize everything that was going on. I really like how the book referred to reactions about alkenes to introduct the aromatic reactions. This was a usual tool for me to recall the alkene reactions and use the same principles. In all of the chapters, the energy diagrams were great to show how the reactions work and why they work (with reference to the energetics). Both of these chapters were very long and included many sections. However, I did like this because it enable me to separate everything that I was learning based on sections. The B&F covered most of the same concepts but in a lot less pages than Carey (and in less detail in some places).

Carey (Ch 5/8 and Ch 12)
(1) Layout of the text
The contents of the chapter sections are not included at the beginning of each chapter. However, the chapters include a summary by chapter section at the end of each chapter, which helps identify the important concepts by subtopics. The tables are rather large, and filled with too much detail, making them more difficult to use. The important points highlighted in the margin area are very helpful.
(2) Clarity of the presentation
The content of the chapter 8 table comparing SN1 and SN2 mechanisms is a good summary of substitution reactions. The key reactions of chapter 12 are listed at the end of the chapter within the summary, which is of course very helpful. The presentation of key reactions uses bold type and informative text. Overall, the text is easy to read and understand.
(3) Logical organization of the material
I do not care for the separation of substitution and elimination reactions into two different chapters. The chapters are organized in a format seemingly appropriate; however, the chapter order within the text does not appeal to me.
(4) Overall usefulness as a text for this course
Disregarding our current text, this was my favorite text in terms of aesthetics, layout, clarity/logical organization, and the overall user-friendly style.
Chapter 12 gives a good example of Carey's excellent interpretation of the material. H-NMR spectra explanations highlight peaks and the fragment of the compound in question. Brown&Foote do not highlight but just explain in words, sometimes confusing the reader. Carey uses just enough space to make graphs/spectra legible and clear to understand but do not use too much space. Organization is logical and clear from each spectroscopy type to the next.

Carey (Ch. 5/8, and Ch 12)
Carey uses awesome space-filling models in graphics (e.g. showing degress of electron densities by shading intensities). Solutions to problems are easily accessible but are "sample" solutions to guide the student along in their thinking process. Conditions for reactions and special notes remarking an important point are color-coded. Mechanisms are good in presentation: overall reaction is followed by the step-by-step mechanism. Mechanisms are given in both space-filling and carbon skeleton models. Credibility is built by little notes on the margins remarking about issues dealing with the presented concepts/ideas in the real-world. Carey gives good separation between texts and graphics. A good summary of general equations is displayed and specific examples are given for each (Comments help in learning each reaction). Special sections (e.g. Ethylene and Propene: The Most Important Industrial Organic Chemicals) are placed toward the back of the section which is good in giving an example of a real-world involvement of the chapter. Carey avoids distraction by not putting the section directly in the middle of the chapter. Logical organization is definitely a strength, starting from more simpler reactions to those that are more involved.
Chapter 12 gives a good example of Carey's excellent interpretation of the material. H-NMR spectra explanations highlight peaks and the fragment of the compound in question. Brown&Foote do not highlight but just explain in words, sometimes confusing the reader. Carey uses just enough space to make graphs/spectra legible and clear to understand but do not use too much space. Organization is logical and clear from each spectroscopy type to the next.

Carey (Ch 5/8 and Ch 22)
LIKE: well, this book is very similar to our book but not quite as good I think. I also like the summary which show the most important parts of each section. It's pretty easy to read. DISLIKE: I don't like their sample problems very much because they don't explain very well how they get their answers.

Carey (Ch 5/8 and Ch 22)
Like I said before, this book had nice mid-way sections describing rxns so far. But I noticed that some of the rxns shown in the little tables were not discussed in the text and that made them seem less important. You could see what could happen, but without a discussion who knew if they were common, useful or anything else. They used a term 'Walden Inversion' and although it was something that we already knew about, it was a new term that B&F did not use. Chapter 8 had some nice space filling models to show steric hinderance and also some very nice, complete energy diagrams. Chapter 22 on amines, presented naming of amines very clearly and also how to identify each as primary, secondary and tertiary. I think they went into a little more detail than B&F. This book introduced the Gabriel Sybnthesis which B&F did not do. I also liked that they presented a discussion on spectroscopy at the end of chapters instead of in the middle. It made the discussion flow a little more.
(By the way...I REALLY liked Carey's book a lot. If I had to choose between this one and B&F, I would surely pick this one!)

Carey (Ch 5/8 and Ch 22)
Layout: Carey presented us with well-demarcated mechanism boxes, although they were still not specifically titled like in Brown and Foote (i.e. "SN2 : The Mechanism). I liked that Carey, like Brown and Foote, designed small tables/diagrams and used bold colors to highlight even the shortest of trends, like leaving group abilities of halides. The summary at the end of the substitution chapter was particularly thorough and included most of the key points of the chapter.
Clarity: I didn't find this text to read as smoothly as the Jones or Ege text, but Carey used other tools in his text to simplify some of the more technical language. In addition to his increased usage of graphics, he also did a good job of introducing new words and explaining, rather than assuming we know, what it means (Brown and Foote often seemed to move on without providing a thorough understanding or a review in the chapter itself). In both chapters, Carey did good reviews of previously learned information (review of Amine synthesis) as well as previews and general themes of upcoming information.
Organization: Generally, I like the flow of this book a lot, except for the elimination chapter being separated from the substitution chapter. Had this been the case, the information on substitution and elimination could have all been included in Carey's excellent review table at the end of Chapter 8. Other than this comment, I didn't find any of the other organizational pieces problematic.
Overall: I'm probably biased because Dr. Carey is a family friend and taught me General Chemistry. However, I would honestly say that, compared to Brown and Foote (which I've realized I like more than I thought I did!), Carey's text is one of my top two in the selected five. I think it does a very good job of integrating the strong aspects of the other texts into one text. His narrative is relatively clear, he provided and ample amount of well-highlighted summarizing diagrams, mechanism sections, and tables, and presented many more solved in-chapter problems than the other books.

Carey (Ch 20 and Ch 22)
Carboyl Deriv. is a lot of info to jam into one chapter. However, Carey did an AWESOME job with this tough material. I loved how they took one group and showed all the rxtns for that group. Then, to add greatness, they used one of their awesome tables to organize it even better. This was much easier for me to follow than B&F-where they present the reactions and then describe each group going to that particular rxtn. They used far more sections than B&F, but as I already said, this enabled me to organize my thoughts more efficiently. The chapters flow was excellent and, based on my first point, it was organize very well! I found the amines Chapter was very similar to B&F. However, due to the tables, carey was easier to grasp. ONce again, there was tons of sections, which I didn't NOT like here. Instead, I liked B&F because I felt like it made its point quickly, and was done. Carey seemed to drag on in this chapter.

Carey (Ch 20 and Ch 22)
Color-codedness throughout the chapter gives explanations and concepts an attractiveness and simplicity for the reader. No confusion is felt about what the author is talking about. However, Carey does break too often between texts to show tables and charts.
Carey includes too many tables, and examples between sentences to somewhat jumble the information and skip from text to graphics too quickly. Chapter 22 shows how the layout in the charts use too many words on the sides and spacing of rxns is relatively crowded.

Carey (Ch 20 and 22)
Layout
got good graphs, and it was really easy to follow and easy to understand. the amine chapter was very helpful.
Presentaion
chapter 20 was not very easy to follow, and i had a little trouble with it,. but i likes the amine chapter it was easy to follow better than the bown book.
Organization
I didn't like the way the chapters were orderd didn't think it was very organized.
Overall
I liked the amie chapter and thought it was very helpful and i understood the material better from this book.

Carey // Brown & Foote
Comments
The nomenclature of carboxylic acid derivatives in Carey is not as in-depth as Brown & Foote
Carey's text has nice electron density models showing electron distribution (figure 17.4).
In chapter 20, there are too many reactions grouped into large tables. It is difficult to see the connection or the "big picture." Instead, our text has a nice figure showing the interconversion between derivatives (Figure 17.4).
Carey does a better job of showing the different preparations of amines by reduction (Section 22.10) than our text.
Both Carey and Brown & Foote have nice features. I would be happy to use either text.

Carey (Ch 5/8) // Brown & Foote (Ch 8)
Commentary:
Carey employs the same methods as Brown & Foote. Mechanisms are clear and detailed. Unlike Jones, readers do not have to surmise a mechanism or read through an incorrect one before the correct method. Carey is matter-a-fact, easy to read and thorough.
Things I like:
This chapter did a better job addressing solvent effects. The information was located in one section whereas Brown & Foot addressed this issue in two separate sections several pages apart. Carey's treatment of E1 and E2 is FAR BETTER than Brown & Foot. An entire subsection was written for E1 reaction! Reading this chapter instead of Brown & Foote would have been easier on the whole class. I remember, my workshop having difficulty grasping when which elimination reaction was preferred and why. Carey's treatment of Elimination was just as through as the SN1&2 reactions. Integration of competing SN and Elimination reactions were better introduced that Brown & Foote's comparison section. Carey listed the theoretical concepts and conditions in which one was better than another before delving into example reactions.
Carey's summary was written in a better format than Brown & Foote. Each section was summarized, so that it was easy to go back to the appropriate section in the book to review.
Table 8.1 is helpful.
Things I don't like:
I must have grown accustom to the graphical presentation of Brown & Foote, because every other textbook seems pale in comparison. Carey does use graphics and color to delineate sections of text and problems, yet it doesn't appear quite as distinguished as in Brown & Foote.

Carey, (Ch 5/8) // Brown and Foote (Ch 8) (Generally from point of view of Carey)
1. Layout:
Lists of reactions, mechanisms, nucleophilicities, etc. are placed where naturally encountered during initial reading of text. Margin notes with useful, but appropriately marginal, notes of related references, history, etc.
Monotonous, drab. Font size, print boldness, coloring are completely uninteresting. Suffers in comparison to B&F, esp. in the boxed examples meant to inspire interest! B&F uses bright, attractive, interesting graphics, which provides a welcome change from brow-wrinkling reading.
However, Carey's computer graphics ruled, through their clear depiction of orbitals, electron transfers and electron densities during reactions and in varying structures. Much clearer description and depiction of anti-coplanar requirements than B&f.

2. Clarity:
At first, reading felt cumbersome, but after adjustment, I found the text quite readable, and I appreciated the specific, point-by-point detail through the reaction mechanisms. The text was fairly tight (only for a textbook! He took 5 lines to say 'A carbon can move, and reattach to another. This is called "rearrangement."') He added richness to descriptions of reactions, reagents and conditions, v. B&F, which showed throughout the text the intent to teach one how to synthesize effectively. On re-reading B&F, I found the style more literary, but the information not as focussed upon the moment, v. Carey. Carey did introduce some sections with a list of anticipatory questions, which did help to frame the ensuing text.

3. Logical Organization
The chapter summary was much more thorough than B&F (of little value) and organized by the numbered chapter sections. Reading it first provided an immediate grasp of the context when reading the general text. I noticed that o, p, m directing wasn't covered in Carey's Ch 22. I found it in Ch 12 with his earlier treatment of aromatic rings, which seemed appropriate, which allowed more focus upon the amine group itself in Ch 22. Similarly, substitution reactions were formally treated earlier than page 185, and in fine detail. I think both of these regroupings might be more effective.

4. Overall Usefullness:
I think I'd find more of what I wanted were I to turn to a specific section to find find a fact or a context for one, in Carey v. B&F. But B&F did have a better list of functional groups; I liked the presentation of the precise functional element v. an example of a compound in the family, as Carey provided. Both had good glossaries & indexes. Carey had many molecular drawings to support glossary entries, but I don't recall needing any such support before. B&F had a table to track all of the reaction mechanisms in the text.

5. I like Carey's concision and constant notes on effective synthetic strategies-even I began to feel like I could handle syntheses! By providing constant recommendations and comparisons of reagents, conditions and product proportions, I can't but expect that it would lead to more familiarity with all of those.
He is thorough, point-by-point, clear.
I don't like
Carey's drab, monotonous graphics (except for the computer graphics!). I prefer the occasional relief of B&F. B&F's chapter summaries-too skimpy.

Carey (Ch 5/8) // Brown and Foote (Ch 8)
The chapter text of the Carey book is clearer and easier to understand. There is slightly more detail than Brown and Foote. More pictures in Carey text adds to its clarity. Presentation of mechanisms are the same for this chapter. The summary at the end of the chapter is more comprehensive than Brown and Foote. Making it better than the current text. Sadly, the amount of problem sets do not increase with the Carey book.

Carey (Ch 5/8) // Brown and Foote (Ch 8)
a) Things I liked:
Good comments in the margins
CDROM for PC use to see animations.
Sample problems have solutions so you can see if you are getting it right away. This lets you walk thru the steps to see what's needed to work the problems.
good colored graphical representation of orbitals in the figures.
Use of color highlighted atoms to help students keep track of which C is which thru a reaction.
Nice figure showing cis tran 4-tertbutyl cyclohexyl bromid in fig 5.11.
It is easy to see the 3-D orientation.
Good shaded and colored 3-D space filling models along with ball and spoke.
Fig 8.4 illustrates solvation clearly and quickly. B&F was confusing to me on this.

b) Things I didn't like:
B&F coverage of phase transfer catalysis was hard to get.

Carey (Ch 5/8 and Ch 12) // Brown & Foote (Ch 8 and Ch 20)
I like the fact that subst. and elimination are not split up (subs. and elimination are presented in the same chapter). There is no cool graphics however. Carey is very well color coordinated which helps you visualize what is going on. However I don't like the fact that they break up subs. and elim. into different chapters. I would give Brown & Foote a B and Carey a B as well on graphics.I found Brown & Foote to be very clear, they do a good job explaining subst. and elimination but Carey seemed more clear. There are many mistakes in Brown & Foote so I would give them a B on Clarity and A to Carey. Brown and Foote, I have noticed split up chapters down component by component whereas Carey seems to combine more concepts into each chapter. For this reason I would give B&F and A for logical organization and Carey a B. Overall I think Carey would probably make a better text book, over Brown and Foote. Brown and Foote does not seem to catch my attention as much as Carey did (the included many visuals which probably make learning organic very fun) I would give Brown and F a B- overall and Carey an A-.

Aromatic Substitution Brown and Foote vs. Carey
Layout of the text: I would give Brown and Foote a B and Carey an A+. B&F is easy to use but they do not have enough graphics. Carey has some awesome tables which help organize material especially on pg. 445.Clarity of the presentation: B&F a B and Carey an A. I think B&F does a great job describing what benzene does, but Carey includes constants describing the ortho, para, and meta positions (you showed us in class) our book does not show us those constants. Those constants I thought help students really understand the ramifications between different substitution patterns on the benzene ring.

Logical Organization of the material: I would give B&F a B and Carey an A. I think B&F is organized yet I seem to see more information included in tables in Carey. I believe when tables are presented it helps students organize material in their heads better than just having it written out for you. Overall usefulness as a text for this course: I would give B&F a C and Carey an A. Since I studied from B&F I did not know what other concepts chpt 20 could include, but now I realize that the graphics and tables are not as good. Maybe Carey may give much more detail than we need (such as the constants) but that helps us understand it much better, in a sense its almost like they are showing the proof behind the theories being presented.

Carey (Ch 5/8 and Ch 12) // Brown & Foote (Ch 8 and Ch 20)
The summary in Carey was more helpful than in Brown & Foote. However, I prefered the Key Reaction section in Brown & Foote. The Carey text provided an excellent comparison summary of Sn1 and Sn2 mechanisms. It made more sense to me though to combine substitution and elimenation reactions together in the same chapter. I found both texts to be very comparable and really did not have a preference.

Carey (Ch 12) / Brown and Foote (Ch 20)
Aromatic substitution is presented earlier in the text. I think sequence is better in B+F. The graphical presentation was better in Carey, leading to more clarity.

Carey (Ch 12) // Brown and Foote (Ch 20)
a) Things I liked:
Carey is the best Org Chem book I've looked at. I recommend this one.
I like the colored electrostatic potential maps. e.g. fig 12.6 shows the region of + charge of a C=O bond associated with the C atom.
Table 12.1 pf 445 is good, it shows Temp required for the reaction and side products are shown too. The substituents on the benzene ring are color highlighted as in B&F.
CD to see models on a PC.
A summary section at ends of Ch and table of reaction similar to B&F. Some of other choices weren't as good.
The IR spectra are large, clear, and color highlighted in the region of interest.

b) Things I didnt like
no complaints.

Carey (Ch 12) // Brown & Foote Ch 20)
This book had very clear naming styles, much like B&F. They had pictures of electron density in blue and red whereas B&F could only try to describe where the clouds would be. BUT...this book does not have very good end of chapter descriptions. They have tables close to the end of sections summarizing what happened and I expected them to be in the back also, but they really weren't. This book had really good NMR's. It was much easier to see which C's were giving rise to which peaks when the color of the peak matched the color of the C in the molecule. There were no new reactions in chapter 20.
I liked that the chapter on benzene followed the chapter on alkenes more directly. By the time we got to benzene in B&F, I'd stopped reviewing rxns with alkenes and had to pick it up again. Carey just follows it through and I liked that. This chapter also showed partial rate factors on rings to determine o, m and p, like we were shown in class. That provided an easy way to determine the directing effect.

Carey (Ch 12) // Brown & Foote (Ch 20)
Commentary:
Carey employs the same methods as Brown & Foote. Mechanisms are clear and detailed. Unlike Jones, readers do not have to surmise a mechanism or read through an incorrect one before the correct method. Carey is matter-a-fact, easy to read and thorough.
Things I like:
Unlike Brown & Foote, there was a mechanism for all reactions including the sulfur reaction, which our current text failed to show. Carey is very thorough about showing mechanisms no matter how similar.
Table 12.1 was a great introduction at the beginning of a chapter to introduce all electrophilic reactions right after the concept of electrophiles was introduced. It's easier to organize reactions as you read them because you already anticipate it from the table.
They introduce Clemmsen and Wolff-Kishner reductions here where there is a need to learn them as part of a synthesis step to reduce substituents on an aromatic ring. I agree with Carey instead of Brown & Foote. Granted it reduces carboxylic acids, but it makes more sense to introduce them in context with other reactions.
Carey's summary was written in a better format than Brown & Foote. Each section was summarized, so that it was easy to go back to the appropriate section in the book to review.

Things I don't like:
Not much to say here except for what I've already mentioned. I must have grown accustom to the graphical presentation of Brown & Foote, because every other textbook seems pale in comparison. Carey does use graphics and color to delineate sections of text and problems, yet it doesn't appear quite as distinguished as in Brown & Foote.

Carey (Ch 12) // Brown and Foote (Ch 20)
Carey-Needs to show me the formation of the nitronium ion.
Carey Needs to keep the figures closer to the discussion.
The problems in B&F give the solutions to their chapter questions right after the discussion. This is helpful after covering new material.
Directing discussion is too long winded. B&F keeps it to the point.
Summary table in Carey WAY too crowded.

Carey (Ch12) // Brown & Foote (Ch 20)
Both texts did very well in presenting their ideas and knowledge about this topic. When I read about the topic in Brown & Foote, The ideas were pretty straight forward to understand and also easy to visualize. The use of several rxn mechanisms to clarify the rnxs in Brown & Foote was great and aided better understanding of the text.
Carey also did a great job in presenting this topic. The organization was great too. It was much easier to understand how the rxns occurred the way they did with through the use of energy diagrams and reaction factors. Both books also presented the various resonance forms of intermediates that were formed. I think Brown & Foote did better job at this because for each rxn and mechanism, resonance forms of intermediates were presented. I also liked the summaries in Carey better because they were more detailed and made more sense of what the chapter was about. One could read through the summary and have a good background of what the chapter is about. This was not the case in Brown & Foote where the summaries consist of few lines of words.
In a whole, both authors did well.

Carey (Ch 12) // Brown and Foote Ch 20)
Some of the mechanisms are easier to follow in Brown, especially the Friedel-Crafts reaction.

Carey (Ch 20) // Brown and Foote (Ch 17)
The most obvious improvement over B+F is the illustrations in the text. The summary was better than the B+F summary at chapter end. The summary was able to hit the more relevant points and provide more detail. The clarity was better in Carey due to the pictures. I would not have minded using the Carey book to study for carboxyl derivatives.

Carey (Ch 20) // Brown and Foote (Ch 17)
Things that I liked about Carey:
Carey was a readable text. The concepts were understandable, yet I prefered the current B&F style of presentation. Perhaps I prefer th4e B&F style because I am familiar with the text already.
Things that I didn't like about Carey:
The organization of the material in the text was scattered and hard to follow. The layout was inconsistent compared to the standard presentation that is uniform throughout B&F.

Carey (Ch 20) // Brown and Foote (Ch 17)
Carey chapter 20 has good graphics and use of color. It has an excellent summary and is easy to follow. The font size is good and the tables are great. Even though I really liked this textbook, Brown has the edge with the "chemistry in action" sections.

Carey (Ch 20) // Brown and Foote (Ch 17)
The overall general presentation of topics on this material by Carey was very accessible and organized. The author treated each carboxyl derivatives one after the other. In essence, every principle and characteristic of each derivative were discussed individually. This was an exception in Brown & Foote. There were constant returns to the discussion of each derivative, which means that each derivative was partly discussed each time with regards to their characteristic rxns and properties. I remember this being a problem for me when I read about this material in Brown & Foote. I had to map out a study structure so that I could better visualize and understand what the author tried to put across.
The other thing that I liked about Carey's text was in the way he presented the several rxns possible with each derivative. It was very easy to learn and understand the kinds of rxns each derivative could undergo. Brown & Foote also did something similar but, not as well. The use of electron filled molecular orbital diagrams was also useful in better visualizing the interaction within each compound.

Carey (Ch 20) // Brown and Foote (Ch 17)
This was a good text. They did use italics as opposed to bold when using new terms and the like, but that was a minor point. They have problems in the text with a sample solution, which is nice to see. There were tables summarizing and explaining reactions pretty frequently, which is helpful. Some of their new mechanisms are not really offset in a box or anything, so that was not as good as B&F. That is mostly for minor mechanisms, the major ones have all steps explained and are boxed. The tables also review previously introduced material though, so you need not flip back if you need a refresh on some points. This text also follows the format, this is what it is and this is how it works, then repeat; B&F follows the approach of this is everything, and then here is how they all work. The Carey approach seems better, easier to retain. The summary at the end was a bit weak, but overall a good chapter. This text and the B&F text are probably equal overall, with both being books I would recommend.

Carey (Ch 20) // Brown and Foote (Ch 17)
Commentary:
Carey employs the same methods as Brown & Foote. Mechanisms are clear and detailed. Unlike Jones, readers do not have to surmise a mechanism or read through an incorrect one before the correct method. Carey is matter-a-fact, easy to read and thorough.
Things I like:
Carey displays multiple tables to introduce preparatory reactions for various functional groups as well as conversion reactions of the each functional group. I found this to be a very useful outline of the text. It was wonderful that it was consistently displayed throughout the chapter.
Thiols and heterocyclic reactions were discussed at the end to avoid confusion.
Brown & Foote's treatment of Mass Spec, IR and NMR always bothered me. This section was always placed in between nomenclature and reactions/physical properties. I'm glad that Carey placed this section at the end of this chapter after all the reactions have been discussed. To me, it flows better.
Things I don't like:
Because each functional group was presented in a segregated fashion, there should have been a table or section that integrated or drew similiarities between the functional groups as Brown & Foote explains in the "Interconversion" subsection.

Carey (Ch 22) // Brown & Foote (Ch 21)
Commentary:
Carey employs the same methods as Brown & Foote. Mechanisms are clear and detailed. Unlike Jones, readers do not have to surmise a mechanism or read through an incorrect one before the correct method. Carey is matter-a-fact, easy to read and thorough.
Things I like:
Brown & Foote's treatment of Mass Spec, IR and NMR always bothered me. This section was always placed in between nomenclature and reactions/physical properties. I'm glad that Carey placed this section at the end of this chapter. To me, it flows better. Additionally, the H-NMRs have labeled hydrogens not just the number but also the position on the molecule in question
Carey places biographical information as a footnote rather than incorporating as apart of the text. I like this approach as it doesn't divert the focus on anything other than the highlighted molecules.
Things I don't like:
Not much to say here except for what I've already mentioned. I must have grown accustom to the graphical presentation of Brown & Foote, because every other textbook seems pale in comparison. Carey does use graphics and color to delineate sections of text and problems, yet it doesn't appear quite as distinguished as in Brown & Foote.

______Things I like, Things I dislike_______
I like this chapter by Carey particularly by the color labeling and for the fact that it goes back to the previous chapter and sorted out the making of amine. However, for B and F, there are a list of methods of the making of amine that half of the time, I have trouble remembering from previous chapter.

Carey Ch 22) // Brown and Foote (Ch 21)
B&F has a better discussion on the basicity of amines than Carey.
Phase transfer catalyst section useful for practical understanding of lab usefulness of ammonium salts.
Discussion is easier to read in B&F; it flows better.
Carey adds a lot of extraneous information that gets in the way of reading the chapter.

Carey (Ch 22) // Brown and Foote (Ch 21)
The strength of Carey's book is the multitude of illustrations. Organization is about the same for both books. The problem sets are not improved over B&F, but questions like 22.35 in Carey were good. Clarity is very similar between the books. The usefulness is about the same. The color scheme of the Carey chapter enhances readability.

Carey (Ch 22) // Brown and Foote (Ch 21)
Things that I liked:
I didnot like much about the approach of this text.
Things that I didn't like:
I was unimpressed about the presentation of this difficult subject matter. The text approached the material in a manner that seemed the reader was very familiar with the mechanics already. It seemed over myb head compared to the B&F text.

Carey (Ch 22) // Brown and Foote (Ch 21)
Again, another very well done chapter. I liked the fact that phase transfer catalysis is explained here, where B&F says go back to another chapter. The review of pertinent information from previous chapters is a very strong point for this book. They continually put reviews in tables, which I find to be a real asset to learning and remembering. It also lists alternate ways of doing things all together, such as the different methods to reduce nitro to NH2. The mechanisms in this text are still not as strong as B&F, and visually it may not be as well done, but I think maybe the information is organized better. They also always give a general and then a specific example when introducing reactions. This also makes them easier to follow and thus easier to learn. Of the four books I reviewed, and B&F, this or B&F would be what I would like to see the class next year be working with.

Carey (Ch 20 and Ch 22) // Brown and Foote (Ch 17 and Ch 21)
Carboxy Deriv:
Layout of the text: I would give B&F a B and Carey an A. B&F is ok but they can use more visuals. Carey shows a great visual on pg 777 of electrostatic potential maps, this is useful for seeing electrostatic repulsion. Clarity of the presentation: I would give B&F a C and Carey an A. I do not like the fact that Brown and Foote presents the material with what for ex: alcohols react with, instead and what water reacts with and so forth. Carey lists all of the carboxyl deriv. then speaks about rxns each derivative can undergo (for ex: acid halides with almost anything). I like this much more than listing reagents then functional groups that undergo rxns with those reagents which is what B&F does.
Logical organization of the material: I would give B&F a B and Carey an A. Once again as mentioned above I like the fact that the derivatives are listed and reagents that react with those derivatives better it helps organize the material clearly as opposed to just listing reagents and jumping around with functional groups.
Overall usefulness as a text for this course: I would give B&F a C and Carey and A-. A large part in doing well in organic chemistry is being able to sort our all of the knowledge instead of having it all jumbled up in our head. When there are many tables and colorful pictures representing challenging concepts it makes learning easier to do. This is what I like about Carey, which B&F lacks. I do like the fact that B&F uses larger print however whereas Carey uses somewhat of a smaller font.
Amines:
Layout of the text: I would give both B&F and Carey an A. Both books clearly organize what amines do.
Clarity of the presentation: I would give B&F a B and Carey A-. B&F makes sense yet when comparing it to Carey I saw something very different. Carey refreshens the readers on how to prepare amines from previous chapters (table) whereas Brown and Foote just ways to prepare from other chapters. Logical organization of the material: I would give B&F an A and Carey a B. I like the fact that B&F builds up to the rxns of amines whereas Carey just jumps right in. I think it is more helpful to speak about a functional group such as its physical properties, nomenclature, spec properties...etc.. before just jumping into what it reacts with.
Overall usefulness as a text for this course: I would give both of the books a B. Both B&F and Carey have their ups and downs. In B&F I like the fact that their are rxns at the end of the chapters yet I don't like the fact that it does not refreshen our memories on previous knowledge of amines or other related groups from previous chapters. In Carey I really like the fact that everything is so color coordinated yet I don't seem to see rxns presented at the end of the chapter like B&F does.

Carey (Ch 20 and Ch 22) // Brown and Foote (Ch 17 and Ch 21)
Carey: 1.) I found this text to be easy to use. As a whole, the graphics were numerous and very informative, consistently walking the reader through difficult subtleties in an efficient step by step manner.
Brown and Foote: 1.) This text was very user friendly, often cross referencing past concepts when needed. The graphics were extremely useful, however, I found them lacking in explanation, as subtle steps were often left out.
Carey: 2.) The material represented in these chapters was presented in a clear and concise manner. Important terminology was clearly defined, often with pictorial representations adjacent to the text. One area that I found lacking in explanation was the spectroscopic
properties of the functional groups of focus. Both the text and graphics in these sections were minimalist in nature and did not adequately represent the material.
Brown and Foote: 2.) This text presented the material in an effective manner. The text was well written and overall the graphics expressed the information in an efficient manner. Some of the graphics, however, were misleading as they left out subtleties necessary to a complete understanding of the material.
Carey: 3.) I felt that this text presented the material in an excellently organized manner. A brief outline of the chapter was presented the in beginning, often referencing past concepts as necessary. The body of the chapter presented the material in an organized and logical order, presenting broad concepts which were later clarified through explanation of the subtleties.
Brown and Foote: 3.) Brown and Foote presented the material in a similar manner. The larger concept was first explained and later xsclarified with the intricacies of the concept.
Carey: 4.) Aside from its lack of information pertaining to the spectroscopy of the groups of interest, I found this book to be very useful. Difficult concepts were conveyed in an simple, organized, and effective manner that allowed for a high degree of understanding.
Brown and Foote: 4.) This text served as an excellent resource that proved to be very useful for this course. It was organized in an effective manner which simplified the understanding of the material.
Casey: A.) What I liked most about this text was the detailed mechanisms that it presented from the previous chapters before it went on to describe new ones. When a new mechanism was presented, the text detailed previous mechanisms that applied to the functional group of interest. This allowed for an increased understanding in how the older mechanisms applied to the chapter of study.
B.) I did not like the sections on spectroscopy outlined in these chapters. I found them lacking in essential information and generally rushed. Both the text and graphic in these sections were minimal and did not convey the information well.
Brown and Foote: A.) I found the cross references to past concepts, within the text, to be very useful. This made it easier to thumb back through the book and gain a better understanding of the presented material.
B.) I did not like some of the mechanisms presented in the text. I found that when the text skipped a few of the simpler steps, it made it difficult to understand the overall mechanism.

Carey (Ch 20 and Ch 22) // Brown & Foote (Ch 17 and Ch 21)
Carey had better graphics and I especially appreciated the electron density overlaying the ball and stick models. I also liked the section summarizing reactions discussed in previous chapters. Brown and Foote provided more practical examples that I found interesting and gave me a bigger picture of the topic. The basic information provided by both texts appeared very comparable. Overall, I would say the Carey text would be a better learning resource but the Brown & Foote text would be more interesting.

Return to Summary Page