free screencasting solution

[kirby urner]

Maria may have already shared about Screencast-o-matic
in some earlier thread. Seems somewhat ideal for
developing those short demonstrations of how to use
present and future math tools.

For example, here's a demo showing off vZome, the
"virtual Zome Tool" used by geometry enthusiasts like
my friend David Koski (he and I are both award winning
"explorers" per the sponsoring BFI.org).

http://coffeeshopsnet.blogspot.com/2011/12/screen-test.html

(requires Java enabled in browser )

Kirby

[Dani Novak]

Thanks a lot for sharing this.  Looks like a really useful tool.  Does anyone know the difference between this and screenr which seems to do s similar thing but may not be the same.  This looks like a really good quality.

--Dani

Kirby

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MathFuture" group.
To post to this group, send email to mathf...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to mathfuture+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mathfuture?hl=en.

--
Dr.  Dani Novak
Math Department
Ithaca College, Ithaca NY 14850 USA
no...@ithaca.edu
http://faculty.ithaca.edu/novak/
http://www.ithaca.edu/dani

[Sue Hellman]

Screenr

• best if you want to store screencasts on their website, embed, and be able to display on mobile devices (not flash)
• associated with Articulate
• 15 minute time limit
• controls are very easy
• no watermark on free videos
• because it's so simple it's fastest to learn

Screencastomatic

• videos stored on their website are flash files so students need a flash viewer on their computers to watch.
• flv files play nice with Moodle if you want to store videos in your own course files
• if you want mobile friendly you will not be able to embed from their website. Download in a different format and upload to YouTube or wherever.
• watermark unless you subscribe ($12 per year) -- then also get some editing tools and others
• associated with Techsmith (Snagit, Camtasia, Jing)
• more saving options (even as an animation that works easily in PPT) if you want to download
• 15 minute time limit
• can add captions
• 'jump ahead' feature only works well if you store the videos online and view embedded files
• how-to videos http://www.screencast-o-matic.com/channels/cXhI3EVTh

If you have a PC, whichever one you choose, you might want to use a bigger or a coloured cursor. I've switched to a red one for general use and havea big red one for screencasts (free downloads).
 
Sue 

[shaun]

don't forget that quicktime can screencast (on snowleopard and lion)

Shaun Errichiello
Salk School of Science
212-614-8786
http://sites.google.com/site/shaunteaches/
http://shaunteaches.blogspot.com/
http://www.youtube.com/user/shaunteaches

[Bradford Hansen-Smith]

Kirby, can you explain how using this virtual zome tool will give students a better understanding of polyhedra than actually building it from scratch for themselves? I have the same question about any virtual experience when compared to actual experience of doing something. I assume you have done a lot of model construction and it is easy for you to understand having the experience, but what understanding do students get with only virtual experience? Brad --- On Thu, 12/8/11, kirby urner <kirby...@gmail.com> wrote:

-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MathFuture" group. To post to this group, send email to mathf...@googlegroups.com.

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to mathfuture+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

[kirby urner]

On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 6:55 PM, Bradford Hansen-Smith <wholem...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

Kirby, can you explain how using this virtual zome tool will give students a better understanding of polyhedra than actually building it from scratch for themselves? I have the same question about any virtual experience when compared to actual experience of doing something. I assume you have done a lot of model construction and it is easy for you to understand having the experience, but what understanding do students get with only virtual experience? Brad

Oh no, I don't claim that.  Having lots of hands on experience with these shapes is also a plus.

The group where Koski is most active (as the owner) actually includes a welder in Australia who does some of these things in metal.  He also uses virtual tools.

The thing about ZomeTool as a physical building kit is you may not have enough or just the right struts sometimes, no can you always carry these things around.

Here's a picture of the back of my car when I'm about to give a talk (GIS in Action this time).  As you can see, I'm hardly shy about sharing real shapes:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/17157315@N00/3463679331/in/set-72157617152555758

Or better, here's me giving a talk at a local school (note models):

http://www.flickr.com/photos/17157315@N00/4430539563/in/set-72157623491114005

Kirby

 

--- On Thu, 12/8/11, kirby urner <kirby...@gmail.com> wrote: From: kirby urner <kirby...@gmail.com> Subject: [Math 2.0] free screencasting solution To: mathf...@googlegroups.com Date: Thursday, December 8, 2011, 7:23 PM Maria may have already shared about Screencast-o-matic in some earlier thread.  Seems somewhat ideal for developing those short demonstrations of how to use present and future math tools. For example, here's a demo showing off vZome, the "virtual Zome Tool" used by geometry enthusiasts like my friend David Koski (he and I are both award winning "explorers" per the sponsoring BFI.org). http://coffeeshopsnet.blogspot.com/2011/12/screen-test.html (requires Java enabled in browser ) Kirby -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MathFuture" group. To post to this group, send email to mathf...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to mathfuture+unsub...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mathfuture?hl=en.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MathFuture" group.
To post to this group, send email to mathf...@googlegroups.com.

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to mathfuture+...@googlegroups.com.

[Maria Droujkova]

On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 9:55 PM, Bradford Hansen-Smith <wholem...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

Kirby, can you explain how using this virtual zome tool will give students a better understanding of polyhedra than actually building it from scratch for themselves? I have the same question about any virtual experience when compared to actual experience of doing something. I assume you have done a lot of model construction and it is easy for you to understand having the experience, but what understanding do students get with only virtual experience? Brad

Brad,

It is better to have both experiences. The reason is that they are different. In particular, and to answer your question, there are three major features of virtual tools that physical tools don't have.

1. EASY SHARING

Virtual constructions can be uploaded to the web and emailed around. I can't directly email you the construction of the lopsided origami dragon I made yesterday, though I am attaching a photo of the end product (and I could take a video, for sure). But it's not as easy as with virtual objects, and you don't get the perfect copy of the real thing, but a representation of it. I remember our exchange of many emails about me trying to replicate one of your constructions. It took quite a lot of work to share. 

2. EASY STEP REVIEW & UNDO

Speaking of the dragon, I would love to rewind the construction step-by-step and find where I made the extra fold: the wings look different. It's somewhere around step 9 of 21. I don't feel like finding the mistake in my paper version: it will ruin the dragon completely, and I am not sure I will trace the mistake anyway. Repeatable step-by-step review, analysis and changes are hard to do by hand, especially for young students whose memory works differently and has fewer registers than adults have.

Step review works wonders with sharing. A student can send the whole construction (often animated, or a screencast - easily made!) and ask peers or mentors to analyze steps, or post questions like, "What would you do differently in Step 5?" With some environments, they can then all share their fully interactive constructions that are answers to that question.

3. EASY DYNAMIC LINKS AMONG REPRESENTATIONS

You can dynamically link formulas, graphs and constructions, which support depth of mathematics. It provides a certain holographic view on the essence of math, metaphorically speaking. GeoGebra is probably a better-known example of this, with algebraic representations linked with geometric constructions. Check out DGS (dynamic geometry software) systems in Paul Libbrecht's i2geo series (more coming up, stay tuned) at Math Future for beautiful examples:

http://mathfuture.wikispaces.com/JSXGraph_DGS

http://mathfuture.wikispaces.com/CaRMetal_DGS

http://mathfuture.wikispaces.com/i2geo

The word "easy" here is the difference between thousands and millions doing the three activities I described above.

Cheers,

MariaD

[Bradford Hansen-Smith]

Maria, thank you for your response. I recognize both approaches are important for  balance and appreciate the desire to make things easier through technology. What concerns me is that everything need not be easy for everyone. We all have different needs, abilities, and capacity for learning where resistance is necessary for gain. Many times things of value come because they are not easy. While our communications took work on both ends there was I feel gain for both of us. How much more we might have gained in less time had there been direct exchange. First hand experience is always preferable to knowledge passed on by others, even through dynamic geometry software and other math tools. As you have seen with young children there is nothing that can replace hands-on problem solving and figuring things out either in a small groups or individually, that gives a sense of self worth, accomplishment, and confidence to challenge a broad spectrum of situations. I have to question the need to have millions instead of thousands doing the same thing using the same programs with the same limitations developing the same technological mind set. Brad --- On Fri, 12/9/11, Maria Droujkova <drou...@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Maria Droujkova <drou...@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Math 2.0] free screencasting solution To: mathf...@googlegroups.com

--

[kirby urner]

On Fri, Dec 9, 2011 at 10:06 PM, Bradford Hansen-Smith <wholem...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

Maria, thank you for your response. I recognize both approaches are important for  balance and appreciate the desire to make things easier through technology. What concerns me is that everything need not be easy for everyone. We all have different needs, abilities, and capacity for learning where resistance is necessary for gain. Many times things of value come because they are not easy. While our communications took work on both ends there was I feel gain for both of us. How much more we might have gained in less time had there been direct exchange. First hand experience is always preferable to knowledge passed on by others, even through dynamic geometry software and other math tools. As you have seen with young children there is nothing that can replace hands-on problem solving and figuring things out either in a small groups or individually, that gives a sense of self worth, accomplishment, and confidence to challenge a broad spectrum of situations. I have to question the need to have millions instead of thousands doing the same thing using the same programs with the same limitations developing the same technological mind set. Brad

It's likely too early to start worrying about massive adoption of vZome in any setting.  

ZomeTool, taken up by George Hart, dad of Vi Hart, and author of Pavilion of Polyhedreality (web site), is far from being well known in the high schools I frequent wearing a different hat (that of debate team judge).  Clackamas High and Ridgefield High don't do anything with Zome, virtual or for real, I feel it's safe to say.  It's just not part of the curriculum.

Indeed, on Math Forum and places, I have to defend the relevance of polyhedrons at any level.  They're regarded as antique and esoteric by today's authorities.  I've had to buck this attitude for decades.  I've done a pretty good job, and of course I'm one of many engaged in this struggle.  Arthur Loeb of Harvard was a champion.  M. C. Escher...

In any case, I hope someday we're maybe worried about whether to do polyhedrons in the shop, or on the screen.  Obviously both is the answer, and in other media as well.

I like to introduce the topological idea of a tetrahedron by having students build a web site of four pages, each linked to the other three.  That's four nodes and six edges:  a tetrahedron.  A web site.

Kirby

[Bradford Hansen-Smith]

Kirby, I am not advocating Zome tools or vZome one way or another. I have found toothpicks and rubber cement far more instructive for linear modeling because the angles are not predetermined by a manufactured hub but are determined by structural design. In this way nothing is "locked" into place, not to mention the cost difference. The issue here is doing rather than just seeing, we are often deceived by the contrived placing of parts and pieces of what we see. We agree about the absence of polyhedra in today's curriculum being an educational travesty. Often in teacher workshops I ask how many are familar with the five Platonic Solids, only a few tentatively raise their hands. Using moving pictures to introduce teachers and students to polyhedra is not particular productive. We can not understand the color of a sunset or space of a great vista by looking at a picture if we have not had similar experiences. A web site tetrahedron is an interesting abstraction, not sure its a good place to start. But then where ever we are is the only place we have to start. Yes, the real number for the tetrahedron is 10, found in the closest packing of spheres as well as in folding a circle in half. Both experientially accessible and understandable to first grade students. Brad

--- On Sat, 12/10/11, kirby urner <kirby...@gmail.com> wrote:

From: kirby urner <kirby...@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Math 2.0] free screencasting solution To: mathf...@googlegroups.com

[kirby urner]

On Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 5:57 AM, Bradford Hansen-Smith <wholem...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

Kirby, I am not advocating Zome tools or vZome one way or another. I have found toothpicks and rubber cement far more instructive for linear modeling because the angles are not predetermined by a manufactured hub but are determined by structural design. In this way nothing is "locked" into place, not to mention the cost difference. The issue here is doing rather than just seeing, we are often deceived by the contrived placing of parts and pieces of what we see.

Well sure that's an issue, and one Koski cares about.  

He's sometimes skeptical of the Youtubes coming from Antiprism users for example, the most excellent free / open source geodesic graphics tools by Adrian Rossiter.  

Could that "jitterbugging donut" really work?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcMCou6CrK4

I do advocate the locked-in fixed-hub fixed-length Zome / vZome regime for some studies as the geometrical explorations may have to do with precisely these constraints.  In David Koski's case, that's true.

I could see introducing vZome precisely to get clear on what Koski is up to (that'd be the focus), which has to do with tetravolumes and an arrangement of polyhedrons we consider core to the gnu / digital math curriculum (see Martian Math on Wikieducator).

Magnus Wenninger provides a good example of someone who works hands-on, does sculpture, and yet also uses computer tools, Stella in particular.  

Koski and I visited Father Wenninger in Minnesota a few weeks ago.  He's 91 and still going strong.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/17157315@N00/5837465354/in/set-72157626970656426

(Magnus Wenninger and Dave Koski, photo by me)

 

We agree about the absence of polyhedra in today's curriculum being an educational travesty. Often in teacher workshops I ask how many are familar with the five Platonic Solids, only a few tentatively raise their hands. Using moving pictures to introduce teachers and students to polyhedra is not particular productive. We can not understand the color of a sunset or space of a great vista by looking at a picture if we have not had similar experiences.

Right, if we have not had similar experiences.  

But in fact every shape -- from a chair to a foot -- is a polyhedron one might say (perhaps highly faceted).  Therefore, if you don't happen to have a rhombic triacontahedron (RT) handy (RT = "NCLB polyhedron" per my postings to the Math Forum), you may nevertheless have these instructive screen casts and movies.  These are useful, as most of us weren't born yesterday (literally) and have already had lots of experience with shapes to date.

Actually building these things from scratch, versus passively holding finished products made by others, takes a lot of motor and construction skills many students and teachers don't have.  You might need a sharp cutting tool, a glue gun, and of course a rule and compass.   Perhaps you'll need welding equipment.  These new 3D printers are cool.

Geometry as a class always had some redeeming value because you had to use tools other than just a pencil, like a protractor and compass.  More like a real work shop.  However still not enough of this goes on.  

The government is too cheap to issue regulation cell phones with gps to public school kids (in the US, not talking about more truly developed societies) so little school time is spent on these important navigation / geodesy tools.

 

A web site tetrahedron is an interesting abstraction, not sure its a good place to start. But then where ever we are is the only place we have to start. Yes, the real number for the tetrahedron is 10, found in the closest packing of spheres as well as in folding a circle in half. Both experientially accessible and understandable to first grade students. Brad

My theory is "it's not too late" even if you're an adult, to fill in some of the missing holes regarding some of the stuff we have on tap under the heading of "Verboten" and/or "Radical Math."  

A lot of it has to do with tetravolumes and demoting the cube on many levels, looking at a different model of 3rd powering.

This one by Richard Hawkins is an old favorite in that regard:  http://controlroom.blogspot.com/2008/11/clocktet.html

Kirby

[Julia Brodsky]

December 10, 2011 Latest: Discussions (1) • Members (2) New Discussions (1) It may be of interest: Call for Papers: Innovative technologies for the seamless integration of formal and informal learning - Submission 10 Jan 2012 Started by Laura Carletti, PhD Researcher at Università Politecnica delle Marche

--
Julia Brodsky
www.artofinquiry.net

[Donald Cohen]

Bravo Brad!

I have had students "playing" with The Tower of Hanoi Puzzle for years- like one student really worked on it for years and did find a rule for it, then graphed the rule. I never pushed and thought that was fine. Another student this afternoon worked on it for about 45 minutes, then proceeded to arrive at the exponential function for it.

I have seen and tried a computer version of this and was very disappointed in how it worked, without getting a feel for my making mistakes.

I worked on PLATO, at the UIL, trying to get kids graphing on a computer. In reality, with pencil and graph paper, they make mistakes, like putting the numbers on the axes between the lines (like on maps) and others, that I can check quickly. They couldn't make these mistakes on the computer. I have kids making up equations, which is great fun, because they usually make them up much harder than I would.

I must admit that when I work on GeoGebra, I can see and fix my own mistakes, or get help from a colleague.

Very tricky.

Don

--

"Learning, Living and Loving mathematics.."- the core of Don's teaching and books, observed by Seth Nielson.

The Math Program

Don Cohen -The Mathman
809 Stratford Dr.
Champaign, IL 61821-4140
Tel. 217-356-4555
Fax: 1 217 356 4593
Email: doncohe...@gmail.com   
Don's Mathman website URL: http://www.mathman.biz

See Don's new clickable  A Map to Calculus with student works and sample problems from Don's books at every node
Our Shaklee website:
http://marilynanddoncohen.myshaklee.com