Getting Graphs to Instructure Canvas Discussions

It’s not too hard to get graphs (or any kind of image that you can grab off your screen) into Instructure Canvas. From the instructor side, you can upload an image, which is easy enough, but what about from the student side?

An example of a student post that includes a graph (copied from Wolfram Alpha using Jing)

The trick seems to be copying and pasting from a stable URL. For example, in our first attempt, we tried to just copy and paste an image from WolframAlpha. Initially it looked like it worked. The image appeared on the discussion board as expected, and it seemed to save when the post went live. However, as soon as I visited the post from a different computer, the images copied directly from WolframAlpha were gone.

[Read more…]

Possibly Related Posts:


Logarithm Graphs in Wolfram Alpha

At the Wolfram Alpha Workshop at ICTCM, there was universal disappointment about the fact that you cannot get a graph of a logarithm that is only over the real numbers.  We tried everything we could think of to remove the complex part of the graph.

Personally, I have tried and tried and tried and tried to explain the problem with this in the feedback window for Wolfram Alpha, but been universally unsuccessful.   Every time I suggest a change, I am told that the “After review, our internal development group believes the plots for input “log(x)” are correct.” … yes, I know that … that doesn’t mean it’s the answer that most people will be looking for.

I find it ironic that “inverse of e^x” produces the graph we’d like to see, and even gives log(x) as an equivalent.

inverse-of-ex

But then ask for a graph of  log(x) or ln(x) and the graph will always include the solution over the complex numbers.

problem-with-logs3

What’s worse is that W|A inconsistently decides when to use reals only and when to use both complex and real numbers.  For example, the output for y=ln(x), y=x includes the complex numbered plot, while the output for y=ln(x), y=2x-3 includes only the Reals.  What!?!  Actually, I have some idea why this is … it seems that in some cases, if the extra graph intersects the real part of the log graph, then you get reals only.  If the graphs do not intersect, then you get real+complex.  For example compare the output for y=ln(x), y=2x-3 to the output for y=ln(x), y=2x+5.  On the other hand, when I tried to show a graph transformation, like y=ln(x) with y=ln(x)+4 (including the extra graph y=4x-3), I was back to getting the graphs with complex numbers again. Maddening.

log-maddening

We spend a LOT of time in the algebra and precalculus levels working with  transformations of graphs, understanding inverse functions, and specifics like the domain of a graph.  We can’t use Wolfram Alpha for any of these topics with regards to logarithms because of the way the graphs look.  I can live with the fact that W|A uses log(x) instead of ln(x) … it’s not great, and is confusing to students, but I can explain it and live with it.  But as long as the Wolfram Alpha graph includes the complex number system with no way to see the graphs on only the reals, we’ll have to pull out that old-fashioned graphing calculator to teach this section, and that’s a shame.

I’ve also heard the argument that we should just include the domain we want to see in the W|A input.  For example, y=ln(x), x>0.  But how is a student, learning logs for the first time, supposed to recognize that this is required?  After all, the graph they see when they first try W|A with y=ln(x) leads them to believe that y=ln(x) has a domain that includes all real numbers but zero.  This argument also means that to show graph transformations, we need to use much more complicated graphing commands, restricting each domain separately (to tell you the truth, I have not yet figured out a way to do it … although I suspect it’s possible).

It seems to me that there are two obvious solutions to this math teaching nightmare, and I can’t imagine why either one wouldn’t serve all parties using Wolfram Alpha (both high-level mathematicians, and the rest of us):

Solution #1: Use a toggle-able option to see the graph with only reals or both complex and reals  (I would prefer a default to the Real numbers graph, since my guess would be that the majority of the world’s population would be looking for that one).

log-toggle-option

Solution #2: Display TWO graphs.  Show a graph of the logarithm that is only on the real number system.  Then, below it, show a graph that includes both the complex and real number systems.

log-two-graph-solution

That’s all – end of rant.  This is the one thing I absolutely hate about Wolfram Alpha.  And I’m guessing that I’m not alone here.  Please can’t we just find a solution without hearing “After review, our internal development group believes the plots for input “log(x)” are correct.” again?

Possibly Related Posts:


Wolfram Alpha Discovery

Okay, technically it was a workshop at ICTCM, but with 30 math faculty in one room, all armed with computers, I couldn’t help but make it a discovery and brainstorming session too.  I’m a firm believer in harnessing the power of a room of people instead of talking to them (provided that we have some technology to facilitate that).

This post is Part I … the discovery portion of the workshop.

One of the things that made this workshop a bit out-of-the-ordinary for math workshops was that I set up a “backchannel” for participants to use to share their thoughts, discoveries, and ideas.   To do this, I used a Chatzy Virtual Room – anyone can “join the room” as long as they know the URL – just state your name, and you’re in the chat room.  This made the discovery process collaborative, as well as fast and furious as everyone in the room got a chance to contribute to the conversation in real time.

chatzy-participation

The first question I was asked (which I am asked in almost every workshop I do), is how on earth I was magnifying just a small portion of the screen (like where the input box was).  I use a free tool called the Virtual Magnifier.

virtual-magnifying-glass

The group “play” with Wolfram Alpha lasted for about an hour, during which we (they, mostly) discovered quite a few interesting things, all of which I am sharing with you here in a clickable format.

parabola-properties1

Did we forget to mention that you can copy images (or save them) directly from W|A output? [right click or command-click (mac) on the image to get copy and save options] You can actually do this for any output of W|A, including tables, equations, and images.

copying-images

change-viewing-window

wolfram-demonstrations

inverse-function

  • When you use ln(x) the output shows log(x), which has traditionally been Mathematica notation for natural log.  To get a log with base b, use log(b,x).  Yes, the graphs suck.  That’s something I’ll post about later this week.

With Wolfram Alpha, you can compare any list of items that have some kind of data associated with them.  Just separate the items with a comma:

Participants also stumbled upon Alpha’s sense of humor …

That was approximately one hour of our Wolfram Alpha Workshop with about 95% of the content and discovery being done by participants.  It took me three hours to write that up, which just goes to show you how powerful a backchannel chat window can be!  I will save the brainstorming session “How can we restructure classroom learning and assignments to use Wolfram Alpha?” in another post.

Possibly Related Posts:


Best of the Ed Tech Freebies!

In a “pilot” program, we used Camtasia to record several sessions at the 2009 AMATYC Conference in Las Vegas.  Several of these recordings are now available on the AMATYC 2009 Conference Proceedings Website.

In particular, you might want to check out my live presentation “Best of the Educational Technology Freebies” … at least, you can check out the first 24 minutes of it (before my spectacular graphics-overload-induced red-screen-of-death computer crash).  The live presentation starts approximately 1 minute into the video.

2009-amatyc-talk

There is a Part II (audio with a few PowerPoint slides – all my computer was capable after burning up the graphics capability temporarily), but I guess they haven’t put it up yet.  Update: Part II is now also available here.  Incidentally, this incident sealed the deal on my getting a new tablet PC (I was running with the memory capacity and hard drive maxed on the old one).

Word to the wise: You should not attempt to simultaneously record new audio narrative for a Camtasia video project running in the background, while running that video in a player on the notebook and projecting to a screen.  Sure, it works for 5 minutes, but will it work for 60? [no, unless you have a really powerful computer and graphics card]

The easy way to find all the recorded videos from the 2009 AMATYC Conference is to search the Conference Proceedings website (Ctrl-F for find) for the word “flash” (as in Flash video).

Possibly Related Posts:


Teaching Math with Technology (Discussion Panel)

While I was at Wolfram Alpha Homework Day, I participated in a Panel Discussion about the Myths about Teaching with Technology. The panel ran 30 minutes and was mediated by Elizabeth Corcoran. There were three of us (all women, weirdly enough), Debra Woods, a mathematics professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; Abby Brown, a math teacher at Torrey Pines High School; and myself.

I no longer remembered anything that I said in this panel, so it was fun to watch the discussion from an outside point-of-view. I am glad to see that I talked about the value of play during the discussion, because I am finding more and more that introducing play (and exploration) back into learning makes a big difference in engagement and in retention of the subject.

Possibly Related Posts: