Ruben R. Puentedura's Weblog

The Infinite Canvas Reloaded: Digital Storytelling, Webcomics, and Web 2.0

The slides for the presentation that I gave at the 2009 NMC Summer Conference are now online. Here's the original session description:

In 2000, Scott McCloud created the concept of the "infinite canvas," a radical re-envisioning of the narrative possibilities opened up for comics by their transition from the printed page to the computer screen. Now, his vision is finally coming to fruition, enabled by new technologies and Web 2.0 tools. This session will examine how the new comics transform digital storytelling, the tools needed, and how to put the results to good use in academia.

My thanks to everyone who participated in this session — I really enjoyed the conversations that followed it.

Edugaming - Real Fun, Real Learning

The slides for the presentation that Tim Hart, Doug Snow, and myself gave jointly at the 2009 MLTI Student Conference are now online. Here's the original session description:

To understand video games and their uses, you have to analyze them — but you also have to play them. So, in this session, we will be doing both. What is it that draws kids of all ages — and adults — to games? How can games, and the lessons learned from playing them, be used in a classroom setting? Why is the recent "game builder" game Little Big Planet such a huge success — and what are its lessons for educators? How are virtual worlds defining a new learningscape? This session will offer an opportunity to explore, experience, participate, and reflect on games, gaming, and education.

Tim's slides are available from his blog, while my slides can be downloaded here. I have also uploaded the list of games we showcased in this presentation — each game listing is accompanied by a brief explanation for why that game was selected. With the exception of the Wii games, all the games are available either as downloadable demos, or for free.

My thanks to the team of students from Messalonskee HS that assisted us in this session — great work, guys.

The Promise - and the Perils - of Wolfram Alpha

Wolfram Alpha, the new search tool developed by Stephen Wolfram and his team, is now available for anyone to try out, and it appears to have caught the eye of the press. I've been testing it quite heavily since its release, and I have to say that the engine driving the system is pretty impressive - but don't take my word for it, Doug Lenat (of Cyc fame) also says so. It's also nice to see articles in the popular press that actually talk about AI and related fields reasonably, rather than complaining because HAL isn't a reality yet. That said, there's an aspect of Wolfram Alpha in its current state that I find rather worrisome: the company's overall approach to data.

When you read through the FAQ page on the Wolfram Alpha site, you come across a section on data that contains the following phrases:

Where does Wolfram|Alpha's data come from?
Many different sources, combined and curated by the Wolfram|Alpha team. At the bottom of each relevant results page there's a "Source information" button, which provides background sources and references.

Can I find the origin of a particular piece of data?
Most of the data in Wolfram|Alpha is derived by computations, often based on multiple sources. A list of background sources and references is available via the "Source information" button at the bottom of relevant Wolfram|Alpha results pages.

OK, sounds good - let's check it out. When I run a query on "USA Life Expectancy", I get a very nice page with results, tables, and graphs:

However, nowhere on that page am I told the actual source of the data. No problem - I'll just click on the "Source Information" link:

Wait a second - I see as the primary source "Wolfram|Alpha curated data, 2009", followed by four databases and three sources for models - so where did this data come from? Is it from one of the databases? a composite from some or all four? and if the latter, how was the composite constructed? OK, there's one more link at the bottom of the page - it reads "Requests by researchers for detailed information on the sources for individual Wolfram|Alpha results can be directed here." Clicking on that link, I get the following screen:

I know, it's beta time - but frankly, this is extremely discouraging. Even if this page worked, it seems to imply that detailed info about how the query results were sourced will require that a human being get back to me. By contrast, the CDC tells me exactly how its data was collected and analyzed, as do all the other data sources used by Wolfram Alpha. In other words, Wolfram Alpha has taken data that was transparent in its sourcing and analysis and made it - at least at first impression - opaque.

Things get worse when we get into economic data. Try the following query about basic economic data: "France Economy"

"Source Information" is even more opaque in this case, with a lengthy list of sources that includes everything from the UN and OECD to Britannica and Wikipedia, but does not include France's own governmental offices. Does this mean that the - quite reliable in my experience - French government's data is not being considered in this aggregate? Given that Wolfram Alpha claims to have "trillions of elements" of data in its system, you would think that data published by world governments would be a rather obvious source to include - even at launch. Also, what year do these numbers come from? If you assumed 2008, say, you'd be wrong - but there's no way of knowing that from this screen. To find out, you'd have to run a separate query - for instance, for the Gini Index the estimate corresponds to 2005:

This is not an obscure, nitpicky complaint: any serious user of social and economic data knows that how data was sourced, aggregated, and processed determines crucially how it can be used. Looking at the list of sources mentioned by Wolfram Alpha, I would use some for some purposes, and others for others - but I can't leave that decision in Wolfram's hands, nor would I accept a teacher or professor encouraging their students to do so. And for people inclined to say "hey, just roll with it - after all, it looks pretty good, and they seem to know what they're doing", I would remind them that the current economic situation was very largely created by people doing precisely that - putting too much trust in opaque data, and the people and algorithms that generated it.

Let me be clear: I do not in any way believe that the creators of Wolfram Alpha have any nefarious intents in how they're handling data and presenting search results. Indeed, I have nothing but the highest respect for Stephen Wolfram's intelligence and that of his team, and believe that they are indeed trying to provide people with a reliable and useful tool - but the road to decision hell is nonetheless paved with the best data intentions.

Now, all my complaints could be addressed trivially: if the "Source Information" link, instead of directing users to a generic page, revealed the exact data sources used, together with a general description of any additional processing applied, I would be perfectly happy. All the necessary info is in the database, and should be readily retrievable for any given query. As it is, I am not sanguine that this change will occur. Why? Well, reading the "Terms of Use" is a positively depressing experience in over-extension of copyright claims - for instance, Wolfram Alpha claims copyright over any plots, formulae, tables, etc. that might be generated as a result of your query. To put this in context, this would be not unlike Microsoft claiming copyright over any plots you generate using Excel. You are also forbidden from executing "systematic patterns of queries", and "systematic professional or commercial use of the website" is out of bounds. In other words, Wolfram Alpha is unusable for anything much more challenging than the occasional bar bet - I would have to warn any librarian that "systematically" using Wolfram Alpha to teach students about data sourcing might run afoul of the TOU, and regular use by a university research group would seem to be likewise forbidden. Of course, there is - you guessed it - a commercial license available as an option, although it's unclear whether this option would lift the veil of opacity I detailed above.

All of this being said, I have hopes that the situation with Wolfram Alpha will eventually change. Why? Well, Google has already made some announcements this week that seem to indicate that it is very interested in tapping the same market that Wolfram Alpha is targeting. And while Wolfram Alpha may currently have a headstart in the necessary infrastructure, Google has some pretty mean mathematical and programming chops of its own - and the cash reserves to buy as many more warm bodies as it needs. So, given that Google's business model does not rely on opacity of information sources for searches, I can see Wolfram Alpha deciding that it might prove wise to relax some of its constraints sooner, rather than later. In the meantime, the only use I can recommend of Wolfram Alpha for educators and students is to use it to get a crude first answer - and then go to its listed sources to get the real data.

Rethinking Presentations - Prezi and Dynamic Narrative

The recording of the workshop I presented at last week's Pictures Sounds Numbers Words conference is now available online. Here's the original workshop description:

What do you get when you combine presentation software with a concept mapping tool, and add a bit of comic book flair to the mix? The answer: Prezi, a truly remarkable Web 2.0 tool that transforms what is meant - and what can be said - by online presentations. We'll explore Prezi hands-on, and take a look at some of the possibilities it opens up for educators. We will also see how it fits in with other concepts, such as the "infinite canvas" in webcomics, and what this means for future work in media literacy and creation.

I also strongly recommend checking the recordings for one of the other workshops - excellent presenters, and a great range of topics.

A Birthday Phrase Net

It's Shakespeare's 445th birthday today - so, as a small birthday gift, here is a phrase net for Julius Caesar:

This particular phrase net focuses on the most salient possessive links (e.g., "Caesar's ambition") centered around Caesar's name in the play. Interesting, don't you think?

Happy birthday, Will - here's to 445 more.

Reading Math - II: Painting by Numbers

Podcast number nine in the As We May Teach… series is now available:

Reading Math — II: Painting by Numbers

This podcast returns to the concept of math as a language that can be "read" by everybody, with the assistance in this scenario of numerical simulation and modeling tools.

Resources for this podcast are listed below. If you develop new models of your own using the resurces mentioned in this podcast, please let me know in the comments — I'd love to feature them in a future podcast.

Visualizing Chemistry: 3D and the Secret Life of Molecules

The eighth podcast in the As We May Teach… series is now online:

Visualizing Chemistry: 3D and the Secret Life of Molecules

The theme for this podcast: how visualization and computational tools can make chemistry more accessible for a broader audience, and increase everyone's understanding of the subject at the same time.

As always, the resources for this podcast are listed below. If you have questions about the tools used in the podcast, by all means please post them in the comments — I'll be happy to answer them.

Reading Math — I: Visualization as Virtual Interpreter

This week's podcast in the As We May Teach… series is now online:

Reading Math — I: Visualization as Virtual Interpreter

This podcast focuses on the use of visualization tools as a way to provide everyone access to mathematics as a language they can "read" and apply, even if they have not taken advanced courses in the subject.

The resources for this podcast are listed below. If you have examples of uses of visualization tools in math that you would like to share, by all means please do so via the comments.

Collaboration and Peer Instruction: Google Docs and Forms

A new podcast in the As We May Teach… series is now online:

Collaboration and Peer Instruction: Google Docs and Forms

This podcast concludes the "Google Docs Trilogy," discussing uses of the Forms module to enhance collaboration, and to change the dynamics of classroom discussion. Coming next week: technology and "reading math."

As usual, resources for this podcast are listed below; please let me know what you think via the comments.

Synthesizing Information: Google Docs and Mashups

This week's podcast in the As We May Teach… series is now online:

Synthesizing Information: Google Docs and Mashups

In this podcast, I outline how to use the Google Docs spreadsheet module to create mashups, and what the advantages of this approach are for data integration and visualization.

The resources for this podcast are listed below; all feedback on these resources and the podcast is welcome.

"As We May Teach" Highlighted on iTunes U

My podcast series, As We May Teach, is currently featured in the "Highlights" section on iTunes U, together with the University of Oxford's Internet Institute and PRI/BBC/RockhopperTV's Survival:

Needless to say, I'm really happy about this — it's an honor to have my work featured in this company.

Networked Collaboration 101: Exploring Google Docs

The next podcast in the As We May Teach… series is now online:

Networked Collaboration 101: Exploring Google Docs

This podcast takes a first look at Google Docs as a platform for collaboration, showing how it can be used for both discussion and the creation of projects that can be shared via the Web.

Resources for this podcast are listed below; suggestions for other associated resources, as well as comments on the podcast are always welcome.

Three Easy Pieces: Putting Google Earth to Work

A new podcast in the As We May Teach… series is now online:

Three Easy Pieces: Putting Google Earth to Work

This podcast continues the exploration of Google Earth begun in the previous podcast in the context of three educational projects, ranging from economics data visualization, through literary analysis, to environmental citizen science.

The resources for this podcast are listed below; suggestions for other associated resources are always welcome — please post them in the comments.

As We May Teach: Educational Technology, From Theory Into Practice

I am happy to announce that, as part of a joint project with the Maine Learning Technology Initiative (MLTI), I have started a new weekly podcast series. These podcasts will look at several models for the use of educational technologies, and how to apply them in teaching via hands-on examples. The iTunes U podcasts can be found at:

As We May Teach: Educational Technology, From Theory Into Practice

The first two podcasts in the series are now online. The first, TPCK and SAMR — Models for Enhancing Technology Integration, presents the two theoretical frameworks that will guide much of the rest of the series. The second, Power in Simplicity: Virtual Thumbtacks on Virtual Maps, shows how ideas from these models can be applied to educational uses of Google Earth-generated cartography. All of the podcasts have associated online and offline resources — the ones that accompany the first two podcasts are listed below. Each weekly podcast will be accompanied by a blog post here, containing resources, as well as an opportunity for people to ask questions and provide feedback via the comments.

While the specific software and examples have been selected to be particularly useful to Maine educators, I hope these podcasts prove useful to educators in other places. If you have any thoughts about the podcasts, post them in the comments — I really would like to hear from you.