========================================================================== ========================================================================== 1999 CONFCHEM TRIAL SESSION - LECTURE DEMONSTRATIONS ARCHIVE OF DISCUSSION -- Feb. 14 - Mar. 2, 1999 (Some blank lines and header info were deleted to reduce file size.) ========================================================================== ========================================================================== LECTURE DEMONSTRATIONS IN CHEMISTRY ON THE WORLD WIDE WEB On-Line Conference on Chemistry Education and Research Trial Session February 1999 On-Line Session Spring 2001 Conference co-chairs: Oliver Seely and Dr. George Wiger Department of Chemistry California State University at Dominguez Hills 1000 E. Victoria Street Carson CA 90747 oliver@dhvx20.csudh.edu and gwiger@dhvx20.csudh,edu An on-line Conference consisting of Chemistry Lecture Demonstrations available as video/audio files on the World Wide Web is planned for the Spring of 2001. A trial session will be held from February 15 to March 2, 1999. The purpose of the trial session is to provide prospective authors and participants samples of demonstrations prepared by Oliver Seely. The CONFCHEM Listserv discussion and your evaluation of this trial session will help in the planning of the Spring 2001 session. Participants are urged to assemble the necessary hardware and software between now and February 15 and to view the on-line materials. The URL of the Trial Session Website is: http://www.chem.vt.edu/confchem/1999trial/ Netscape or Internet Explores as a browser and one of the following viewers are needed: Real Player, Windows Media Player or Quick Time 3.02 (see Introduction section on the Trial Session website for more details). Contact Oliver Seely (oliver@dhvx20.csudh.edu) if you have questions about hardware, software or the video/audio files. Each participant is urged to view and evaluate each video/audio file. Discussion of the three trial session demonstrations will begin on February 15 via the CONFCHEM Listserv. Two days will be devoted to the discussion of each Demonstration. To subscribe to the CONFCHEM Listserv send the message: SUBSCRIBE CONFCHEM your-first-and-last-name To: LISTSERV@CLVM.CLARKSON.EDU You will be asked to CONFIRM your registration. Questions about or problems regarding the Listserv should be addressed to Donald Rosenthal (ROSEN1@CLVM.CLARKSON.EDU) A paper has been prepared describing the preparation of the video/audio files. Discussion of the preparation and viewing will occur during the second week. Participants are urged to contribute ideas and suggestions during the second week. TRIAL SESSION SCHEDULE ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Before February 15 Participants view the materials Contact Oliver Seely about problems with the web materials. Contact Donald Rosenthal about CONFCHEM Listserv problems. February 15 and 16 Discussion of Demonstration 1 February 17 and 18 Discussion of Demonstration 2 February 19 and 22 Discussion of Demonstration 3 February 23 to March 1 Discussion of Preparation Paper, software and hardware. March 2 Date for returning the Evaluation and Suggestion Form to Donald Rosenthal. As a result of the Trial Session it is hoped participants will agree to prepare Demonstrations for the Spring 2001 Session. SPRING 2001 Session ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Submitted work will be in the form of a video/audio presentation of a chemical demonstration of the submitter's choosing, which he/she uses periodically for his/her classes. Each submission will be followed by at least two days of discussion on the CONFCHEM Discussion Listserv. Discussion may focus on issues of pedagogy, techniques of execution and presentation, safety, and the appropriate level of recipients. Our objectives are several: (1) to encourage our colleagues to share a typical classroom experience with the members of CONFCHEM. (2) to identify problems confronted by all chemical demonstrators in the execution of demonstrations. (3) to use the World Wide Web to present material to students. (4) to stimulate our colleagues into new creative efforts in the presentation of chemical principles. (5) to offer new ideas about the preparation of chemical demonstrations when constrained by the exigencies of the "little screen" (6) to increase our awareness of what can be done when only the simplest video equipment is available as well as with that which can be accomplished when a functioning distance education studio is available. (7) to offer opportunities for all of us to witness the talents of the naturally gifted demonstrators among us. (8) to encourage all of us to begin to look more closely at how we might better use digital web-based video for advancing the discipline of chemistry. All presenters will be encouraged to place a copy of their video presentations on their own servers, if available. This will be the principal link for that presentation to CONFCHEM. A backup copy will be kept on the server at the host institution, CSU Dominguez Hills. If a server is not available at the institution of a presenter, he/she will still be encouraged to do all editing according to transmission requirements which will be set by the conference chair (at this writing, the specs would allow participants to view the video using a 28.8 kbaud modem. Who knows what might transpire between now and the conference as regards increased bandwidth? Presenters ought also to be encouraged to present lecture demonstrations as a series of still images IF THEY FEEL that such a presentation would be just as effective. It is possibility that the co-chairs of the conference will have the capability to put into viewable form the presentations by submitters who don't have the necessary equipment to do so. Should more than a few presenters ask for this service Oliver Seely and George Wiger must insist on sufficient advance receipt of the material in order to meet the conference deadline. That which constitutes "sufficient" won't be known until after the trial run is completed. Files in the MOV format are being considered. We will know better what kind of effort will be involved by June, 1999. Prospective authors and demonstrators of the Spring 2001 session will be told what software and procedures must be used to move a demonstration from a videotape to a digital file. Conference Pre-Schedule Before October 1, 2000 Expression of interest in preparing a demonstration January 1, 2001 Deadline for title and abstract March 1, 2001 Deadline for receipt of web materials - Send to Oliver Seely ========================================================================== Date: Sun, 14 Feb 1999 17:09:12 -0600 From: Oliver Seely Subject: Resend of corrupted message My first message announcing the first discussion period was corrupted by some Word Perfect characters. Here it is again, hopefully uncorrupted. Lecture Demonstrations in Chemistry on the World Wide Web A Trial Session, by Oliver Seely, CSU Dominguez Hills, oliver@dhvx20.csudh.edu Web site URL: http://www.chem.vt.edu/confchem/1999trial/ The three demonstrations for this trial session were assembled for the purpose of a "shake-down" before moving toward a more ambitious set of offerings prepared by you and your colleagues in the spring of 2001. A number of questions must be answered about pedagogy, technical difficulties encountered in receiving the video files, availability of software and how to be prepared to be able to handle video capture for the spring, 2001 session. The first of the three demonstrations offered for this trial session targets lower division undergraduates at a California State University. It was designed for the purpose of aiding students to avoid common pitfalls in using a buret during the volumetric analysis experiments in my Quantitative Analysis course. It is devoid of any video augmentation mainly because such a clip was not available, but I'm not sure that I would have used video in any case, as the resolution required to make the point is well beyond what can be achieved with the facilities I have available to me in video production. Discussion of Demonstration 1 will begin on Monday, February 15 at noon Greenwich Mean Time (7 am EST, 4 am PST) and will continue until Wednesday, February 17 at noon GMT. Demonstrations two and three use video clips from recorded lecture demonstrations during a two-way live video series for a California high school chemistry class in 1994. The science building had burned the previous semester and there was urgent need for some contact, if only vicarious, with laboratory chemistry. As the interaction with the students produced long pauses while I waited for responses, I decided to precede the video clips with still images and textual explanations of the most important details of the demonstrations. The clips came from twenty hours of video recordings and were conveniently available. I have been curious for some time about their potential effectiveness as clips in presentations such as these. It is only recently that software to produce streaming video and compressed downloadable files from VCR recordings is within the budget of public educational institutions, hence this trial session. All comments from participants in this trial session will be welcomed in the public forum, including 1. suggestions about the content and format 2. what could be done to improve the demonstration 3. problems encountered by participants in receiving the video and audio 4. suitability for viewing by students in a large classroom either with the use of large monitors or a projection system 5. suitability for viewing by students at individual workstations in a computer laboratory or at home. 6. how else might one use the demonstrations? I look forward to some lively discussions. Oliver ========================================================================== Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 08:19:35 -0600 From: Charles Sundin Subject: ces - Paper 1 - Other Quicktime 3 Problems Oliver's comment about the non-appearing QuickTime movies does present a problem which is not only annoying but can be a detriment to video development. Oliver notes, "The file is downloaded, the "slider" appears and the movie begins, but there is no image since QuickTime 3.0 supercedes my version.... it would appear that either a compression algorithm decoder has been abandoned or changed so that there is no longer seamless receipt of the file. In a word, there appears to be a bug in the newer version." The two excellent "Chemistry Comes Alive" CD's http://jchemed.chem.wisc.edu/JCESoft/Issues/Series_SP/SP18/abs-sp18.html produced by the Journal of Chemical education Software http://jchemed.chem.wisc.edu/JCESoft/index.html contain movies which were compressed, etc. and are in QuickTime 2 format. The computer for the projector in our lecture room came with QuickTime 3 installed and we can't easily and directly see the demonstrations from the CD's. During lecture, one doesn't have the time to go through all of the manipulations Oliver described to present a demonstration. The solution is to get Quicktime changed to version 2 on the lecture computer. But, will some other faculty not be able to play their QuickTime 3 movies???? The long term problem is that some faculty will wonder why they should put forth the video production effort if two years from now, the demonstration can't be viewed because the newer software won't play it? Many participants on this conference will say, "So what, full speed ahead" but many others won't and one might be a potential, modern, Michael Faraday. Perhaps this "bug" can be fixed. Or perhaps it's a one time event. Maybe some of the "experts" in our midst can put our minds at ease. However, in any event, video over the net in some fashion will allow me to bring interesting, meaningful images of chemical phenomena to my students that I no longer can bring in live because of safety and other factors. Charles E. Sundin, Professor of Chemistry Department of Chemistry and Engineering Physics University of Wisconsin-Platteville 1 University Plaza PLATTEVILLE WI 53818-3099 sundin@uwplatt.edu http://www.ems.uwplatt.edu/sci/chem/fac/sundin/ VOICE: 608-342-1015 FAX: 608-342-1566 ========================================================================== Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 09:36:04 -0500 From: William Pfeiffer Subject: OS-Demos#1,2,3--mechanics+question This is mostly a comment on mechanics at the viewing site. The demos look good and would appear to be useful in classrooms or on individual monitors. But I had some trouble with resolution...the images looked "mosaic'd'" (for lack of a better word). But I could read the thermometer in #3 with some effort. I viewed #2 and #3 with the free version of RealPlayer and #3 with the Windows Media Player only. The sound in the RealPlayer version of #3 was too low and not sufficiently adjustable for use in a classroom. Sound was fine for #3 in the Windows viewer. Demo #1 seems very appropriate for "pre-laboratory" (more realistically for our students, "in-laboratory") viewing to complement the instructions provided by the laboratory instructor. This raises a question for those of you who are using such computer or video demos for teaching or reviewing basic techniques: Where, physically, do you locate the computers/players in relation to the laboratory? Are they readily available for students who want the reassurance of a review as they are doing an experiment? Bill Pfeiffer -- William F. Pfeiffer, Ph.D. Utica College of Syracuse University Professor of Chemistry 1600 Burrstone Road (315) 792-3071 Utica, NY 13502-4892 wpfeiffer@utica.ucsu.edu FAX: (315) 792-3292 ========================================================================== Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 10:37:12 -0500 From: Jimmy Reeves Subject: Re: ces - Paper 1 - Other Quicktime 3 Problems By contrast to the quicktime observations below, the RealVideo movies came across flawlessly, and I have had the same experience with other earlier RealVideo formats. I use RealVideo encoded movies for my Internet distance learning class, and have experienced no complaints about the accessibility or quality of these offerings. The format is highly compressed, and as Oliver's movies demonstrate, they can be streamed over the Internet, so that they begin playing long before they have completely downloaded. The RealVideo encoder, which coverts both .mov (QuickTime) and .avi (Windows) formats, is free from the site referenced previously. It, along with a lot of other very useful free stuff, can also be downloaded from our site here at UNCW, http://aa.uncwil.edu/tc/software.htm . All who benefit from this site owe a great debt of gratitude to Dick Ward of this department, its creator and custodian. Jimmy Reeves -----Original Message----- From: Charles Sundin To: reeves@uncwil.edu Date: Monday, February 15, 1999 9:33 AM Subject: ces - Paper 1 - Other Quicktime 3 Problems > Oliver's comment about the non-appearing QuickTime movies does >present a problem which is not only annoying but can be a detriment to >video development. > > Oliver notes, "The file is downloaded, the "slider" appears and the >movie begins, but there is no image since QuickTime 3.0 supercedes my >version.... it would appear that either a compression algorithm decoder >has been abandoned or changed so that there is no longer seamless >receipt of the file. In a word, there appears to be a bug in the newer >version." > > The two excellent "Chemistry Comes Alive" CD's > >http://jchemed.chem.wisc.edu/JCESoft/Issues/Series_SP/SP18/abs-sp18.html > >produced by the Journal of Chemical education Software > >http://jchemed.chem.wisc.edu/JCESoft/index.html > >contain movies which were compressed, etc. and are in QuickTime 2 >format. The computer for the projector in our lecture room came with >QuickTime 3 installed and we can't easily and directly see the >demonstrations from the CD's. During lecture, one doesn't have the time >to go through all of the manipulations Oliver described to present a >demonstration. The solution is to get Quicktime changed to version 2 on >the lecture computer. But, will some other faculty not be able to play >their QuickTime 3 movies???? > > The long term problem is that some faculty will wonder why they >should put forth the video production effort if two years from now, the >demonstration can't be viewed because the newer software won't play it? >Many participants on this conference will say, "So what, full speed >ahead" but many others won't and one might be a potential, modern, >Michael Faraday. > > Perhaps this "bug" can be fixed. Or perhaps it's a one time event. >Maybe some of the "experts" in our midst can put our minds at ease. > > However, in any event, video over the net in some fashion will allow >me to bring interesting, meaningful images of chemical phenomena to my >students that I no longer can bring in live because of safety and >other factors. > >Charles E. Sundin, Professor of Chemistry >Department of Chemistry and Engineering Physics >University of Wisconsin-Platteville >1 University Plaza >PLATTEVILLE WI 53818-3099 > >sundin@uwplatt.edu >http://www.ems.uwplatt.edu/sci/chem/fac/sundin/ >VOICE: 608-342-1015 FAX: 608-342-1566 ========================================================================== Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 08:29:20 -0800 From: hemphill Subject: OS paper 1 Use for high school labs Dear all, As I looked through the still and video'd demoes for this trial session, I immediately tried to figure out how I could use this gift in my high school classroom and, next, whether I might be able to garner enough hints from this session to figure out how to record lab techniques myself for the specific labs I run. I downloaded the first demo on titration technique. I think I could use it as part of the prelab assignment for students--one to be accessed on the web as a way to help my students get more comfortable getting information off the web. Our net connections at our school, although they are improving, would probably not allow for realtime viewing of the video's from demoes 2 & 3. I had some difficulty with the RA version. However, both pages could still be used for students who had missed class demoes/labs. I wonder out loud when a demo, eg, the sodium acetate crystallization, is best seen on a video as opposed to running the real demo. I do not see many safety issues with this demo (or lab). Do you see wider uses for these demoes, other than for students who missed the demo or lab in class. I do see that for demoes that have a safety issue, eg, decomposition of ammonium dichromate, a video may well be a better way to let see students see the demo. Finally, how did you record your video and stills. Did you use a digital camera? Would a cheaper (and more readily available to HS teachers) device such as a CreateNShare-type camera be used. When you saved the video for others to download, what kinds of techniques did you use to minimize the file size. At a workshop two summers ago, groups working on electronic grant applications, included video as part of their applications. They took a very large file, kept the audio track at its highest level, but desaturated the color video until it was, I believe, at 256 color resolution. The file was reduced to under 100K. The logic was that the sound delivery was most important, that many machines might not be able to display Millions of colors, and that the smaller, easier to load if somewhat grainier video images were acceptable. I have considered that it could be a useful exercise to have student lab pairs do an electronic "procedure" for their lab reports perhaps once during the school year. They would be learning a different "technique" and I would benefit by having one student-procedure-data set to demonstrate for part of prelab the following year and that an absent student could use in a real pinch to do calculations on. We currently have students working on independent projects who videotape their experiments, digitize them, and then analyze them later. Thank you for making your materials available for others. Rosa Hemphill hemphill@teleport.com http://www.canby.com/~hemphill ========================================================================== Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 11:35:00 EST From: Donald Rosenthal Subject: CONFCHEM Registrations and Trial Session Participation * CONFCHEM - Conference on Chemistry Discussion List * * There are currently 882 registrations from approximately 46 countries * on CONFCHEM as of February 15, 1999 * The Trial Demonstration Session webpage * (http://chemistry.csudh.edu/oliver/intro.htm) has been visited 429 times. * The Demonstration 1 website - Buret Use has been visited 250 times. * The Demonstration 2 website - Vapor Pressure has been visited 271 times. * The Demonstration 2 website - Supersaturated has been visited 185 times. * * Country Subscribers * ------- ----------- * Argentina 2 * Australia 21 * Austria 1 * Belgium 3 * Brazil 4 * Canada 32 * Chile 3 * China 4 * Columbia 1 * Finland 1 * France 1 * Germany 2 * Great Britain 17 * Greece 2 * Hungary 6 * India 1 * Israel 5 * Italy 6 * Japan 2 * Malaysia 1 * Mexico 6 * Morocco 1 * Netherlands 3 * New Zealand 3 * Norway 3 * Phillipines 1 * Poland 7 * Portugal 1 * Romania 2 * Russia 7 * Saudi-Arabia 7 * Singapore 1 * Slovakia 1 * Slovenia 1 * South Africa 1 * Soviet Union 4 * Sweden 1 * Taiwan 2 * Thailand 2 * Turkey 3 * USA 666 * Venezuela 2 * Vietnam 1 * Yugoslavia 1 * ??? 40 * * Total number of users subscribed to the list: 882 * Total number of countries represented: 46 ========================================================================== Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 12:32:23 -0500 From: Jimmy Reeves Subject: wrong URL Everyone, It was just pointed out to me that UNCW's URL where a number of free programs and plugins can be found was incorrect. They are located at http://www.uncwil.edu/tc/software.htm . Sorry for the mix-up. Jimmy ************************************************ Dr. Jimmy Reeves Associate Professor of Chemistry University of North Carolina at Wilmington 601 S. College Rd. Wilmington, NC 28403 Office: 910-962-3456 Fax: 910-962-3013 WWW: http://www.uncwil.edu/people/reeves/ ******************************************************** ========================================================================== Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 12:51:51 -0500 From: Brian Tissue Subject: BT: stills versus video Oliver, In what cases do you think a video is much more valuable than a tutorial with text and still images? A sequence of text and still images can convey a lot, is much quicker to produce, and has the advantage that it can be printed. Brian ========================================================================== Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 13:45:28 -0500 From: Leon Combs Chemistry Subject: Re: wrong URL I am not quite as enthusiastic as some others. We have been "playing around" with videos as prelab lectures for physical chemistry lab for a couple of years with about the same results as I see here. The Real Streaming video is jerky and lacks detail, the Media Player looked very good but downloading it from a 28.8 modem would have taken a good bit of time -- assuming no disconnect. The person taking the video moved the camera several times which makes both videos (Real and Media) worse -- it is very important to have a still camera. =20 We have no dorms and about 13,000 students. We do have quite a few computer labs on campus where students can log in and view videos ok. However most of our students work and their need is for computer information when they have time from work and in their homes. In the not-too-distant future my area (Atlanta) will have many students with high bandwidth connections. However that is not the case now and probably won't be for about five years. At this point in time I think we are limited to short videos of concepts and even those are problematic. I like the use of images and we are making image and video prelab lectures. Real Video has improved their product considerably in recent months and I am sure that they will continue to improve. I am optimistic that video will be an important part of the learning experience and thank the authors and others who are working in this area -- we need a listserv of our own to help each other. Leon Leon L. Combs, Ph.D. Tel:= 770-423-6159 Professor and Chair fAX: 770-423-6744 Department of Chemistry lcombs@ksumail.kennesaw.edu=20 Kennesaw State University 1000 Chastain Road CARPE DIEM ---- CORUM DEO Kennesaw, GA 30144 Yahweh Nissi >http://science.kennesaw.edu/~lcombs ========================================================================== Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 13:15:20 -0600 From: "Gary L. Bertrand" Subject: GLB:Re: stills versus video There is an in-between route here, using animated GIFs. The use of text rather than audio has several advantages, particularly if the students are likely to be accessing this information in a room full of computers. I've used some animated GIFs for describing the Bomb Calorimeter http://www.umr.edu/~gbert/animation.html They are relatively easy to construct from still photographs or any type of graphic, and are relatively small in size so that they download quickly compared to videos. They are not set up for audio, but as I said before, I do not consider this a major detriment. They are embedded in a HTML page, so the page can be saved onto a hard drive and "played" by the browser without going back to the site. Gary >Oliver, >In what cases do you think a video is much more valuable than a tutorial >with text and still images? A sequence of text and still images can convey >a lot, is much quicker to produce, and has the advantage that it can be >printed. >Brian Gary L. Bertrand gbert@umr.edu www.umr.edu/~gbert Dept. of Chem. (573) 341-4441 Fax(573) 341-6033 University of Missouri-Rolla Rolla, MO 65409-0010 =========================================== "The practice of Chemical Thermodynamics is simply a matter of finding the proper wrench to pound on the right screw." ========================================================================== Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 14:04:29 -0600 From: Charles Sundin Subject: Re: JR on URL Jimmy Reeves alerted us to a great campus site. Not only will students get the right version but download times should be minimal since they are coming off the campus server (in most cases). I recommend that you check out this site. Now if I can only get my IT people to do the same. Charles ################################################################### >Everyone, > It was just pointed out to me that UNCW's URL where a number of free >programs and plugins can be found was incorrect. They are located at >http://www.uncwil.edu/tc/software.htm . Sorry for the mix-up. >Jimmy >************************************************ >Dr. Jimmy Reeves >Associate Professor of Chemistry >University of North Carolina at Wilmington ############################################################ Charles Sundin UW-Platteville sundin@uwplatt.edu ========================================================================== Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 14:37:32 -0600 From: "Salvador G. Medina" Subject: Re: JR on URL >... IT people to do the same. > >Charles > Please every one, avoid acronims, you are talking to the world! UBQ! Regards, Salvador. __ || / \ Salvador G. Medina / FQ \ adan@servidor.unam.mx / UNAM \ Facultad de Quimica, UNAM (________) =95 ***This message was printed with recycled electrons*** =20 ========================================================================== Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 16:54:46 EST From: Donald Rosenthal Subject: DR: Suggested Changes in Demo 1 and Some Questions Demonstration 1 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ In his Sunday 14, February 14 17:09 message Oliver Seely wrote: > All comments from participants in this trial session will be welcomed > in the public forum, including: > > 1. suggestions about the content and format > 2. what could be done to improve the demonstration > 3. problems encountered by participants in receiving the video and audio > 4. suitability for viewing by students in a large classroom either > with the use of large monitors or a projection system > 5. suitability for viewing by students at individual workstations in a computer laboratory or at home > 6. How else ought the demonstrations to be used? I have a few comments about items 1 and 2. In Demonstration 1 much information is provided which is of interest and value to students. The statement is made "it is important that your line of sight be in a direction perpendicular to the buret column". However, I don't believe it is explained exactly how you do this or why the problem exists. It seems to me that it is appropriate to introduce and demonstrate the concept of parallax. The bottom of the meniscus is a different distance from the observer than the buret markings. If you move your head up and down and look at the meniscus, it will appear near different buret markings and different buret readings will be obtained. In order to position your head properly the full ml markings which go completely around the buret are used. For example, in Figures 1, 3, 4 and 5, the correct buret reading is between 32 and 33 ml. When the 32 ml marking is observed, the marking will appear as a straight line when your eyes are perpendicular to the buret at the 32 ml marking. As you move your eye below the 32 ml marking an ellipse will appear. The meniscus reading is between 32 and 33 ml. Both the 32 and 33 ml readings must appear as ellipses when your eyes are properly positioned. If the reading were exactly 32.5 ml the 32 and 33 ml ellipses would need to be the same. If the reading is closer to 33 ml than to 32 ml, the minor axis is shorter for the 33 ml than for the 32 ml ellipse. It seems to me that some additional information could have been provided in demonstration 1. Instead of using a felt tipped pen, I prefer to use shiny black electrical tape on an index card. It would be useful to number the figures so that in discussing them students can quickly identify the figure. Rinsing the buret with the solution to be used prior to filling the buret might be mentioned. QUESTIONS ^^^^^^^^^^ 1. Very often figures which are drawn are used rather than or in addition to photographs. Would this be useful? 2. Did you use Demonstration 1 in a laboratory or lecture class period and go over the information as well as making it available to the students in a terminal room? Should this be done? ========================================================================== Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 16:03:20 -0600 From: Oliver Seely Subject: Re: DR: Suggested Changes in Demo 1 and Some Questions Thanks to Don Rosenthal for some excellent suggestions, some of which had occurred to me (not enough information about parallax, for example) and I'm definitely going to do something about that (after the Trial Session, however) Regarding his questions: >1. Very often figures which are drawn are used rather than or in addition > to photographs. Would this be useful? No. For several semesters I have had a figure of a buret for my students to see in our "in-house" lab manual. First of all it is in black and white, so the calibration lines, also black, are completely obscured in the figure. In the color photographs note that those calibration lines CAN be seen. It is possible to decide that the volume reads 32.63 or 32.64 in the first, 40.09 or 40.10 in the second 41.15 in the third even without the advantage of being able to move the card downward to make sure of the location of the next full mL. Secondly, the figure is stylized and idealized -- not nearly like that which the students will see in lab. Thirdly, cameras with good resolution and a close focus have lenses which most closely approximate the quality of the human eye with the scale being in focus, the meniscus behind it and the buret card slightly blurry at the rear. It is an excellent way in my opinion of demonstrating to the student that even with the optical disadvantages of a non-idealized image, one can obtain reproducible volume measurements. >2. Did you use Demonstration 1 in a laboratory or lecture class period and > go over the information as well as making it available to the students > in a terminal room? > Should this be done? Not yet. Our volumetric carbonate experiment doesn't start for a couple of weeks, but they'll get an assignment using the page when that time comes. Oliver ========================================================================== Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 16:30:21 -0600 From: Charles Sundin Subject: Re: JC and JR on RealVideo Quality >I am not quite as enthusiastic as some others. We have been "playing >around" with videos as prelab lectures for physical chemistry lab for a >couple of years with about the same results as I see here. The Real >Streaming video is jerky and lacks detail, u > >Leon >> >Leon L. Combs, Ph.D. >Kennesaw State University I too share Leon's concern about RealVideo. Streaming is great but the quality is not there. I was testing a number of RealVideos today and they sometimes stopped due to "network congestion" or the audio kept playing but not the video. (I had no problems on the weekend with Oliver's videos.) I went to RealVideo for examples of good video and obtained one on what to watch out for when making videos for the Internet. http://ramhurl.real.com/smildemohurl.html?file=marketing/reallife/ realn_carib_filmv_176x132_vo_si_34.rm (Note that the above two line address all must be entered.) It's quality was also lacking. Perhaps Jimmy could share a snippet of his RealVideo. >the RealVideo movies came across flawlessly, and I have had the same >experience with other earlier RealVideo formats. I use RealVideo >encoded movies for my Internet distance learning class, and have >experienced no complaints about the accessibility or quality of these >offerings. >Jimmy Reeves When I look at the quality of: http://jchemed.chem.wisc.edu/JCESoft/NI3.mov http://jchemed.chem.wisc.edu/JCESoft/Issues/Series_SP/SP18/prog-SP18_2.m ov ov (Line above ends with /prog-SP18.mov) I am impressed the processing is also important because what appears to be the same video does not have the same quality. Compare: http://jchemed.chem.wisc.edu/JCESoft/CCA/W1MV/W0653/M653.MOV Exciting times ahead and what I have learned already makes this conference worthwhile. Charles Sundin University of Wisconsin-Platteville sundin@uwplatt.edu ========================================================================== Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1998 11:50:06 -0500 From: c kingsbury Subject: Re: Short Question - "The State of Science Education: Subject--r I think that university science is slowly moving toward a two-tier system: researchers who do little teaching, and teachers, who are presumably experts in that enterprise. At some point, scientists are going to have to pay attention to cognitive abilities in students. It is too bad that the cognitive studies literature is so dense. It is worse than quantum mechanics. CK ========================================================================== Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 17:44:12 -0500 From: Leon Combs Chemistry Subject: general video comments I forgot to change the subject when I submitted my message so I am resending it with a proper subject. Sorry. *********************************** I am not quite as enthusiastic as some others. We have been "playing around" with videos as prelab lectures for physical chemistry lab for a couple of years with about the same results as I see here. The Real Streaming video is jerky and lacks detail, the Media Player looked very good but downloading it from a 28.8 modem would have taken a good bit of time -- assuming no disconnect. The person taking the video moved the camera several times which makes both videos (Real and Media) worse -- it is very important to have a still camera. We have no dorms and about 13,000 students. We do have quite a few computer labs on campus where students can log in and view videos ok. However most of our students work and their need is for computer information when they have time from work and in their homes. In the not-too-distant future my area (Atlanta) will have many students with high bandwidth connections. However that is not the case now and probably won't be for about five years. At this point in time I think we are limited to short videos of concepts and even those are problematic. I like the use of images and we are making image and video prelab lectures. Real Video has improved their product considerably in recent months and I am sure that they will continue to improve. I am optimistic that video will be an important part of the learning experience and thank the authors and others who are working in this area -- we need a listserv of our own to help each other. Leon Leon Combs, Ph.D. Professor and Chair Department of Chemistry Kennesaw State University (GA, U.S.A.) lcombs@ksumail.kennesaw.edu ========================================================================== Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 16:57:44 -0800 From: George Wiger Subject: Re: general video comments One issue that should be emphasized is that the videos being shown were encoded for slow connections. Oliver assummed a 28.8KBps connection. This led to a compression ratio of over 1000:1 and an accompanying loss of fidelity. I encoded the same files assuming a T1 or higher connection, the compression ratio is about 50:1 and the fidelity is, in my opinion, very good. It's always going to be a compromise. The broader an audience we wish to reach, the more we will have to make some compromise with regards to quality. On a related matter, Oliver noted that we had some problems with our backbone. This has resulted in a number of my servers which are used by others, in particular "chemistry2.csudh.edu" being offline. That situation is likely to continue until midday Tuesday. I apologize for this. George Wiger ========================================================================== Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 20:59:43 -0500 From: Scott Goode Subject: Re: SG: Suggested Changes in Demo 1 and Some Questions Perhaps I'm being overly pedantic but I would suggest a couple of changes to the buret demonstration. Most do not affect the student's perceptions and are more a matter of "style" than "substance." 1. All photographs of the buret should show it as close to vertical as possible. Rotating images is pretty easy with most software. 2. For many years, I have told my students that a measuring device can be read to 1/5 of the last unit. I would tell my students that a buret with divisions every 0.10 mL can be read to 0.02 mL. Rather than stating that the volume could be read to 0.02 or 0.01 mL, why not state that the eye can estimate the space between lines to about 1 part in 5 (or 1 part in 10) so that the better students can carry away a lesson that they can apply to other measurements as well? 3. I would play down the use of acidic dichromate as a cleaning aid. Most industries have eliminated dichromate from their labs since chromium is regulated under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Solutions containing more than 5 ppm chromium are classified as hazardous waste and must be disposed as such. Although the text clearly states to ask the _instructor_ to draw the dichromate cleaning solution through, it might be better to ask the instructor to draw some Nochromix through the pipet. Now, before everyone comments about my chemical hysteria, the law (40 CFR 261) has been interpreted as meaning that the final effluent from your Chemistry Building to your local Municipal Waste Treatment plant must not exceed 5 ppm, so it is not unlawful to dump small amounts of chromium down the drain with large amounts of water. But is this the message that we want to send to our students? Its not like chromic acid cleaning solutions are irreplaceable. If you would like to read the definition of hazardous waste, check out CFR 40 261.20 which you can view (the pdf file) at http://www.epa.gov/docs/epacfr40/chapt-I.info/subch-I/40P0261.pdf 4. I found the text plus photos of Demo 1 more "friendly" than the video of Demo 2. I could go at my own pace, could reread, examine photos, etc. There is really no reason that a video cannot be one of the graphics. 5. Probably most of us get CD ROMs with demos that support the sales of chemistry textbooks. I've found that I am more inclined to show the animations (molecules vibrating, rotating, colliding with the proper orientation) than demonstrations at the macroscopic level. Let me point out that the establishing a public domain set of demonstrations allows me to incorporate changes, such as eliminating dichromate or rotating the photographs, for my own uses. The free use of public domain material is a treasure. I use such materials in an auditorium with 316 seats and a video projector and my lectures are based around PowerPoint slides. I download video clips to the local drive and paste them into slides and have observed that the students truly enjoy the videos. I fabricated exam questions that indicate to me that my students tend to remember these videos with greater detail than the text. > Oliver Seely wrote: > > > All comments from participants in this trial session will be welcomed > > in the public forum, including: > > > > 1. suggestions about the content and format > > 2. what could be done to improve the demonstration > > 3. problems encountered by participants in receiving the video and audio > > 4. suitability for viewing by students in a large classroom either > > with the use of large monitors or a projection system > > 5. suitability for viewing by students at individual workstations in a > computer laboratory or at home > > 6. How else ought the demonstrations to be used? -- Scott R. Goode Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry University of South Carolina Columbia SC 29208 Voice: 803-777-2601 Fax: 803-777-9521 Email: Goode@sc.edu Home page: http://www.chem.sc.edu/goode/ ========================================================================== Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 07:37:49 -0600 From: Charles Sundin Subject: ces on GW on general video comments George, I am sure all of us would like to see an example of the same video at different compression ratios. (I bet that is why the two NI3 videos were of different quality.) Charles Sundin >One issue that should be emphasized is that the videos being shown were >encoded for slow connections. Oliver assummed a 28.8KBps connection. >This led to a compression ratio of over 1000:1 and an accompanying loss >of fidelity. I encoded the same files assuming a T1 or higher >connection, the compression ratio is about 50:1 and the fidelity is, in >my opinion, very good. >George Wiger ========================================================================== Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 11:07:13 -0500 From: Jimmy Reeves Subject: Re: general video comments >One issue that should be emphasized is that the videos being shown were >encoded for slow connections. Oliver assumed a 28.8KBps connection. This >led to a compression ratio of over 1000:1 and an accompanying loss of >fidelity. I encoded the same files assuming a T1 or higher connection, the >compression ratio is about 50:1 and the fidelity is, in my opinion, very >good. It's always going to be a compromise. The broader an audience we wish >to reach, the more we will have to make some compromise with regards to >quality. My understanding is that video encoded in RealVideo with the G2 encoder, sent through a G2 enabled server and played with the G2 player (earlier players cannot play G2 formatted video, BUT G2 can play video encoded with earlier versions of the encoder) can automatically detect the bandwidth of the potential user and provide an encoded signal appropriate to the bandwidth. That would solve the compression problem, and it points to the fact that video delivered over the WWW is HERE now, and needs to be used by as many of us as have the time and tools to create for it. One lesson I've learned is that using the technology, even in crude form, teaches us valuable lessons about its effective use when it becomes truly ready for prime time. Videos we use here at UNCW are short, focused, integrated into WWW applications, and flexible. I've found that the most useful clips last no more than 15 to 30 seconds, not because of bandwidth, but because they can make the point most effectively if properly created. I have a good example of what I mean posted at the URL http://aa.uncwil.edu/reeves/MyResearch/myresh95.htm#Traditional . The conductivity videos were made here at UNCW by Dick Ward. The simulation is "borrowed" from a laser disk, with the sound track added by me. I also make extensive use of videos from the Saunders Interactive General Chemistry CD-ROM. These have been converted (with permission) to RealVideo and are made available to my distance learning students who are expected to own the CD-ROM. Many other publishers provide CD-ROM packages with similar materials. Getting them to agree to let us use them in integrated WWW based or classroom presentations is an important part of the equation. Jimmy ========================================================================== Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 11:08:23 -0500 From: Oliver Seely Subject: Server update. The server holding the demonstrations for this conference seems again to be operational after being unavailble for a couple of hours earlier today. This is the second day of discussion on Demonstration 1, Helpful Hints on the Use of a Buret. It will continue until noon GMT Wednesday, approximately 17 hours from now, at which time we will move on to Demonstration 2, the Vapor Pressure of Diethyl Ether. As of this moment 333 participants have viewed Demonstration 1. Oliver ========================================================================== Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 11:25:47 -0600 From: "Alan B. Combs" Subject: Comments about video from a Greyhair I am in agreement with the comments by Leon Smith about the quality of the streaming video. At the same time, I am really grateful that someone is willing to put work up for comment. Thanks, folks. Now, a historical perspective (I hate to be that old, but so be it). In the mid-to late 70s, we were faced with the necessity of reducing the number of animals (rats, mice) used in pharmacology wet labs. We thought that the way to proceed was to videotape (anyone remember the large beta-format?) laboratory demonstrations for the purposes of playing them back later. We spent six months to a year doing this. Now, we didn't go in unprepared. We planned for the shots and we scripted (loosely) what we wanted to say. The pharmacology demonstrations were good; the videotapes caused more sleep than opium. The technical quality of the tapes was dreadful. After all the effort, we used the tapes for only a year or two. My bottom line for this experience? I was glad we tried the experiment, but it became very clear that media and RTF professionals who are experts on PRESENTATION, rather than content, were very necessary if we were to have succeeded. I have the same feeling about video-media in this conference, as I learned then. The contents are good, didactically useful, and sound. However, the presentation quality is not there, yet. The soon-to-be availability of really fast telephone protocols and/or cable modems will go a long way toward decreasing the streaming problems. However, at least as much time must be spent on the "show biz" aspects as on the didactic material, probably more. Back when we first tried videotapes, the word was that for every hour of presentation, there would be about 100 hours of background work. We didn't think so, and we were quite wrong. I suspect that this ratio will not change much, even if the bandwidth increases dramatically. Best wishes, Alan [Who also suspects that the capability of the presentation technology will continue to expand faster than the bandwidth can contain it.] ========================================================================== Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 12:38:37 -0600 From: "Nancy S. Gettys" Subject: Re: ces - Paper 1 - Other QuickTime 3 Problems/ JC and JR on RealVideo Quality Some comments have been made about JCE Software video. I would like to address some of the points raised. _______________________________ > The two excellent "Chemistry Comes Alive" CD's > >http://jchemed.chem.wisc.edu/JCESoft/Issues/Series_SP/SP18/abs-sp18.html > >produced by the Journal of Chemical education Software > >http://jchemed.chem.wisc.edu/JCESoft/index.html > >contain movies which were compressed, etc. and are in QuickTime 2 >format. The computer for the projector in our lecture room came with >QuickTime 3 installed and we can't easily and directly see the >demonstrations from the CD's. During lecture, one doesn't have the time >to go through all of the manipulations Oliver described to present a >demonstration. The solution is to get QuickTime changed to version 2 on >the lecture computer. But, will some other faculty not be able to play >their QuickTime 3 movies???? The video in the Chemistry Comes Alive! CDs was compressed in Intel Indeo Video 3.2 format. It is not compatible with QuickTime 3 for Windows 95. The video does play with QuickTime 3 for Mac OS provided the Indeo Video extension (included on the CDs) is installed. The video also plays using the built in resources in Windows 98 with Internet Explorer. You can have both QuickTime 2.1.2 and QuickTime 3 installed on the same computer running Windows 95 without any problems. In order to view the Chemistry Comes Alive! video in your WWW browser, you must have QuickTime Plug-in 1.1 installed in the browser's plugins directory. QuickTime 3 will be used preferentially to QuickTime 2.1.2 everywhere except the browser with QuickTime Plug-in 1.1. JCE Software is currently working to compress our video in a QuickTime 3 format. In addition to increased compatibility, it will allow us to make available higher quality video with smaller file sizes. _______________________________ >When I look at the quality of: > >http://jchemed.chem.wisc.edu/JCESoft/NI3.mov > >http://jchemed.chem.wisc.edu/JCESoft/Issues/Series_SP/SP18/prog-SP18_2.m >ov >ov > >(Line above ends with /prog-SP18.mov) > >I am impressed the processing is also important because what appears to >be the same video does not have the same quality. Compare: > >http://jchemed.chem.wisc.edu/JCESoft/CCA/W1MV/W0653/M653.MOV The video clips referenced above are from the JCE Software Web site. They are of different quality because they were compressed differently for different uses. The NI3 movie (first URL above) is found on JCE Software's home page, http://jchemed.chem.wisc.edu/JCESoft/. It was compressed so that it downloads fairly quickly, but is of good quality. The same movie was digitized at lower quality (the third URL above) to be a part of a preview site for Chemistry Comes Alive!, http://jchemed.chem.wisc.edu/JCESoft/CCA/. The idea here is to let people see all of the video available on the CD before they buy it---but without "giving away" the video. If you want to use any of the video in a classroom setting, you would need to purchase the CD in order to get acceptable quality. The second URL above, (http://jchemed.chem.wisc.edu/JCESoft/Issues/Series_SP/SP18/prog-SP18_2.mov), is a demonstration of electrostatic attraction and is accessed from the online abstract of Chemistry Comes Alive!, Volume 1, (CD-ROM) JCE Software Special Issue 18 (http://jchemed.chem.wisc.edu/JCESoft/Issues/Series_SP/SP18/abs-sp18.html). This video clip is intended to download fairly quickly and be of reasonably good quality in order to provide a sample of the video included on the CD. It is smaller, shorter, and lower quality than the same movie on the CD. See http://jchemed.chem.wisc.edu/JCESoft/CCA/W1MAIN/CD1W3430.HTM#3430 for the Chemistry Comes Alive! preview version of this movie. Nancy Gettys ********************************************** Nancy S. Gettys Technical Editor, JCE Software University of Wisconsin-Madison 209 North Brooks Street Madison, WI 53715-1116 gettys@chem.wisc.edu Phone: 800-991-5534, FAX: 608-262-7145 http://jchemed.chem.wisc.edu/JCESoft/ ********************************************** ========================================================================== Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 14:49:17 -0500 From: Jerry Jacobsen Subject: reinvention of the wheel I have created a website at http://jchemed.chem.wisc.edu/JCESoft/CCA/confer.htm which may be of interest to participants in the conference. It contains some samples relating to the topics being discussed, namely: Reading a Buret Vapor Pressure Crystallization of Sodium Acetate Creating Chemistry Videos Sharing a Classroom Experience Comparison of media technologies ========================================================================== Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 14:50:45 -0500 From: Oliver Seely Subject: Re: Current quality of the Web I won't address any specific points about video until we begin the discussion of Demonstration 2 tomorrow. Whether speaking of text, still images or video, we ought to keep one matter in focus, which in my mind is of overriding importance. Everything we as individuals produce is ours to use and to share as we wish. Until the emergence of the Web the material which we created and offered to our students (usually at no charge) and which could be referenced by them on demand, consisted for the most part of monochrome text and images. The Web has opened up some new possibilities which are too delicious to pass up. In one sense I view the Web no differently than I do a spirit duplicator, mimeograph, xerox machine or laser printer. It's a way of transmitting the material to the student. It even allows us to generate a facsimile which can be duplicated and given to students in classes where the Web is not accessible. But when the Web can be accessed directly, its possibilities allow us to dream a little -- perhaps even to convert some of our dreams into reality. The potential coverage is fantastic with no additional effort on the part of the creator. Imagine the effort I expended in (1) preparing my three demonstrations for the Web. Now imagine the effort required (2) to make them available to 800 conference participants. Now imagine the additional effort required (3) to make them available to tens of millions of people with current access to the Web. The amount of effort in each case was (1) quite a bit, (2) zero and (3) zero. There are no distribution costs, in time, labor or money for Web based materials. This morning a colleague said to me, "When you finish putting all your demonstrations on the Web it would be great if you would transfer them to a CD ROM." My response was "Why don't you download them onto whatever medium you desire and use them in any way you see fit?" "Yes, I guess I could do that," was his response. Beyond that, one purpose of this trial session is to generate sufficient enthusiasm among the participants to result in some contributions for the spring 2001 conference. So put on your thinking caps. Oliver ========================================================================== Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 15:11:40 -0500 From: Robley Light Subject: Re: Comments about video from a Greyhair I agree with the comments of the "greyhair". At FSU we have begun to have some contact with the British Open University and though there methods may not travel well transatlantic, one thing is clear. All their materials are made by large team efforts. That is quite a bit different from what we are used to in chemistry. Some production work goes into the textbook, but from there on out it is pretty much individual effort. Some are more successful at adapting their individual efforts to the web. I am very impressed with the work George Wiger has done with all his interactive drill problems, for example, and my hat is off to him and I owe him my gratitude for being able to point students to his web site. But the really professional multi-media things are going to take several people working together--experts in video (from film schools?), experts in instructional design, not to speak of experts in computer software, HTML, etc--all over and above the "content" experts. And while I am at it, I have a question about the various video, movie, etc. files. I note from the "open file" menu of RealVideo G2 that it apparently can read all of the following file types: .ram, .rmm, .ra, .rm, .smi, .smil, .swf, .rt, .rp, .au, .wav, .aif, .avi, .mov, .qt, .aif, .viv, .mpg, .mpeg, .mpa, .mp2, .mp3, .mpv, .mid, .rmi, .rmid Now I know what a few of these are--but am a long way from understanding the intracacies of each, which are streaming and which are not, which I should use RealVideo for, which Quicktime 2, which Quicktime 3 (I've encountered files on publishers CD ROMS that won't work with Quicktime 3), which Windows Media Player, and what some of these other players I've downloaded in the past and forgotten about do: VDO Live and WINPLUS Runtime, for example. On top of that, sometimes I download a REALPlayer file and it opens RealPlayer and plays. Sometimes the "Mime type" is different and I get asked to pick a viewer. If all of this leaves me in a state of confusion, I can imagine that many students feel the same way. (Granted that there are students out there who are much more sophisticated in computers than I am as a latecomer). A long introduction to a simple question. Can someone point me to a web page that begins with the basics and describes these various formats and where each is useful? ************************************************************* Robley J. Light Professor of Chemistry Department of Chemistry Phone: (850) 644-3844 Florida State University Email: rlight@chem.fsu.edu Tallahassee, FL 32306-4390 Fax: (850) 644-8281 Home Page: http://www.sb.fsu.edu/~rlight > -----Original Message----- > From: Listserv Forwarder [mailto:VMUTIL@CLVM]On Behalf Of Alan B. Combs > Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 1999 12:26 PM > To: rlight@CHEMMAIL.CHEM.FSU.EDU > Subject: Comments about video from a Greyhair > > > I am in agreement with the comments by Leon Smith about the quality of > the streaming video. At the same time, I am really grateful that someone > is willing to put work up for comment. Thanks, folks. > > Now, a historical perspective (I hate to be that old, but so be it). In > the mid-to late 70s, we were faced with the necessity of reducing the > number of animals (rats, mice) used in pharmacology wet labs. We thought > that the way to proceed was to videotape (anyone remember the large > beta-format?) laboratory demonstrations for the purposes of playing them > back later. We spent six months to a year doing this. > > Now, we didn't go in unprepared. We planned for the shots and we > scripted (loosely) what we wanted to say. The pharmacology > demonstrations were good; the videotapes caused more sleep than opium. > The technical quality of the tapes was dreadful. After all the effort, > we used the tapes for only a year or two. > > My bottom line for this experience? I was glad we tried the experiment, > but it became very clear that media and RTF professionals who are experts > on PRESENTATION, rather than content, were very necessary if we were to > have succeeded. > > I have the same feeling about video-media in this conference, as I > learned then. The contents are good, didactically useful, and sound. > However, the presentation quality is not there, yet. The soon-to-be > availability of really fast telephone protocols and/or cable modems will > go a long way toward decreasing the streaming problems. However, at > least as much time must be spent on the "show biz" aspects as on the > didactic material, probably more. > > Back when we first tried videotapes, the word was that for every hour of > presentation, there would be about 100 hours of background work. We > didn't think so, and we were quite wrong. I suspect that this ratio will > not change much, even if the bandwidth increases dramatically. > > Best wishes, > > Alan > [Who also suspects that the capability of the presentation technology > will continue to expand faster than the bandwidth can contain it.] ========================================================================== Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 22:44:47 -0600 From: Oliver Seely Subject: Chemical Demonstrations: Second Discussion Announcement Lecture Demonstrations in Chemistry on the World Wide Web A Trial Session, by Oliver Seely, CSU Dominguez Hills, oliver@dhvx20.csudh.edu and George Wiger, gwiger@dhvx20.csudh.edu Web site URL: http://www.chem.vt.edu/confchem/1999trial/ Thanks to all who contributed to the discussion of Demonstration 1, Helpful Hints on the Use of a Buret. All opinions were appreciated; they will be invaluable in helping me to improve the delivery. Demonstration 2, The High Vapor Pressure of Diethyl Ether consists of a video clip preceded by still images and text. The videoclip is a part of a 45 minute series of demonstrations offered to the chemistry class at Dominguez High School in Compton, CA in 1994 via two-way television. By adding still images and text I attempted to add some conceptual and procedural points not covered in the video clip. Discussion of Demonstration 2 will begin at noon Greenwich Mean Time or Universal Coordinated Time (UTC), Wednesday, February 17 (4am PST, 7am EST). During this discussion I look forward to participating in a wider range of topics connected to problems associated with transmitting and receiving video signals over the Web. As with Demonstration 1, all comments from participants will be welcomed on CONFCHEM, including 1. suggestions about the content and format 2. what could be done to improve the demonstration 3. problems encountered by participants in receiving the video and audio 4. suitability for viewing by students in a large classroom either with the use of large monitors or a projection system 5. suitability for viewing by students at individual workstations in a computer laboratory or at home. 6. how else might one use the demonstrations? Oliver ========================================================================== Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 10:24:58 -0500 From: Oliver Seely Subject: Re: DR: Suggested Changes in Demo 1 and Some Questions At 09:58 AM 2/17/99 -0700, Gabriela wrote, in part: >But I think it is important to also >remember the limitations of these media and consider how we can help clarify >concepts with drawings or animations that simplify what is occuring. Right, sorry. I ought to have said in my posting on this that I was addressing the matter of drawings as they would apply specifically to Demonstration 1 about the buret. Gabriela's observations about the photos of the vapor pressure setup are in my opinion right on target and there will be changes based on her advice. The first time I saw my own still image of the apparatus I thought, "Oh, great. You can't see a thing!" Many thanks. Oliver ========================================================================== Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 11:04:19 -0500 From: Oliver Seely Subject: A question about video downloads As some of you know, I place my pages in the public domain and invite people to download any and all of the material, including still images and videos to use as they wish. The MPEG files are no problem, because to view them they have to be downloaded and the page links go directly to them. In the case of the Real Media files, a page is linked to a .RAM file holding one line. The Vapor Pressure page, for example, has a link to the following one- line ram file: vaporpre.ram. The one line in that file reads pnm://chemistry.csudh.edu/oliver/video/vaporpre.rm It is the .rm file which actually has the video. What method is used to download a file "hidden" by one step? Thanks. Oliver ========================================================================== Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 09:58:10 -0700 From: Gabriela Weaver Subject: Re: DR: Suggested Changes in Demo 1 and Some Questions > Thanks to Don Rosenthal for some excellent suggestions, ... > > Regarding his questions: > > >1. Very often figures which are drawn are used rather than or in > >addition > > to photographs. Would this be useful? > > No. ... > > Oliver I think that the vapor pressure demonstration page is an excellent example of when a graphical representation of the apparatus would be very useful. In the photos at the end where the meniscus falls upon addition of diethyl ether, it would be extremely helpful to see the entire length of the buret. However, in the photo at top that does show the entire buret it is impossible to see the liquid level. A very helpful graphic could be a simplified drawing of two burets, side by side, one with the water level shown before diethyl ether and one with the water level shown after its addition. This would emphasize the change that is occuring in the system during this demonstration. I think that this type of drawing would also make it MUCH easier to understand what will be occuring in the video and, therefore, allow the student to be looking for it. Because of the low resolution of the RealVideo file that I watched, I found it very difficult at first to see what actually occured in the demonstration. (The MPEG movie was better in this regard, though certainly much slower to download.) In general, I think that photos and video have an important role in helping us demonstrate a variety of concepts in chemistry. The Web has now made the use of these much more flexible than ever. But I think it is important to also remember the limitations of these media and consider how we can help clarify concepts with drawings or animations that simplify what is occuring. After all, the goal is to make sure that our students *understand* the concepts and so all the tools available to us that could assist in this should be considered. Gabriela C. Weaver University of Colorado at Denver Chemistry Department Campus Box 194 P. O. Box 173364 Denver, CO 80217-3364 Phone: (303) 556-3201 Fax: (303) 556-4776 ========================================================================== Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 12:00:33 -0500 From: "Richard O. Pendarvis" Subject: ROP video and other production work in academia Robley Light wrote : < I agree with the comments of the "greyhair". At FSU we have begun to have some contact with the British Open University and though there methods may not travel well transatlantic, one thing is clear. All their materials are made by large team efforts. That is quite a bit different from what we are used to in chemistry. Some production work goes into the textbook, but from there on out it is pretty much individual effort. Some are more successful at adapting their individual efforts to the web. I am very impressed with the work George Wiger has done with all his interactive drill problems, for example, and my hat is off to him and I owe him my gratitude for being able to point students to his web site. But the really professional multi-media things are going to take several people working together--experts in video (from film schools?), experts in instructional design, not to speak of experts in computer software, HTML, etc--all over and above the "content" experts. > People in schools often take approaches driven by enthusiasm rather than prudence. This is a natural result of our individual dynamics but does not produce optimum results. Others have noted that video production is better left to the professionals. The problem is that it may never get done. Those of us in smaller institutions are never going to have the resources to do much of what we would like. I guess that means that we will always have a lot of less than optimum things. What is important is that these things improve learning. If they do not, it really does not matter how polished they are. In reallity, the only agencies which can spend man years developing materials are in the private sector. When they can see a profit in the near term, more materials will become available. It is interesting to look at some of the things which are coming out of the private sector. I am using HBJ/Archipelago's materials for teaching Gen. Chem. 1 on line this term. The students have much more trouble installing the proper plugins etc than I would have ever believed. The system uses only Quick Time 3 but solves the bandwidth (and revenue) problem by selling CD sets which contain the multimedia files. What is troubling to many is that the lecture movies (which are very good) wwere done by actors! /* Richard */ #include - - ____ | | _ | | Organic Chemistry / \ |_| | | || CAI Programming / \ | | / \ || Pizza / \ / \ | | _||_ Star Trek (_________) (_____) |______| _/____\_ Doberman Pinschers --------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Richard Pendarvis, Ph.D. 3001 W. College Road | | Associate Professor of Chemistry Ocala, FL 32608 | | Central Florida Community College EMAIL: afn02809@afn.org | --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ========================================================================== Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 16:36:13 -0600 From: Charles Sundin Subject: CES - Demo 2 - Vapor Pressure The Vapor Pressure Video serves to remind us of a number of things we should keep in mind as we make videos of chemistry related topics. As such I am going to risk saying the obvious. My comments are directed at the motion video since my first consideration is video for use in lecture. I missed some things in the motion video because I did not look at the stills first. As a standalone Web lesson, the high quality stills effectively augment the motion sequence. Pedagogy: 1. First and foremost, this is the best video I have seen of this demo. It seeks to take this abstract concept of vapor pressure and to quickly and visually convince the learner that it is real. 2. As we make videos there are subliminal messages we could include. The actors should be wearing safety goggles. The reagent bottles should have the appropriate safety labels, ether for instance. Perhaps when the bottle was picked up we could have seen a fire extinguisher in the background. (But not when seeing the actual phenomenon for fear of clutter.) Video: 1. Video people tell me that curved glass surfaces are the hardest thing to film (shoot?). They reflect light and other images at the wrong times and are transparent at the wrong times. Be prepared for frustrating times. 2. Background. In the split screen, the background (lab coat) was too dark for me to easily see the glass. Also, the natural curves and wrinkles of the lab coat made it difficult to see. It was realistic but hindered my getting the correct message. 3. Clutter. Anything in the image that I don't need should not be there. The other two burettes distracted me. I confused the clamp to one of those with the clamp to the right burette shown in the split image (split screen was a nice touch though) and did not see the level to which the liquids dropped. It appears that there is a ringstand in the foreground (or the reflection of one) in one shot which led me astray. 4. Liquids. Would it work to put say a green dye in the water so I could really see the water level and perhaps a blue dye in the ether. (Avoid red if you want a sharp image.) Audio (Text): 1. The initial description of the gas in the burette was a bubble of air. I was looking for a tiny little bubble rather than the larger 3-5 mL gas phase. I didn't see the gas until the second or third viewing. (Obviously I didn't look at the stills first.) 2. The gas in the burette was referred to as air. But it really is air and saturated water vapor. Perhaps a rephrasing to gas would reinforce the concept that water also has a vapor pressure. Last comment. There was a time when I wouldn't spend a dime on a CD because the visual quality was not there. Look where we are today. As one of our colleagues so ably pointed out, in a few years compression and fidelity problems will be solved. Now is the time to experiment with the concept, the pedagogy. In fact, the fidelity is good enough right now for Web based motion video to be pedagogically valuable. My thanks to Oliver for providing the activation energy to get some of us working and all of us thinking. I have learned so much from the discussion and evaluating the videos and thinking of possibilities. Charles Sundin University of Wisconsin-Platteville sundin@uwplatt.edu ========================================================================== Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 15:19:06 EST From: Donald Rosenthal Subject: T.O.: A Question about Video Downloads from Tom O'Haver From: "Tom O'Haver" To: CONFCHEM - Conference on Chemistry Discussion List Subject: Re: A question about video downloads Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 07:24:03 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) Go to http://chemistry.csudh.edu/oliver/video/ and right-click on one of the ".rm" files, then select "Save link as"....This will download the rm file to your local hard disk. However, when I try to play those files, using free RealPlayer G2, all I get is a black screen - on video or audio. Perhaps these files were meant to be played in streaming mode from a RealPlayer server, not directly from a local disk. Tom -------------------------------------------------- Tom O'Haver Professor Emeritus Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry and Maryland Collaborative for Teacher Preparation The University of Maryland at College Park to2@umail.umd.edu http://www.wam.umd.edu/~toh > On Wed, 17 Feb 1999 11:04:19 -0500 Oliver Seely > wrote: > In the case of the Real Media files, a page is linked to a .RAM file holding > one line. > The Vapor Pressure page, for example, has a link to the following one-line ram > file: > > vaporpre.ram. > > The one line in that file reads > > pnm://chemistry.csudh.edu/oliver/video/vaporpre.rm > > It is the .rm file which actually has the video. What method is used to > download a file "hidden" by one step? Thanks. > > Oliver ========================================================================== Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 15:22:58 -0600 From: Charles Sundin Subject: CES re OS: A question about video downloads >It is the .rm file which actually has the video. What method is > used to download a file "hidden" by one step? Thanks. > >Oliver Oliver, I have tried numerous things but to no avail. Have you tried to FTP the files. Does your campus allow FTP into your server? Does anyone else have a solution?? Charles Charles Sundin University of Wisconsin-Platteville sundin@uwplatt.edu ========================================================================== Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 22:10:16 -0600 From: Oliver Seely Subject: Chemical Demonstrations: Third Discussion Announcement Lecture Demonstrations in Chemistry on the World Wide Web A Trial Session, by Oliver Seely, CSU Dominguez Hills, oliver@dhvx20.csudh.edu and George Wiger, gwiger@dhvx20.csudh.edu Web site URL: http://www.chem.vt.edu/confchem/1999trial/ At this writing, Discussion 2 on The High Vapor Pressure of Diethyl Ether is due to end in less than six hours. Demonstration 3, Crystallization of sodium acetate from a supersaturated aqueous solution consists of a video clip preceded by still images and text. The videoclip comes from the same series of two-way television programs offered to the chemistry class of Dominguez High School in Compton, CA in 1994. Discussion of Demonstration 3 will begin at noon Greenwich Mean Time or Universal Coordinated Time (UTC), Friday, February 19 (4am PST, 7am EST). As in the case of the other two discussions, all comments from participants will be welcomed on CONFCHEM, including 1. suggestions about the content and format 2. what could be done to improve the demonstration 3. problems encountered by participants in receiving the video and audio 4. suitability for viewing by students in a large classroom either with the use of large monitors or a projection system 5. suitability for viewing by students at individual workstations in a computer laboratory or at home. 6. how else might one use the demonstrations? Oliver ========================================================================== Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 09:18:12 EST5EDT From: Paul Zitzewitz Subject: Re: T.O.: A Question about Video Downloads from Tom O'Haver I had the same problem on one of my computers, but not another. I'm pretty sure the difference is the exact version of the RealPlayer G2 you have installed. On the one that gave me a blank screen, I couldn't close the application and had to reboot my computer. Version 6.0.3.143 worked. I think that the one that didn't work is slightly newer! > Go to http://chemistry.csudh.edu/oliver/video/ and > right-click on one of the ".rm" files, then select "Save > link as"....This will download the rm file to your > local hard disk. However, when I try to play those files, > using free RealPlayer G2, all I get is a black screen - on > video or audio. Perhaps these files were meant to be > played in streaming mode from a RealPlayer server, not > directly from a local disk. > > Tom > -------------------------------------------------- > Tom O'Haver > Professor Emeritus > Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry > and Maryland Collaborative for Teacher Preparation > The University of Maryland at College Park > to2@umail.umd.edu > http://www.wam.umd.edu/~toh > > > On Wed, 17 Feb 1999 11:04:19 -0500 Oliver Seely > > wrote: > > > In the case of the Real Media files, a page is linked to a .RAM file holding > > one line. > > The Vapor Pressure page, for example, has a link to the following one-line ram > > file: > > > > vaporpre.ram. > > > > The one line in that file reads > > > > pnm://chemistry.csudh.edu/oliver/video/vaporpre.rm > > > > It is the .rm file which actually has the video. What method is used to > > download a file "hidden" by one step? Thanks. > > > > Oliver > Paul Zitzewitz, Professor of Physics Department of Natural Sciences University of Michigan-Dearborn 4901 Evergreen Rd Dearborn, MI 48128 (313) 593-5158 FAX (313) 593-4937 ========================================================================== Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 09:29:33 -0600 From: Charles Sundin Subject: CES: Re: T.O.: A Question about Video Downloads from Tom O'Haver Tom, It seems to be more than that. I downloaded a "rm" file from Jimmy Reeeves so I would have something to experiment with. I can play that on my desk machine but not the "rm" files from Oliver. Charles Charles Sundin University of Wisconsin-Platteville sundin@uwplatt.edu >From: "Tom O'Haver" >Go to http://chemistry.csudh.edu/oliver/video/ and >right-click on one of the ".rm" files, then select "Save >link as"....This will download the rm file to your >local hard disk. However, when I try to play those files, >using free RealPlayer G2, all I get is a black screen - on >video or audio. Perhaps these files were meant to be >played in streaming mode from a RealPlayer server, not >directly from a local disk. ========================================================================== Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 10:32:36 -0500 From: Oliver Seely Subject: Re: CES re OS: A question about video downloads At 03:22 PM 2/18/99 -0600, Charles wrote: >I have tried numerous things but to no avail. Have you tried to FTP the files. Does your campus allow FTP into your server? That being the case, what we'll probably do sometime in the next couple of months is to make the individual .rm files available the way I do a variety of other binary files: offer an index in which downloads are allowed by holding down a shift key and clicking the mouse with the cursor on the link. Then the user can indicate which subdirectory is to get the file. Oliver ========================================================================== Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 10:39:33 -0500 From: Oliver Seely Subject: Use of Power Point I'm forwarding a message from Paul Zitzewitz who offers an important contribution on the use of Power Point as a hybrid delivery of demonstrations materials along with text and video. Oliver ***** I am a physicist who has used the Web with my large-enrollment courses primarily for communication (announcements, distribution of grades, problem hints and answers, old exams, etc.) and to distribute assignments (web-based homework problems, extra-credit puzzles etc.) that are completed on-line and submitted via forms. http://curie.umd.umich.edu/Phys/classes/p150/ One method I have seen that is intermediate between the text + still images is RealAudio along with a PowerPoint slide show. It had "beeps" in the audio track that was the signal to advance to the next slide. I would guess that this could be automated. It's a lower-bandwidth solution to transmit high-quality images. It's clear to me that RealVideo has a long way to go, even if you have a cable modem at home as I do. Paul Zitzewitz Professor of Physics Department of Natural Sciences University of Michigan-Dearborn Dearborn MI 48128 ========================================================================== Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 10:53:46 -0500 From: Oliver Seely Subject: Re: T.O.: A Question about Video Downloads from Tom O'Haver Most interesting. When I downloaded the .rm file cryst1.rm from the location http://chemistry.csudh.edu/oliver/video/ and then brought up Real Player Plus G2, accessed the file and tried to play it I got the blank screen described by Tom O'Haver, but when I brought up the "same" .rm file which I had stored as a backup after having created it with the Real Media Encoder, it played perfectly. Clearly the file is being downloaded in a way that makes it unviewable, but not unplayable because the slider dutifully makes its way across the screen. Windows Explorer shows the downloaded file to be 347 kBytes and the one I saved from Real Media Encoder to be 346 kBytes. Anyone have a suggestion on this? Oliver ========================================================================== Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 11:37:36 -0600 From: "Salvador G. Medina" Subject: SGM CES re OS: A question about video downloads Dear=DD=DDOliver, I think that maybe a solution is to compress the archives into .zip .bin =2Etag , with the file "hidden" (In Mac you can see it so it's easy to put them in a folder) and then put the compressed archive as the reference on your page, so if someone want to copy, could download it. The other option is to transfer it as QuickTime video and then you have no troubles anymore. Regards, Salvador. >It is the .rm file which actually has the video. What method is used to >download >a file "hidden" by one step? Thanks. > >Oliver __ || / \ Salvador G. Medina / FQ \ adan@servidor.unam.mx / UNAM \ Facultad de Quimica, UNAM (________) =95 ***This message was printed with recycled electrons*** =20 ========================================================================== Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 12:03:32 -0600 From: "Salvador G. Medina" Subject: SGM Re: BT: stills versus video Brian, If you need to explain things in order to see every intant (fractions of a second, remember video have 30 squares per second), then you should use video, if you can explain a phenomena with just a few steps use still images. I don't remember now in wish book of the Time-Life series, there is a serie of 3 photograps where they explain the efect of freezing water and the power it have. The first you see they put water in an iron vessel, the second that is freezing sorrounded with ice and on the third you see the explotion of the vessel. You don't need more visual information to understand what happened. In other words the only justification to use video is that you need all the visual information it gives. Regards, Salvador. PS At my Faculty we want to buy some equipment for taken still pictures and video (if necesary) to incorpore videos and images to our web pages. Actually we digitize and the results are Aughhh! a ugliness. People that sell equipment want to do just that (Mexico still belong to the 3rd world). Can you please give us some tips on hardware and software? >Oliver, >In what cases do you think a video is much more valuable than a tutorial >with text and still images? A sequence of text and still images can convey >a lot, is much quicker to produce, and has the advantage that it can be >printed. >Brian __ || / \ Salvador G. Medina / FQ \ adan@servidor.unam.mx / UNAM \ Facultad de Quimica, UNAM (________) =95 ***This message was printed with recycled electrons*** =20 ========================================================================== Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 17:14:51 EST From: Donald Rosenthal Subject: DR: Jerry Jacobsen's Web Links On Tuesday, February 16 Jerry Jacobsen sent a message (CONFCHEM 99-00036) entitled "reinvention of the wheel". In the message he indicates that he has established a website: http://jchemed.chem.wisc.edu/JCESoft/CCA/confer.htm The site contains links to Chemistry Comes Alive materials available on video disk and videotape from the Journal of Chemical Education - Software. The Chemistry Come Alive materials contains video and text information on the Buret, Vapor Pressure and Crystallization of Sodium Acetate - topics covered in Trial Session Demos 1 to 3. I've examined these videos and I must say they are very professional. I would urge participants to look at them. Also, Jerry Jacobsen has provided access to video segments on "Creating Chemistry Videos". These are useful to anyone contemplating development of video/audio materials. Jerry also includes information on "Sharing a Classroom Tradition" a description of "Establishing New Traditions: Revitalizing the Chemistry Curriculum" a Chemistry Reform project funded by NSF. This contains several videos. Last, but not least, a comparison of Media Streaming Technologies. (http://emt.doit.wisc.edu/streamcompare/). This has information and plug-ins for Real Media G2, Quick Time 3.0, Emblaze and Netshow 3.0. Video and audio materials are provided with 28.8 kbps, 56.6 kbps and 150 kbps band widths and evaluation information. This should be of use to many of us. Thank you Jerry, for your contribution! Don Rosenthal ========================================================================== Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 17:00:03 -0600 From: "Nancy S. Gettys" Subject: Re: T.O.: A Question about Video Downloads from Tom O'Haver >Most interesting. When I downloaded the .rm file cryst1.rm from the location > >http://chemistry.csudh.edu/oliver/video/ > >and then brought up Real Player Plus G2, accessed the file and tried to >play it >I got the blank screen described by Tom O'Haver, but when I brought up the >"same" >.rm file which I had stored as a backup after having created it with the >Real Media >Encoder, it played perfectly. Clearly the file is being downloaded in a >way that makes >it unviewable, but not unplayable because the slider dutifully makes its >way across >the screen. Windows Explorer shows the downloaded file to be 347 kBytes >and the >one I saved from Real Media Encoder to be 346 kBytes. Anyone have a >suggestion on this? > >Oliver I just tried downloading the Real Video movies, and was sucessful with supersat.ram, vaporpre.ram, and cryst1.rm using "Save This Link As...". I was using Netscape Navigator 4.5 on a Power Macintosh G3. All three downloaded files play perfectly with Real Player 5.0 (free version). Nancy ********************************************** Nancy S. Gettys Technical Editor, JCE Software University of Wisconsin-Madison 209 North Brooks Street Madison, WI 53715-1116 gettys@chem.wisc.edu Phone: 800-991-5534, FAX: 608-262-7145 http://jchemed.chem.wisc.edu/JCESoft/ ********************************************** ========================================================================== Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 21:17:46 -0600 From: Oliver Seely Subject: Re: T.O.: A Question about Video Downloads from Tom O'Haver At 05:00 PM 2/19/99 -0600, Nancy wrote: >I just tried downloading the Real Video movies, and was sucessful with >supersat.ram, vaporpre.ram, and cryst1.rm using "Save This Link As...". I >was using Netscape Navigator 4.5 on a Power Macintosh G3. All three >downloaded files play perfectly with Real Player 5.0 (free version). Thanks Nancy. At your urging here I downloaded the same files this evening using WS_FTP95 LE and played them successfully with Real Media Plus G2. Evidently the "shift-click" method using Netscape causes problems in some cases. Speaking only for myself, I have lots to learn about this new technology. Oliver ========================================================================== Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 21:34:08 -0600 From: Oliver Seely Subject: Re: DR: Jerry Jacobsen's Web Links Thanks, Don, I've added the link showing a comparison between streaming video technologies (http://chemistry.csudh.edu/oliver/intro.htm) and corrected a caption on the JCES site with the demos similar to the ones in this conference. I had problems with the vapor pressure "movie". It gave me a blank screen (but I did receive the audio) and was nowhere to be found when I tried to play it off-line. Oliver ========================================================================== Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 22:41:13 -0600 From: Oliver Seely Subject: Re: SGM Re: BT: stills versus video Earlier Brian wrote: =20 >In what cases do you think a video is much more valuable than a tutorial >with text and still images? A sequence of text and still images can convey >a lot, is much quicker to produce, and has the advantage that it can be >printed. I'm not sure if I gave an adequate answer to this one. We've had our departmental digital camera now for just over two months. Moreover, video encoding software is within our budget and we've just begun to use it. I'll be able better to answer the question above after I've worked through more of the demonstrations I did for the students at Dominguez High School four years ago. My first impression is that where seeing the motions involved in a technique is considered to be important, video would be better than stills. Where color or form (precipitates, indicators, lab setups) is that which ought to be observed, stills might suffice. Emotional surprise and spontaneity can be conveyed only with video and audio in my opinion. When I said, "Look! Look! The crystals are beginning to form," that was no act. I was concentrating on three other things at that instant and a seed crystal evidently started things going. It took me a second or so to realize that there was a reaction in progress. As I recall, that particular crystallization was the third time I carried it out that day. My cameraman Jos=E9 was ready for what was now familiar process and he first showed the crystals approaching the bulb and then the scale, just at the right moment before and during the time that the crystals reached the bulb. Of course it isn't always necessary (or desirable) to convey one's happy surprise over a simple observation, but there is no substitute for video when that is one's objective. I have another clip which I particularly like in which I was able to achieve that delicate state between the species Cu(2+) and Cu(NH3)4(2+), a translucent suspension of Cu(OH)2. I had passed through the point three times, alternatively with NH3(aq) and H2SO4, missing it each time. Finally I got it and the translucence developed slowly and the tone of my voice conveyed the unmistakable excitement of discovery. You can't convey that excitement with stills. I'll put something together using that one in a month or so. Brian's point is of paramount importance in any case. Text and stills can be cranked out quickly and in my opinion those suffice completely for many descriptions of chemical processes. Video can be added later if need be. Oliver ========================================================================== Date: Sat, 20 Feb 1999 10:27:17 -0500 From: "Robert D. Allendoerfer" Subject: Re: Downloading Oliver's cryst1.rm Oliver's cryst1.rm file downloads and plays just fine here in Buffalo over a modem connected at 38kB. The way we do it is to open Real Player G2 by itself and under "open location" type in the whole URL. ie http://chemistry.csudh.edu/oliver/video/cryst1.rm and after a few seconds it just begins to play. The G2 version is 6.0.3.128. Since G2 saves the last few URL's, there is no need to save anything or even bookmark it. If we want it again, we just point and click and it comes again by the "magic of the internet" from California. -- Robert D. Allendoerfer Department of Chemistry SUNY University at Buffalo ========================================================================== Date: Sat, 20 Feb 1999 09:52:38 -0600 From: Oliver Seely Subject: Re: Downloading .rm files Robert D. Allendoerfer reports to me that the G2 version of Real Player allows one to open a location and to play an .rm file directly. I just tried it at my location http://chemistry.csudh.edu/oliver/video/cryst1.rm and it works perfectly. But after the file plays it is nowhere to be found. Such files often can be found in my "cache" subdirectory, but not this one. Does anyone know if Real Player has an option to save an .rm file which is playing? Oliver ========================================================================== Date: Sat, 20 Feb 1999 13:17:22 -0600 From: Charles Sundin Subject: CES on OS on RA Re: Downloading .rm files My understanding is that once it is played in RealPlayer, it is thrown away (for real). That way, you could watch a program all day and never fill up memory. Charles Charles Sundin, UW-Platteville >Robert D. Allendoerfer reports to me that the G2 version of Real Player >allows one to open a location and to play an .rm file directly. I just tried >it at my location > >http://chemistry.csudh.edu/oliver/video/cryst1.rm > >and it works perfectly. But after the file plays it is nowhere to be >found. Such files >often can be found in my "cache" subdirectory, but not this one. Does >anyone know >if Real Player has an option to save an .rm file which is playing? > >Oliver ========================================================================== Date: Sat, 20 Feb 1999 16:59:30 EST From: Donald Rosenthal Subject: DR: Jacobsen's Web Links and Another URL Oliver Seely wrote: > Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 21:34:08 -0600 > From: Oliver Seely > Subject: Re: DR: Jerry Jacobsen's Web Links > I had problems with the vapor pressure "movie". It gave me a blank screen > (but I did receive the audio) and was nowhere to be found when I tried to I viewed all of Jerry Jacobsen's demos using Quick Time and a MAC and had no difficulties. When I looked at "Creating Chemistry Videos" the system crashed towards the end of video 3. HAS ANYONE ELSE HAD PROBLEMS WITH JACOBSEN'S WEB LINKS. Another site worth looking at is: http://pocahontus.doit.wisc.edu/ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Donald Rosenthal ROSEN1@CLVM.CLARKSON.EDU Department of Chemistry Clarkson University Potsdam NY 13699-5810 ========================================================================== Date: Sat, 20 Feb 1999 17:30:25 -0500 From: Scott Goode Subject: Re: SG.: A Question about Video Downloads To add some more fuel... When I save vaporpre.rm from Oliver's site to my local drive, my results depend on the browser I use. Netscape Communicator 4.5 Download does not play properly Netscape Navigator 3.0 Download does not play properly Internet Explorer 4.0 Download plays properly The files downloaded by Netscape are 513,462 bytes. The IE file is 511,526 bytes. Yet more evidence that Less is More. Oliver's files play perfectly in the streaming mode. I use RealPlayer G2 and operate on a PC platform. Although I have no evidence, I wonder if the successful Netscape downloads come from Mac users. --- Scott R. Goode Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry University of South Carolina Columbia SC 29208 Voice: 803-777-2601 Fax: 803-777-9521 Email: Goode@sc.edu Home page: http://www.chem.sc.edu/goode/ ========================================================================== Date: Sat, 20 Feb 1999 16:32:08 -0600 From: Charles Sundin Subject: CES Re: DR: Jacobsen's Web Links and Another URL Don, I don't know if mine crashed since I have QT 2 on my machine so that I can view the actual CD (just found a neat demo on "Ring Strain" (pinene and iodine vs. cyclohexene and iodine) that I can use in organic). The QT slider went all the way across at normal speed. I tried the method suggested in the footnote and that did not work either. Charles Charles Sundin, UW-Platteville sundin@uwplatt.edu >I viewed all of Jerry Jacobsen's demos using Quick Time and a MAC and >had no difficulties. > >When I looked at "Creating Chemistry Videos" the system crashed towards >the end of video 3. > >HAS ANYONE ELSE HAD PROBLEMS WITH JACOBSEN'S WEB LINKS. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >Donald Rosenthal >ROSEN1@CLVM.CLARKSON.EDU ========================================================================== Date: Sat, 20 Feb 1999 18:53:55 -0500 From: Brian Pankuch Subject: Re: SG.: A Question about Video Downloads I use a Mac with OS 8.5.1. It took me 3 tries to download the last video. Oliver thinks it was due to his server going down. The video played fine a Quicktime movie, but the resolution was poor. Brian Scott Goode wrote: > To add some more fuel... > > When I save vaporpre.rm from Oliver's site to my local > drive, my results depend on the browser I use. > > Netscape Communicator 4.5 Download does not play properly > Netscape Navigator 3.0 Download does not play properly > Internet Explorer 4.0 Download plays properly > > The files downloaded by Netscape are 513,462 bytes. The IE > file is 511,526 bytes. Yet more evidence that Less is More. > > Oliver's files play perfectly in the streaming mode. > > I use RealPlayer G2 and operate on a PC platform. Although > I have no evidence, I wonder if the successful Netscape > downloads come from Mac users. > > --- > Scott R. Goode > Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry > University of South Carolina > Columbia SC 29208 > Voice: 803-777-2601 Fax: 803-777-9521 > Email: Goode@sc.edu > Home page: http://www.chem.sc.edu/goode/ ========================================================================== Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1999 10:27:37 -0600 From: Oliver Seely Subject: Hotlinks update The collection of hotlinks (to various sites with demonstrations, bibliographies of demonstrations, instructions for demonstrations and additional links) which have appeared individually in this conference have been expanded to include a total of 12. The Brigham Young University address now works properly thanks to Don Rosenthal who caught the typo in the link. The collection of hotlinks may be found at http://chemistry.csudh.edu/oliver/intro.htm Oliver ========================================================================== Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1999 13:43:43 -0600 From: Oliver Seely Subject: One hot link to go away. Of the 12 hotlinks contributed by participants and listed on the introductory page http://chemistry.csudh.edu/oliver/intro.htm, I am advised that one of them is due to go away after this Trial Session. That link is #4, at http://jchemed.chem.wisc.edu/JCESoft/Issues/Series_SP/SP18/abs-sp18.html by Jerrold J. Jacobsen and John W. Moore Oliver ========================================================================== Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1999 13:47:23 -0600 From: Oliver Seely Subject: Announcement forthcoming on final discussion. The discussion on Demonstration 3, Spontaneous crystallization of sodium acetate from a supersaturated aqueous solution will continue until 12:00 UT Monday, 21 February. At that time the discussion on the short paper The Preparation of Demonstration Materials for the 2001 Session will begin. A longer announcement on the beginning of that discussion will be posted later today. Oliver ========================================================================== Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1999 22:33:19 -0600 From: Oliver Seely Subject: Chemical Demonstrations: Discussion of paper on the preparation of demonstration materials. --=====================_3602208==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Lecture Demonstrations in Chemistry on the World Wide Web A Trial Session, by Oliver Seely, CSU Dominguez Hills, oliver@dhvx20.csudh.edu and George Wiger, gwiger@dhvx20.csudh.edu Web site URL: http://www.chem.vt.edu/confchem/1999trial/ At this writing, Discussion 3 on the Crystallization of sodium acetate from a supesaturated aqueous solution is due to end in less than six hours. Our final discussion will deal with subjects covered in the paper The Preparation of Demonstration Materials for the 2001 Session, the route to which may be found in the link shown above or directly at http://chemistry.csudh.edu/oliver/howto.htm. Discussion of this paper will begin at 12:00 Greenwich Mean Time or Universal Coordinated Time (UTC), Monday, 22 February (4am PST, 7am EST). The paper covers the following topics: Justification for chemical demonstrations Sourcebooks for demonstrations Capabilities of the World Wide Web for chemical demonstrations Material currently available on the Web Demonstrations needed Any which are unavailable to students and/or teacher Those which produce fires and explosions Those which produce noxious fumes Those which require inordinate amounts of time for preparation Those which require equipment which cannot be brought into the classroom Objectives of the upcoming conference in 2001 Methods used for preparing still images and video files Linking the files to a Web page Your participation in discussions on any of these topics is welcomed. The video clips for the two demonstrations just discussed were extracted from tapes prepared during two-way video class sessions using a moderately well equipped distance education studio. That represents just one of several ways a video clip might be prepared. I would welcome discussions on other methods being considered by participants. Participants might want to consider how videos are to be used by instructors at other institutions, the pros and cons of preparing a video recording in the presence of live students or conversely in an empty classroom, and if before live students how those students might be engaged by the instructor. Finally, I shall welcome all comments and suggestions which participant consider to be of importance in developing a successful program in 2001. An evaluation questionnaire will be posted later in the week. Oliver --=====================_3602208==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Lecture Demonstrations in Chemistry on the World Wide Web
A Trial Session, by Oliver Seely, CSU Dominguez Hills, oliver@dhvx20.csudh.edu
and George Wiger, gwiger@dhvx20.csudh.edu
Web site URL: http://www.chem.vt.edu/confchem/1999trial/

At this writing, Discussion 3 on the Crystallization of sodium acetate from a supesaturated aqueous solution is due to end in less than six hours.

Our final discussion will deal with subjects covered in the paper The Preparation of Demonstration Materials for the 2001 Session, the route to which may be found in the link shown above or directly at http://chemistry.csudh.edu/oliver/howto.htm.

Discussion of this paper will begin at 12:00 Greenwich Mean Time or Universal
Coordinated Time (UTC), Monday, 22 February (4am PST, 7am EST).  The paper covers the following topics:

Justification for chemical demonstrations
Sourcebooks for demonstrations
Capabilities of the World Wide Web for chemical demonstrations
Material currently available on the Web
Demonstrations needed
        Any which are unavailable to students and/or teacher
        Those which produce fires and explosions
        Those which produce noxious fumes
        Those which require inordinate amounts of time for preparation
        Those which require equipment which cannot be brought into the classroom
Objectives of the upcoming conference in 2001
Methods used for preparing still images and video files
Linking the files to a Web page

Your participation in discussions on any of these topics is welcomed.  The video clips for the two demonstrations just discussed were extracted from tapes prepared during two-way video class sessions using a moderately well equipped distance education studio.   That represents just one of several ways a video clip might be prepared.  I would welcome discussions on other methods being considered by participants. 

Participants might want to consider how videos are to be used by instructors at other institutions, the pros and cons of preparing a video recording in the presence of live students or conversely in an empty classroom, and if before live students how those students might be engaged by the instructor.

Finally, I shall welcome all comments and suggestions which participant consider to be of importance in developing a successful program in 2001.  An evaluation questionnaire will be posted later in the week.

Oliver

--=====================_3602208==_.ALT-- ========================================================================== Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 09:45:11 -0500 From: William Pfeiffer Subject: Re: SG.: A Question about Video Downloads Scott Goode wrote: > > To add some more fuel... > (deletions) > I use RealPlayer G2 and operate on a PC platform. Although > I have no evidence, I wonder if the successful Netscape > downloads come from Mac users. > (In case you're taking a survey...) No. I was able to view the demos using Netscape 4.?? on a PC Bill -- William F. Pfeiffer, Ph.D. Utica College of Syracuse University Professor of Chemistry 1600 Burrstone Road (315) 792-3071 Utica, NY 13502-4892 wpfeiffer@utica.ucsu.edu FAX: (315) 792-3292 ========================================================================== Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 12:23:25 EST From: Donald Rosenthal Subject: DR: Multimedia Streaming Examples MULTIMEDIA STREAMING EXAMPLES ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ One of the hot links added to the INTRODUCTION (intro.htm) and the "The Preparation of Demonstration Materials for the 2001 Session" is link 12 - http://pocahontus.doit.wisc.edu/ I just looked at and heartily recommend the "Introduction to Media Streaming" by Les Howles. It provides very useful information in an easily understandable form. Also, I found the "Teaching and Learning with Technology" Showcase interesting. ========================================================================== Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 14:05:05 -0500 From: Oliver Seely Subject: Final discussion starts officially tomorrow. The final discussion, on the Preparation of Materials for the 2001 Session, officially starts tomorrow at 12:00 UT. I inadvertently sent out a premature announcement that it would start today. I shall rectify that this evening when I post the corrected announcement. Oliver ========================================================================== Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 14:10:03 -0500 From: Oliver Seely Subject: Re: SGM CES re OS: A question about video downloads At 11:37 AM 2/19/99 -0600, Salvador wrote: >I think that maybe a solution is to compress the archives into .zip .bin >with the file "hidden" (In Mac you can see it so it's easy to put >them in a folder) and then put the compressed archive as the reference on >your page, so if someone want to copy, could download it. That may well be the way to go. I shall be trying a few things like that after the conference before I settle on one which seems to be the most practical for the user. Thanks, Salvador. Oliver ========================================================================== Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 14:46:28 EST From: Donald Rosenthal Subject: DR: Bomb Calorimetry Experiment THE OXYGEN BOMB CALORIMETER ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ One of the hot links provided in Oliver Seely's Introduction and paper is an animation developed by Gary Bertrand. 8. University of Missouri at Rolla, Oxygen Bomb Calorimeter Demonstration http://www.umr.edu/~gbert/animation.html I liked the animation very much. Would photographs of the actual apparatus add something to this presentation? I assume the animation is supplemented with other materials and activities. Perhaps Gary could explain how the animation is used. Do the students perform such an experiment in the laboratory? Are there handouts? Do students submit some sort of laboratory report? ========================================================================== Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 17:52:31 -0500 From: Robley Light Subject: Re: T.O.: A Question about Video Downloads from Tom O'Haver My experience is similar. I added the .rm extension to my netscape (4.5) preferences to be played by the realplayer G2. Even after closing and opening Netscape and then rebooting the computer, when I click on the cryst1.rm file I get a page of characters (beginning:.RMF=F5_=02=E3/X=7F=07=9F=D1=F7M=AA=86=DC=D3Uh9=B9=01=93PP=98=A8= S=BA=D2V#=90] and continuing on.) If I either save this file, or use the shift key when I click on the file= , it gets saved as cryst1.rm. When I try to open it locally with the realplayer, I get a black screen but the slider does move and the counter= at the bottom indicates something is happening. If I go directly to the URL by entering it in the "open location" of the real player, then it downloads and plays correctly. Perhaps I have it wrong in the Netscape preferences? What should I enter= as MIME type? Robley Light ************************************************************* Robley J. Light Professor of Chemistry Department of Chemistry Phone: (850) 644-3844 Florida State University Email: rlight@chem.fsu.edu Tallahassee, FL 32306-4390 Fax: (850) 644-8281 Home Page: http://www.sb.fsu.edu/~rlight > -----Original Message----- > From: Listserv Forwarder [mailto:VMUTIL@CLVM]On Behalf Of Oliver Seely > Sent: Friday, February 19, 1999 10:54 AM > To: rlight@CHEMMAIL.CHEM.FSU.EDU > Subject: Re: T.O.: A Question about Video Downloads from Tom O'Haver > > Most interesting. When I downloaded the .rm file cryst1.rm from > the location > http://chemistry.csudh.edu/oliver/video/ and then brought up Real Player Plus G2, accessed the file and tried to play it I got the blank screen described by Tom O'Haver, but when I brought up the "same" .rm file which I had stored as a backup after having created it with the Real Media Encoder, it played perfectly. Clearly the file is being downloaded in a way that makes it unviewable, but not unplayable because the slider dutifully makes its way across the screen. Windows Explorer shows the downloaded file to be 347 kBytes and the one I saved from Real Media Encoder to be 346 kBytes. Anyone have a suggestion on this? Oliver ========================================================================== Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 20:58:06 -0600 From: "Gary L. Bertrand" Subject: GLB:Re: DR: Bomb Calorimetry Experiment >THE OXYGEN BOMB CALORIMETER >^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >Would photographs of the actual apparatus add something to this presentation? > >I assume the animation is supplemented with other materials and activities. > >Perhaps Gary could explain how the animation is used. > >Do the students perform such an experiment in the laboratory? > >Are there handouts? > >Do students submit some sort of laboratory report? The Oxygen Bomb Calorimetry experiment is performed in the Physical Chemistry Laboratory (Chem 242) at UMR by approximately 80 Chem and ChemEng students each year. The list of experiments can be accessed from my home page http://www.umr.edu/~gbert through the link "Experiments" under "Chem 242". This gives a brief description of the experiments with links to PDF files (which are essentially the lab manual - an evolving document) and other information such as datasheets, annotated spreadsheets, and animations. The animations are there to enhance the "lab manual". Note: The "Tutorials/Simulations" link on the Home Page is only usable by Macs, and requires the Roadster plug-in, which is downloadable through a link provided. The Windows plug-in is expected "soon", but I'm not holding my breath. None of the simulations there are currently being used in PChem Lab (the Iodine Clock reactions have been used in the past), but a couple are used in conjunction with GenChem Lab, and several are used as individualized assignments in the PChem lecture course. There are simulations to accompany four of the experiments, the Bomb Calorimeter is one of these. The general idea is to get the students involved before coming to lab, so that the laboratory experience is more meaningful. I originally thought that the mere availability of a simulation would encourage students to "experiment" with it before coming to lab. WRONG! This was just one more example of Bertrand's Adage - "No credit, forget it!". Now (beginning this semester) all of the simulations have "unknowns", and each student is assigned a code number which determines his/her unknown in the simulation. Students must submit the correct result for their "unknown" before they are allowed to actually perform the experiment (most do this via email the night before the lab). We've completed the first set of four experiments and have only lost 2 of 35 students (less than half of the normal drop rate). My general impression is that students have a more positive attitude toward the lab than in the past three semesters, but that could be due to a number of factors. I hope to make a presentation on these observations at a future ChemConf. Another use of technology in the PChem Lab is the sharing of data through the "Results" link on the Web Page. Each group must enter their experimental data into a spreadsheet and save it to this file before the TA initials their Lab Notebook for the day. Then they must calculate their results and those of another group (usually with different materials), and comment on both. Some of my simulations have been used in lieu of laboratories, here and elsewhere. There are pro's and con's for this useage. My personal belief is that there is no substitute for real laboratory experience, but proper use of simulations can effectively broaden and enhance that experience in many cases. I also feel that a simulated experience is better than no experience at all. So far, the simulations used in PChem Lab are only available through on-campus servers (both Mac and Windows platforms), and they must be downloaded to the hard drive of the computer in order to run them. I started working with the animated GIFs as a Web-active, platform-independent supplement to the Lab Manual. They are fairly easy to build, and download relatively quickly compared to other methods. I regard them as one more tool in our bag of teaching devices - not necessarily any better or worse than other tools, but different. The videos that George and Oliver are developing are wonderful, and I will certainly make use of them. However, I would be lost trying to create in that medium. They are showing reality, and that is very useful. But as an experimental physical chemist, I delight in modeling reality, and that's what simulation is all about. I sense an excitement in this ChemConf which I have not felt since the first one. Congratulations to Don and to the presenters. Gary Gary L. Bertrand gbert@umr.edu www.umr.edu/~gbert Dept. of Chem. (573) 341-4441 Fax(573) 341-6033 University of Missouri-Rolla Rolla, MO 65409-0010 =========================================== "The practice of Chemical Thermodynamics is simply a matter of finding the proper wrench to pound on the right screw." ========================================================================== Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 22:03:42 -0600 From: Oliver Seely Subject: Re: some comments about downloading .rm files. At 05:52 PM 2/22/99 -0500, Robley Light wrote: >My experience is similar. I added the .rm extension to my netscape (4.5) >preferences to be played by the realplayer G2. Even after closing and >opening Netscape and then rebooting the computer, when I click on the >cryst1.rm file I get a page of characters. . . . I had a little time this evening to work on the problem. I haven't solved it yet, but I discovered that my copy of Microsoft Internet Explorer will download the .rm file, (using a shift/click) store it in /windows/temporary internet files/ with the same name and allow me to move it to another directory and rename it. It then plays back without a problem using Real Player. The other thing is that in the Frequently Asked Questions at Netscape I received the following advice: If . . . your downloaded files are *still* coming across garbled, then it's possible that the web server itself isn't configured to recognize that file type properly, and by default it's telling your browser "this is an ASCII text file", which is causing the file to download in ASCII mode and get chewed on as explained above. In this case, contact the administrators of the web server you're connected to and make sure they're aware of this problem I'm not sure that this is our problem, but it certainly is a possibility. I'll check into it tomorrow. I also sent an e-mail message to the folks at Real Media and asked if there is a way to store an incoming .rm file using their player. Oliver ========================================================================== Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 22:05:14 -0600 From: Oliver Seely Subject: Chemical Demonstrations: Discussion of paper on the preparation of demonstration materials. Lecture Demonstrations in Chemistry on the World Wide Web
A Trial Session, by Oliver Seely, CSU Dominguez Hills, oliver@dhvx20.csudh.edu
and George Wiger, gwiger@dhvx20.csudh.edu
Web site URL: http://www.chem.vt.edu/confchem/1999trial/

At this writing, Discussion 3 on the Crystallization of sodium acetate from a supesaturated aqueous solution is due to end in less than six hours.

Our final discussion will deal with subjects covered in the paper The Preparation of Demonstration Materials for the 2001 Session, the route to which may be found in the link shown above or directly at http://chemistry.csudh.edu/oliver/howto.htm.

Discussion of this paper will begin at 12:00 Greenwich Mean Time or Universal
Coordinated Time (UTC), Tuesday, 23 February (4am PST, 7am EST).  The paper covers the following topics:

Justification for chemical demonstrations
Sourcebooks for demonstrations
Capabilities of the World Wide Web for chemical demonstrations
Material currently available on the Web
Demonstrations needed
        Any which are unavailable to students and/or teacher
        Those which produce fires and explosions
        Those which produce noxious fumes
        Those which require inordinate amounts of time for preparation
        Those which require equipment which cannot be brought into the classroom
Objectives of the upcoming conference in 2001
Methods used for preparing still images and video files
Linking the files to a Web page

Your participation in discussions on any of these topics is welcomed.  The video clips for the two demonstrations just discussed were extracted from tapes prepared during two-way video class sessions using a moderately well equipped distance education studio.   That represents just one of several ways a video clip might be prepared.  I would welcome discussions on other methods being considered by participants. 

Participants might want to consider how videos are to be used by instructors at other institutions, the pros and cons of preparing a video recording in the presence of live students or conversely in an empty classroom, and if before live students how those students might be engaged by the instructor.

Finally, I shall welcome all comments and suggestions which participants consider to be of importance in developing a successful program in 2001.  An evaluation questionnaire will be posted later in the week.

Oliver

========================================================================== Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 23:43:44 -0500 From: "Richard O. Pendarvis" Subject: Re: GLB:Re: DR: Bomb Calorimetry Experiment I have used Gary's bomb calorimeter simulation with my general chemistry one class. Although we do some classical calorimeter experiments (with styrofoam cups), it added a lot to my students understanding and provided them with experience which we could not afford on our budget. /* Richard */ #include - - ____ | | _ | | Organic Chemistry / \ |_| | | || CAI Programming / \ | | / \ || Pizza / \ / \ | | _||_ Star Trek (_________) (_____) |______| _/____\_ Doberman Pinschers --------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Richard Pendarvis, Ph.D. 3001 W. College Road | | Associate Professor of Chemistry Ocala, FL 32608 | | Central Florida Community College EMAIL: afn02809@afn.org | --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ========================================================================== Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 07:07:02 -0500 From: Brian Pankuch Subject: an interesting site with a VR movie Here is an interesting site with a VR movie within a VR movie of general not chemical interest http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Research-Review/Magazine/1998/als/ALS_QTVR.html Is anyone using this technology to explore inside molecules using models? Brian ========================================================================== Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 09:03:00 -0600 From: "Dr. David Ritter" Subject: Re: Chemical Demonstrations: Discussion of paper on the preparation of demonstration materials. Question: Does anyone else find this message hard to read? Am I doing something wrong? David Ritter At 10:05 PM 2/22/99 -0600, you wrote: > >Lecture Demonstrations in Chemistry on the World Wide >Web
>A Trial Session, by Oliver Seely, CSU Dominguez Hills, >oliver@dhvx20.csudh.edu
>and George Wiger, gwiger@dhvx20.csudh.edu
>Web site URL: > size=2>http://www.chem.vt.edu/confchem/1999trial/
>
>At this writing, Discussion 3 on the Crystallization of >sodium acetate from a supesaturated aqueous solution is due to end in >less than six hours.
>
>Our final discussion will deal with subjects covered in the paper The >Preparation of Demonstration Materials for the 2001 Session, the route to >which may be found in the link shown above or directly at > size=2>http://chemistry.csudh.edu/oliver/howto.htm.
>
>Discussion of this paper will begin at 12:00 Greenwich Mean Time or >Universal
>Coordinated Time (UTC), Tuesday, 23 February (4am PST, 7am EST).  >The paper covers the following topics:
>
>Justification for chemical demonstrations
>Sourcebooks for demonstrations
>Capabilities of the World Wide Web for chemical demonstrations
>Material currently available on the Web
>Demonstrations needed
>        Any which >are unavailable to students and/or teacher
>        Those >which produce fires and explosions
>        Those >which produce noxious fumes
>        Those >which require inordinate amounts of time for preparation
>        Those >which require equipment which cannot be brought into the classroom
>Objectives of the upcoming conference in 2001
>Methods used for preparing still images and video files
>Linking the files to a Web page
>
>Your participation in discussions on any of these topics is >welcomed.  The video clips for the two demonstrations just discussed >were extracted from tapes prepared during two-way video class sessions >using a moderately well equipped distance education studio.   >That represents just one of several ways a video clip might be >prepared.  I would welcome discussions on other methods being >considered by participants. 
>
>Participants might want to consider how videos are to >be used by instructors at other institutions, the pros and cons of >preparing a video recording in the presence of live students or >conversely in an empty classroom, and if before live students how those >students might be engaged by the instructor.
>
>Finally, I shall welcome all comments and suggestions which participants >consider to be of importance in developing a successful program in >2001.  An evaluation questionnaire will be posted later in the >week.
>
>Oliver
>
> > David Ritter Department of Chemistry Southeast Missouri State University Cape Girardeau, MO 63701 dritter@semovm.semo.edu ========================================================================== Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 11:01:01 -0500 From: Jimmy Reeves Subject: Re: Chemical Demonstrations: Discussion of paper on the preparationof demonstration materials. David et al, I think the reason this is hard to read for all of us who display our emails in "straight text" is that it appears to be written in HTML code. Some email clients, including Outlook Express by Microsoft, have the ability to display email in HTML format. If the raw code could be viewed by a browser, the control codes like "
" and that annoying " " would function as formatting commands and not show up in the email. Till we all have email configured to read HTML code, I suggest we refrain from posting materials in this format. Jimmy -----Original Message----- From: Dr. David Ritter To: reeves@uncwil.edu Date: Tuesday, February 23, 1999 10:12 AM Subject: Re: Chemical Demonstrations: Discussion of paper on the preparationof demonstration materials. >Question: >Does anyone else find this message hard to read? Am I doing something wrong? >David Ritter >At 10:05 PM 2/22/99 -0600, you wrote: >> >>Lecture Demonstrations in Chemistry on the World Wide >>Web
>>A Trial Session, by Oliver Seely, CSU Dominguez Hills, >>oliver@dhvx20.csudh.edu
>>and George Wiger, gwiger@dhvx20.csudh.edu
>>Web site URL: >>> size=2>http://www.chem.vt.edu/confchem/1999trial/
>>
>>At this writing, Discussion 3 on the Crystallization of >>sodium acetate from a supesaturated aqueous solution is due to end in >>less than six hours.
>>
>>Our final discussion will deal with subjects covered in the paper The >>Preparation of Demonstration Materials for the 2001 Session, the route to >>which may be found in the link shown above or directly at >>> size=2>http://chemistry.csudh.edu/oliver/howto.htm.
>>
>>Discussion of this paper will begin at 12:00 Greenwich Mean Time or >>Universal
>>Coordinated Time (UTC), Tuesday, 23 February (4am PST, 7am EST).  >>The paper covers the following topics:
>>
>>Justification for chemical demonstrations
>>Sourcebooks for demonstrations
>>Capabilities of the World Wide Web for chemical demonstrations
>>Material currently available on the Web
>>Demonstrations needed
>>        Any which >>are unavailable to students and/or teacher
>>        Those >>which produce fires and explosions
>>        Those >>which produce noxious fumes
>>        Those >>which require inordinate amounts of time for preparation
>>        Those >>which require equipment which cannot be brought into the classroom
>>Objectives of the upcoming conference in 2001
>>Methods used for preparing still images and video files
>>Linking the files to a Web page
>>
>>Your participation in discussions on any of these topics is >>welcomed.  The video clips for the two demonstrations just discussed >>were extracted from tapes prepared during two-way video class sessions >>using a moderately well equipped distance education studio.   >>That represents just one of several ways a video clip might be >>prepared.  I would welcome discussions on other methods being >>considered by participants. 
>>
>>Participants might want to consider how videos are to >>be used by instructors at other institutions, the pros and cons of >>preparing a video recording in the presence of live students or >>conversely in an empty classroom, and if before live students how those >>students might be engaged by the instructor.
>>
>>Finally, I shall welcome all comments and suggestions which participants >>consider to be of importance in developing a successful program in >>2001.  An evaluation questionnaire will be posted later in the >>week.
>>
>>Oliver
>>
>> >> >David Ritter >Department of Chemistry >Southeast Missouri State University >Cape Girardeau, MO 63701 >dritter@semovm.semo.edu ========================================================================== Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 10:41:33 -0600 From: Charles Sundin Subject: CES on DR Re: Chemical Demonstrations: Discussion of paper on the preparation of demonstration materials. - Hard Read I believe this has to do with the MIME Type in which the message was written. It appears to be in HTML (Hypertext Markup Language) and could have been written using a WEB type mail package. I have a cousin who e-mails me with the same "mess" and my e-mail asks me if I want to Decode the message. If I do, it is in proper form, if I don't it's like Oliver's messsage. Charles Charles Sundin, UW-Platteville, sundin@uwplatt.edu >Question: >Does anyone else find this message hard to read? Am I doing something wrong? >David Ritter >At 10:05 PM 2/22/99 -0600, you wrote: >> >>Lecture Demonstrations in Chemistry on the World Wide >>Web
>>ich produce fires and explosions
>>        Those >>which produce noxious fumes
>>< >>Finally, I shall welcome all comments and suggestions which participants >>consider to be of importance in developing a successful program in >>2001.  An evaluation questionnaire will be posted later in the >>week.
>>
>>Oliver
>>
>> >> >David Ritter ========================================================================== Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 13:42:15 -0500 From: Robley Light Subject: Re: Chemical Demonstrations: Discussion of paper on the preparationof demonstration materials. There is more to it than that. I'm using Outlook 98 which can read messages formatted as HTML. Sometimes I get a message formatted correctly, sometimes one shows up like this. Could it have something to do with what either the SMTP or POP server is doing to the message? ************************************************************* Robley J. Light Professor of Chemistry Department of Chemistry Phone: (850) 644-3844 Florida State University Email: rlight@chem.fsu.edu Tallahassee, FL 32306-4390 Fax: (850) 644-8281 Home Page: http://www.sb.fsu.edu/~rlight > -----Original Message----- > From: Listserv Forwarder [mailto:LISTFWDR@CLVM]On Behalf Of Jimmy Reeves > Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 1999 11:01 AM > To: rlight@CHEMMAIL.CHEM.FSU.EDU > Subject: Re: Chemical Demonstrations: Discussion of paper on the > preparationof demonstration materials. > > > David et al, > I think the reason this is hard to read for all of us who display our > emails in "straight text" is that it appears to be written in HTML code. > Some email clients, including Outlook Express by Microsoft, have > the ability > to display email in HTML format. If the raw code could be viewed by a > browser, the control codes like "
" and that annoying " " would > function as formatting commands and not show up in the email. Till we all > have email configured to read HTML code, I suggest we refrain from posting > materials in this format. > Jimmy > -----Original Message----- > From: Dr. David Ritter > To: reeves@uncwil.edu > Date: Tuesday, February 23, 1999 10:12 AM > Subject: Re: Chemical Demonstrations: Discussion of paper on the > preparationof demonstration materials. > > > >Question: > >Does anyone else find this message hard to read? Am I doing something > wrong? > >David Ritter > >At 10:05 PM 2/22/99 -0600, you wrote: > >> > >>Lecture Demonstrations in Chemistry on the World Wide > >>Web
> >>A Trial Session, by Oliver Seely, CSU Dominguez Hills, > >>oliver@dhvx20.csudh.edu
> >>and George Wiger, gwiger@dhvx20.csudh.edu
> >>Web site URL: > >> eudora="autourl"> >> size=2>http://www.chem.vt.edu/confchem/1999trial/
> >>
> >>At this writing, Discussion 3 on the Crystallization of > >>sodium acetate from a supesaturated aqueous solution is due to end in > >>less than six hours.
> >>
> >>Our final discussion will deal with subjects covered in the paper The > >>Preparation of Demonstration Materials for the 2001 Session, > the route to > >>which may be found in the link shown above or directly at > >> eudora="autourl"> >> size=2>http://chemistry.csudh.edu/oliver/howto.htm size=2>.
> >>
> >>Discussion of this paper will begin at 12:00 Greenwich Mean Time or > >>Universal
> >>Coordinated Time (UTC), Tuesday, 23 February (4am PST, 7am EST).  > >>The paper covers the following topics:
> >>
> >>Justification for chemical demonstrations
> >>Sourcebooks for demonstrations
> >>Capabilities of the World Wide Web for chemical demonstrations
> >>Material currently available on the Web
> >>Demonstrations needed
> >>        Any which > >>are unavailable to students and/or teacher
> >>        Those > >>which produce fires and explosions
> >>        Those > >>which produce noxious fumes
> >>        Those > >>which require inordinate amounts of time for preparation
> >>        Those > >>which require equipment which cannot be brought into the classroom
> >>Objectives of the upcoming conference in 2001
> >>Methods used for preparing still images and video files
> >>Linking the files to a Web page
> >>
> >>Your participation in discussions on any of these topics is > >>welcomed.  The video clips for the two demonstrations just > discussed > >>were extracted from tapes prepared during two-way video class sessions > >>using a moderately well equipped distance education studio.   > >>That represents just one of several ways a video clip might be > >>prepared.  I would welcome discussions on other methods being > >>considered by participants. 
> >>
> >>Participants might want to consider how > videos are to > >>be used by instructors at other institutions, the pros and cons of > >>preparing a video recording in the presence of live students or > >>conversely in an empty classroom, and if before live students how those > >>students might be engaged by the instructor.
> >>
> >>Finally, I shall welcome all comments and suggestions which participants > >>consider to be of importance in developing a successful program in > >>2001.  An evaluation questionnaire will be posted later in the > >>week.
> >>
> >>Oliver
> >>
> >> > >> > >David Ritter > >Department of Chemistry > >Southeast Missouri State University > >Cape Girardeau, MO 63701 > >dritter@semovm.semo.edu > ========================================================================== Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 18:51:08 LCL From: Reed Howald Subject: Re: Chemical Demonstrations: Discussion of paper on the preparation of demonstration materials. At 10:05 PM 2/22/99 -0600, you wrote: > confchem list, I am more impressed with the still pictures posted on the demonstration web sites than by the video, and even two minutes of video still takes up a lot of space (and time if sent by modem). There are many methods now of digitizing pictures or video frames, and these can be extremely useful to all chemistry teachers if a wide assortment covering many experiments and demonstrations is available without paying large fees. I am happy to wait a few years for better connections, cheaper ways to write CDROM, and video compression before investing much time in sharing video clips. But right now we can easily share pictures in JPEG or other selected format. We can then make them available to our students on the web, on computer screens, with color printers, and with lecture room projection systems. Let's get this started and organized. Sincerely, Reed Howald Reed Howald Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry Montana State University Bozeman Bozeman, Montana, MT 59717 U.S.A. howald@montana.edu ========================================================================== Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 15:37:09 EST From: Donald Rosenthal Subject: DR: Revised Version of Message from Oliver Seely From: Oliver Seely Subject: Chemical Demonstrations: Discussion of paper on the preparation of demonstration materials. Lecture Demonstrations in Chemistry on the World Wide Web A Trial Session, by Oliver Seely, CSU Dominguez Hills, oliver@dhvx20.csudh.edu and George Wiger, gwiger@dhvx20.csudh.edu Web site URL: http://www.chem.vt.edu/confchem/1999trial Our final discussion will deal with subjects covered in the paper The Preparation of Demonstration Materials for the 2001 Session, the route to which may be found in the link shown above or directly at http://chemistry.csudh.edu/oliver/howto.htm Discussion of this paper will begin at 12:00 Greenwich Mean Time or Universal Coordinated Time (UTC), Tuesday, 23 February (4am PST, 7am EST).  The paper covers the following topics: 1. Justification for chemical demonstrations 2. Sourcebooks for demonstrations 3. Capabilities of the World Wide Web for chemical demonstrations Material currently available on the Web 4. Demonstrations needed a. Any which are unavailable to students and/or teacher b. Those which produce fires and explosions c. Those which produce noxious fumes d. Those which require inordinate amounts of time for preparation e. Those which require equipment which cannot be brought into the classroom 5. Objectives of the upcoming conference in 2001 6. Methods used for preparing still images and video files Linking the files to a Web page 7. Your participation in discussions on any of these topics is welcomed. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ The video clips for the two demonstrations just discussed were extracted from tapes prepared during two-way video class sessions using a moderately well equipped distance education studio. That represents just one of several ways a video clip might be prepared.  I would welcome discussions on other methods being considered by participants.  Participants might want to consider how videos are to be used by instructors at other institutions, the pros and cons of preparing a video recording in the presence of live students or conversely in an empty classroom, and if before live students how those students might be engaged by the instructor. Finally, I shall welcome all comments and suggestions which participants consider to be of importance in developing a successful program in 2001. An evaluation questionnaire will be reposted later in the week. Oliver ========================================================================== Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 15:28:10 -0800 From: Oliver Seely Subject: Re: DR: Revised Version of Message from Oliver Seely Many thanks Don for the reposting of my garbled message. My Eudora went on the fritz this morning and I had to reinstall it this afternoon. From now on all my messages will go as plain text. Oliver ========================================================================== Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 15:05:25 -0500 From: "Thomas C. O'Haver" Subject: Size of JPG images I have two questions related to the section the section "The Preparation of Still Images" 1. What does it mean to say the "Each image was prepared at a resolution of 100 dpi"? Dots per inch of what? A digital camera was used to capture the images in digital format directly - therefore no physical medium is involved, until the image is displayed on my screen. And clearly you can not know what I have my screen resolution set to. How would the image differ if it had been prepared at a resolution, say, of 200 dpi? 2. The images on the "Helpful hints on the use of a buret" page (http://155.135.31.26/oliver/buretuse.htm) are actually 640 X 512 pixels in dimension (as determined by downloading the images and inspecting them in a graphics editor), yet they are displayed smaller (200 X 250 pixels) on the Web page (using the HEIGHT and WIDTH tags, as mentioned in the paper). Why is this done in this way? If the images themselves were reduced to 200 X 250 pixels in a graphics editor, then displayed at their actual sizes, the page would look exactly the same, but the resulting image files would be much smaller and the page would load much faster. For an example, see bottom of http://www.inform.umd.edu/UMS+State/UMD-Projects/MCTP/Technology/image/size.html Tom -------------------------------------------------- Tom O'Haver Professor Emeritus Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry and Maryland Collaborative for Teacher Preparation The University of Maryland at College Park to2@umail.umd.edu http://www.wam.umd.edu/~toh ========================================================================== Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 18:43:19 -0500 From: Brian Pankuch Subject: Re: Chemical Demonstrations: Discussion of paper on thepreparation of demonstration materials. Hi, I posted the address for an interesting VR movie. Apparently it is to long for some mail software. THE ADDRESS WAS SENT CORRECT. IT IS http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Research-Review/Magazine/1998/als/ALS_Q TVR.html If it didn't work the first time look carefully at the address that transfers to your browser, i.e. , in the location line on Navigator. You will probably see that the letters VR.html have not transferred. Whatever letters have been deleted have to be typed in, then the address works. Part of the end Magazine/1998/als/ALS_QTVR.html was there but dropped as part of the address, it came through fine to me from my own mail system but not from the listserver?? Brian ========================================================================== Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 20:51:10 -0600 From: Oliver Seely Subject: Re: Size of JPG images At 03:05 PM 2/24/99 -0500, Tom O'Haver wrote: >1. What does it mean to say the "Each image was prepared at a >resolution of 100 dpi"? Dots per inch of what? Yes, dots per inch. > A digital camera was >used to capture the images in digital format directly - therefore no >physical medium is involved, until the image is displayed on my >screen. And clearly you can not know what I have my screen >resolution set to. How would the image differ if it had been >prepared at a resolution, say, of 200 dpi? That's an excellent question and one that I haven't fully answered yet to my satisfaction. Early in my experience of scanning photos for use on the Web, I tried scanning resolutions of 100, 300, 600 and 1200 dpi. I finally decided that for displays of "average" size (from 1/2 to full screen width), images prepared at a resolution of 100 dpi, that is 640 x 512 based upon a 6" x 5" photograph, sufficed admirably. I've simply kept that number in mind. The highest resolution of the Olympus camera offers approximately 3x linear resolution over 640 x 512, the lowest is 640 x 512. I can't remember the middle allowed resolution. I'm a bit at a disadvantage here because the camera and instruction manual are at the university and I'm at home. I'll make sure of my figures tomorrow. > >2. The images on the "Helpful hints on the use of a buret" page >(http://155.135.31.26/oliver/buretuse.htm) are actually 640 X 512 >pixels in dimension (as determined by downloading the images and >inspecting them in a graphics editor), yet they are displayed smaller >(200 X 250 pixels) on the Web page (using the HEIGHT and WIDTH tags, >as mentioned in the paper). Why is this done in this way? I chose the resolution first, as the lowest allowed by the camera, then formatted things on the Web. I didn't use a graphics program to adjust the resolution because we were a bit pressed for time. Had I done that, the image files would likely be smaller by a factor of 4. Formatting continues to be a problem because different browsers offer different amounts of free space for text between right-aligned and left-aligned images. I still haven't completely figured out how best to format things for all browsers. >If the >images themselves were reduced to 200 X 250 pixels in a graphics >editor, then displayed at their actual sizes, the page would look >exactly the same, but the resulting image files would be much smaller >and the page would load much faster. Right you are. It is all a matter of developing procedural steps which work and which allow users quickly to download the image files. Oliver ========================================================================== Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 07:09:02 -0500 From: "Thomas C. O'Haver" Subject: Formatting Web pages On Wed, 24 Feb 1999 20:51:10 -0600 Oliver Seely wrote: > Formatting continues to be a problem because > different > browsers offer different amounts of free space for text between > right-aligned and > left-aligned images. I still haven't completely figured out how best to > format things > for all browsers. It's even worst than that. Different users of the same browser can have the width of their browser window set differently or may have set a different default font for text display, all of which can effect the exact formatting of pages. To get around this, some Web authors utilize tables extensively or convert their materials into PDF format, for viewing with the Adobe Acrobat Reader. The downside is that both of these techniques tend to make pages load slower. In my opinion, however, the Web is more about delivering content than about formatting, so I tend not to worry too much about formatting, as long as the text and images are clear and the pages load quickly. Tom -------------------------------------------------- Tom O'Haver Professor Emeritus Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry and Maryland Collaborative for Teacher Preparation The University of Maryland at College Park to2@umail.umd.edu http://www.wam.umd.edu/~toh ========================================================================== Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 12:17:24 -0500 From: "Dr. Edward W. Vitz" Subject: Re: Hotlinks update Dear Oliver and CONFCHEM-- You may want to include links to the JCE Tested Demonstration Mission Statement and information for authors among your "demonstration hotlinks." Tested Demonstrations provides a great way for authors of novel demonstrations to disseminate their work. Information can be found at the JCE site or through http://www.kutztown.edu/~vitz/TD/TDhome.html which includes links to some other demonstration sites. Best, Ed PS: This is a PS because it may be "out of order"--I had no time to respond during the official "comments" time period. Apologies if someone else made these comments... Oliver-- The vapor presure demo was good, but I'd suggest the following: The fact that the "vp of ether is 20x that of water" as you state is not clear from the demo. Why not use mercury? In a classroom, many teachers can't, and maybe you wanted to use water so that they could copy the demo for a live presentation (a great idea!). But on the web, you could also provide a great service by doing demos that can't be done live for safety reasons. mercury would make the 20:1 ratio clear, and it also makes the concept of VP clearer since you need not deal with gas mixtures. To derive the 20:1 ratio from your demo, I first had to look at the stills (I'd recommend that the video should be clear enough to make this unnecessary). In the stills, it looks like the water level fell from 50 to 46 mL. To get the 20:1 ratio, I had to assume that 1mL is about 1 cm. and do calculations like the following: So total gas pressure at 50 mL is 76-(50/13.6) or roughly 72.3 cm, assuming 76 cm Atmospheric pressure. Then Pair = 72.3-VP H2O= 70.3. At 46 cm, Pair = 30 cm Hg (Boyle), PH2O is still 2, so P(air + water) = 32 cm. Ptot = 76-(46/13.6) = 72.6. P(ether) = 72.6-32 = 40 cm. I hope I'm thinking straight...:) Thanks for your stimulating contributions, Oliver! ______________________________________________________________________________ Dr. Ed Vitz vitz@kutztown.edu Editor, Tested Demonstrations, Journal of Chemical Education Kutztown University 610-683.4443 Kutztown, PA 19530 FAX 610-683-1352 On Sun, 21 Feb 1999, Oliver Seely wrote: > The collection of hotlinks (to various sites with demonstrations, > bibliographies of > demonstrations, instructions for demonstrations and additional links) which > have > appeared individually in this conference have been expanded to include a > total of 12. > The Brigham Young University address now works properly thanks to Don > Rosenthal > who caught the typo in the link. > > The collection of hotlinks may be found at > http://chemistry.csudh.edu/oliver/intro.htm > > Oliver ========================================================================== Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 17:10:41 EST From: Donald Rosenthal Subject: DR: What Demonstrations are Needed? Oliver Seely mentioned some of the topics which might be discussed during this session: > 1. Justification for chemical demonstrations > 2. Sourcebooks for demonstrations > 3. Capabilities of the World Wide Web for chemical demonstrations > Material currently available on the Web > 4. Demonstrations needed > a. Any which are unavailable to students and/or teacher > b. Those which produce fires and explosions > c. Those which produce noxious fumes > d. Those which require inordinate amounts of time for preparation > e. Those which require equipment which cannot be brought into the > classroom > 5. Objectives of the upcoming conference in 2001 > 6. Methods used for preparing still images and video files > Linking the files to a Web page Most of these topics have not been addressed by CONFCHEM participants. I'd be interested in hearing from those of you who use or see a need for chemical demonstrations. * What demonstrations are needed? * How effective would WWW, CD ROM or videotape demonstrations be in * meeting these needs? * Do you or would you use any of these? * If so, how do or would you use them? The following information recently gleaned from CHEMED-L is pertinent: >> From: Dean Waldow >> Date: Wednesday, February 24, 1999 10:24 PM >> Subject: Pre-kindergarten Class Demonstrations? >> >> I am curious if folks might have suggestions about what type of >> chemistry (or more general science) demonstrations people have found >> that work well for children in a pre-kindergarten class? > Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 22:33:23 -0800 > From: "mike horton" > Subject: Re: Pre-kindergarten Class Demonstrations? > > There are a million things that you can do with bubbles. There are also > recipes for slime, gak, ooze, etc. You can take the water absorbing > substance from diapers and "play" with that. Blacklights and > glow-in-the-dark objects are eye catchers. Make some of the colloidal > mixture of corn starch and water. Personally, these are some of the things I have always found fascinating. Its probably the child in me. Any comments or suggestions? Don Rosenthal ========================================================================== Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 17:44:12 EST From: "JAMES E. STURM" Subject: Re: DR: What Demonstrations are Needed? Don Rosenthal: On demos for pre-kindergarden, ones which did generate dwell time for students' own pondering were, in my experience: - Cartesian diver in a long transparent cylinder capped with a rubber sheet to allow modification of the pressure - Clock reaction in which one can modify considerably the time taken for sudden color change, the modification brought about by changing concentrations and by students serving as mixers of reagents - Liquid nitrogen, especially along with asking students what is the coldest condition ever experienced (before the demo) - Catalytic action (by some other name?) whereby only a tiny amount of something added will profoundly change (increase) the rate at which some reaction occurs Jim Sturm jesd@lehigh.edu ========================================================================== Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 20:41:11 -0600 From: "Gary L. Bertrand" Subject: GLB:Justification for Demonstrations Don Rosenthal asked for comments regarding demonstrations. Here's an observation that I feel is pertinent. I teach a Chem 1 section of 100+ students in the Fall semester, and try to do at least one demonstration a week. I also occasionally hook up a projector and run simulations on the computer. I build a talking point around the demonstration: "I'm going to do this and that, what do you think will happen?" After some discussion to define the possible outcomes, I ask for a show of hands as to how many think each outcome will occur, always including "How many don't really give a ( carefully worded reference to the nether region of a rodent)?" which always gets a unanimous response. Then I do the demo, and we discuss the outcome. After my regular lectures, I usually have a few students stopping by the lectern to discuss logistical matters - when something is due, expected absences, etc. - rarely to discuss Chemistry. This also applies to computer simulations, and I suspect it would also apply to movies and videos. My experience is that you'll lose a few of them if you turn the lights down for thirty seconds. However, after each demo I always have 6 or more (I've had a couple of dozen) inspecting the materials I've used, asking about the demo, relating their own experiences, etc. Often these include the poorer students in the class. I have no doubt as to the effectiveness of demonstrations at least for holding their attention. I've had more than one student tell me, "You seem to know when I'm going to have trouble staying awake. You wheel out the cart with your toys, and I'm wide awake!" Gary Gary L. Bertrand gbert@umr.edu www.umr.edu/~gbert Dept. of Chem. (573) 341-4441 Fax(573) 341-6033 University of Missouri-Rolla Rolla, MO 65409-0010 =========================================== "The practice of Chemical Thermodynamics is simply a matter of finding the proper wrench to pound on the right screw." ========================================================================== Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 21:03:19 -0700 From: Gabriela C Weaver Subject: Re: GLB:Justification for Demonstrations On Thu, 25 Feb 1999, Gary L. Bertrand wrote: > However, after each demo I always have 6 > or more (I've had a couple of dozen) inspecting the materials I've used, > asking about the demo, relating their own experiences, etc. Often these > include the poorer students in the class. > This is not the kind of thing that they would be able to do with video demos (i.e. examine the materials and the results of the demo). Would this imply that the video demos are not as good in that regard? I don't have an answer to this - I'm really just curious. I've noticed the same behavior with my students when I do demos. Of course, video demos have the advantage of being able to show things that are not possible to show when speed is an issue (i.e. the real reaction is too slow or too fast) or when visibility is an issue (i.e. the real reaction is too difficult to see). I did a demo in class with a flammable gas which creates a beautifully shaped flame. However, that is very difficult to see. So I followed the live demo with a videotaped version that showed the flame in slow motion (and I have this as RealVideo format is anyone is intersted.) This seemed to really help the students see what is going on. I wonder if this is not potentially one of the real strengths of video demos - as a supplement to the real thing. Because, as far as excitement goes, I think that live demos definitely have a corner on the market. > I have no doubt as to the effectiveness of demonstrations at least for > holding their attention. I've had more than one student tell me, "You > seem to know when I'm going to have trouble staying awake. You wheel > out the cart with your toys, and I'm wide awake!" > > Gary > > Gary L. Bertrand gbert@umr.edu www.umr.edu/~gbert > Dept. of Chem. (573) 341-4441 Fax(573) 341-6033 > University of Missouri-Rolla Rolla, MO 65409-0010 > =========================================== > "The practice of Chemical Thermodynamics is simply a matter of > finding the proper wrench to pound on the right screw." > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< Gabriela C. Weaver Assistant Professor, Chemistry Univ. of CO, Denver Phone (303)556-3201 Chemistry Dept. Fax (303)556-4776 Campus Box 194 / PO Box 173364 GWeaver@Carbon.CUDenver.Edu Denver, CO 80217-7364 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< ========================================================================== Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 13:26:50 -0000 From: "Mumford, Cedric" Subject: Re: Conference Evaluation Oliver, This form typifies the sorts of problems I run into when using Internet technology. As I type in the details, the lines I am supposed to type on break and slide to the right. This whole conference has left me in a daze. At first I was afraid to download plug-ins in case I got charged. When I did find a free plug-in I had to be very careful not to order the $30 version. Having got the plug-in it was not obvious how it was meant to be used so I was none the wiser. In the end, as the plug-in took up more hard-disk space than the average virus, I felt it safest to delete it. The whole experience has put me off using internet videos for life. I suspect that many of the people who wrote to cancel their participation in the conference did so out of sheer frustration. Some people enjoy wrestling with the technical problems, but most of us haven't got the time or patience to keep chasing technology that seems intent on staying ten jumps ahead. Regards, Cedric Cedric Mumford UWIC, Cardiff cmumford@uwic.ac.uk (01222) 506828 > ---------- > From: Oliver Seely[SMTP:oliver@DHVX20.CSUDH.EDU] > Reply To: CONFCHEM - Conference on Chemistry Discussion List > Sent: 26 February 1999 01:31 > To: Multiple recipients of list CONFCHEM > Subject: Conference Evaluation > > To: ALL CONFCHEM PARTICIPANTS > > From: Donald Rosenthal > CONFCHEM Listserv Manager > ACS Division of Chemical Education's > Committee on Computers in Chemical Education > 315-265-9242 > ROSEN1@CLVM.BITNET > > Re: EVALUATION OF THE TRIAL SESSION > > Date: February 25, 1999 > > A Trial Session Information and Evaluation Form is appended. > > The primary reason for the Trial Session is to determine how > satisfactory > the trial demonstrations are and to obtain your comments and > suggestions. > These will be used in determining the format and nature of the Spring > 2001 session. > > Please fill out the form and return it at the end of the Conference. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > TRIAL SESSION EVALUATION AND SUGGESTION FORM > LECTURE DEMONSTRATIONS IN CHEMISTRY ON THE WORLD WIDE WEB > > 1. NAME ________________________________ DATE > _________________________ > > 2. ADDRESS AT WORK > _____________________________________________________ > > > _____________________________________________________ > > > _____________________________________________________ > > 3. TITLE AT WORK _________________ (e.g. Professor, Teacher, > Student, etc) > > 4. ELECTRONIC MAIL ADDRESS ________________ > > 5. COURSES YOU TEACH > ___________________________________________________ > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > GENERAL > > 6. Were any problems created by Internet delivery of the > video/audio materials? > ________ > > If your answer is yes, explain > ______________________________________ > > > _____________________________________________________________________ > > 7. What was the approximate download time to your computer for each > video? > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > _ > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---- > > DEMONSTRATION 1 - Buret > > Evaluation - Scale 1 to 5 - 1 is Poor, 3 is Average and 5 is excellent > > 8. Overall evaluation of Demonstration 1 > ________ > > 9. Evaluation of text > ________ > > 10. Evaluation of graphics > ________ > > 11. Comments and suggestions - > _________________________________________ > > ______________________________________________________________________ > __ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > DEMONSTRATION 2 - Vapor Pressure > > 12. Overall evaluation of Demonstration 2 > ________ > > 13. Evaluation of text > ________ > > 14. Evaluation of graphics embedded in text > ________ > > 15. Comments and suggestions about text - > > 16. Evaluation of the demonstration in Real Video > ________ > > 17. Comments and suggestions about the demonstration in Real Video - > > 18. Evaluation of the demonstration in MPEG format > -------- > > 19. Comments and suggestions about the demonstration in MPEG format - > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > DEMONSTRATION 3 - Crystallization from a Supersaturated Solution > > 20. Overall evaluation of Demonstration 3 > ________ > > 21. Evaluation of text > ________ > > 22. Evaluation of graphics embedded in text > ________ > > 23. Comments and suggestions about text - > > 24. Evaluation of the demonstration in Real Video > ________ > > 25. Comments and suggestions about the demonstration in Real Video - > > 26. Evaluation of the demonstration in MPEG format > -------- > > 27. Comments and suggestions about the demonstration in MPEG format - > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > PREPARATION OF DEMONSTRATION MATERIALS FOR WEB VIEWING > > 28. Overall evaluation of paper > ________ > > 29. Comments and suggestions about the paper - > > 30. Overall evaluation of Discussion about preparation > ________ > of materials > > 31. Comments and suggestions - > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > 30. Would you be interested in preparing a Demonstration > for the Spring 2001 Conference? > ________ > > ______________________________________________________________________ > __ > > Please return this form to Donald Rosenthal (ROSEN1@CLVM.CLARKSON.EDU) > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > by March 2 > ^^^^^^^^^^ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ========================================================================== Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 08:10:40 -0600 From: Oliver Seely Subject: Re: Conference Evaluation At 01:26 PM 2/26/99 +0000, Cedric Mumford wrote: > This form typifies the sorts of problems I run into when using >Internet technology. As I type in the details, the lines I am supposed >to type on break and slide to the right. Indeed. We really need a more sophisticated method of form completion. I don't know if it means installing a special server or if it can be done using Java. But I quite agree that this form structure puts people off. > This whole conference has left me in a daze. Me too. I still have 20 hours of video demonstrations which keep staring down at me from my book case and say, "O.K. you have the Real Video Encoder. Now do something with me!" >The whole experience has put me off using internet videos for >life. On the wagon again? A likely story! See you again during the spring 2001 session! 8-) Oliver ========================================================================== Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 08:39:37 -0600 From: Oliver Seely Subject: Re: Conference Evaluation At 09:06 AM 2/26/99 -0600, David Ritter wrote: >As far as plug-ins go, my hard drive maxed out the first time that I tried a >demonstration. I have been able to see a single one of them for this >conference. :-( Exactly. I'm the sad owner of three Syquest removable drives (Syquest has filed for bankruptcy). I thought they were going to be my answer to be able to store some of these large media files. Right now there doesn't seem to be any equivalent device which has the same high density and can read and write at the same high rate. One of my drives has already begun to show troubling signs of failure. If I really get serious about doing something with my 20 hours of video demonstrations, I estimate the short-term need for 3.2 Gigabytes of reliable storage for what I want to put together. The resulting material would amount to little more than MPG clips of the kind available in my two Trial Session demonstrations and a T1 version in Real Media format on a PC with a Real Media server (so that transmission speed will be adjusted automatically to the client's needs). >I believe that video demos, or web demos, put the phenomena being illustrated into the realm of TV Well, yes. I presume that it is the same TV which brings us Seinfeld on the one hand and NOVA on the other. (For non-U.S. participants, Seinfeld is a comedy series of ultimately mean-spirited if amusing characters and NOVA is a series on the advancement of science on the Public Broadcasting System) >and/or video games. The only redeeming feature of video games (in my opinion) is the development of eye/hand coordination. Video demonstrations can't claim even that, though they do show processes and action sequences which possibly would not be clear with still images. With appropriate equipment, time lapse sequences and slow motion are already available both of which could be useful in the exemplification of some chemical principles. >The great capacity for special effects using THIS SAME MEDIUM in other venues makes >the demonstrations (in my humble opinion) much less effective for the young people (that >we are trying to communicate the concepts to) than for ourselves. That is certainly a peril which continues to worry me also. Oliver ========================================================================== Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 08:48:23 -0600 From: Oliver Seely Subject: Re: GLB:Justification for Demonstrations At 08:41 PM 2/25/99 -0600, Gary L. Bertrand wrote: >However, after each demo I always have 6 >or more (I've had a couple of dozen) inspecting the materials I've used, >asking about the demo, relating their own experiences, etc. Often these >include the poorer students in the class. In my opinion video demonstrations on the Web are no substitute for live demonstrations. As teachers, we seem to be indefatigable in our curiousity about the potential effectiveness of new pedagogical techniques as they become available to us. Video on the Web is but the latest possibilty. Oliver ========================================================================== Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 08:50:39 -0600 From: Oliver Seely Subject: Re: Conference Evaluation At 09:36 AM 2/26/99 -0600, Gary L. Bertrand wrote: >Since the theme of this conference is the development of web materials, why >not a Web-based evaluation form? Excellent suggestion. Do we have a volunteer for the spring 2001 session? How about you Gary? Oliver ========================================================================== Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 08:57:19 -0600Sender: Listserv Forwarder From: Oliver Seely Subject: Re: CES on CM Re: Conference Evaluation At 09:37 AM 2/26/99 -0600, Charles Sundin wrote: >Of course, Oliver may have received personal notes that we >did not see. Except for one instance, all messages went to the group, which satisfies me immensely. I ought to have forwarded the message to everyone, but it was on a rather specific topic (I'm at a disadvantage here because it is in my "out" file at work and I'm at home -- I can't remember the topic but it wasn't particularly controversial) and I responded directly to the sender. So all participants were treated to virtually all opinions. On to the spring 2001 session! Oliver ========================================================================== Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 09:06:47 -0600 From: "Dr. David Ritter" Subject: Re: Conference Evaluation Bravo. This needs to be reiterated. For example, something as simple as e-mail formatting made several of the messages that I got unreadable. As far as plug-ins go, my hard drive maxed out the first time that I tried a demonstration. I have been able to see a single one of them for this conference. :-( Even though I do not consider myself "anti-technology" (I have been computing for over thirty years now, how time flies:), I believe that video demos, or web demos, put the phenomena being illustrated into the realm of TV and/or video games. The great capacity for special effects using THIS SAME MEDIA in other venues makes the demonstrations (in my humble opinion) much less effective for the young people (that we are trying to communicate the concepts to) than for ourselves. David Ritter At 01:26 PM 2/26/99 -0000, Cedric Mumford wrote: >......This whole conference has left me in a daze...... >...In the end, as the plug-in took up more hard-disk >space....The whole experience has put me off using internet videos for >life. ....Some >people enjoy wrestling with the technical problems, but most of us >haven't got the time or patience to keep chasing technology that seems >intent on staying ten jumps ahead. > Regards, Cedric > Cedric Mumford > UWIC, Cardiff > cmumford@uwic.ac.uk > (01222) 506828 > David Ritter Department of Chemistry Southeast Missouri State University Cape Girardeau, MO 63701 dritter@semovm.semo.edu ========================================================================== Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 09:07:21 -0600 From: Oliver Seely Subject: Re: Evaluation form By the way, my request to Gary Bertrand to prepare a Web-based evaluation form for the 2001 session is a serious one. We certainly DO need something better and we need someone who can get motivated about such things to do it. If not Gary, do we have another volunteer? Those 20 hours of video demonstrations keep staring down at me and the possibility of doing SOMETHING with them is too delicious to pass up five years from retirement!! 8-) Oliver ========================================================================== Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 10:32:12 EST From: Donald Rosenthal Subject: DR: Filling Out the Evaluation Form There are several ways in which the CONFCHEM EVALUATION FORM can be filled out and returned to ROSEN1@CLVM.CLARKSON.EDU Method 1 Download the Evaluation Form to disk. Edit it with a word processor. Save it as an ASCII (text) file and send it as an ASCII file to: ROSEN1@CLVM.CLARKSON.EDU. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Method 2 This works on my mail system. Your mail system may be different. Hopefully, you are able to do something like the following: a. I Type FORWARD ROSEN1@CLVM.CLARKSON.EDU The modified (filled out evaluation form) will be forwarded. b. The message which contains the evaluation form appears on my monitor. I can edit it. i. I delete lines at the beginning of the message including the header lines in the message I received and all lines up to the beginning of the Form. ii. I insert appropriate responses in the Evaluation Form These insertions REPLACE underlined portions of the Form. iii. Once the Evaluation Form is filled out, I Forward the Evaluation Form. I have appended a portion of the Evaluation Form handled by Method 2. -----------------------Partly Filled Out Evaluation Form---------------- TRIAL SESSION EVALUATION AND SUGGESTION FORM LECTURE DEMONSTRATIONS IN CHEMISTRY ON THE WORLD WIDE WEB 1. NAME __Donald Rosenthal______________ DATE __February 26____________ 2. ADDRESS AT WORK __Department of Chemistry____________________________ __Clarkson University________________________________ __Potsdam NY 13699-5810______________________________ 3. TITLE AT WORK __Professor Emeritus 4. ELECTRONIC MAIL ADDRESS __ROSEN1@CLVM.CLARKSON.EDU 5. COURSES YOU TEACH __none - Emeritus Professor________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ GENERAL 6. Were any problems created by Internet delivery of the video/audio materials? _No_____ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ________________________________________________________________________ Please return this form to Donald Rosenthal (ROSEN1@CLVM.CLARKSON.EDU) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ by March 2 ^^^^^^^^^^ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ========================================================================== Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 09:36:11 -0600 From: "Gary L. Bertrand" Subject: Re: Conference Evaluation While I don't share the frustration of some of our colleagues in downloading materials (though I certainly understand it - I'm just fortunate enough to have a technician who's already worked through his frustrations), I wholeheartedly agree with their comments regarding the evaluation form. Since the theme of this conference is the development of web materials, why not a Web-based evaluation form? I realize that would make more work for the organizers, who have already given a lot to us, but it is something to consider for the future. Gary Gary L. Bertrand gbert@umr.edu www.umr.edu/~gbert Dept. of Chem. (573) 341-4441 Fax(573) 341-6033 University of Missouri-Rolla Rolla, MO 65409-0010 =========================================== "The practice of Chemical Thermodynamics is simply a matter of finding the proper wrench to pound on the right screw." ========================================================================== Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 09:37:52 -0600 From: Charles Sundin Subject: CES on CM Re: Conference Evaluation Cedric and All, > This form typifies the sorts of problems I run into when using >Internet technology. As I type in the details, the lines I am supposed >to type on break and slide to the right. When that happens, I just don't worry about it. The sender of the form has tested it and knows that it will happen and can cope with it. If they don't like getting replies back that way, they create a form with boxes in it. > This whole conference has left me in a daze. That's fine. We all start in a daze. That's what happens to our students. Oliver is trying to do for us what we do for our students. >At first I was >afraid to download plug-ins in case I got charged. When I did find a >free plug-in I had to be very careful not to order the $30 version. >Having got the plug-in it was not obvious how it was meant to be used so >I was none the wiser. We all go through that the first time we install a plug-in. At that point you should have asked Oliver or someone how do you know if it works. That way Oliver and the rest of us can improve the instructions we give our students. Many of my students had never installed a plug-in before. (Of course they can avoid it by going into the computer labs where the plug-ins are already installed.) > The whole experience has put me off using internet videos for >life. I suspect that many of the people who wrote to cancel their >participation in the conference did so out of sheer frustration. I see this on every list. People sign up with other thoughts in their minds. Just like taking a book off the shelf. Title looks interesting. After a few pages some go back on the shelf. I never saw anyone sign off because of technical problems. Of course, Oliver may have received personal notes that we did not see. I will let him respond. >Some >people enjoy wrestling with the technical problems, but most of us >haven't got the time or patience to keep chasing technology that seems >intent on staying ten jumps ahead. You are quite right. And at my campus, those who don't call in a technical person and say, I need that, make it work. An d it gets done, not necessarily in ten minutes but within several days. Charles Charles Sundin UW-Platteville sundin@uwplatt.edu ========================================================================== Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 15:54:23 +0000 From: Mark Winter Subject: Re: Formatting Web pages >On Wed, 24 Feb 1999 20:51:10 -0600 Oliver Seely >wrote: > >> Formatting continues to be a problem because >> different >> browsers offer different amounts of free space for text between >> right-aligned and >> left-aligned images. I still haven't completely figured out how best to >> format things >> for all browsers. > >It's even worst than that. Different users of the same browser can >have the width of their browser window set differently or may have >set a different default font for text display, all of which can >effect the exact formatting of pages. To get around this, some Web >authors utilize tables extensively or convert their materials into >PDF format, for viewing with the Adobe Acrobat Reader. The >downside is that both of these techniques tend to make pages load >slower. > >In my opinion, however, the Web is more about delivering content than >about formatting, so I tend not to worry too much about formatting, >as long as the text and images are clear and the pages load quickly. > The Web/HTML is designed so that the reader is empowered to display the content provided by the publisher in any way, within reason. The publisher can provide hints for the browser program about how to display the content, through the use of style sheets, tables, align, etc, but the reader is the person really in control. This is not a weakness ! It is one of the key features of the medium. It is left to the reader to adjust viewing parameters to suit themselves, and this can include viewing in ways perhaps not anticipated by the publisher - braille, audio, for instance. Ask yourself: is pixel control *really* that important? Think very hard about the answer. If the answer is "Yes" then do use pdf files, as mentioned by Tom above. However, unless you are in control of your audience, you will lose readers as many do not have the Acrobat plugin or reader. If the answer is "No", then *do* worry about layout, but don't worry *too* much! Keep your pages simple and clear. Most people will regard them as elegant if you do. Minimise flashy effects for the same reason - they can distract and they can go wrong. My comments are a case of do as I say, not as I do! My own WebElements package is far too extensively "tabled" for my own liking. I am trying to simplify the organisation and layout though! Regards Dr Mark J Winter (Director of Studies) Department of Chemistry, The University, Sheffield S3 7HF, England tel: +44 (0)114 222 9304 fax: +44 (0)114 222 9303 e-m: mark.winter@sheffield.ac.uk http://www.shef.ac.uk/chemistry/staff/mjw/mark-winter.html WebElements is the periodic table on the world-wide web: http://www.shef.ac.uk/chemistry/web-elements/ The Sheffield Chemdex is a listing of chemistry sites on the world-wide web: http://www.shef.ac.uk/chemistry/chemdex/ ========================================================================== Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 11:31:50 -0500 From: Jimmy Reeves Subject: Re: Conference Evaluation >Even though I do not consider myself "anti-technology" (I have been >computing for over thirty years now, how time flies:), I believe that video >demos, or web demos, put the phenomena being illustrated into the realm of >TV and/or video games. The great capacity for special effects using THIS >SAME MEDIA in other venues makes the demonstrations (in my humble opinion) >much less effective for the young people (that we are trying to communicate >the concepts to) than for ourselves. I'm afraid I have to voice my disagreement with this line of reasoning. While it is true that videos are no substitute for the real thing, most of what we present to students is very far from the real thing. Even doing one demo a week cannot begin to cover the vast amount of conceptual information we try to convey to our students, and words on a blackboard or still images of moving molecules and real life events fail to communicate the most important point, that our world is in constant motion. It is much more effective to show a video of silver chloride forming when solutions of silver nitrate and sodium chloride are mixed, than to describe it in words, or show a static picture. And while this demo is easy to do, its not so easy to show it in a way that 200 students can see what you're doing, nor is it available to show repeatedly, as a video would be. All the educational research I've read suggests that involving more senses enhances learning. Videos and simulations accompanied by sound are a powerful tool for learning, and we are at the point where making them available to our students in an anywhere, anytime format is possible, if difficult. I agree completely that the technology is not user friendly, nor is it ready for prime time, but advances like RealVideo, with viewers and encoders available free to anyone, open a whole new world of educational possibility for us to explore. As I mentioned previously, Dick Ward has compiled FREE tools, in their most current form, at the site http://www.uncwil.edu/tc/software.htm. I hope that more of us will tackle the technology, and study how to use these new resources effectively. Our students deserve nothing less. Jimmy Reeves ========================================================================== Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 11:29:09 -0600 From: "Anne T. Sherren" Subject: Re: Conference Evaluation I've been too busy to try any of the demos. If they are at the web site maybe over spring break. Looks like a lively discussion. Anne Sherren ========================================================================== Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 13:07:34 -0500Sender: Listserv Forwarder From: "Carl H. Snyder; Chemistry Department; University of Miami" Subject: Re: Formatting Web Pages Oliver wrote, in part: >Formatting continues to be a problem because different >browsers offer different amounts of free space for text between >right-aligned and >left-aligned images. I still haven't completely figured out how best to >format things for all browsers. One solution would be to omit left-aligning and right-aligning HTML coding altogether. Instead, put the images into the left and right cells of a one-row, three-cell table, with text in the center cell. I've done something similar, with text in the left and right cells and a graphic in the center cell. The three-cell table works well in situations like that. Carl Carl H. Snyder Internet: CSNYDER@miami.edu Chemistry Department Phone: (305)-284-2174 University of Miami FAX: (305)-284-4571 Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA http://www.miami.edu/chm/ ========================================================================== Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 15:02:06 EST From: Donald Rosenthal Subject: DR: People, Technology and Club Membership People, Technology and Club Membership ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ We all know colleagues who for one reason or another do not use computers. (Fortunately their numbers are diminishing with time.) Some people have access to computers but not the Internet. Some people have access to the Internet and e-mail but not the World Wide Web. Some people have access to the WWW but do not have audio or video capability - this may be because of hardware, software or expertise. I have a computer in my office which provides me with access to the Internet, the WWW, has audio and CD ROM capabilities. However, I can not obtain satisfactory access to the video-audio materials. I can see the textual material and stills which Oliver provided. I can see Gary Bertrand's simulations and the University of Illinois materials. If I wish to examine Oliver Seely's video-audio material or the University of Wisconsin materials, I use a colleague's computer or terminal room facilities. With more sophisticated materials - video, audio, etc. I know that some of us will not be able to view and hear web materials. Presentations CAN be made which only a FEW of the 800 registrants will be able to view and hear because the others don't have the hardware, software or expertise. One purpose of the present TRIAL session is to determine how many registrants are able to view and hear the materials. We hope to learn something about this from the EVALUATION FORMS. We need to hear from YOU even if you are not able to access the video-audio demos. By 2001 (two years from now) things will have changed. At this time we are not certain what hardware and software will be used in the 2001 demonstrations. Some questions: Will you be able to view and hear the demonstrations in 2001? Will you be able to use the materials in your office or in a classroom? Will your students be able to view the materials in their rooms, in a classroom or terminal room? Will you want to view or use the materials? Will you or your students want to view the materials? There is three dimensional projection hardware and software presently available. Will such systems be commonplace by 2001? Donald Rosenthal ROSEN1@CLVM.CLARKSON.EDU Clarkson University Potsdam NY 13699-5810 ========================================================================== Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 15:31:05 -0500 From: Brian Tissue Subject: Re: Conference Evaluation I also agree completely that a web form would be the best way to collect the conference evaluation data. The current CONFCHEM server will support PERL scripts if anyone would like to write a script and the accompanying HTML form to collect and collate the evaluation data. I would also welcome a volunteer who would set up forms for CONFCHEM on another web server if that is more convenient. Brian ********************************************************* Brian M. Tissue phone: (540) 231-3786 Chemistry Department FAX: (540) 231-3255 Virginia Tech e-mail: tissue@vt.edu Blacksburg, VA 24061-0212 http://www.chem.vt.edu/chem-dept/tissue/ ========================================================================== Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 15:02:38 -0600 From: Paul Kelter Subject: Re: Conference Evaluation Folks, I will second Jimmy Reeves' thoughts and add one more: Scientists and science teachers ought to have a never-ending capacity to dream. We look at what could be, what is not yet possible, and find ways to make it so. As with any experiment, this one is not easy and may end up to be of limited value in helping us understand our world (our students) better. But it is an experiment that I delight in seeing run. Passionate "thank you's" to Oliver Seely and all those who are running the experiment. Please keep your enthusiasm to teach us as we teach others. Paul ____________ Paul Kelter http://www.chem.unl.edu/kelter ========================================================================== Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 15:37:17 -0800 From: Oliver Seely Subject: Re: Preparation of Web demonstration pages Some of you who downloaded my photos and demonstrations may have been surprised at the labyrinthine links I used from the text to photos and to the .ram files and the .rm files. Once I had them in place and they worked I didn't try to fix them!! But it was clear that there had to be a better way of organizing things. I've just finished trying a file structure in which EVERYTHING used for one demonstration is put in the same subdirectory. Relative addressing of photos, .ram files, .rm files and .mpg files is reduced to the filename alone. I like it very much and unless someone in this forum comes up with a reason why my structure might be a recipe for disaster, I think that future demonstrations pages will be so structured. It seems to make life a lot easier. Comments anyone? Oliver ========================================================================== Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 18:19:14 -0700 From: "Barbara A. Gaddis" Subject: Re: GLB:Justification for Demonstrations I agree that life demos are best--however, life demos have some obvious drawbacks: they are difficult to use in large classes (which is most of our general chemistry classes); it is becoming increasingly difficult to use chemicals, which are classified as hazardous; we are not permitted to take any chemicals out of the science building....since I teach in an adjacent (but not connected) building, this means that I can't do any demonstrations at all. The Web demos have a valuable purpose. Barbara Gaddis, Director Science Learning Center Univ. of Colorado at Colorado Springs P. O. Box 7150 Colorado Springs, CO 80933-7150 phone: (719) 262-3688 email: bagaddis@mail.uccs.edu FAX: (719) 262-1239 ========================================================================== Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 21:37:17 -0600 From: "Gary L. Bertrand" Subject: Re: Conference Evaluation Oliver I'm a dedicated non-volunteer for anything that sounds like work, but I'll be re-working my Chem 1 questionnaire this summer and doing the Evaluation Form should not add much to the chore. I put the questionnaire together late last summer for the start of the Fall semester, using the mail-to function and there were some problems. I've been assured that a Perl script will avoid the problems. Since my questionnaire http://www.umr.edu/~gbert/q1.html is a type of Web material, I'll make a couple of comments. It was based on the questionnaire that Eric Mazur gives in "Peer Instruction." on student expectations from the course. I reviewed their responses http://www.umr.edu/~gbert/quest.html . I'm convinced that this questionnaire (any reply was worth 10 points out of a total of 600 for the course) and another 10-point assignment for them to introduce themselves to me via email (both in the first week of class) set the tone for the semester. They were far from the best-prepared group I've seen, but they were the most congenial and enjoyable class I've ever had. Over the whole semester, I estimate the number of students that came to see me outside of class tripled the normal number. Gary >At 09:36 AM 2/26/99 -0600, Gary L. Bertrand wrote: > >>Since the theme of this conference is the development of web materials, why >>not a Web-based evaluation form? > >Excellent suggestion. Do we have a volunteer for the spring 2001 session? >How >about you Gary? > >Oliver Gary L. Bertrand gbert@umr.edu www.umr.edu/~gbert Dept. of Chem. (573) 341-4441 Fax(573) 341-6033 University of Missouri-Rolla Rolla, MO 65409-0010 =========================================== "The practice of Chemical Thermodynamics is simply a matter of finding the proper wrench to pound on the right screw." ========================================================================== Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 08:00:05 LCL From: Reed Howald Subject: Re: GLB:Justification for Demonstrations At 06:19 PM 2/26/99 -0700, you wrote: >I agree that life demos are best--however, life demos have some obvious >drawbacks: they are difficult to use in large classes (which is most of >our general chemistry classes); One year while we were introducing computers into our freshman chemistry laboratories, I had the opportunity to team teach in the lecture. It is easy to show details of the experiment on copies of the computer screen to the whole class even in very big lecture rooms, and you still have the experience of a live demonstration. I can also highly recommend team teaching so that one person can devote his or her full attention to the experiment, trouble shooting when trouble occurs, while someone else can watch the students or even lecture. > it is becoming increasingly difficult to >use chemicals, which are classified as hazardous; we are not permitted to >take any chemicals out of the science building....since I teach in an >adjacent (but not connected) building, this means that I can't do any >demonstrations at all. I would fight this restriction. There are a lot of demonstration with essentially no hazard, and with overhead projectors and live video we can use small quantities of bromine or HF and still have the reaction visible to students. > The Web demos have a valuable purpose. Yes, but we don't have to give up on live demonstrations. Sincerely, Reed >Barbara Gaddis, Director >Science Learning Center >Univ. of Colorado at Colorado Springs >P. O. Box 7150 >Colorado Springs, CO 80933-7150 > >phone: (719) 262-3688 >email: bagaddis@mail.uccs.edu >FAX: (719) 262-1239 Reed Howald Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry Montana State University Bozeman Bozeman, Montana, MT 59717 U.S.A. howald@montana.edu ========================================================================== Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 11:07:55 -0500 From: "Carl H. Snyder; Chemistry Department; University of Miami" Subject: Comments on CONFCHEM Say what you will about the CONFCHEM, positively or negatively, the salient feature is that it was done! Step back for a moment, everyone, and recognize what was accomplished. Here we've had a conference that's moved beyond the written word and has reached out to the cutting edge of still and video graphics! We've come a long, long way from our first On Line Chemistry Conference (OLCC) back in the summer of 1993! Sure the plug-ins are a nuisance, sure the resolution is primitive, sure lots of things need more work, but it was accomplished! It's real; we're not just talking about how nice it would be if we could do something like this someday. Looking back from some 35 years in this profession, I find that what's going on now, as exemplified by this current OLCC, is absolutely astounding. Can anyone *possibly* imagine what the state of chemical education might be like some 35 years from now? If we move along as we have in just the past 6, the next 35 will be something beyond our comprehension. We're all working at the outer limits now, folks, and I want to express my sincere thanks and admiration to people like Oliver Seely and Don Rosenthal who are showing the way. The times aren't just interesting; they're breathtaking. Carl H. Snyder Internet: CSNYDER@miami.edu Chemistry Department Phone: (305)-284-2174 University of Miami FAX: (305)-284-4571 Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA http://www.miami.edu/chm/ ========================================================================== Date: Mon, 1 Mar 1999 05:26:12 -0500 From: "Thomas C. O'Haver" Subject: Comments on CONFCHEM On Sat, 27 Feb 1999 11:07:55 -0500 "Carl H. Snyder; Chemistry Department; University of Miami" wrote: > ... We've come a long, long way from our first On Line > Chemistry Conference (OLCC) back in the summer of 1993! Indeed we have. Those first stumbling steps were taken before graphical Web browsers were widely available. We had only the most primitive methods of distributing and viewing graphics. Many of us had trouble dealing with the complexities of the graphics in 1993 and some went through the entire conference without seeing one picture. These days, no one complains that they can't see the still pictures - evidently everyone has learned to install the appropriate networking and broswer software. Now, we have difficulties with digital video clips and streaming video. In a few years even this will pass, and all the complaints will concern the difficulty of getting the 3D interactive virtual reality laboratory simulations operating effectively. ;-) Tom -------------------------------------------------- Tom O'Haver Professor Emeritus Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry and Maryland Collaborative for Teacher Preparation The University of Maryland at College Park to2@umail.umd.edu http://www.wam.umd.edu/~toh ========================================================================== Date: Mon, 1 Mar 1999 12:56:51 -0000 From: "Mumford, Cedric" Subject: IT expertise CM Dear All, Many thanks from all those encouraging we technophobes to keep struggling with the video technology. I am getting help this afternoon with the Real time video plug-in so perhaps I will not be put off video for life after all. My ultimate concern is with students. We do not want them to be put off the chemistry because they can't cope with the computer. I recall one student who was about to abandon his course because he had tried printing his address using a PC for a whole year. After 10 minutes on a MAC he was laughing, and confident to continue without any further help. All too often PC users have to beg for help. Even our IT experts admit that the HELP function is next to useless. Regards, Cedric Cedric Mumford UWIC, Cardiff cmumford@uwic.ac.uk (01222) 506828 ========================================================================== Date: Mon, 1 Mar 1999 08:01:49 -0800 From: George Wiger Subject: Re: Conference Evaluation I'll be happy to handle the form preparation for WWW evaluations. I've been doing this for quite a while and it shouldn't be difficult. I'd prefer to run it on my server, since the scripts are all in place. All anyone needs to do is figure out content. George ========================================================================== Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 15:09:43 EST From: Donald Rosenthal Subject: END OF TRIAL SESSION To: All CONFCHEM Participants From: Donald Rosenthal and Brian Tissue C.C.C.E Members and CONFCHEM Listserv and Website Managers This Trial Session was sponsored by the ACS Division of Chemical Education. On behalf of the Committee on Computers in Chemical Education (C.C.C.E.) which manages these on-line sessions, we would like to thank Oliver Seely, George Wiger and all those who participated in this session. We hope that some of you will contribute demonstrations to the Spring 2001 Session - "LECTURE DEMONSTRATIONS IN CHEMISTRY ON THE WORLD WIDE WEB". If you are interested in doing this, please indicate this on the evaluation form or contact Oliver Seely (oliver@DHVX20.CSUDH.EDU). The Trial Session messages will be available on the CONFCHEM Listserv (Filelist) for about two more weeks. After that the files will be available on the CONFCHEM website. The next on-line session will begin in about four weeks. The schedule of on-line conferences is available on the CONFCHEM Website. We will send the schedule to you via this Listserv in a few minutes. If you have not filled out and returned the evaluation form, please do so. Again, thank you all for making these sessions so stimulating. ========================================================================== Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 16:21:41 -0500 From: Brian Pankuch Subject: Re: END OF TRIAL SESSION Don and Brian and Oliver, Thanks for making the conference possible. I've already incorprated some of the buret pictures in my PowerPoint lectures and found them effective in lecture. Brian Donald Rosenthal wrote: > To: All CONFCHEM Participants > > From: Donald Rosenthal and Brian Tissue > C.C.C.E Members and CONFCHEM > Listserv and Website Managers > > This Trial Session was sponsored by the ACS Division of Chemical Education. > On behalf of the Committee on Computers in Chemical Education (C.C.C.E.) > which manages these on-line sessions, we would like to thank Oliver Seely, > George Wiger and all those who participated in this session. > > We hope that some of you will contribute demonstrations to the Spring 2001 > Session - "LECTURE DEMONSTRATIONS IN CHEMISTRY ON THE WORLD WIDE WEB". > If you are interested in doing this, please indicate this on the evaluation > form or contact Oliver Seely (oliver@DHVX20.CSUDH.EDU). > > The Trial Session messages will be available on the CONFCHEM Listserv > (Filelist) for about two more weeks. After that the files will be available > on the CONFCHEM website. > > The next on-line session will begin in about four weeks. > The schedule of on-line conferences is available on the CONFCHEM Website. > We will send the schedule to you via this Listserv in a few minutes. > > If you have not filled out and returned the evaluation form, please > do so. > > Again, thank you all for making these sessions so stimulating. ========================================================================== ============ END OF DOCUMENT (prepared by B. Tissue 3/99) ================