Timeline for Adoption / penetration rates for dynamic geometry software in secondary school
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
17 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S May 8, 2014 at 16:16 | history | bounty ended | CommunityBot | ||
| S May 8, 2014 at 16:16 | history | notice removed | CommunityBot | ||
| May 5, 2014 at 20:00 | answer | added | David Wees | timeline score: 3 | |
| May 3, 2014 at 23:16 | answer | added | JPBurke | timeline score: 2 | |
| May 2, 2014 at 15:59 | answer | added | David Ebert | timeline score: 3 | |
| S Apr 30, 2014 at 14:52 | history | bounty started | mweiss | ||
| S Apr 30, 2014 at 14:52 | history | notice added | mweiss | Authoritative reference needed | |
| Apr 29, 2014 at 20:26 | comment | added | vonbrand | The "free of cost" is mostly a red herring, getting trained staff (support for the student's machines, keep software up to date; teachers trained in the use; ready-made material for the courses, tailored to whatever is done locally) is a tremendous amount of resources/work. Noone in their right mind will embark on that unless there is a very good chance it will be used for a long time... and said support resources will be available. | |
| Apr 29, 2014 at 1:50 | comment | added | mweiss | Agree completely that provider-based data would be both hard to get and hard to interpret. I was hoping not for info on purchases and/or downloads, but rather for something like a nationwide survey of high school teachers that asks if and how they use DGS. Perhaps nothing like that exists, but it strikes me as something that the DGS community would want to know about. (And perhaps would be a good dissertation topic for a math ed grad student looking for a research question.) | |
| Apr 29, 2014 at 0:49 | comment | added | JPBurke | @mweiss BTW - there is a connection between the information being sought here and payment, or at least registration. Ed tech creators can find themselves in a dilemma, wanting wide adoption to maximize impact, wanting to support and improve the software & curriculum (S&C), wanting to know where the S&C was used (i.e. this question), and wanting a relationship with users to help share what they know about making use of the S&C successful. There are different approaches to these issues, but it is easy to see that free software is tougher to track. Download #s aren't very good data. | |
| Apr 28, 2014 at 23:01 | comment | added | JPBurke | I do not have the information you seek. KCP Technologies became part of McGraw-Hill Education in 2012, and Nick hasn't been involved with that group since last September (2013). McGraw-Hill Education may not be very free with market info. Speaking of free, you are correct; it's hard to argue with it. As a researcher, I see myself as having some responsibility in bringing the mathematic-educational suitability of a technology into the discussion so that there is at least awareness of it. People will make their own decisions; I will always advocate for making that suitability a primary factor. | |
| Apr 28, 2014 at 19:53 | comment | added | mweiss | I won't dispute that GSP has many features that make it far superior to Geogebra for teaching purposes. On the other hand, it is hard to argue with free. In any case, the purpose of this question is not to compare the pros and cons of different DGS platforms, but rather to find out whether there is any usage data out there, either for a single product or for the category as a whole. @JPBurke, do you know if Jackiw might have any information on that question? | |
| Apr 28, 2014 at 18:39 | comment | added | JPBurke | Disclosure: I consider the original creator of GSP a colleague, though he's no longer involved with the product. I've been involved with some dynamic geometry software research (on a project that also involved the creator of GSP, in another publication.) I believe the differences are significant, but details, beyond what I provided above, are beyond the scope of a comment. | |
| Apr 28, 2014 at 18:33 | comment | added | JPBurke | There are good reasons that differentiate Geometer's Sketchpad from GeoGebra. And reasons that differentiate GSP from Cabri (which is the DGS software most popular in Europe, if I understand correctly). Scott Steketee wrote a decent comparison of GSP and GeoGebra. Many reasons that advantage GSP over free alternatives relate to an understanding of how dynamic geometry can/should be used as a mathematical learning environment. | |
| Apr 28, 2014 at 17:09 | comment | added | mbork | GeoGebra (as well as a few similar things) are free (and have a lot of teaching material online), so license costs are not a big issue imho. The real question would be why would anyone want to pay for such software. | |
| Apr 28, 2014 at 15:55 | comment | added | vonbrand | Schools are typically resource-strapped, so it would be a wonder if they had the money for licenses, the computers, and (most importantly) the trained staff. I'd guess in the low 1% range. | |
| Apr 28, 2014 at 14:19 | history | asked | mweiss | CC BY-SA 3.0 |