Platforms Supporting \(\LaTeX\) Online

CampusWire styles itself as a modern competitor to Piazza. features a Q&A forum, chats, lecture support features such as polling, and video chats designed around the idea of “virtual office hours”.

Thoughts: I’ve heard at least one colleague report a good experience switching to this in Spring 2020.

Pros:

• Available as an app;
• it does seem to boast a wide variety of features.

Neutral: Here is the CampusWire information on FERPA Compliance.

Cons: Their system requires some kind of “network set up” for each school before users from that school can log in. I have not yet been able to create an account because of this. Most likely students need to log in using email address from the same institution.

Perusall is designed around discussing reading assignments, but it also has chat rooms and person-to-person chats. It supports automatic grading of discussions based on quantity and quality, for classes of over 20 students. The automatic grading rubric is customizable by the instructor.

Thoughts: I used Perusall with my classes in Spring 2020. My experience varied widely in that students who were further along in their math studies took to it very well, while students earlier in their studies were less likely to buy into it. Overall I was very happy with the threaded “annotation discussions” and how easy it was to include LaTeX math. I did not utilize the automatic grading feature.

Pros:

• LaTeX support works smoothly in comments;
• Includes automatic grading, if desired.

Neutral: Perusall claims FERPA-complaince, but does not explicitly refer to FERPA in its privacy policy.

Cons: While support for discussion outside the context of assignments exists, it is weaker than that for assignment-based discussions.

Piazza is a “Q&A platform,” designed to allow participants to post questions for discussion. Posts can also just be notes, or polls. Content is organized into folders. Questions that have not been answered are highlighted, and discussions can be marked resolved or unresolved.

Thoughts: I used this with a class a few years ago, and I would use it again, but I would take some serious time to compare and contrast Piazza with CampusWire. What Piazza does, it does well, in my experience.

Pros:

• Available as an app;
• can manage content into folders, mark questions resolved;
• the interface does not get in your way.

Neutral: Here is the Piazza information on FERPA Compliance.

Cons: Students must log in using email address from the same institution.

Discord grew out of the gaming world, where it served as a third-party solution for voice chat. It has become a popular tool for both voice and text chat, but it is not designed with education or office productivity in mind. Two bots available for LaTeX in Discord are TeXit and MathBot. To use them, you must have a discord server running, and be logged into the server while visiting one of the above links. Clicking the “Invite” button will let you set it up, which is very straightforward. As a bonus, both bots also provide access to Wolfram Alpha queries.

Thoughts: I have heard at least one report of an instructor satisfied with switching to Discord in Spring 2020. I like the simple effectiveness of Discord, and it is neat that the bots also provide access to Wolfram alpha and calculator features.

Pros:

• Available as an app;
• offers voice chat;
• supports limited file sharing;
• access to wolfram alpha queries;
• TeXiT bot allows you to change preamble to include different packages;
• available as an app.

Cons:

• LaTeX is supported through a bot, so it is not inline;
• I’ve found bot configuration for TeXiT bot less transparent than I’d hoped;
• Discord’s position as a gaming platform comes through in how they present themselves — this isn’t inherently problematic, but it is possible that it might set a tone that some instructors would not prefer.

Slack is an office productivity communications tool. Though it is not designed with education in mind, some of the office-oriented aspects, such as file sharing, may be quite useful.

Thoughts: I’ve used Slack outside the classroom context. It seems to have a lot of nice features, like file sharing; it can be confusing logging into different Slack workspaces.

NOTE: The only Slack app that shows up when you search the Slack Apps in Slack is LaTeXforSlack, and this is displaying a message that it will shut down on July 1. There do exist other Slack bots, such as MathSlax, but it requires a Linux server (and a more significant install process). Additionally, someone wrote a script that will render math in-place, though this seems to recall each user have it installed themselves.

Pros:

• Available as an app;
• supports file sharing;
• supports threaded responses to top-level posts

Cons:

• As with Discord, LaTeX support is not built in. One must invite a bot to the channel, which will do the translation. So, the LaTeX isn’t replaced with math; instead the bot replies with the math.

By using the Auto-LaTeX Equations add-on for Google Docs, you can include LaTeX in your documents. The add-on provides a side-bar with buttons for rendering and de-rendering LaTeX.

Thoughts: The add-on is easy to install, and the interface is relatively straightforward. Given that use of Google Docs is widespread and (to my understanding) up to 100 people can edit a document at the same time, this may be a popular solution for many needs.

Pros:

• Can be edited collaboratively if all users have a Google account;
• can be embedded in iframe for inclusion in LMS or other page;
• can be used for back-and-forth discussion, if desired;
• can set permissions so that it is read-only, or to allow others to edit;
• May be better for users who wish to include mathematics in a more standard word processor experience

Neutral:

• Auto-LaTeX Equations uses CodeCogs.com to translate LaTeX;
• Other editors do not need the add-on installed to view the mathematics, but they do need it if they wish to edit the mathematics.

Cons:

• While Google Docs is available as an app (which does support add-ons), Auto-LaTeX Equations is not available for the app as far as I can tell;
• if embedded in an iframe and you wish others to be able to edit and use Auto-LaTeX Equations, they will have to access the document in its own tab to open the Auto-LaTeX equations interface. It cannot be opened within the iframe.

Overleaf is a widely used online LaTeX environment with many features. Its split-screen layout features syntax highlighting and optionally allows you to auto-compile the LaTeX as you type. It also lets you edit in rich-text format instead of source. They have an extensive gallery with examples and templates for a wide variety of documents.

Thoughts: I’ve used overleaf in my classes by having students type up, submit, and revise proofs in LaTeX. It’s great for getting students into LaTeX quickly.

Pros:

• Can be edited collaboratively;
• The rich-text and auto-compile features may be helpful to those new to LaTeX;
• Lots of quality documentation;
• could be used for back-and-forth discussion;
• supports whole LaTeX document, not just math-mode;
• offers some version control (but pay attention to price tier for features);
• can import packages, such as the very helpful TikZ for mathematical images

Neutral:

• Generates whole PDF documents

Cons:

• More than a few users editing collaboratively requires paid subscription;
• Not designed for class discussion.

Like Overleaf, Papeeria offers online collaborative LaTeX document creation in split-screen format.

Thoughts: . I’ve only learned about Papeeria recently, so I have not experimented with it much, yet. One thing I noticed immediately its free version (Epsilon) supports an unlimited number of collaborators, but only one private document. Though private documents can be archived for later, so it’s more like “one private document at a time”. You can access a live demo from their main page.

Pros:

• Unlimited collaborators, even in the free (Epsilon) version;
• Nice syntax highlighting;
• the split screen functions nicely;
• offers version control

Neutral:

• Generates whole PDF documents

Cons:

• Interface does not have as many features as Overleaf (such as auto-update);
• free version has only one private document, paid baseline has only ten — this may be a problem, depending on needs.

PreTeXt’s motto is “write once, run anywhere”. The principle is that a single human readable XML file can be interpreted to compile into various different formats. This is the product of a ongoing effort by a number of academics, funded by multiple NSF grants. There is a nice Gallery of mature textbook projects created with PreTeXt.

Thoughts: I’ve been impressed by PreTeXt so far. Once it is set up, it is pretty smooth to create documents. I still have a lot to learn about the correct way to customize documents with it, and I am looking forward to seeing the documentation continue to improve.

Pros:

• Even though it is still in development, it has pretty good documentation with a lot of examples of what it can do.
• There are existing books which demonstrate its power.
• Compile to multiple formats, including PDF or HTML, including braille (with Nemeth code for math).

Neutral:

• You will be writing in XML.

Cons:

• Installing is a multistep process involving a few different pieces of software. While the instructions are pretty, it may be intimidating to people who are not comfortable diving into various kinds of technology.
• Tweaking the configuration files to suit your needs will likely be a learning process.
• It takes a little more effort to properly include images
• Not appropriate for discussion; it’s really for publishing.

UpMath styles itself as an alternative to MathJax. It is an project created by a single developer, but it seems sleek and functional. It lets a user quickly create web content using markdown language and LaTeX by creating html with mathematics images in realtime, in a WYSIWYG fashion. The user then can download the HTML. Images are either hosted on the same website or generated in real-time, but it isn’t explained.

Pros:

• Straightforward to use;
• features auto-updating split-screen and syntax highlighting;
• Markdown is nice, and very readable;
• Source code is available if you want to host your.

Neutral:

• Provides HTML for you to copy;
• Images hosted on 3rd party site;
• Uses a cookie to store your work so you can leave and come back — to get to original document (which explains use of Markdown and LaTeX), can delete the cookie and refresh page.

Cons:

• You must host the document somewhere? How long will the images be stored for you? It’s not clear;
• More appropriate for publishing, rather than discussions.

Desmos is one of the easiest online graph tools to dive into, and it has a surprising amount of power under its relatively light frame.

Thoughts: I’ve used Desmos often for lots of minor demonstrations. Its interface is simple enough that you can ask students to try things out in it without too much of an orientation. Desmos supports classroom activities; though I have not used them in a class. It supports LaTeX in labels within graphs. believe if you type LaTeX math into its activity editor, it will render the proper mathematics, but I don’t know the limitations of this. When you copy & paste from its math cells, it automatically translates between its math display and LaTeX. Lots of great public graphs already exist, for example search "Riemann sums Desmos".

Pros:

• Mobile app available;
• beautiful graphs quickly;
• One of the most user-friendly interfaces out there;
• animation is easy, for quick and interesting demonstrations;
• surprisingly capable for a 2D-plotter; for example there are nice interactive Riemann-sum demonstrations;
• Can build classroom activities; has a library of publicly available demonstrations and activities
• copying from, or pasting into, a Desmos cell translated between LaTeX and Desmos math.

Neutral:

• It’s made to do 2D graphs

Cons:

• While it does boast many features for a simple 2D grapher, it does have its share of limitations, and if you really dive into it, you may find yourself bridling against those boundaries as you try to push them.

Geogebra handles a wide array of mathematics; not only geometry and algebra, as its name implies, but also Calculus and statistics. It is relatively easy to use and allows for LaTeX.

Thoughts: Geogebra is a powerful tool that supports a variety of wide variety of graphical applications. It supports LaTeX in its TextTool, but I was not able to make LaTeX display in activities. Lots of great public demonstrations and activities exist; for example, search "Riemann sums geogebra".

Pros:

• Has a number of mobile apps available;
• strong graphing functionality;
• features to support a very wide array of mathematics — easily handles things that are tedious or impossible in Desmos;
• can build classroom activities; has a library of publicly available demonstrations and activities
• can create classroom activities.

Neutral:

Cons:

• Higher overall barrier-to-entry than Desmos means that students will likely need more signficant orientation.

Padlet is a “virtual bulletin board” that lets you post a collection (or “padlet”) of “Post-It Note”-like squares of content. Each padlet has a predefined type, such as “wall”, “canvas”, “timeline”, etc., allowing you to customize how it is intended to be used.

Thoughts: Padlet is quite charming. It’s simple and easy to get into, and may prove very accessible to students. But given its minimal structure, if you want to use it with a class, you probably want to think carefully how and where it can add educational value and also about how you will enforce/encourage structure in the class. It’s too bad it doesn’t support inline math, or math in comments; those would be very helpful.

Pros:

• Available as an app;
• can be embedded anywhere you can include an iframe;
• quick and easy to use and share, can view shared content via url without logging in.
• LaTeX is easily converted to math (and back) by selecting it and clicking the π button.
• the various kinds of padlets allow for a variety of potential uses — for example this might be a great place for informal Q&A or for concept-mapping;
• allows for commenting on posts (though comments do not allow LaTeX), reactions (including grading posts), attributing posts to individuals;
• privacy settings (found in the share menu) can set password, or restrict visitor access to read-only, read-write, or read-write-modify.

Neutral:

• Informal;
• Intented for “alternative structure” information sharing.
• Padlet’s privacy policy does not explicitly refer to FERPA, but Common Sense (a non-profit advising on children’s issues) has a privacy evaluation for Padlet which notes potential issues, especially for use with children.

Cons:

• May be difficult to organize a padlet if used heavily;
• Does not support inline math. I.e., If x \in S then, etc., cannot be done; all expressions are on their own line;
• choices for solid background colors are strangely limited;
• The site has a kind of whimsical charm in that it comes up with fine titles, subtitles, and backgrounds, by default. This is nice, but you should be able to set a default “boring” background so that you don’t have to fix it every time. The “whimsical” backgrounds can be quite busy.

Here is an example: