Scioly.org

fourLoko wrote:Could you guys give me some input on this?

So I was thinking about a practice my team did about reaction rate with alka seltzer tablets. Our instinct was to test surface area vs reaction rate, so we divided up the tablets, calculated surface area, dissolved them, etc etc. The thing is though, for a larger tablet, wouldn't the reaction rate be influenced by both the increased surface area and an increased volume? I was thinking about trying to determine the relationship between the Surface Area/Volume ratio to time instead so it would account for both the surface area and volume. Am I overthinking this? Would a simple SA v time experiment have been sufficient?

In this case I think volume should be a controlled variable, because it would affect reaction rate. however you could have still conducted your experiment, listed it as a control, and write about it in the error section.

Are the topics at states anything different from what I should expect?

Bozongle wrote:Can someone give me some advice for Errors? It seems to be the only one I'm consistently doing bad on in our practices.

What I do is basically state anything that has and could have gone wrong. Talk about errors with you data collection, such as faulty equipment. Then say the effect the errors had on your data, which would probably involve it being skewed one way or the other.

A lot of the time you should be able to get your errors from your qualitative observations.

What does the rubric mean by "other ways to look at the given hypothesis"? I know it is not made extremely clear, but I would like to know what everybody else talks about in this section.

aaronstar1 wrote:What does the rubric mean by "other ways to look at the given hypothesis"? I know it is not made extremely clear, but I would like to know what everybody else talks about in this section.

My interpretation was that you should describe another experiment that could test the same hypothesis as your experiment.

I know this is a silly example, and the actual experiment is more likely to apply to B division, but I think this should convey the general idea. Let's say your experiment was shooting gummy bears with a rubber band. Your hypothesis is "If the rubber band is stretched farther back, then the gummy bear will shoot farther." So in your experiment you just hold the rubber the band on the table, stretch it back with the bear inside, and let it launch the bear to slide across the table. Then in the "Applications and Recommendations for Further Use" you can say something like "A further experiment to test this hypothesis could be launching gummy bears with a catapult powered by rubber band, or launching gummy bears off the edge of the table. Then the effect of the bear's launch through the air could be studied instead of it sliding along the table."

I'm having some trouble with the analysis, I always mess it up or confuse it with conclusion. Does anyone have a good sample analysis that I can see?

mrburrito wrote:I'm having some trouble with the analysis, I always mess it up or confuse it with conclusion. Does anyone have a good sample analysis that I can see?

The analysis portion should discuss the data specifically, without regard to the hypothesis. Some things you should touch on are the trend the data showed, how accurate your regression and data points were, and whether you had any clear outliers.

The conclusion should specifically address the hypothesis and whether or not it was supported by your data. You should reference your data to support whatever claim you make, but not near the level of complexity that you would discuss it in the analysis section.

This document contains some sample write-ups to give you a feel for what should be included in each section: http://www.sciencenc.com/coaches-instit ... sent08.pdf

JustDroobles wrote:

mrburrito wrote:I'm having some trouble with the analysis, I always mess it up or confuse it with conclusion. Does anyone have a good sample analysis that I can see?

The analysis portion should discuss the data specifically, without regard to the hypothesis. Some things you should touch on are the trend the data showed, how accurate your regression and data points were, and whether you had any clear outliers.

The conclusion should specifically address the hypothesis and whether or not it was supported by your data. You should reference your data to support whatever claim you make, but not near the level of complexity that you would discuss it in the analysis section.

This document contains some sample write-ups to give you a feel for what should be included in each section: http://www.sciencenc.com/coaches-instit ... sent08.pdf

Thanks.

I have this event in a couple of hours! I think I'm pretty prepared, but wish me luck!