Scioly.org

I have a couple of other questions as well!

1. If our hypothesis isn’t supported, this doesn’t reflect poorly on us, right? Will a write up with an incorrect hypothesis / reasoning score lower than one with the same procedure / experiment, but with the right initial prediction?

2. In the analysis, am I allowed to provide reasoning for why our data was the way it was, even if we didn’t measure it / even if it’s speculation? For example, if we’re talking about a bouncing ball, can I explain that it bounced higher when dropped from a higher point because of impulse, even though we never directly measured the impulse? The rubric says “all statements must be supported by data” but I’m not sure whether that applies here.

3. What happens if you don’t have an outlier? Do you just state that in your analysis? How should this be worded?

mpnobivucyxtz wrote:I have a couple of other questions as well!

1. If our hypothesis isn’t supported, this doesn’t reflect poorly on us, right? Will a write up with an incorrect hypothesis / reasoning score lower than one with the same procedure / experiment, but with the right initial prediction?

2. In the analysis, am I allowed to provide reasoning for why our data was the way it was, even if we didn’t measure it / even if it’s speculation? For example, if we’re talking about a bouncing ball, can I explain that it bounced higher when dropped from a higher point because of impulse, even though we never directly measured the impulse? The rubric says “all statements must be supported by data” but I’m not sure whether that applies here.

3. What happens if you don’t have an outlier? Do you just state that in your analysis? How should this be worded?

If your hypothesis isn't supported by the data it should be fine. That was something we were worried about too when it happened, but it shouldn't affect anything. We didn't get any points off. Just make sure to explain a possible reason why.

In terms of the analysis, sorry but I can't really help you with that. My partner does that section. However, you really should make sure to have an outlier in your data. It's much more convenient to be able to talk about it.

Ambrosia wrote:

mpnobivucyxtz wrote:I have a couple of other questions as well!

1. If our hypothesis isn’t supported, this doesn’t reflect poorly on us, right? Will a write up with an incorrect hypothesis / reasoning score lower than one with the same procedure / experiment, but with the right initial prediction?

2. In the analysis, am I allowed to provide reasoning for why our data was the way it was, even if we didn’t measure it / even if it’s speculation? For example, if we’re talking about a bouncing ball, can I explain that it bounced higher when dropped from a higher point because of impulse, even though we never directly measured the impulse? The rubric says “all statements must be supported by data” but I’m not sure whether that applies here.

3. What happens if you don’t have an outlier? Do you just state that in your analysis? How should this be worded?

If your hypothesis isn't supported by the data it should be fine. That was something we were worried about too when it happened, but it shouldn't affect anything. We didn't get any points off. Just make sure to explain a possible reason why.

In terms of the analysis, sorry but I can't really help you with that. My partner does that section. However, you really should make sure to have an outlier in your data. It's much more convenient to be able to talk about it.

I would advise against making up data - at state last year the event supervisors would tier any teams who faked data.

dxu46 wrote: I would advise against making up data.

How would they know unless they see you not doing the experiment? What would you do in the case there are no outliers?

mpnobivucyxtz wrote:

dxu46 wrote: I would advise against making up data.

How would they know unless they see you not doing the experiment? What would you do in the case there are no outliers?

The Event Supervisors in Missouri watch us. If you don't have an outlier, don't write about it.

dxu46 wrote:

mpnobivucyxtz wrote:

dxu46 wrote: I would advise against making up data.

How would they know unless they see you not doing the experiment? What would you do in the case there are no outliers?

The Event Supervisors in Missouri watch us. If you don't have an outlier, don't write about it.

But it’s a rubric point right? So should i explicitly say “there were no unusual data points observed”

mpnobivucyxtz wrote:

dxu46 wrote:

mpnobivucyxtz wrote:
How would they know unless they see you not doing the experiment? What would you do in the case there are no outliers?

The Event Supervisors in Missouri watch us. If you don't have an outlier, don't write about it.

But it’s a rubric point right? So should i explicitly say “there were no unusual data points observed”

I think you would just write something about how well the data follows a trend. IDK because I don't do analysis.

Are we allowed to use the materials we bring in as a part of the experiment? Like using the meterstick we bring in to make a ramp or something?

mpnobivucyxtz wrote:Are we allowed to use the materials we bring in as a part of the experiment? Like using the meterstick we bring in to make a ramp or something?

I think so - we are allowed to use our own stopwatches, so why not metersticks?

mpnobivucyxtz wrote:Are we allowed to use the materials we bring in as a part of the experiment? Like using the meterstick we bring in to make a ramp or something?

Like the ES at my invitational said, if everyone else has one, you can use it. (In reference to taping something to a table, but you get the idea.)