Friday* |
Mathematical Models and Population Dynamics Ezrailson Akeley 115 |
Vectors Kuhlman/Keller Curriculum Plan Ezrailson AK-L 125 |
Thursday, July 14, 2011
Day 5: Friday, Friday...Thank you, Everyone!
Wednesday, July 13, 2011
Welcome to Day 3 of our Shortcourse, Everyone!
Enzyme Catalyst Lab
Wednesday |  |
Keller and Ezrailson AK-L 115 | |
Chemical Kinetics – Koppang and Kuhlman Pardee 103 |
Tuesday, July 12, 2011
Monday Assignment(Density of a Metal)
1. We used copper for our experiment. The true value fell within the confidence interval. The experimentally measured density was within acceptable borders. The error was minimal which suggests accuracy.
2. The difference in the M values got larger with more trials. This larger difference is not intuitive. Yes, I would explain the change to the students conceptually.
3. If I made a determinant(human) error for the first measurement in the liquid density portion, it will affect my results but not necessarily my measurements. If both mass and volume were not correct and the values deviated as farther as possible towards opposite sides of the spectrum, it would not affect susequent measurements.
2. The difference in the M values got larger with more trials. This larger difference is not intuitive. Yes, I would explain the change to the students conceptually.
3. If I made a determinant(human) error for the first measurement in the liquid density portion, it will affect my results but not necessarily my measurements. If both mass and volume were not correct and the values deviated as farther as possible towards opposite sides of the spectrum, it would not affect susequent measurements.
Welcome to Day 2 of the Integrating Math and Science Instruction Short Course
Today's Schedule
Tuesday Discussion of Yesterday's Density Lab Keller and Ezrailson AK-L 115 Log Functions - Koppang Pardee 103 |
Working with Excel
Monday, July 11, 2011
Day 1 Integration of Mathematics and Science Instruction
Density Lab
Yes our true value fell within the confidence level. Both are within the confidence level, so we could conclude that our value is within the range for the true value.
Question 2
The confidence level increases with increasing % which is counter intuitive. The more confidence you have the "closer" the values should be. But if you think about it,
A broad question which can be answered in many different ways has a higher chance of being answered correctly than a more specific question with a smaller range of acceptable answers.
Question 3
If you use the beginning water level in your graduated cylinder for all three readings then each value would be off. If on the other hand you change the water for each of the volume readings, then you have a chance that the first incorrect value will only affect the first measurement. It won't help though if you still read the cylinder incorrectly. For our group, the first value was indepentent of the last two (we emptied the water and started fresh), but for the last two readings we just added more metal so an incorrect reading would carry through to the end.
Metal density questions - Greg
1. Yes, the true value for the density of nickel of 8.902 fell within the 90% and 95% confidence interval. The significance of being within the confidence interval verifies accuracy of our experimental value.
2. The interval increases as the confident percentage increases. To have a higher confidence level that the experimental value falls within the confidence range requires a bigger interval.
3. The error would affect subsequent measure if one error is made in determining mass or volume. If an error is made in determining both the mass and the volume in the same way, subsequent measures may not be affected.
2. The interval increases as the confident percentage increases. To have a higher confidence level that the experimental value falls within the confidence range requires a bigger interval.
3. The error would affect subsequent measure if one error is made in determining mass or volume. If an error is made in determining both the mass and the volume in the same way, subsequent measures may not be affected.
Monday assignment
1. Did the true value for density fall within the confidence interval? What is the significance of the confidence interval with respect your experimentally measured density and the true value of density?
2. Does the interval increase or decrease and as the confidence level changes from 90 to 95 to 99% and is the change intuitive? Could you explain the change to your students conceptually?
3. The procedure for measuring density for the liquid used a graphical approach as opposed to our three trials and average method for determining the density of the solid. If you made a determinant (human) error for your first measurement in the liquid density portion, would this error plague or affect the subsequent measurements? (try to think of a situation where it would not and a situation where it would).
From jerseyinsd (Sam)
1. Yes, the value falls between the confidence value. The value shows the likelihood that the true density is somewhere between the two values, as calculated by the confidence formula.
2. The interval increases as the value increases which, in my opinion, is counterintuitive. I would have to use an example of something visual to explain that, as the percentage increases it is MORE likely that it is within an area, range, etc.
3. Human error could affect subsequent measurements, depending on what was being measured. If you mis-read the scale, the error would NOT affect subsequent measurements of mass, but if you misread the volume, you might continuously be off in subsequent volumes.
2. Does the interval increase or decrease and as the confidence level changes from 90 to 95 to 99% and is the change intuitive? Could you explain the change to your students conceptually?
3. The procedure for measuring density for the liquid used a graphical approach as opposed to our three trials and average method for determining the density of the solid. If you made a determinant (human) error for your first measurement in the liquid density portion, would this error plague or affect the subsequent measurements? (try to think of a situation where it would not and a situation where it would).
From jerseyinsd (Sam)
1. Yes, the value falls between the confidence value. The value shows the likelihood that the true density is somewhere between the two values, as calculated by the confidence formula.
2. The interval increases as the value increases which, in my opinion, is counterintuitive. I would have to use an example of something visual to explain that, as the percentage increases it is MORE likely that it is within an area, range, etc.
3. Human error could affect subsequent measurements, depending on what was being measured. If you mis-read the scale, the error would NOT affect subsequent measurements of mass, but if you misread the volume, you might continuously be off in subsequent volumes.
Density Daily Questions for Tyler Dahl
1. Yes it falls within the 95% interval. It helped us identify aluminum as our metal.
2. Increases. I would have trouble explaining the change to my students.
3. It would be independant of the other measurements.
2. Increases. I would have trouble explaining the change to my students.
3. It would be independant of the other measurements.
day one questions
1. Did the true value for density fall within the confidence interval? What is the significance of the confidence interval with respect your experimentally measured density and the true value of density?
2. Does the interval increase or decrease and as the confidence level changes from 90 to 95 to 99% and is the change intuitive? Could you explain the change to your students conceptually?
3. The procedure for measuring density for the liquid used a graphical approach as opposed to our three trials and average method for determining the density of the solid. If you made a determinant (human) error for your first measurement in the liquid density portion, would this error plague or affect the subsequent measurements? (try to think of a situation where it would not and a situation where it would).
2. Does the interval increase or decrease and as the confidence level changes from 90 to 95 to 99% and is the change intuitive? Could you explain the change to your students conceptually?
3. The procedure for measuring density for the liquid used a graphical approach as opposed to our three trials and average method for determining the density of the solid. If you made a determinant (human) error for your first measurement in the liquid density portion, would this error plague or affect the subsequent measurements? (try to think of a situation where it would not and a situation where it would).
My answers - Kelly Farley
1. No, unfortunately ours did not match, but was close. The true value for zinc is 7.14. Our intervals were 6.48-6.91 at 90% and 6.44 - 6.95 at 95%.
2. The interval increased as the confidence level increased. The range that is considered as acceptable is so large that the results are really meaningless.
3. If you make an error, initially, and continue to make the same error with subsequent measurements it should not make a difference. However, if you make an error and it is corrected when you gather the rest of your data it will skew your results.
2. The interval increased as the confidence level increased. The range that is considered as acceptable is so large that the results are really meaningless.
3. If you make an error, initially, and continue to make the same error with subsequent measurements it should not make a difference. However, if you make an error and it is corrected when you gather the rest of your data it will skew your results.
Mike's_answers
1. Yes, it fell within the 95% interval. Our density was smaller than the accepted value. These looked like drops from an aluminum welder, and perhaps there was some voiding or trapped air pockets, which would make them less dense. The confidence interval shows how certain we are that the true density lies within the,interval.
2. The interval increases (gets bigger) as the confidence level increases. I think that this is counter intuitive. I thought that the interval would shrink as we got more confident! I would tell students that it is more likely to hit something big like the broad side of a barn than something small, like a chicken.
3. If you forgot to subtract the weight of the beaker, it would change your density and the slope of the line if you used (0,0) as a data point. However, if you did not, the y intercept would be the weight of the beaker and the slope would be the density of the fluid.
2. The interval increases (gets bigger) as the confidence level increases. I think that this is counter intuitive. I thought that the interval would shrink as we got more confident! I would tell students that it is more likely to hit something big like the broad side of a barn than something small, like a chicken.
3. If you forgot to subtract the weight of the beaker, it would change your density and the slope of the line if you used (0,0) as a data point. However, if you did not, the y intercept would be the weight of the beaker and the slope would be the density of the fluid.
Daily Questions and Homework
Post Your Answers to the Daily Question(s) and homework here below the questions:
1. Did the true value for density fall within the confidence interval? What is the significance of the confidence interval with respect your experimentally measured density and the true value of density?
Yes, I am 90% confidence that Our expermental values are resentable.
2. Does the interval increase or decrease and as the confidence level changes from 90 to 95 to 99% and is the change intuitive? Could you explain the change to your students conceptually?
The interval increased because we have to make it bigger to be more sure that our data would fall where we thought it would.
3. The procedure for measuring density for the liquid used a graphical approach as opposed to our three trials and average method for determining the density of the solid. If you made a determinant (human) error for your first measurement in the liquid density portion, would this error plague or affect the subsequent measurements? (try to think of a situation where it would not and a situation where it would).
If I read the water level wrong it would affect the every test but if the mass is wrong on the first it would only affect only that first sample.
Another test
I am testing whether or not I can post on the blog.
Go Twins!!!!!!!!
Should the Twins trade Span for Jamie Shields?
Go Twins!!!!!!!!
Should the Twins trade Span for Jamie Shields?
Sunday, July 10, 2011
Welcome to: Integrating Math and Science Instruction!
There will be 5 Face to face meetings, one equivalent day of independent study with development of a curriculum plan during the week of July 11 -15
Tentative First Day (Monday) Schedule
Meet in Akeley Lawrence Science Center (AK-L) 125
8:30 – 9:00…….Registration, Gary Girard, Division of Cont Ed.
9:00 – 9:15…….Introductions and overview (objectives), review of syllabus, MNS program .
9:15 – 9:45…….Pre-survey, Kris DeWitt
9:45 -10:00…....Break
10:00 – 11:00…Web resources, the Blog and more, Cathy Ezrailson
11:00 – 12:00….Begin Density lab. Explanation of the lab driving math modeling understanding. (Pardee 103)
12:00 – 1:30…...Lunch -longer on Monday to find eating places and register vehicles with USD public safety, etc.
1:30 – 3:00…….Density activity continued
3:00 – 4:30…….Math/Science Curriculum Discussion and intro of curriculum plan assignment
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)