Can't Judge a Powder B

User avatar
samlan16
Member
Member
Posts: 523
Joined: December 30th, 2013, 2:54 pm
Division: Grad
State: TN
Contact:

Re: Can't Judge a Powder B

Postby samlan16 » March 13th, 2015, 8:38 am

Conniving_Vegetable wrote:So, I'm from Minnesota, State's tomorrow. Should I bring test tube stoppers?

I don't know anymore, so use your discretion.
Remember, we are proud of every team that participated and you are all winners.

Conniving_Vegetable
Member
Member
Posts: 18
Joined: February 25th, 2015, 1:20 pm
State: -

Re: Can't Judge a Powder B

Postby Conniving_Vegetable » March 13th, 2015, 8:43 am

I guess I won't. Better safe than sorry.

User avatar
boomvroomshroom
Member
Member
Posts: 189
Joined: February 19th, 2015, 5:10 pm
Division: C
State: CA

Re: Can't Judge a Powder B

Postby boomvroomshroom » March 13th, 2015, 9:47 am

samlan16 wrote:
Conniving_Vegetable wrote:So, I'm from Minnesota, State's tomorrow. Should I bring test tube stoppers?

I don't know anymore, so use your discretion.


What purpose do they have? It's not like anything will explode on you, and poking the things give as much effect as shaking them up.

User avatar
crisume
Member
Member
Posts: 5
Joined: March 13th, 2015, 8:06 am
Division: B
State: MN

Re: Can't Judge a Powder B

Postby crisume » March 23rd, 2015, 5:54 pm

Hello ////
I am doing Can't Judge this year, and our state CJAP observation sheet was sketchy.
It had us record our observations as usual, however next to the observation, we had to write "how we got the observation", kind of like a mini procedure.
I've never heard or seen anything that required us to do this, so we weren't really sure what do write (like how detailed etc) plus we were running low on time, so I scribbled some short (and probably too short) things down.

I was wondering if anyone else had encountered this, and if so, what the standards are for a good "mini procedure".
Idk what else to call it lol ;-; Thank chu

dholdgreve
Member
Member
Posts: 512
Joined: February 6th, 2006, 2:20 pm
Division: B
State: -

Re: Can't Judge a Powder B

Postby dholdgreve » March 24th, 2015, 6:50 am

crisume wrote:Hello ////
I am doing Can't Judge this year, and our state CJAP observation sheet was sketchy.
It had us record our observations as usual, however next to the observation, we had to write "how we got the observation", kind of like a mini procedure.
I've never heard or seen anything that required us to do this, so we weren't really sure what do write (like how detailed etc) plus we were running low on time, so I scribbled some short (and probably too short) things down.

I was wondering if anyone else had encountered this, and if so, what the standards are for a good "mini procedure".
Idk what else to call it lol ;-; Thank chu


What a shame... For an event supervisor at the state level to inject their own personal twist on the rules that has been unpracticed by all for the entire year is just sad... So sorry you had to go through that...
Dan Holdgreve
Northmont Science Olympiad

Dedicated to the Memory of Len Joeris
"For the betterment of Science"

SPP SciO
Member
Member
Posts: 259
Joined: March 24th, 2015, 8:21 am
Division: B
State: NY
Location: Brooklyn

Re: Can't Judge a Powder B

Postby SPP SciO » March 24th, 2015, 8:44 am

This was mentioned earlier in the thread but I think it's worth revisiting:

How much quantification is really possible, assuming the ES provides the bare minimum (NaOH, HCl, water, waste container, and nothing else)? If students have practiced with a "scoop," which would be the better observation: A) "One scoop of the sample completely dissolved in 1.0 mL of water with gentle stirring" or B) "Approximately 0.1 gram of the sample completely dissolved in 1.0 mL of water with gentle stirring." If I were the ES, I'd go with A - it was less quant-y, but a better observation. "Observation" B in the example relies on an estimation, based on an inference, based on prior observations at some point with a scale. I'm just suspicious that some ES would, using a "quick-and-dirty" rubric, weight B higher, because at first glance it contains more numbers.

What other quantifiable observations are being made? Is it enough to describe conductivity of a solution as "strong" or "weak" based on how brightly an LED appears to glow, or would it be better to avoid using those sort of modifying words, since they're meaningless without a reference comparison? Also, how closely are student observations scrutinized to make sure they're, well, real? It's totally plausible that students could write an observation that they didn't actually make (clearly in defiance of "spirit of the rules" but how is it caught?).

We've been struggling to up the quantification in observations - is it legal to use time? Are students allowed to use a watch, or the clock in the room? Is an observation such as "When 1.0 mL of HCl was added to the substance, a fizzing sound was audible at a distance of 15 centimeters from the ear for a duration of 4.4 seconds" any better than ""When 1.0 mL of HCl was added to the substance, a fizzing sound was audible" ? How the students would justify writing 15 cm, I'm not sure - maybe they knew their test tube was approximately that length and estimated? If they used a timer on their watch, the duration part could be justified, but, not every team would have equal access to that since stopwatches weren't explicitly permitted. First-year coach, first-year team, first-time post - thanks for your consideration!
Coach
MS 821 Sunset Park Prep
http://www.sppscio.com

Fibonacci924
Member
Member
Posts: 35
Joined: October 27th, 2014, 9:27 am
Division: C
State: MN
Location: In the Castle by the lake, determining which book I should read in to next.

Re: Can't Judge a Powder B

Postby Fibonacci924 » April 29th, 2015, 1:16 pm

crisume wrote:Hello ////
I am doing Can't Judge this year, and our state CJAP observation sheet was sketchy.
It had us record our observations as usual, however next to the observation, we had to write "how we got the observation", kind of like a mini procedure.
I've never heard or seen anything that required us to do this, so we weren't really sure what do write (like how detailed etc) plus we were running low on time, so I scribbled some short (and probably too short) things down.

I was wondering if anyone else had encountered this, and if so, what the standards are for a good "mini procedure".
Idk what else to call it lol ;-; Thank chu


That actually happened to me once. If the person conducting experiments is done, have them do the mini procedure because you
have too many things to write.
"Truth is like poetry. And most people *butterfly* hate poetry."- Overheard in a Washington DC bar.

Always remember: P. Sherman, 42 Wallaby Way, Sydney.

Two time member of the Eternal Order of the Assassinators

User avatar
asthedeer
Member
Member
Posts: 56
Joined: November 5th, 2013, 6:04 am
Division: C
State: MD
Location: On Earth.
Contact:

Re: Can't Judge a Powder B

Postby asthedeer » May 22nd, 2015, 7:49 am

Does anyone have the raw scores for nationals?
Pilgrimage Homeschool Science Olympiad 2017!!!
Anatomy, ExD, Rocks and Minerals, Helicopters.

Check out my blog!
rockandminerals4him.wordpress.com

For I know the plans I have for you, declares the Lord, plans for welfare and not for evil, to give you a future and a hope.
~God, Jeremiah 29:11


Return to “2015 Lab Events”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron