Page 5 of 9

Re: Experimental Design B/C

Posted: November 2nd, 2018, 9:49 pm
by dxu46
Wait, is it new that Experimental Design is in the at-the-beginning-of-the-competition time block (same block as Disease Detectives)? Do we know how definite this is?
IIRC, and according to my sister who did expd at nats for 5 years, expd didn't use to be in the morning because she also did disease, which has always been at 7.

Re: Experimental Design B/C

Posted: November 3rd, 2018, 6:58 am
by Unome
Wait, is it new that Experimental Design is in the at-the-beginning-of-the-competition time block (same block as Disease Detectives)? Do we know how definite this is?
IIRC, and according to my sister who did expd at nats for 5 years, expd didn't use to be in the morning because she also did disease, which has always been at 7.
Experimental Design has been in the morning on one occasion in the past, in 2017 (and will be there again this year).

Re: Experimental Design B/C

Posted: November 3rd, 2018, 7:12 am
by Ruby
I was just wondering what the "halfway" cut off for the checklist was. Does anyone know?

Re: Experimental Design B/C

Posted: November 3rd, 2018, 7:18 am
by Anomaly
I was just wondering what the "halfway" cut off for the checklist was. Does anyone know?
I believe up until the Quantitative Data section is the first half and then after 20 minutes they'll give you the Graphs and everything after that section. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, too lazy to look at rules right now.

Re: Experimental Design B/C

Posted: November 3rd, 2018, 10:29 am
by Jacobi
I was just wondering what the "halfway" cut off for the checklist was. Does anyone know?
I believe up until the Quantitative Data section is the first half and then after 20 minutes they'll give you the Graphs and everything after that section. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, too lazy to look at rules right now.
That's right. If you use a standard writer + 2 experiment runners setup, you might have the writer help with the experiment.

Re: Experimental Design B/C

Posted: November 13th, 2018, 10:44 am
by Ender1982
So the scoring packet here: https://www.soinc.org/sites/default/fil ... 101018.pdf


1.) Is analysis really only half a page?
2.) is procedure really only half a page?

I didn't see where in the rules it says we can ask for more paper during the event.

So yeah......

Re: Experimental Design B/C

Posted: November 13th, 2018, 12:17 pm
by kate!
So the scoring packet here: https://www.soinc.org/sites/default/fil ... 101018.pdf


1.) Is analysis really only half a page?
2.) is procedure really only half a page?

I didn't see where in the rules it says we can ask for more paper during the event.

So yeah......
Not every proctor follows this form. Plus, the rules don't say you can't ask for more paper. I think most proctors would be pretty lenient, because some people have larger handwriting or more to write.

Re: Experimental Design B/C

Posted: November 13th, 2018, 12:37 pm
by UTF-8 U+6211 U+662F
So the scoring packet here: https://www.soinc.org/sites/default/fil ... 101018.pdf


1.) Is analysis really only half a page?
2.) is procedure really only half a page?

I didn't see where in the rules it says we can ask for more paper during the event.

So yeah......
Not every proctor follows this form. Plus, the rules don't say you can't ask for more paper. I think most proctors would be pretty lenient, because some people have larger handwriting or more to write.
After all, tiny handwriting is harder to grade

Re: Experimental Design B/C

Posted: November 13th, 2018, 2:22 pm
by dxu46
So the scoring packet here: https://www.soinc.org/sites/default/fil ... 101018.pdf


1.) Is analysis really only half a page?
2.) is procedure really only half a page?

I didn't see where in the rules it says we can ask for more paper during the event.

So yeah......
They're more like guidelines (if you're writing many many pages, then you're probably doing something wrong, same if you only write a sentence.)

Re: Experimental Design B/C

Posted: November 13th, 2018, 2:57 pm
by Jacobi
So the scoring packet here: https://www.soinc.org/sites/default/fil ... 101018.pdf


1.) Is analysis really only half a page?
2.) is procedure really only half a page?

I didn't see where in the rules it says we can ask for more paper during the event.

So yeah......
They're more like guidelines (if you're writing many many pages, then you're probably doing something wrong, same if you only write a sentence.)
I think that procedure shouldn't take longer than that unless you're doing a complex experiment. You may want to extend diagrams up to the E section, or on the back.

In general, you should be able to ask for more paper, or use the back of the page they give.

Re: Experimental Design B/C

Posted: December 9th, 2018, 8:34 pm
by mpnobivucyxtz
hey, we just did our first invitational and we wanted to confirm some things about grading.

1. Important information about data collection given: we got 0 points despite writing, verbatim "since the data was collected by a manually operated stopwatch read by eye, human reaction time may have artificially inflated the time recorded". Why is this wrong? Are we misinterpreting what this part of the rubric means?

2. We got points off for using line breaks on our graph, is this universally accepted as incorrect?

3. We had a diagram but only got 1 point. How in depth do diagrams have to be? Should they be labeled?

4. How do we write Standard of Comparison? This is what we had "Our SOC is the trial with a paper square with an area of 16cm^2 because it was our lowest IV level and would presumably experience the least air resistance. Thus, by comparing our other IV levels with this control, we would ensure that our change in DV was due strictly to changes in our IV, and not inherent properties of falling paper."
I get the wording is weird but I was essentially trying to say that since the falling paper with least area is closest to real free fall, using it as our control would give us a basis on how paper regularly falls, which would give context to our other trials and ensure there was no flaw in our experiment due to properties of specifically paper falling (like, for example, if somehow paper's motion differed from what is expected regularly from falling objects). Should I just have described it better?

Re: Experimental Design B/C

Posted: December 9th, 2018, 8:55 pm
by kate!
hey, we just did our first invitational and we wanted to confirm some things about grading.

1. Important information about data collection given: we got 0 points despite writing, verbatim "since the data was collected by a manually operated stopwatch read by eye, human reaction time may have artificially inflated the time recorded". Why is this wrong? Are we misinterpreting what this part of the rubric means?

2. We got points off for using line breaks on our graph, is this universally accepted as incorrect?

3. We had a diagram but only got 1 point. How in depth do diagrams have to be? Should they be labeled?

4. How do we write Standard of Comparison? This is what we had "Our SOC is the trial with a paper square with an area of 16cm^2 because it was our lowest IV level and would presumably experience the least air resistance. Thus, by comparing our other IV levels with this control, we would ensure that our change in DV was due strictly to changes in our IV, and not inherent properties of falling paper."
I get the wording is weird but I was essentially trying to say that since the falling paper with least area is closest to real free fall, using it as our control would give us a basis on how paper regularly falls, which would give context to our other trials and ensure there was no flaw in our experiment due to properties of specifically paper falling (like, for example, if somehow paper's motion differed from what is expected regularly from falling objects). Should I just have described it better?
1. Personally, I think that information would better be described as an experimental error. They aren't really looking for things that affect the experiment, just things that you noticed.
2. It depends what you were testing. Did you have a trial for 0 IV and 0 DV? If not, then you should have started the graph at the first DV.
3. It depends a lot on the diagram itself. It could have been irrelevant or you could have had a diagram on a different part of the procedure.
4. I'd say that that SOC should be a little better described, but mostly it seems logical.

Re: Experimental Design B/C

Posted: December 10th, 2018, 6:05 am
by mpnobivucyxtz
hey, we just did our first invitational and we wanted to confirm some things about grading.

1. Important information about data collection given: we got 0 points despite writing, verbatim "since the data was collected by a manually operated stopwatch read by eye, human reaction time may have artificially inflated the time recorded". Why is this wrong? Are we misinterpreting what this part of the rubric means?

2. We got points off for using line breaks on our graph, is this universally accepted as incorrect?

3. We had a diagram but only got 1 point. How in depth do diagrams have to be? Should they be labeled?

4. How do we write Standard of Comparison? This is what we had "Our SOC is the trial with a paper square with an area of 16cm^2 because it was our lowest IV level and would presumably experience the least air resistance. Thus, by comparing our other IV levels with this control, we would ensure that our change in DV was due strictly to changes in our IV, and not inherent properties of falling paper."
I get the wording is weird but I was essentially trying to say that since the falling paper with least area is closest to real free fall, using it as our control would give us a basis on how paper regularly falls, which would give context to our other trials and ensure there was no flaw in our experiment due to properties of specifically paper falling (like, for example, if somehow paper's motion differed from what is expected regularly from falling objects). Should I just have described it better?
1. Personally, I think that information would better be described as an experimental error. They aren't really looking for things that affect the experiment, just things that you noticed.
2. It depends what you were testing. Did you have a trial for 0 IV and 0 DV? If not, then you should have started the graph at the first DV.
3. It depends a lot on the diagram itself. It could have been irrelevant or you could have had a diagram on a different part of the procedure.
4. I'd say that that SOC should be a little better described, but mostly it seems logical.
for the 1st one, it was an experimental error. Just one of the rubric points says data collection. and we didn't have 0 DV or IV but the line breaks were still incorrect :/

Re: Experimental Design B/C

Posted: December 10th, 2018, 2:01 pm
by kate!
for the 1st one, it was an experimental error. Just one of the rubric points says data collection. and we didn't have 0 DV or IV but the line breaks were still incorrect :/
Hmm, I don't see a problem with your explanation of the error... then again, maybe the proctor was just harsh?
Also, if you didn't have any data for 0, you shouldn't have put it in the graph and therefore you wouldn't need a break there. I'm not sure what your other data was like, but maybe the proctor didn't think your data should have been so far apart.

Re: Experimental Design B/C

Posted: December 16th, 2018, 4:34 pm
by dxu46
for the 1st one, it was an experimental error. Just one of the rubric points says data collection. and we didn't have 0 DV or IV but the line breaks were still incorrect :/
Hmm, I don't see a problem with your explanation of the error... then again, maybe the proctor was just harsh?
Did you describe the error and explain how it affected the data?