About The Procedures,calculate Volume Of Gas Production - 2200 Words

About The Procedures,calculate Volume Of Gas Production (Lab Report Sample) Content: Course: Biology Unit: Plants: Green Factories Assignment: Experiment: Photosynthesis Lab Report Expectations and Instructions:Lab report grades make up 40% of each unit grade. Before you complete your first lab assignment, please take some time to review the following documents and notes.Please place your work for each section of the lab report below the instructions for each section on the template. Be sure to leave all directions and questions intact within the template.Here are your goals for this lesson: * Make quantitative observations about the effect of light on photosynthesis * Make quantitative observations about the effect of temperature on photosynthesis * Make quantitative comparison between the rate of gas exchange between light and dark environments.** Please read over the teacher comments after the report is submitted and graded. Experiment: PhotosynthesisStudent Name:Date Experiment done:Date Report Completed:Name of Grader:Hypothesis (10 points) : * A prediction of what you think the results of the project will be before you complete the project. * Create an if, then statement for each part of the lab that is related to the goal(s) of the experiment. (Example: Goal: To determine what improves student grades. Hypothesis: If students get adequate rest, then grades will improve).Hypothesis: If I provide more light, then the rate of photosynthesis will increase and so will the amount of released oxygen. If the temperature is raised, then the rate of photosynthesis will increase and if the temperature drops, then the rate will decrease. Procedure (5 points): * In 1st person past tense, write step by step what you actually did in performing the experiment. * Summarize in your own Words. Be sure to include any modifications. * You should include enough detail so that someone could reproduce the experiment based on what you have written.Procedure: For the first experiment, I filled a flask with 100ml of NaHCo3. Later I put a branch of an Elodea plant in the flask. I attached a thermometer to the flask. I dragged the plant lamp all the way down and put it to 10(maximum light) while I turned the overhead lights in the lab off. After sealing the flask with a rubber-stopper, I attached a syringe to it and set a timer in order to measure the volume of gas produced. I measured the volume of gas at 0,0 minutes first and then at 2.5,5,7.5 and 10 minutes. For the second experiment, the same procedure was followed. However all the lights were off. For the third experiment, the procedure included the same as above with the plant light dimmer set on 8 and then I repeated it while it was set on 4. The temperature for all three experiments was 21,5o C and the plant lamp was as close to the work bench as possible. For the fourth experiment, I made a few changes. I took a flask again and filled it with 100 ml of NaHCo3 and a branch of Elodea plant. I also attached a thermometer. Later I took a constant thermometer bath and p laced it on the workbench and put the flask in it while I set the temperature at 40o C. When the thermometer reached a steady temperature of 40o C, I positioned the plant light at the height of the shelf line and set it at 10 (maximum light). The overhead lights were still off. I closed the flask with a stopper and attached a syringe. I set a timer and recorded the gas volume at 0.0,2.5,5,7.5 and 10 minutes. Then I repeated the procedure with the temperature set at 0o C. Data (30 points): * Fill out the data chart(s) below by answering the questions or recording data. * List all measurements and include proper labels and units.Lab Data: Temperature: 21,5o CPlant type:Elodea plantExperiment 1: Light Setting:10 (maximum)only the plant lamp was on ,the overhead lights were offTime (min):Volume (mL)Change in volume (mL)0.00____2.524.924.95.0 47 22.17.5 68.2 21.210.0 88.6 20.4Experiment 2: Light Setting:0, the overhead lights were offTime (min):Volume (mL)Change in volume (mL)0.0 88,6______2.5 85 3,65.0 82.7 2.37.5 80.4 2.310.0 78.2 2.2Experiment 3:Light Setting: 8Light Setting 4Time (min)Volume (mL)Time (min)Volume (mL)0.01,40.0 1,12.522,52.5 16,75.043,35.0 327.5637.5 4710.08310.0 61,5Experi ment 4: Light setting: 10Temp: 40 CTemp: 0 CTime (min)Volume (mL)Time (min)Volume (mL)0.00.4 0.0 02.592.5 1.75.017.45.0 3.27.525.87.5 4.710.034.210.0 6.3Data Analysis- Calculations (10 points): * Show all math performed. * Type the full calculations in the calculations box * Give the results in the answer box * Include proper labels and unitsExperiment 1: 1 Find the average of your changes in volume. Average change= (24.9+22.1+21.2+20.4)/4=22.15 ml 2 Divide this value by 2.5 to obtain the rate of O2 production in mL/ minute. 22.15:2.5=8.86 ml/minExperiment 2: 1 Find the average of your changes in volume. Average change=(3.6+2.3+2.3+2.2)/4=2.6 ml 2 Divide this value by 2.5 to obtain the rate of O2 production in mL/minute. 2.6:2.5=1.04ml/minData Analysis- Interpretation Questions (10 points): * Answer all questions listed below.Experiment 2: 1 How does this value compare to the value you found in experiment 1? The value is equal to 11.73% of the value I found in experiment 1. 2 What happens to the rate of gas exchange between a light setting of 10 and a setting of 0?The rate of gas exchange decreases dramatically.Experiment 3: 1 How does your rate of gas production compare between a light setting of 8 and a light setting of 4? The rate of gas production is considerably greater when the light is set at 8. 2 Why is there a difference? Because the more light we provide, the greater the rate of photosynthesis becomes.Experiment 4: 1 How does the rate of gas production compare between a warm and cold temperature? The rate of oxygen production per minute is 6.944 and 1.272 for a warm and cold temperature, respectively. That means that the gas rate in cold temperature is approximately 18% of that in warm temperature. 2 What does this say about the amount of photosynthesis that is occurring at th ese two temperatures? That means the amount of photosynthesis in the cold temperature drops significantly and it is almost 1/6 of the amount of photosynthesis in warm temperature.Conclusion (30 points): * Answer the following questions in full sentences. * Helpful tip: someone should be able to read ONLY your conclusion and tell what you thought was going to happen, what actually happened, and why it happened. It should show complete understanding of the concepts of this lab. Use the three questions below to form your conclusion.1. What was your hypothesis and was it correct? (2-3 sentences)I assumed that when the light intensity increases, the rate of photosynthesis increases, as well. My hypothesis was correct as it is proved through experiments 1-3. The rate of oxygen production was maximum when the plant lamp was the closest to the plant and it was set at maximum light. I also assumed that when I raise the temperature, then the rate of photosynthesis will increase and if I decre ase the temperature, then the rate will also decrease. My hypothesis was correct as it is proved in experiment 4. The rate of photosynthesis in the cold temperature drops significantly and it is almost 1/6 of the amount of photosynthesis in warm temperature. 1 How do you know your hypothesis was correct? Use relevant data/observations to support your answer. (3-5 sentences)My hypothesis is proved to be correct if all the first three experiments are taken into consideration. The rate of oxygen production was higher in the first experiment where maximum light was provided and lower when no light was provided in the second experiment. As far as the third experiment is concerned, there is a considerable difference when the light was set at 8 and 4. In the first case there is a higher rate of oxygen production and thus a higher rate of photosynthesis. Also, concerning my second hypothesis, I calculated that the rate of photosynthesis in cold temperature is almost 1/6 of the rate in warm temperature. 2 Go back and read the goals for this lesson at the top of this template. Form a summary statement for each goal, showing you understand and have met the goals of this lab. Be sure to explain all major concepts and relationships presented in this lab. (3-5 sentences)To summarize, the rate of photosynthesis increases as the light intensity increases. If we double the light intensity (as in the experiment 3), the rate of gas production per minute increases by approximately 75%. In addition, in a dark environment the rate is 11,73% of the rate when t...

On the new SAT essay, pt. 3 what is actually expected...and can you still make things up

In  response to my previous post on the equity issues surrounding the redesigned SAT essay, one reader had this to say: I read a few of the essay prompts and honestly they seem like a joke. Essentially, each prompt asked for the exact same thing, it’s almost like CB is just screaming â€Å"MAKE A TEMPLATE† because all students need to do is plug in the author’s name, cite an example, and put a quote here and there and if it’s surrounded by prepared fancy sentences, they’ve got an easy 12. (or whatever it is now) That’s a fair point. I didn’t actually mean to imply in my earlier post that students would actually need to be experts in rhetoric in order to score well  Ã‚  Ã¢â‚¬â€œ my goal was primarily to point out the mismatch between the background a student would need to seriously be able to complete the assignment, and the sort of background the most students will actually bring to the assignment.  Ã‚   For a good gauge of what is likely to happen, consider the French AP exam, which was revised a couple of years ago to be more holistic and â€Å"relevant.† It now includes a synthesis essay that is well beyond what most AP French students can write. The result? Score inflation. A similar phenomenon is inevitable here: when there is such a big mismatch between ideal and reality, the only way for the College Boart to avoid embarrassment and promote the illusion that students are actually doing college-level work is assign high scores to reasonably competent work that does not actually demonstrate mastery but that throws in a few fancy flourishes, and solid passing scores to work that is only semi-component. So I agree halfway. Something like what the reader describes is probably going to be a pretty reliable formula, albeit one that many students will need tutoring to figure out. But that said, I suspect that it will be one for churning out solid, mid-range essays, not top-scoring ones. Here’s why: While looking through the examples provided by the College Board, I noticed something interesting: out of all the essays, exactly one made extensive use of â€Å"fancy† rhetorical terminology (anecdote, allusion, pathos, dichotomy). Would you like to guess which one? If you said the only essay to earn top scores in each of the three rubric categories, you’d be right. What this suggests to me is that the redesigned essay will in fact be vulnerable to many of the same â€Å"inflation† techniques that many high-scoring students already employ. As Katherine Beals and Barry Garelick’s recent Atlantic article discussed, the only way to assess learning is to look for â€Å"markers† typically associated with comprehension/mastery. A problem arises, however, when the goal becomes solely to exhibit the markers of mastery without actually mastering anything – and standardized test- essays are nothing if not famous for being judged on markers of mastery rather than on substance. The current SAT essay, of course, has been criticized for encouraging fake â€Å"fancy† writing – bombastic, flowery prose stuffed full of ten-dollar words, and there is absolutely nothing to suggest that this will change. In fact, the new essay is likely to encourage that type of writing just as much, if not more, than the old one. Indeed, the top-scoring examples include some truly cringe-worthy turns of phrase. For example, consider one student’s statement that â€Å"This dual utilization of claims from two separate sources conveys to Gioia’s audience the sense that the skills built through immersion in the arts are vital to succeeding in the modern workplace which aids in logically leading his audience to the conclusion that a loss of experience with the arts may foreshadow troubling results.† Not to mention this: â€Å"In paragraph 5, Gioia utilizes a synergistic reference to two separate sources of information that serves to provide a stronger compilation of support for his main topic† (https://collegereadiness.collegeboard.org/sample-questions/essay/2, last example). And this: â€Å"In order to achieve proper credibility and stir emotion, undeniable facts must reside in passage.† This is the sort of prose that makes freshman (college) composition instructors tear their hair out. Is this what the College Board means by â€Å"college readiness?† Furthermore, if the use of fancy terminology correlates with high scores, why not exploit that correspondence and simply pump out essays stuffed to the gills with exotic terms, with little regard for whether they describe what is actually occurring in the text? As long as the description is sufficiently flowery, those sorts of details are likely to slip by unnoticed. In fact, why not go a step further and simply make up some Greek-sounding literary terms? Essay graders are unlikely to spend more than the current two minutes scoring essays; they don’t have the time or the liberty to check whether obscure rhetorical terms actually exist. Some really smart kids with a slightly twisted sense of humor will undoubtedly decide to have some fun at the College Board’s expense. Heck, if I could force myself to wake up at 6 a.m. on a Saturday morning, I’d be tempted to go and do it myself. Another observation: as discussed in an earlier post, one of the key goals of the SAT essay redesign was to stop students from making up information. But even that seems to have failed: lacking sufficient background information about the work they are analyzing, students will simply resort to conjecture. For example, the writer of the essay scoring 4/3/4 states that Bogard (the author of the first sample passage) is â€Å"respected,† and that â€Å"he has done his research.† Exactly how would the student know that Bogard is â€Å"respected?† Or that he even did research? (Maybe he just found the figures in a magazine somewhere.) Or that the figures he cites are even accurate? It is of course reasonable to assume those things are true, but strictly speaking, the student is â€Å"stepping outside the four corners of the text† and making inferences that he or she cannot â€Å"prove† objectively. So despite the College Board’s adamant insistence that essays rely strictly on the information provided in the passages, the inclusion of these sorts of statements in a high-scoring sample essay certainly suggests that the boundary between â€Å"inside† and â€Å"outside† the text is somewhat more flexible than it would appear. The point, of course, is that it is extraordinarily difficult, if not downright impossible, to remain 100% within the â€Å"four corners† of a non-fiction text and still write an analysis that makes any sense at all – particularly if one lacks the ability to identify a wide range of rhetorical figures. Of course students will resort to making up plausible-sounding information to pad their arguments. And based on the sample essays, it certainly seems that they will continue to be rewarded for doing so.