The National Student Research Center
E-Journal of Student Research: Multi-Disciplinary
Volume 6, Number 3, March, 1998
The National Student Research Center
is dedicated to promoting student research and the use of the
scientific method in all subject areas across the curriculum,
especially science and math.
For more information contact:
- John I. Swang, Ph.D.
- Founder/Director
- National Student Research Center
- 2024 Livingston Street
- Mandeville, Louisiana 70448
- U.S.A.
- E-Mail: nsrcmms@communique.net
- http://youth.net/nsrc/nsrc.html
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Science:
- Testing The Purity Of Bottled Water
- Does The Amount Of Air Pressure In
A Basketball Affect The Height Of Its Bounce?
- How Different Types Of Polluted Water
Affect A Grass Seed's Germination And Growth
- Planting Depth of Wheat
- How Color Affects the Absorption
of Heat Radiation
Math:
- Is The Formula For Finding the Volume
of a Rectangular Prism Always Right?
- Does Euler's Formula Work?
- Does The Area Of A Rectangle Always
Equal Base x Height?
Social Studies:
- A Survey About Household Hazardous
Wastes And Their Disposal
- What Do Students Know And Feel About
Cloning And Genetic Engineering?
SCIENCE SECTION
Title: Testing The Purity Of Bottled Water
Student Researcher: Erin Hodges
School Address: Grace Baptist Academy
7815 Shallowford Rd.
Chattanooga, TN 37421
Grade: 8th
Teacher: Miss Tracy Burns
I. Statement of Purpose and Hypothesis
I wanted to find out which bottled water company produces the
purest water. My first hypothesis stated that Laurel Mountain
Spring Water will have the least amount of bacteria in it. My
second hypothesis stated that Deer Park brand water will have
the most bacteria in it.
II. Methodology
I used the following materials to test my hypothesis: sterilized
water, bottled water (Aquafina, Laurel Mountain Springs,
Crystalline Natural Artesian, Deer Park, Evian, and Zephyrhill),
sterile cotton swabs (one per plate), Petri dishes with agar-
agar in them (two for each water sample), camera (optional),
incubator, inoculating loop, Bunsen burner, striker, distilled
water for gram staining, gram staining kit, microscope, and
microscope slides.
The first step is to let the micro-organisms in the bottled
water colonize. That will be done by opening the first bottle
and pouring some water onto a sterile cotton swab. While you
are doing this take care not to let anything touch the rim of
the bottle or get into the bottled water. Then brush the swab
over the agar in two petri dishes. After you have made two
plates for each bottled water and labeled the plates, put them
into the incubator set at 37 degrees Celsius. You also need to
make two plates for the sterile water that will act as your
control. Make sure that you use a different cotton swab for
each plate. Incubate all of the samples for 48 hours. After
you do this count the number of colonies on each plate.
Now you need to put the colonies on microscope slides. You do
this by first cleaning the slides. Next, you need to place a
small drop of water onto the slide. Then you need to sterilize
the inoculating loop by holding it into the flame of the Bunsen
burner. Using the inoculating loop, scrape a small amount of
bacteria off of a colony on the first plate and smear it onto
the microscope slide. Sterilize the inoculating loop after each
smear. Only smear one colony of bacteria per microscope slide.
Repeat this process with every different kind of bacterial
colony. Give all the slides that come from the same plate the
same label. Do this with every plate. Then you need to let the
slides air dry and then heat fix them by running them through
the Bunsen burner flame about six times.
Now you need to Gram stain the slides in order to tell what type
of bacteria is on the slide. Cover the slide with crystal
violet for 30 seconds. Wash the slide off with distilled water.
Next, cover the smear with Gram's iodine for 30 seconds. Wash
this off with the alcohol. Immediately wash the alcohol off
with distilled water. Now stain the slide with safranin and
leave it on there for 30 seconds. Wash off the safranin with
distilled water. Then blot the slide with the paper towels.
Let dry. Repeat this process with each slide.
Now you are ready to analyze the slides under the microscope. If
the slide is purple, it means that it is gram-positive (meaning
that it retained the crystal violet stain) or if it is pink it
means that it is gram-negative (meaning that it retained the
safranin stain).
After you have done all of this you can determine the shape of
each bacteria present. There are three basic shapes: cocci,
bacilli, and spirilla. Look at each slide under the microscope
to tell which shape it is.
After all this is finished, you need to analyze the data, accept
or reject your hypothesis, and apply your findings to the world
outside of the classroom.
III. Analysis of Data
My data show that on plate A1 there were no colonies. Plate A2
showed no signs of growth and plate B1 had no bacterial colonies
either. Plate B2 had one colony that was a deep yellow and
about the size of a pencil eraser in diameter. On plate C1,
there were no colonies. Plate C2 had seven colonies that were a
whitish-beige color and the size of the tip of a pencil. Both
plates of brand D and E had no bacteria on them. Brand F had
bacteria on both of its plates with 8 and 14 colonies,
respectively. The colonies were a whitish-beige in color.
IV. Summary and Conclusion
Brand A is Aquafina. Brand B is Laurel Mountain Springs. Brand
C is Crystalline Artesian Water. Brand D is Deer Park. Brand E
is Evian. Brand F is Zephyrhill.
The findings from this experiment indicated that Brands A, D,
and E were tied for first place. Second place was Brand B.
Third was Brand C. Fourth place was Brand F. The reason that
they were ranked this way was because A, D, and E did not have
any bacteria on either of their plates. Brand B, which was
second, had only an average of .5 colonies per plate. Brand C
had an average of 3.5 colonies on its plates. Brand F had an
average of 11 colonies on each of its plates.
Based upon my findings, I reject my first hypothesis which
stated that Laurel Mountain Springs would be the purist. I also
reject my second hypothesis which stated that Deer Park would be
in last place and have the most bacteria. Laurel Mountain
Springs ended up being in second place and Deer Park tied for
first.
I am thinking that brand B and C might have been contaminated
since only one of their plates had bacteria on it, although the
type of bacteria was the same as all of the others. There is
also the possibility that Brand F was also contaminated. It
would be necessary to run additional test to be sure.
If I could go back and change some of the things I might repeat
my research many times under sterile lab conditions to make sure
that my findings were not contaminated by other bacteria from
the experimental environment.
V. Application
My findings indicate that some bottled water may contain
bacteria. It is important for consumers to know the purity of
their bottled water so that they will not consume any bacteria
that may be harmful. My findings also indicate a need for
government inspection of bottle water just like other food and
drink products.
TITLE: Does The Amount Of Air Pressure In A Basketball Affect
The Height Of Its Bounce?
STUDENT RESEARCHER: Eric Fleekop
SCHOOL ADDRESS: Grant Sawyer Middle School
5450 Redwood St.
Las Vegas, NV 89118
GRADE: 8
TEACHER: Mrs. Hazel
I. Statement of Purpose and Hypothesis:
The purpose of this project is to find if the amount of air
pressure in a basketball changes the height of its bounces. How
high a basketball can bounce is very important when it comes to
the use of a basketball which is used in the game of basketball.
The game of basketball would be greatly altered if the
basketball used in the game bounced too high or too low. I also
have a great interest in this project because I play a lot of
basketball and I am interested in the equipment of basketball.
My hypothesis states that the amount of air pressure in a
basketball will affect the height of its bounce.
II. Methodology:
I used the following materials in my experiment: 1) Two new
Spalding basketballs. They are N.B.A. official size and weight,
made of synthetic leather, for indoor and outdoor use, and the
label on them suggest they be inflated to have air pressure of 7
- 9 pounds per square inch. 2) One new Huffy 12 inch inflating
pump with pressure gauge for all inflatable balls. 3) Two
assistants. 4) Two meter sticks.
I used the following procedure to test my hypothesis: 1) Inflate
one basketball so that it has the air pressure in it of 4 pounds
per square inch. 2) Inflate another basketball so that it has
the air pressure in it of 9 pounds per square inch. 3) Have
your assistant drop the basketball with the less air pressure in
it from 1.3 meters above the ground and have your other
assistant hold a meter stick next to the ball as it bounces. 4)
Observe and record the height of the basketball's first, second,
and third bounce. 5) Repeat steps 3 and 4, but replace the
basketball that has less air pressure with the basketball that
has more air pressure. 6) Repeat the entire procedure five more
times. 7) Compare the heights of the basketball's bounces to
determine if the amount of air pressure in a basketball affects
the height of it's bounces.
III. Analysis of Data:
The data I collected after repeating the procedure of my
experiment six times is described below. The data shows that
the height of the first bounce of a basketball with four pounds
per square inch of air pressure averaged 72.6 centimeters. The
height of the second bounce of the same ball averaged 45
centimeters and the third bounce averaged 21.8 centimeters in
height.
The data also shows that the height of the first bounce of a
basketball with nine pounds per square inch of air pressure
averaged 88.3 centimeters. The height of the second bounce of
the same ball averaged 60.8 centimeters and the third bounce
averaged 32.8 centimeters in height.
I used metric measurements when I measured the height of the
bounces, but I was unable to use metric measurements when I
measured the amount of air pressure in the basketballs. I could
not find any air gauges that had metric standards.
IV. Summary and Conclusion:
When two balls of equal size and constructed of the same
material are dropped from a equal height to the same surface
with the only manipulated variable being the amount of air
pressure, there is a significant difference in the height of the
bounces of the two balls. Therefore, after experimentation and
research I conclude that the air pressure in a basketball is a
major factor on how high a basketball will bounce. I learned
through my research that there is the same gravitational pull on
both balls as they drop. A fully inflated ball has less
available surface coming in contact with the ground and
therefore it has less gravitational pull on the contact area
allowing it to bounce higher. The ball with less air pressure
does have more area coming in contact with the ground and in
turn it did cause it to bounce at a lesser height. Although
there was a degree of human error that could cause some
inaccuracies in my experiment, I found based on the data from my
experiment and my research that my hypothesis was correct. The
amount of air pressure in a basketball does affect the height of
it's bounces. The greater the air pressure, the higher the
bounce.
V. Application
I feel this research can be applied to the real world in
different sports. Any athlete that play sports which use balls
that must be inflated could very well use my research to make
sure their equipment can perform the way it was intended to. I
know this project has helped me inflate my basketballs to the
right extent.
TITLE: How Different Types Of Polluted Water Affect A Grass
Seed's Germination And Growth
STUDENT RESEARCHER: Joshua Foster
SCHOOL: Mandeville Middle School
Mandeville, Louisiana
GRADE: 6
TEACHER: John I. Swang, Ph.D.
I. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND HYPOTHESIS:
I would like to do a scientific research project to find out how
different types of polluted water affect a bean plant's seed
germination and growth. My hypothesis states that the grass
watered with tap water will grow the tallest.
II. METHODOLOGY:
First, I chose my topic. Then I wrote my statement of purpose
and I did a review of literature about water pollution, plants,
germination, acid rain, soap, phosphate, fertilizer, petroleum,
salt water, and sewerage. Next, I developed my hypothesis.
Then I wrote a methodology to test my hypothesis. Next, I
gathered my materials needed to conduct the experiment.
Then I obtained the river water sample by gathering 100
milliliters of water from the polluted Tchefuncte River. I
obtained the eutrophicated water sample by mixing 20 grams of
plant food and 100 milliliters of water. I obtained the salt
water sample by mixing 2 tbsp (25 mL) of salt and 100
milliliters of water. I obtained the acid water sample by
mixing 2 tbsp (25 mL) of vinegar and 100 milliliters of water.
I obtained the oily water sample by mixing 1 tbsp (12.5 mL) of
motor oil and 100 milliliters of water. I obtained the soapy
water sample by mixing 1 tbsp (12.5 mL) of liquid soap and 100
milliliters of water.
Then I filled seven cups two-thirds full with potting soil and
planted thirty grass seeds in each cup. I placed them on a
sunny windowsill. I watered the grass seeds in each cup with a
different water sample: river, acid, salt, oil, tap,
eutrophicated, and soapy. I gave each cup of grass seeds 5
milliters of water each day for two weeks. I recorded the
average height of the grass growth each day.
Then I analyzed my data using charts and graphs. Next, I wrote
my summary and conclusion where I accepted/rejected my
hypothesis. Last, I applied my findings to the world outside
the classroom.
I identified my controlled variables, my manipulated variables,
and my responding variable. My controlled variables were the
kind of grass seeds, the amount of sunlight, the amount of water
given to the grass seeds, the amount of soil, and the depth of
planting. My manipulated variable was the type of water used.
My responding variable was the height each sample grew.
The materials needed to conduct the experiment were two hundred
and ten grass seeds, seven eight-ounce cups, potting soil,
ruler, pencil, data collection form, polluted river water, 5%
acidity vinegar, fertilizer, salt, oil, soap, and tap water.
III. ANALYSIS OF DATA:
Water Type
___________________________________________________
| | Tap |Soap |Eutro|Oily |River|Acid |Salt |
|-------|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|
|Day 1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
|Day 2 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
|Day 3 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
|Day 4 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
|Day 5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
|Day 6 | 3.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Average
|Day 7 | 4.7 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Height
|Day 8 | 8.8 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | In
|Day 9 |11.7 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 3.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Centimeters
|Day 10 |12.7 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 3.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
|Day 11 |13.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 4.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
|Day 12 |14.7 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 4.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
|Day 13 |16.1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 5.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
|Day 14 |16.1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 5.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
|Sprouts|46.7%|0.0% |0.0% |3.0% |0.0% |0.0% |0.0% |
My data show that the grass seeds watered with soapy water,
eutrophicated water, polluted river water, acid water, and salt
water did not germinate. My data show that fourteen out of
thirty seeds watered with tap water sprouted and grew to an
average height of 16.1 cm. by the fourteenth day. My data show
that one out of thirty seeds watered with oily water sprouted
and grew to an average height of 5.2 cm. by the fourteenth day.
IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION:
My data show that the grass seeds watered with tap water grew
taller than grass seeds watered with soapy, eutrophicated, oily,
polluted river, acid, and salt water. Therefore, I accept my
hypothesis, which states that the grass watered with tap water
will grow the tallest.
V. APPLICATION:
I can apply my findings to the world outside the classroom by
showing that pollutants such as acid rain, oil, feces, sewage,
excessive fertilizer, salt, and soap can hamper or prevent plant
growth from happening.
Title: Planting Depth of Wheat
Student Researcher: Amy Houdek
School Address: Belleville Middle School
Belleville, Kansas
Grade: 8
Teacher: Mrs. Jean Jensby
I. Statement of Purpose and Hypothesis
I investigated how planting depth of wheat affects its rate of
emergence from the soil. My hypothesis stated that seeds
planted to a depth of 2 inches will have the quicker emergence.
II. Methodology
Manipulated variable: different planting depths of seed wheat
Responding variable: seeds that sprouted and came up
Controls: soil, field, variety of wheat, amount of sunshine,
amount of water or rain, day planted, and number of seeds
planted in each row
Materials: calendar, Champ seed wheat-medium coleoptile, metric
ruler, data sheet, my dad's farm field, garden hoe, row markers
Procedure:
1. Gather materials.
2. Find section out in middle of a field for experiment.
3. Using a garden hoe, make five rows about three feet long.
4. Measure row depths in soil-1 inch through 5 inches with
ruler.
5. Plant 25 kernels of wheat at each depth, one inch apart.
6. Cover seeds with soil, so the planting area is level.
7. Make row markers. (Wood markers were used.)
8. Observe the emergence of the wheat plants.
9. Record observations and comments on data sheet.
III. Analysis of Data
My data shows that the wheat planted 2 inches deep had the
quickest emergence. Five plants came up on day 6. The 1 and 3
inch depth plants came up on day 7. The seeds planted one each
deep had a better emergence than 3 inches because the 1 inch
depth had 12 plants emerging compared to the 4 plants in the 3
inch depth. In the 4 inch depth. 8 plants emerged on day 8.
The total plants that grew in the 5 inch depth was only 3. My
observations indicated that the deeper seeds had a yellowish
color as they shot out of the ground. I believe this happened
because the plants were in the ground longer and had a harder
time growing. This kind of seed has an 80 percent germination
rate.
IV. Summary and Conclusion
I found out that the seeds planted at 2 inches had a quicker
emergence, therefore my hypothesis was accepted. Of all the
planting depths tested the 2 inch depth was the best. The order
of emergence from fastest to slowest was 2", 1", 3", 4", 5".
After some of the wheat emerged, grasshoppers chewed off a
couple of plants; however they re-emerged and grew much like the
other plants. The weather was ideal following planting. We had
a perfect 0.70 rainfall on the field which had been very dry.
This created ideal moisture conditions.
V. Application
I now understand that it is important for farmers to not cover
their wheat too deep. Producers also should look at the yield
potential of different seed varieties, disease resistance, and
many other factors; not just the seed depth. In addition to my
experiment, I could have tested more varieties, more depths, and
repeated the procedure again.
TITLE: How Color Affects the Absorption of Heat Radiation
STUDENT RESEARCHER: Mika Nagasaki
SCHOOL ADDRESS: Westminster School
3819 Gallows Road
Annandale, Virginia 22003
GRADE: 8
TEACHER: Cynthia Bombino
I. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND HYPOTHESIS:
The purpose of this experiment is to find out which colors
absorb the most heat radiation. My hypothesis states that the
black can will absorb more heat radiation than the others.
II. METHODOLOGY:
The materials I used to test my hypothesis included: paint
(black, red, white, blue, yellow), paintbrush, thermometer,
lamp, 25 mL graduated cylinder, 100 watt light bulb, dropping
pipette, 6 identical soup cans, and marker.
My independent variable was the color of the cans. My dependent
variable was the temperature inside each can. My control
variables included the size and shape of the unpainted cans, the
wattage of the heat source, and its distance from the cans.
My procedure included the following steps: 1) Remove the labels
from the cans. Paint the outsides and insides of each of the
cans with each of the colors. 2) Fill each can with 100 mL of
water. 3) Adjust the lamp to the desired position. Mark the
spot where the light hits the table (where you plan to place the
can). Do not change the positions of the lamp or mark. 4)
Measure the temperature of the water in the can before you place
it under the lamp. Record. 5) Place the can on the mark. Turn
on the lamp. Start the stopwatch. 6) Measure and record the
temperature of the water in the can every 5 minutes for fifteen
minutes. 7) Repeat steps 4-6 with each can.
III. ANALYSIS OF DATA:
The average temperature change of the water in the control which
was not painted was 1.5 degrees Celsius. The average
temperature change for the yellow can was 2.1 degrees. The
average temperature change for the white can was 2.8 degrees.
The average temperature change for the blue can was 2.8 degrees.
The average temperature change for the red can was 3.1 degrees.
The average temperature change for the black can was 4.4
degrees.
IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION:
My results supported my hypothesis. I had expected the black
can to exhibit warmer temperatures than the rest (which it did);
however, I did not expected the blue and white cans to have the
same temperatures as each other.
A few minor miscalculations may have influenced my results.
After the first trial, I realized that one side of the can was
colder than the other side, due to the way I had set up my heat
lamp. Shining the light directly above the can may have
produced more accurate results. A few times I did not leave the
thermometer in the cans long enough. Despite these
miscalculations, I was able to demonstrate that dark colors
absorb more heat than light colors.
V. APPLICATION:
In winter, many people wear dark colored clothing to absorb more
heat. In summer, people wear light colored clothing to produce
the opposite effect. Houses in warm climates are often
whitewashed or have light color tones. Refrigerators and
freezers should not be black or dark blue. Likewise, thermoses
should be dark or light colored depending on their purpose.
These are all examples of how people use colors to insulate
things.
MATH SECTION
TITLE: Is The Formula For Finding the Volume of a Rectangular
Prism Always Right?
STUDENT RESEARCHER: Jack Bell and Adam Osborn
SCHOOL: Mandeville Middle School
Mandeville, Louisiana
GRADE: 6
TEACHER: John I. Swang, Ph.D.
I. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND HYPOTHESIS:
We would like to do mathematical research project to see if the
formula of length times width times height always equals the
volume of a rectangular prism, no matter how large or small the
prism. Our hypothesis states that the formula, V=LxWxH, always
equals the volume of a rectangular prism no matter how large or
small it is.
II. METHODOLOGY:
First, we chose our topic. Next, we wrote our statement of
purpose. Then we reviewed the literature about volume,
geometry, prism, cube, rectangular prism, mathematics, and
Archimedes. After that we developed our hypothesis and wrote
our methodology to test our hypothesis. Then we identified our
variables. We then gathered our materials. Next, we found five
objects of different sizes having the shape of a rectangular
prism. Then we used the formula, V=LxWxH, to find the volume of
the eight objects. After that we placed them, one at a time, in
a bucket completely full of water. The bucket was placed in a
metal tray. The water displaced by the rectangular object was
collected in the tray. Next, we measured how many milliliters
of water each object displaced. This represented the volume of
the object. One milliliter was equal to one cubic centimeter.
Then we recorded the results on our data collection sheet. Then
we compared the value for the two ways for computing volume.
Next we wrote our analysis of data. Last, we wrote our summary
and conclusion, and application.
III. ANALYSIS OF DATA:
Our data show that when we used the formula V=LxWxH to find the
volume of our first rectangular prism, it was 515 cubic
centimeters. When we put our first rectangular prism in the
water, it displaced 525 milliliters of water, which indicated
that the volume was 525 cm3. The difference of 10 cm3 between
the two volumes is due to measurement error.
Our data show that when we used the formula V=LxWxH to find the
volume of our second rectangular prism, it was 15 cm3 cubic
centimeters. When we put our second rectangular prism in the
water, it displaced 17 milliliters of water, which indicated
that the volume was 17 cm3. The difference of 2 cm3 between the
two volumes is due to measurement error.
Our data show that when we used the formula V=LxWxH to find the
volume of our third rectangular prism, it was 929 cubic
centimeters. When we put our third rectangular prism in the
water, it displaced 975 milliliters of water, which indicated
that the volume was 975 cm3. The difference of 46 cm3 between
the two volumes is due to measurement error.
Our data show that when we used the formula V=LxWxH to find the
volume of our fourth rectangular prism, it was 790 cubic
centimeters. When we put our fourth rectangular prism in the
water, it displaced 800 milliliters of water, which indicated
that the volume was 800 cm3. The difference of 10 cm3 between
the two volumes is due to measurement error.
Our data show that when we used the formula V=LxWxH to find the
volume of our fifth rectangular prism, it was 2072.67 cubic
centimeters. When we put our fifth rectangular prism in the
water, it displaced 2000 milliliters of water, which indicated
that the volume was 2000 cm3. The difference of 72.67 cm3
between the two volumes is due to measurement error.
Our data show that when we used the formula V=LxWxH to find the
volume of our sixth rectangular prism, it was 848.25 cubic
centimeters. When we put our sixth rectangular prism in the
water, it displaced 900 milliliters of water, which indicated
that the volume was 900 cm3. The difference of 51.75 cm3
between the two volumes is due to measurement error.
Our data show that when we used the formula V=LxWxH to find the
volume of our seventh rectangular prism, it was 2808 cubic
centimeters. When we put our seventh rectangular prism in the
water, it displaced 2700 milliliters of water, which indicated
that the volume was 2700 cm3. The difference of 108 cm3 between
the two volumes is due to measurement error.
Our data show that when we used the formula V=LxWxH to find the
volume of our eighth rectangular prism, it was 164.375 cubic
centimeters. When we put our fourth rectangular prism in the
water, it displaced 150 milliliters of water, which indicated
that the volume was 150 cm3. The difference of 14.375 cm3
between the two volumes is due to measurement error.
| Object | Tested Volume | Calculated Volume | Difference |
| object 1| 525 cm3 | 515 cm3 | 10 cm3 |
| object 2| 17 cm3 | 15 cm3 | 2 cm3 |
| object 3| 975 cm3 | 929 cm3 | 46 cm3 |
| object 4| 800 cm3 | 790 cm3 | 10 cm3 |
| object 5| 2000 cm3 | 2072 cm3 | 72 cm3 |
| object 6| 900 cm3 | 848 cm3 | 51 cm3 |
| object 7| 2700 cm3 | 2808 cm3 | 108 cm3 |
| object 8| 150 cm3 | 164 cm3 | 14 cm3 |
|Average Difference| | 39 cm3 |
IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION:
The average difference between the volume of our rectangular
prisms when we used the formula, V=LxWxH, and when we used the
displacement of water was 39.35 cm3. The difference was due to
measurement error.
Our data show that the formula V=LxWxH does work. Therefore, we
accept our hypothesis which states that the formula, V=LxWxH,
always equals the volume of a rectangular prism no matter how
large or small it is.
This research needs to be repeated in such a way as to
significantly reduce the measurement error.
V. APPLICATION:
We could apply our findings to the world by telling people that
V=LxWxH gives you the correct volume for a rectangular prism.
This could help shipping companies to figure out how much of
their goods they could fit in the cargo holds of the trucks,
trains, and ships.
TITLE: Does Euler's Formula Work?
STUDENT RESEARCHER: Matt Kubicek and Alex Manuel
SCHOOL: Mandeville Middle School
Mandeville, Louisiana
GRADE: 6
TEACHER: John I. Swang, Ph.D.
I. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND HYPOTHESIS:
We would like to do a mathematical proof to see if Euler's
Formula works. We would like to see if the number of vertices
plus the number of faces minus 2 always equals the number of
edges of all polyhedrons. Our hypothesis states that Euler's
Formula, (V+F-2=E), works.
II. METHODOLOGY:
First, we chose our topic. Next, we wrote our statement of
purpose. Then we gathered our information and wrote our review
of literature on Euler's Formula, Euler, geometry, faces,
vertices, edges, formulas, and polyhedrons. Next, we developed
our hypothesis.
After that, we created our methodology to test our hypothesis.
Next, we listed all the materials we needed to be able to
perform our experiment which were a data collection sheet, eight
different shaped polyhedrons, a pencil, and a sheet of paper.
Then we took eight different sized and different shaped
polyhedrons and counted the number of vertices and faces on each
of them. We tested Euler's Formula on each polyhedron by adding
the number of vertices to the number of faces and subtracting 2
to see if the overall total equaled the number of edges. We
then counted the number of edges to see if the formula was
correct. Then we recorded the information on our data
collection sheet.
After that, we analyzed our data using charts and graphs. Next,
we wrote our summary and conclusion. Finally, we applied our
findings to the world outside our classroom.
III. ANALYSIS OF DATA:
We counted 8 edges in polyhedron one which had 5 faces and 5
vertices. Using Euler's Formula, V+F-2=E, we calculated that
polyhedron one had 8 edges. We counted 16 edges in polyhedron
two which had 9 faces and 9 vertices. Using Euler's Formula,
V+F-2=E, we calculated that polyhedron two had 16 edges. We
counted 12 edges in polyhedron three which had 6 faces and 8
vertices. Using Euler's Formula, V+F-2=E, we calculated that
polyhedron three had 12 edges. We counted 24 edges in
polyhedron four which had 10 faces and 16 vertices. Using
Euler's Formula, V+F-2=E, we calculated that polyhedron four had
24 edges. We counted 9 edges in polyhedron five which had 5
faces and 6 vertices. Using Euler's Formula, V+F-2=E, we
calculated that polyhedron five had 9 edges. We counted 4 edges
in polyhedron six which had 3 faces and 3 vertices. Using
Euler's Formula, V+F-2=E, we calculated that polyhedron six had
4 edges. We counted 7 edges in polyhedron seven which had 3
faces and 6 vertices. Using Euler's Formula, V+F-2=E, we
calculated that polyhedron seven had 7 edges. We counted 11
edges in polyhedron eight which had 6 faces and 7 vertices.
Using Euler's Formula, V+F-2=E, we calculated that polyhedron
eight had 11 edges. We counted 34 edges in polyhedron nine
which had 20 faces and 16 vertices. Using Euler's Formula, V+F-
2=E, we calculated that polyhedron nine had 34 edges. We
counted 18 edges in polyhedron ten which had 8 faces and 12
vertices. Using Euler's Formula, V+F-2=E, we calculated that
polyhedron ten had 18 edges.
|Polyhedrons | EA | EF = V + f - 2 |
| 1 | 8 | 8 | 5 | 5 | 2 |
| 2 | 16 | 16 | 9 | 9 | 2 |
| 3 | 12 | 12 | 8 | 6 | 2 |
| 4 | 24 | 24 | 16 | 10 | 2 |
| 5 | 9 | 9 | 6 | 5 | 2 |
| 6 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 2 |
| 7 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 3 | 2 |
| 8 | 11 | 11 | 7 | 6 | 2 |
| 9 | 34 | 34 | 16 | 20 | 2 |
| 10 | 18 | 18 | 12 | 8 | 2 |
EA = actual edges
EF = edges calculated from formula
IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION:
Based upon the tests on the ten different polyhedrons, we
conclude that Euler's Formula accurately predicts the number of
edges on all polyhedrons. We accept our hypothesis which stated
that Euler's Formula, V+F-2=E, would really works.
V. APPLICATION:
We can apply our findings by using Euler's Formula in math to
solve mathematics problems that deal with three dimensional
figures.
TITLE: Does The Area Of A Rectangle Always Equal Base x
Height?
STUDENT RESEARCHERS: James Rees and Jane Bordelon
SCHOOL: Mandeville Middle School
Mandeville, Louisiana
GRADE: 6
TEACHER: John I. Swang, Ph.D.
I. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND HYPOTHESIS:
We would like to do a mathematical proof to find out if the
formula for finding the area of a rectangle, A=bh, is correct.
Our hypothesis states that the area of a rectangle always equals
the base of the rectangle times the height of the rectangle.
II. METHODOLOGY:
First, we chose our topic. Next, we wrote our statement of
purpose. Then we conducted a review of literature about
mathematics, geometry, base, height, rectangles, and area.
Next, we wrote our hypothesis. We then developed a methodology
to test our hypothesis. Next, we made a data collection sheet.
The materials we used to perform the experiment were: six
different sized rectangles, ruler, and permanent marker. Then
we chose one base and one height for each of the six rectangles
(three for each student researcher), and used the formula, A=bh,
to figure out the area of the rectangle. We then drew out each
rectangle on square centimeter graph paper. Next, we counted
the number of square centimeters in each rectangle and compared
the amount of square centimeters that we counted on graph paper
to the amount of square centimeters we found when we used the
formula. We repeated this process with the five remaining
rectangles. Then we recorded our data on our data collection
form. Next, we analyzed our data using statistics, charts, and
graphs. Then we wrote our summary and conclusion where we
accepted or rejected our hypothesis. Finally, we applied our
findings to the world outside the classroom.
III. ANALYSIS OF DATA:
Area of a Rectangle
|Rectangle | Base X Height = Area | Count
| #1 | 5 | 8 | 40 | 40
| #2 | 6 | 9 | 54 | 54
| #3 | 3 | 7 | 21 | 21
| #4 | 2 | 5 | 10 | 10
| #5 | 8 | 3 | 24 | 24
| #6 | 9 | 4 | 36 | 36
IX. ANALYSIS OF DATA:
In rectangle number one, the area derived from the formula was
40 square centimeters and the actual count was also 40 square
centimeters. In rectangle number two, the area derived from the
formula was 54 square centimeters and the actual count was also
54 square centimeters. In rectangle number three, the area
derived from the formula was 21 square centimeters and the
actual count was also 21 square centimeters. In rectangle
number four, the area derived from the formula was 10 square
centimeters and the actual count was also 10 square centimeters.
In rectangle number five, the area derived from the formula was
24 square centimeters and the actual count was 24 square
centimeters. In rectangle number six, the area derived from the
formula was 36 square centimeters and the actual count was 36
square centimeters.
IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION:
Our data showed that the formula, A=bh, will always equal the
area of a rectangle. Therefore, we accept out hypothesis which
states that the area of a rectangle will always equal the base
of the rectangle times the height of the rectangle.
V. APPLICATION:
Our findings can be applied to the world outside the classroom
during math tests or other math-related projects. We now know
that the area of a rectangle equals its base times its height.
SOCIAL STUDIES SECTION
TITLE: A Survey About Household Hazardous Wastes And Their
Disposal
STUDENT RESEARCHERS: Joshua Foster, Jack Bell, George
McPherson, and John Casey
SCHOOL: Mandeville Middle School
Mandeville, Louisiana
GRADE: 6
TEACHER: John I. Swang, Ph.D.
I. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND HYPOTHESIS:
We would like to do a survey research project on what students
know and feel about household hazardous waste and its disposal.
Our hypothesis states that the majority of the responses to the
factual questions on our questionnaire about household hazardous
wastes will be correct.
II. METHODOLOGY:
First, we identified our community problem which was the
disposal of household hazardous waste. Then we wrote our
statement of purpose and conducted a review of the literature
about household hazardous waste, soap and detergents, toxins,
recycling, environmental pollution, pesticides, herbicides,
fungicides, pest and weed control, paint and varnish,
turpentine, fertilizer, gasoline, environment, and medicine. We
also interviewed numerous community officials about the
recycling and disposing of household hazardous waste (aerosol
cans, antifreeze, smoke detectors, petroleum based cleaners,
drain opener, expired prescriptions, furniture and floor polish,
insecticides, herbicides, pesticides, paints, liquor, mercury,
motor oil, nail polish and remover, oven cleaner, paint thinner,
rat poison, rubbing alcohol, shoe polish, kitchen and bathroom
cleaners, gasoline diesel fuel, kerosene, batteries, swimming
pool chemicals, brake fluid and/or transmission fluid, bleach,
ammonia, clothes cleaning materials, wood preservatives, art
supplies, flea collars, sprays, and/or soap, contact cement,
fire extinguishers, lighter fluid, moth balls, old propane
tanks, photographic chemicals, old ammunition, old tires,
solvents, and asbestos roof shingles or floor tiles). From our
review of literature and community interviews we developed our
hypothesis.
Next, we wrote a methodology to test our hypothesis. Then we
developed a questionnaire about household hazardous waste. The
questionnaire was given to a random sample of 52 sixth grade
students in Mandeville, Louisiana, at Mandeville Middle School.
We also sent this questionnaire out on the Internet to students
around the world. When the questionnaires were returned we
scored them and recorded the responses on a data collection
sheet.
Then we analyzed our data using simple statistics, charts, and
graphs. Next, we wrote our summary and conclusion where we
accepted/rejected our hypothesis. Last, we applied our findings
to our community.
III. ANALYSIS OF DATA:
Forty-nine students from Mandeville, Louisiana and thirty-two
from Iowa, Texas, and Massachusetts responded to our survey.
Students were in grades 3, 5, 6, 11, and 12. The ten household
hazardous materials that most respondents have in their homes
are; in order from most to least, kitchen and bathroom cleaners,
batteries, art supplies, bleach, paints, nail polish and
remover, smoke detector, furniture and floor polish, shoe
polish, and rubbing alcohol. A majority of 95% of the students
knew that antifreeze should not be disposed of by pouring it
down the drain. A majority of 81% of the students did not know
that smoke detectors contain radioactive materials. A majority
of 97% of the students knew that liquor can be disposed of by
pouring it down the drain. A majority of 97% of the students
did not know that drain opener is explosive. A majority of 59%
of the students did not know that furniture and floor polish
should not be disposed of by throwing it away in the garbage. A
majority of 56% of the students knew that smoke detectors should
not be disposed of by throwing them in the garbage. A majority
of 57% of the students knew that 80% of hazardous household
wastes are disposed of in landfills. A majority of 56% of the
students did not know that the average American household
generates about 15 lbs. of hazardous household wastes each year.
A majority of 76% of the students did not know that the average
American home contains about 8 gallons of hazardous liquids. A
majority of 51% of the students did not know that only 5% of all
American households dispose of household hazardous wastes
properly. A majority of 62% of the students did not know that
55% of all household hazardous waste in American is made up of
house maintenance items. A majority of 60% of the students did
not know that 11% of all household hazardous waste in American
is made up of automotive items. A majority of 89% of the
students thought that people who dispose of household hazardous
waste in an illegal or unecological ways should be fined or
imprisoned. A majority of 88% of the students knew that used
motor oil should not be poured down the sewer. A majority of
53% of the students knew that batteries should not be put in the
garbage. A majority of 71% of the students knew that one liter
of used motor oil can contaminate two million liters of drinking
water. A majority of 58% of the students knew that the best
ways to control household hazardous waste is to buy only the
amount you need, give excess to other people to use, use a
nonhazardous substitute, and to dispose of them properly or
recycle them. A majority of 53% of the students did not have
the telephone number for the poison control center clearly
posted at home in case of an emergency. A majority of 69% of
the students thought that they know how to properly dispose of
hazardous household wastes. A majority of 82% of the students
know that household hazardous materials include explosive
materials, corrosive materials, toxic materials, infectious
materials, and radioactive materials. A majority of 57% of the
students know that a legally hazardous household waste is a
discarded substance who's chemical or biological nature makes it
potentially dangerous to people. A majority of 82% of the
students knew that storing flammable liquids in glass bottles is
dangerous. A majority of 56% of the students knew that storing
bleach and ammonia in glass bottles is not a good idea. Half of
the students reported that their community had a household
hazardous waste disposal or recycling program. A majority of
96% of the students knew that improper disposal of household
hazardous waste can pollute the ground and water. A majority of
99% of the students agreed that household hazardous waste should
be clearly labeled. All of the students agreed that household
hazardous wastes should have directions for proper disposal on
the container.
IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION:
A majority of students believe that household hazardous waste
should be disposed of properly and recycled, but half of them
report no community program for the disposal of or recycling of
household hazardous waste. Almost half of the responses to the
factual questions were inaccurate yet the majority of the
students thought that they knew how to properly dispose of or
recycle household hazardous waste. These findings indicate a
need for community disposal, recycling, and education programs.
A majority of 57% of the responses to the factual questions were
answered correctly on the questionnaire. Therefore, we accept
our hypothesis which stated that the majority of the responses
to the factual questions on our questionnaire will be correct.
V. APPLICATION:
We can apply our findings to the community by encouraging the
City Council to develop a community disposal and recycling
program for household hazardous waste. We will also design a
container for people to put their household hazardous waste in
for collection by the new community program. Finally, we will
produce an instructional video that will inform people about
which household products are hazardous and how to properly
dispose of or recycle them.
TITLE: What Do Students Know And Feel About Cloning And
Genetic Engineering?
STUDENT RESEARCHER: Matt Kubicek and Jane Bordelon
SCHOOL: Mandeville Middle School
Mandeville, Louisiana
GRADE: 6
TEACHER: John I. Swang, Ph.D.
I. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND HYPOTHESIS:
We would like to do a survey research project on what students
know and feel about cloning and generic engineering. Our
hypothesis states that the majority of students will that think
cloning humans is a good idea.
II. METHODOLOGY:
First, we chose our topic. Next, we wrote our statement of
purpose. Then we composed our review of literature about
cloning, genetic engineering, genes, DNA, chromosomes, and
related ethical issues. Next, we developed our hypothesis and
wrote our methodology. After that we developed our
questionnaire. We then sent out our questionnaire about cloning
over the Internet and to 26 randomly chosen students at
Mandeville Middle School in Mandeville, Louisiana. After the
questionnaire were returned and scored, we recorded our findings
on our data collection sheet. Then we wrote our analysis of
data using statistics, charts, and graphs. Next, we wrote our
summary and conclusion. Finally, we applied our findings to the
world outside our classroom.
III. ANALYSIS OF DATA:
A majority of 67% of the students we surveyed knew that a sheep
was the first mammal to be cloned. A majority of 73% of the
students did not know that Ian Wilmut cloned the first mammal.
A majority of 70% did not know a frog was the first animal to be
cloned. A majority of 68% did not know that the Scottish
scientist used 300 embryos to clone Dolly. A majority of 60%
did not know that Gene the cow was cloned in Wisconsin. A
majority of 84% did not feel that human beings should be cloned.
A majority of 57% thought that animals should be cloned in order
to provide higher quality and more plentiful food, medicines,
and donor organs for human transplants. A majority of 60% did
not think that married couples who are unable to have children
should be able to clone themselves in order to have children. A
majority of 77% thought that we should clone endangered species.
A majority of 61% did not feel that geniuses should be cloned to
advance science and technology. A majority of 95% did not feel
that great world leader should be cloned to make the world a
better place. A majority of 96% did not feel that superstar
athletes should be cloned to improve professional sports. A
majority of 81% knew that a clone is a genetically identical
duplicate of an organism. A majority of 71% did not know that a
gene is a unit of inheritance that determines the inheritance of
a trait or group of traits that one has. A majority of 67% did
not know that DNA is a strand of genes. A majority of 67% did
not know that a chromosome is a part of DNA and has a tiny,
thread-like structure.
A majority of 59% of the responses to the factual questions on
our questionnaire were incorrect.
IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION:
Our summary and conclusion states that out of all the students
we surveyed, 84% thought that we should definitely not clone
humans. The students thought it was a good idea to clone
animals in order to provide higher and more plentiful food,
medicine, and donor organs for human transplants. Therefore, we
reject our hypothesis which stated that the majority of the
students would think that cloning humans is a good idea. A
majority of 59% of the responses to the factual questions on our
questionnaire were incorrect which indicates that students don't
know a great deal about cloning and genetic engineering.
V. APPLICATION:
We can apply our findings to the world outside our classroom by
telling teachers to teach their students about cloning because
it is a big issue and students need to know more about it. We
can also write to the legislative part of the government and
tell them to make sure that they know what will happen if they
do clone humans. We can let them know what we found out in our
survey about how students feel about cloning and genetic
engineering.
© 1998 John I. Swang, Ph.D.