The National Student Research Center
E-Journal of Student Research: Multi-Disciplinary
Volume 7, Number 1, April, 1999
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:
- Using Benthic Macroinvertebrates
to Check the Health of the Hudson River In Newcomb, New York
- Keeping The Air Environment Clean
When You Clean
- Does a Steady Hand Get "Shakier"
With Age?
- Which Household Items Lubricate Metal
The Best?
- The Decomposition Of Different Foods
In Different Environments
- The Effect Of pH On The Life Span
Of A Tadpole
Math:
- How Well Do Seventh Graders Understand
The U.S. Customary System?
Social Studies:
- A Student Survey About Hurricanes
Consumerism:
- Computer Game Prices
- Pizza Prices
SCIENCE SECTION
Title: Using Benthic Macroinvertebrates to Check the Health of
the Hudson River In Newcomb, New York
Student Researcher: Lindsay M. Yandon
School Address: Newcomb Central School
Newcomb New York
Grade: 6th
Teacher: Paul Jebb
I. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND HYPOTHESIS:
The objective of this project is to see if the Hudson River in
Newcomb, New York, is a clean and healthy source of water. The
hypothesis is that the Hudson River is clean and healthy.
II. METHODOLOGY:
The macroinvertebrates were collected from the Hudson River at
the inlet of Lake Harris in Newcomb, New York. I took the water
temperature, the speed of the water and I measured the depth of
the water. In order to collect the macroinvertebrates I placed
a net into the water so that it touched the sand on the bottom
of the river. Then I picked up the rocks that were in front of
the net, scrubbed the rock with a brush and the
macroinvertebrates fell into the net.
MATERIALS:
Sieve, net, waders, thermometer, tape measure, glass jars,
alcohol, gloves, clipboard, pencils, brushes, buckets, trays,
magnifying glasses, forceps, petri dishes, glass vials.
LAB WORK:
1) I got back to the lab and put the macroinvertebrates in jars
of 90% alcohol. 2) They were poured into a U.S. standard 30
sieve and picked them apart from all of the other waste. 3)
Then I rough sorted the macroinvertebrates into groups according
to their size, color, and the number of tails. 4) Then I put
the groups into a petri dish and identified and counted the
number of macroinvertebrates in each order. 5) The organisms
from each order were put into vials with alcohol. I labeled the
vials according to where they were found.
III. ANALYSIS OF DATA:
In order to find out if my water is clean, I calculated the
biotic index (Dates, 1997). The number was 3.4. If the biotic
index is 0 - 3.75, there is no pollution problem. This shows my
water is clean.
I also calculated the percentage of macroinvertebrates in
different orders as seen in Table 1.
Table 1
Percentage of macroinvertebrates in different orders.
Order Percent
Ephemeroptera (Mayflies) 7
Plecoptera (Stoneflies) 10
Trichoptera (Caddisflies) 60
Diptera (True flies) 13
Coleoptera (Beetles) 10
Oligochaetes (Worms)
Other
IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION:
The purpose of this experiment was to see if my water is clean.
Crayfish, stoneflies, and caddisflies are all good indicators of
clean water and I found all of these in my water. The results of
my experiment show that my hypothesis was correct, the Hudson
River in Newcomb has both clean and healthy water.
I could improve this experiment by taking more samples, sorting
live animals, and doing this project for a longer period of time
V. APPLICATION:
This will be useful to me because now I know how to tell if
water is polluted or not.
VI. BIBLIOGRAPHY
Dates, Geoff, and Jack Byrne. Living Waters: Using Benthic
Macroinvertebrates and Habitat to Assess Your River's Health.
Montpelier: River Watch Network, 1997.
Title: Keeping The Air Environment Clean When You Clean
Student Researcher: Richard Deitchman
School Address: Fox Lane Middle School
Route 172
Bedford, NY 10506
Grade: 6
Teacher: Dr. Sears and Mr. Karlsson
I. Statement of Purpose and Hypothesis:
This experiment will determine the concentration of airborne
dust using different floor cleaning methods. The methods
include different vacuum cleaners and hand cleaning. The
hypothesis is that better filters produce less airborne dust
while cleaning.
II. Methodology:
Materials: 3 different kinds of vacuum cleaners (a Dust Buster,
a regular vacuum cleaner and a HEPA (high efficiency particulate
absolute) filter vacuum cleaner) and two hand cleaning methods
(wet and dry dusting). I also used a known quantity of
household dust spread on a 1 foot by 1 foot section of the
floor. An airborne particle counter that continuously measures
dust concentrations (Lasair 1002 Particle Counter).
Procedure: Spread dust on a floor surface of 1 foot by 1 foot.
Clean up dust each time with different vacuum or hand cleaning
method. Measure airborne dust levels for each method during
cleaning for 5 minutes and for 15 minutes before cleaning. For
this study, measure the airborne dust levels from the middle of
the room, about 2 1/2 feet from the 1' x 1' test area.
Variables: The experimental variable is the different types of
dust cleaning methods. My dependent variable is the airborne
dust levels. My controlled variables are an equal amount of
dust and the experiment will be done in the same place and for
the same amount of time for all five dust removal methods.
Airborne dust levels will be measured from the same location,
too.
III. Analysis of Data:
The analysis compared airborne dust levels of the different
cleaning methods with background levels of dust taken before
each sampling period. To analyze the data, the difference in
the airborne dust levels from background levels, by particle
size, was determined. In Table l, representative particle sizes
of fine dust (0.4 and 0.7 microns) and coarse dust (1.0 and 2.0
microns) were compared.
Table 1
Particles Between 0.4 And 0.7 Microns Above Background
| Dust | Mini | Dry | HEPA | Wet |
| Buster | Vacuum | Sweeping | Vacuum | Sweeping |
| | | | | |
| 10,175 | 58,844 | 94,532 | 34,733 | 6,374 |
Particles Between 1.0 And 2.0 Microns Above Background
| Dust | Mini | Dry | HEPA | Wet |
| Buster | Vacuum | Sweeping | Vacuum | Sweeping |
| | | | | |
| 58,030 | 3,505 | 61,771 | 1,168 | 9,225 |
IV. Summary and Conclusion:
As anticipated, the HEPA vacuum had the one of the lowest
overall airborne dust concentrations. However, wet sweeping
also was effective in keeping the airborne dust levels down.
Although the HEPA vacuum maybe a good filter when dust is
collected in the vacuum, the movement of air around the vacuum
collection point seems to create some airborne dust. The dust
buster and mini vacuum produced airborne dust levels above
guidelines for clean office levels and were near poor office
level guidelines. Dry sweeping also had particle levels that
were in the poor range for offices. It was also noted that the
background airborne dust levels rose during the experiment,
which might be do to increased car and truck traffic around the
building during the day, which let particles get into the air
intake of the building.
V. Application:
Airborne dust particles can cause health problems for people.
When cleaning it would be good to limit creating airborne dust
while getting floors clean. All five cleaning methods appear to
clean the floors. However, this study demonstrates that
purchasing a HEPA vacuum may be worth the additional cost. For
the vacuums tested, the HEPA creates the least amount of
airborne dust while cleaning. If a vacuum is not available or
affordable then, wet sweeping is very effective. This will get
a home or office clean without creating airborne dust. Don't
dry sweep. It doesn't keep the area you are cleaning free from
airborne dust.
Title: Does a Steady Hand Get "Shakier" With Age?
Student Researcher: Anne Glazer
School Address: Edgemont Jr\Sr. High School
White Oak Lane
Scarsdale, NY l 0583
Grade: 7
Teacher: Mrs. Russo
I. Statement and Purpose of Hypothesis
I wanted to find out whether a person's hand gets shakier as he
or she gets older. My hypothesis is that the nerves in your
hand are steadiest when you are young and you lose that quality
with age. This is an important experiment to do, especially for
potential doctors or dentists. Would you want a surgeon
operating on you who is 30 and has steady hands, or someone who
is 60 and has regular hand tremors? (Of course, experience
counts, too. ) This is a very necessary experiment and I am
happy to be doing it.
II. Methodology
I constructed a nerve-tester. It consists of a buzzer, a long
wire with a small loop on the end, another wire with no loop,
and centimeter markings directly under the wire. I asked three
testers in each age category (5-10, 11-15, 16-20, 2130, 3140,
41-50, 51-60, 60 & up) to run the loop through the non-looped
wire. If the two wires touched, the buzzer would go off. I
recorded at which marking the buzzer sounded. Each person tried
three times, and I recorded their individual scores and
calculated an average score. Keep in mind, the lower the score,
the better.
My controlled variables were:
The nerve-tester itself
The straightness of the wire
The surface the tester was on (it was always on a hard, flat
surface like a desk or a table)
My manipulated variable was the person's age.
My responding variable were the scores each person got.
III. Analysis of Data
After collecting my data, I looked over the results. I computed
an average for each person tested and an average for the overall
age group. When I compared the averages, I found my hypothesis
was almost perfect, with the youngest group scoring the lowest,
and the numbers building higher to the oldest group. The range
of scores were from a low of 1.3 to a high of 8.3. These
numbers represent the points the age group got to on the tester.
The only inconsistent group was the 21-30 year olds, and that
was because one score was very high.
Age Tester No. 1 Tester No. 2 Tester No. 3
Overall
Category Average Score Average Score Average Score Average
5-10 1.6 1.3 1.0 1.3
11-15 1.0 2.0 2.0 1.7
16-20 4.0 3.0 1.0 2.7
21-30 3.0 3.0 7.0 4.3
31-40 2.0 1.0 4.0 2.3
41-50 1.0 7.0 4.0 4.0
51-60 3.0 4.0 9.0 5.3
60+ 8.0 7.6 9.0 8.2
IV. Summary and Conclusion
It appears that my hypothesis is correct and that people's hands
get shakier as they grow older. The youngest group of testers,
the 5-10 year olds, had the lowest average at 1.3. The oldest
group of testers had the highest average at 8.2.
I have also concluded that some people have naturally steady or
shaky hands, no matter how old they are. For example, I
personally have a shaky hand and so does my brother. My mother
and sisters all have very steady hands. Not only does it depend
on the age, but it also has a lot to do with the person.
Most people's hands are at their "shakiest" when they are put
under pressure or very nervous. For example, when I tested my
cousin, he scored very well when I tested him with nobody
around. When all the relatives heard the buzzer and came in to
see what was going on, his hand shook more and he didn't score
as well, just because everyone was watching him. Maybe this
needs to be a variable which is controlled in the future.
I therefore conclude that while my hypothesis is correct, age is
not the only factor to play a role in steadiness of hands.
V. Application
I can easily apply this information to real life. Like I
mentioned earlier, the steadiness of your hand can be important
when looking for a job. Some jobs, like doctors, for example,
require a steady hand. Also, steady hands can be important in
playing sports, holding objects, and even writing. Someone in
one of my classes has very sloppy handwriting, and when I tested
him, I discovered that his hand is very shaky. He probably has
trouble holding a pen.
While at the pharmacy last week, I noticed there were large
grips to fit over things like keys, silverware, light switches,
and doorknobs. These are likely designed for older people who
have trouble grasping small objects. I never realized how
important it is to have a steady hand, and I am glad that people
are doing all they can to make it easier for people who don't
have naturally steady hands.
Title: Which Household Items Lubricate Metal The Best?
Student Researcher: Mandy Mitchell
School Address: Hillside Middle School
1941 Alamo
Kalamazoo, Michigan 49007
Grade: 7
Teacher: Barbara A. Minar
I. Statement of Purpose and Hypothesis
In my experiment, I planned to find out which household items
lubricated metal the best. Of baby oil, Softsoap, vegetable
oil, and Vaseline, I thought vegetable oil would lubricate metal
the best followed by baby oil, Softsoap, and Vaseline.
II. Methodology
To test my hypothesis, I built a ramp 57.5 cm tall, 13 cm wide,
and 103.5 cm long. This created a 29.5 degree angle from the
surface it sits on and the slanted board. The slanted board was
covered with a very smooth aluminum sheet 1 mm thick. I also
bought a steel block l cm wide, l cm tall, and 14 cm long. Then
I rounded the edges on the corners to make sure there weren't
any burrs. I also gathered distilled white vinegar, Vaseline,
baby oil, vegetable oil, paper towels, a level surface big
enough to set the ramp on, a stopwatch that is accurate to the
hundredth of a second, a 5 ml calibrated container, four
disposable paint brushes, and a permanent marker.
In doing the experiment, the controls were the degree of the
ramp, the surface of the ramp, the positioning of the block, the
amount of the lubricant, the method of timing the block, the
method of cleaning the ramp, the spread of the lubricant, the
type and brand of the paint brushes, and the brands of the
lubricants, vinegar, and paper towels.
To begin, place the ramp on the level surface. Measure out 5 ml
of whatever lubricant you decide to start with. To keep from
confusing them, label the paint brushes with the permanent
marker. Also color one end on one side of the metal block with
the permanent marks. When testing, this part of the block
should face upward and be nearest the top of the ramp. To test,
brush the 5 ml of lubricant as evenly as possible onto the metal
surface of the ramp. Ready the stopwatch and release the metal
block from the top edge on "3, 2, 1, GO!" (releasing on "GO!").
Stop the watch when the front edge of the block touches the end
of the ramp. Record the time on your data chart. Now use the
paper towels and white vinegar to remove the lubricant from the
ramp. Do not touch the surface again because of the oil from
your fingers. Repeat the experiment for each of the four
lubricants three times.
III. Analysis of Data:
When I finished the experiment I found my hypothesis to be
almost completely unsupported. Instead of vegetable oil having
the best (shortest) time, followed by baby oil, Softsoap, and
lastly Vaseline; Softsoap came in first followed by baby oil,
vegetable oil, and Vaseline. The only part that turned out as I
had predicted was that Vaseline would come in last. These are
the average times it took the block to read the end of the ramp
with each lubricant:
Softsoap = 0.63 sec.
baby oil = 0.88 sec.
vegetable oil = 1.01 sec.
Vaseline = 1.22 sec.
IV. Summary and Conclusion:
In my experiment, I found that, after three trials, Softsoap had
the best average, baby oil came in second, vegetable oil was
third, and Vaseline was last. Therefore, my hypothesis was
unsupported. My hypothesis stated that vegetable oil world work
the best and that it would be followed by baby oil, then
Softsoap, and finally Vaseline.
One thing I learned from this experiment was that just because a
substance is dense does not mean it cannot lubricate. This and
the data I collected caused me to reject my hypothesis. I ran
into only one problem while doing the experiment. That problem
was the cleaning of the ramp. I found using Dawn dish snap to
be unfair because one of the lubricants was soap, also. It also
left a very thin residue. In its place, I used plain distilled
white vinegar. This solved my problem.
V. Application:
To generalize my findings, I would say I have found that a
substance's ability to lubricate is not determined by its
density. There are not any uses for this knowledge now, but in
the future we may use these products in cars or moving
sidewalks. The possibilities are endless. Even after this
experiment, there are still questions unanswered. "Does the
angle of the ramp affect the ratio of the differences of the
lubricant's times?" is only one. "Would it make a difference if
the ramp was longer?" is another. Despite this research there
are many questions yet unanswered.
Title: The Decomposition Of Different Foods In Different
Environments
Student Researcher: Michael DeSantis
School: Edgemont Jr./Sr. High School
200 White Oak Lane
Scarsdale, NY 10583
Grade: 7
Teacher: Mr. Rubenstein
I. Statement of Purpose and Hypothesis:
I wanted to find out which of the foods that I gathered would
decompose faster in two different environments. My first
hypothesis stated that soil will help the food matter decompose
faster rather than the twigs + grass mixture. My second
hypothesis stated that the food matter will decompose faster for
the room-temperature group rather than the cold-temperature
group. My third hypothesis stated that, of the three foods that
I selected (oranges, tomatoes, and potatoes), the tomatoes will
decompose the fastest.
II. Methodology:
For my experiment, I used plastic cups, soil, twigs, grass, a
shoe box, labels, a refrigerator, tape, a marker, a tomato, a
potato, and an orange.
After gathering the materials that I needed, I constructed the
base or containment for each of the two groups (cold/room
temperature). I then put the plastic cups into the bottom of
the shoe box (6 cups) and taped them down. I then filled them
with either the soil or the twigs + grass. I repeated this for
the top side of the shoe box. I placed the food into the
selected cups. Before I started to fill the cups, I made a data
chart. I placed one box into the refrigerator and one box in my
living room. I took a picture of each box every week and
recorded the percent of the food not decomposed of each cup
every day for 24 days.
The controlled variables were the size of the cups and the
amount of soil and the amount of twigs + grass mixture used.
The manipulated variable was the temperature in which each box
was kept. The responding variable was the rate of decomposition
of the foods being tested.
III. Analysis of Data:
As it turned out, my hypothesis was not entirely correct. The
food in the room-temperature box did in fact decompose faster.
The tomatoes also decomposed faster in both boxes. But the food
in the cups containing twigs + grass decomposed faster than the
food in the cups filled with soil.
Room Temperature
% Not Decomposed
Soil Twigs and Grass
Date Tomato% Orange% Potato% Tomato% Orange% Potato%
4/29/98 84 98 99 79 96 100
5/ 2/98 52 90 96 48 87 99
5/ 6/98 42 80 95 39 78 97
5/ 9/98 42 73 95 39 72 96
5/13/98 40 72 94 39 71 96
5/16/98 40 71 94 39 69 95
5/19/98 40 70 94 38 68 94
Cold Temperature
% Not Decomposed
Soil Twigs and Grass
Date Tomato% Orange% Potato% Tomato% Orange% Potato%
4/29/98 97 98 99 79 98 100
5/ 2/98 94 94 97 94 97 99
5/ 6/98 86 89 96 89 91 98
5/ 9/98 82 88 96 85 89 97
5/13/98 81 88 96 80 88 97
5/16/98 78 88 96 75 87 97
5/19/98 77 88 96 74 87 97
IV. Summary and Conclusion:
I found out that tomatoes are one of the fastest decomposing
foods, especially being compared with oranges and potatoes. But
to my surprise, I also found out that twigs + grass do
contribute by increasing the rate of decomposition compared to
soil. Room temperature is also better than cold temperature for
decomposing matters which is what I expected before conducting
this experiment.
V. Application:
The information I found out while conducting my experiment can
help the earth. For example, now that I know that twigs + grass
are better for decomposing foods than soil, people should use
twigs and grass for the ground (especially for a compost pile).
Also, land fills or places trying to minimize the amount of
garbage (including food scraps) should use twigs and grass for
the ground. Also, knowing that tomatoes are very fast at
decomposing, is useful information when planning a compost pile.
Title: The Effect Of pH On The Life Span Of A Tadpole
Student Researcher: Aaron Friedman
School: Edgemont Jr./Sr. High School
White oak Lane
Scarsdale, New York 10583
Grade: 7
Teacher: Ms. Maria Russo
I. Statement of Purpose and Hypothesis:
I wanted to know more about the effect of pH on a tadpole's life
span. pH is how acidic or basic a liquid is. Does the pH of
water in which a tadpole is placed affect its life span? Will
neutral water tadpoles live longer then acidic or basic ones?
My hypothesis stated that, if one tadpole lives in neutral water
and another lives in acidic water, the one in neutral will live
longer. I feel that a tadpole's water is naturally neutral and
if it is anything else it may be in danger of death or injury.
II. Methodology:
In order to test this hypothesis, I needed 6 bowls, 6 tadpoles,
tadpole food, acidic drops, basic drops, indicator strips,
water, and a net.
First, I filled 6 bowls with water. Two bowls then received 15
drops of acidic drops making their pH 9. Two other bowls were
left at pH 7. The last two bowls received 15 drops of basic
drops making their pH 5. I made sure each pH was correct by
testing the water with indicator strips everyday. I put one
tadpole in each bowl. Every other day, I changed the water and
reapplied the drops. Everyday, I feed them a pinch of food.
There are many other variables that I controlled. The tadpoles
were all placed on the same table and received the same amount
of oxygen. They also received the same amount of food and
water. Their water was changed at the same time and they were
fed at the same time.
The manipulated variable is the pH. The acidic tadpoles
received 15 drops of acidic drops. The basic tadpoles received
15 drops of basic drops. The responding variable is the number
of days the tadpoles stayed alive.
III. Analysis of Data:
My hypothesis was pretty correct. The acidic tadpoles did die
on the first day. As for the basic tadpoles, they did survive
the whole test (33 days). As the acidic tadpoles were dying,
their skin was shedding and they were trying to jump out of the
bowl. Many other odd occurrences happened during my testing.
For example, for about a week, one tadpole we lying upside down
and gasping for breath. Eventually, this ailment went away and
the tadpole was fine.
Tadpole # Days Alive
Acidic Tadpole #1 1
Acidic Tadpole #2 1
Neutral Tadpole #1 33
Neutral Tadpole #2 33
Basic Tadpole #1 33
Basic Tadpole #2 33
IV. Summary and Conclusion:
The acidic tadpoles did die before the neutral ones, but the
basic ones stayed alive as long as the neutral ones. Therefore,
tadpoles are able to survive if the pH is slightly basic. But
if the pH becomes slightly acidic, the results may be fatal.
V. Application:
In this fast changing world, many environments are being
destroyed and even ruined. If a tadpole needs to live in water
with a pH of 7, it is important to know that so we won't
accidentally change the pH. Also, things like acid rain could
definitely harm the water's pH. Not only is the pH of water a
problem for tadpoles, but all marine animals may be facing this
potential problem. I hope to continue my studies and may expand
it to include other animals.
MATH SECTION
TITLE: How Well Do Seventh Graders Understand The U.S.
Customary System?
RESEARCHERS: A.J. Heimbichner, Bryce Wiberg, Steven Williams
SCHOOL: Shepherd Junior High School
Shepherd, Montana
GRADE: 8
TEACHERS: Jennifer Wagner, Lisa Carpenter
I. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND HYPOTHESIS
We did this project to learn more about the U.S. Customary
System and to discover how well seventh grade students could use
this system. The U.S. Customary System is the traditional
system of measurement, with units such as feet, gallons, and
pounds, and was adopted from England. Our hypothesis states
that 75% of the seventh grade students surveyed will get six out
of the nine questions on our questionnaire correct and a majority
will know how to use a ruler.
II. METHODOLOGY
We selected a science class of 21 seventh graders. We gave them
a questionnaire that had 9 questions about the U.S. Customary
System. The questionnaire asked them to use a ruler and to
recall general facts regarding the U.S. Customary System. We
gave them 15 minutes to complete the questions. Then we scored
them and told them as a class how they did.
III. QUESTIONNAIRE AND RESPONSES
How well do 7th graders understand the U.S. Customary System?
1. How many inches are in a foot?_______inches.
% answered correctly: 85%
% answered wrong: 15%
2. How many feet are in a yard?________feet.
% answered correctly: 80%
% answered wrong: 20%
3. How many feet are in a mile?________feet.
a. 9ft. b. 525ft. c. 5,280ft. d. 750,630ft.
% answered correctly: 85%
% answered wrong: 15%
4. How many yards are in a mile?_______yards.
a. 5,651yds. b. 1,760yds. c. 9,542yds. d. 700yds.
% answered correctly: 80%
% answered wrong: 20%
5. Measure this line with a ruler in inches.
|_______________________________________|
% answered correctly: 40%
% answered wrong: 60%
6. Measure this line with a ruler in inches.
|_________|
% answered correctly: 20%
% answered wrong : 80%
7. Measure this line with a ruler in inches.
|________________________________|
% answered correctly: 60%
% answered wrong: 40%
8. Measure 6 3/4 inches and draw a line.
% answered correctly: 65%
% answered wrong: 35%
III. ANALYSIS OF DATA
After scoring the questionnaires we discovered that 76% of the
seventh graders could correctly answer questions about units of
measurement used in the U.S. Customary System. We also found
that over 67% of the seventh graders surveyed were unable to
correctly measure various lines with a ruler.
IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
We accept the first part of our hypothesis which stated that
seventh graders could use the U.S. Customary System. We reject
the second part of our hypothesis which stated that 7th graders
would know how to use a ruler because 67% were unable to
correctly measure various lines with a ruler.
V. APPLICATION
We think that this research will have an impact in Shepherd Jr.
High School. We have decided to send a letter out to the 6th,
7th, and 8th grade teachers to inform them of our research
findings. With this letter, we included a sample questionnaire
that had the percentages of right and wrong answers for each
question. We also gave them ideas and a sample lesson for them
to use with their students on how to use a ruler.
SOCIAL STUDIES SECTION
TITLE: A Student Survey About Hurricanes
STUDENT RESEARCHER: Hannah Wickham Kaufmann-Swang
SCHOOL: Mandeville Middle School
Mandeville, Louisiana
GRADE: 5
TEACHERS: Mrs. Santangelo
I. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE:
I wanted to find out what other students think and feel about
hurricanes.
II. HYPOTHESIS:
My first hypothesis stated that the majority of students
surveyed would be afraid of hurricanes. My second hypothesis
stated that the majority of adults surveyed would be afraid of
hurricanes.
III. METHODOLOGY:
First, I chose my topic and wrote my statement of purpose.
Next, I wrote my review of literature on hurricanes. Then I
developed my hypothesis. After that I wrote my methodology to
test my hypothesis. Then I developed my questionnaire. Then I
surveyed a sample population of 10 students at Mandeville Middle
School in Mandeville, Louisiana, USA. Then I surveyed five
adults. When the completed questionnaires were returned I
scored the results. Then I analyzed my data and wrote my
summary and conclusion. Then I applied my findings to the world
outside of the classroom and wrote my abstract report which was
published in the E-Journal of Student Research.
IV. QUESTIONNAIRE:
1. Have you ever been through a hurricane?
2. Were you relieved that Hurricane Georges did not hit us?
3. Did you board up your house?
4. Did you leave the city when Hurricane Georges came?
5. Were you scared?
V. DATA COLLECTION FORM:
Student Responses (N=10)
1. Have you ever been through a hurricane?
Yes 7 No 3
2. Were you relieved that Hurricane Georges did not hit us?
Yes 3 No 7
3. Did you board up your house?
Yes 2 No 8
4. Did you leave the city when Hurricane Georges came?
Yes 7 No 3
5. Were you scared?
Yes 3 No 7
Adult Responses (N=5)
1. Have you ever been through a hurricane?
Yes 3 No 2
2. Were you relieved that Hurricane Georges did not hit us?
Yes 5 No 0
3. Did you board up your house?
Yes 2 No 3
4. Did you leave the city when Hurricane Georges came?
Yes 5 No 0
5. Were you scared?
Yes 5 No 0
VI. ANALYSIS OF DATA:
A majority of students (7) had been through a hurricane. A
majority of students (7) were not relieved that the hurricane
did not hit the city. They wanted it to hit so they would not
have to go to school. A majority of students (8) did not board
up their houses. A majority of students (7) left the city when
Hurricane Georges came. A majority of students (7) were not
scared.
A majority of adults (3) had been through a hurricane. A
majority of adults (5) were relieved that the hurricane did not
hit the city. A majority of adults (3) did not board up their
houses. A majority of adults (5) left the city when Hurricane
Georges came. A majority of adults (5) were scared.
VII. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION:
A majority of students and adults had been through a hurricane.
A majority of adults were relieved that the hurricane did not
hit the city, but a majority of the students were not. A
majority of students and adults did not board up their houses.
A majority of students and adults left the city when Hurricane
Georges came. A majority of adults were scared, but the
students were not. I rejected my first hypothesis which stated
that the majority of students surveyed would be afraid of
hurricanes, they were not. Accepted my second hypothesis which
stated that the majority of adults surveyed would be afraid of
hurricanes.
VIII. APPLICATION:
Teachers should talk with their students about the dangers of
hurricanes so that they will take them more seriously.
Hurricanes can kill people and destroy their homes.
CONSUMERISM SECTION
TITLE: Computer Game Prices
STUDENT RESEARCHERS: Kit Salo and Amy Arnold
SCHOOL: Mandeville Middle School
Mandeville, Louisiana
GRADE: 6
TEACHERS: John I. Swang, Ph.D.
I. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE:
We would like to do a consumerism research project on the cost
of computer games.
II. HYPOTHESIS:
Our hypothesis states that Wal-Mart will have the cheapest
computer game prices.
III. METHODOLOGY:
First, we identified our topic, gathered our materials, and
wrote our review of literature. Then we wrote our hypothesis
and methodology which included the following steps.
1. We went to one of the selected computer game stores.
2. We recorded the prices of the top five computer games.
3. We repeated steps 1 and 2 at other stores.
4. We averaged the prices from each store.
5. We recorded the store with the lowest prices and the store
with the highest prices.
After we wrote our methodology, we gathered our data, conducted
our analysis of data, and wrote our summary and conclusion.
Last, we applied our findings to the world outside the
classroom.
IV. DATA COLLECTION:
Store Games
Myst Flight Riven Quake Tomb Average
Simulator Raider
Wal-Mart $14.96 $49.96 $29.96 $29.96 $29.96 $30.96
Circuit City $19.99 $44.99 $39.99 $39.99 $39.99 $36.99
Comp USA $24.99 $49.99 $29.99 $39.99 $34.99 $35.99
Babbages $29.99 $59.99 $54.99 $54.99 $39.99 $47.99
V. ANALYSIS OF DATA:
During our project, we found out that Myst sold for $14.96 at
Wal-Mart, $19.96 at Circuit City, $24.99 at Comp USA, and $29.99
at Babbages. The second game on the list of the top five,
Flight Simulator, sold for $49.99 at Wal-Mart, $44.99 at Circuit
City, $49.99 at Comp USA, and $59.99 at Babbages. Riven cost
$29.96 at Wal-Mart, $39.99 at Circuit City, $29.99 at Comp USA,
and $54.99 at Babbages. Quake II cost $29.96 at Wal-Mart,
$39.99 at Circuit City, $39.99 at Comp USA, and $54.99 at
Babbages. The last game, Tomb Raider II, sold for $29.99 at
Wal-Mart, $39.99 at Circuit City, $34.99 at Comp USA, and $39.99
at Babbages.
VI. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION:
In summary, we found that Wal-Mart had the cheapest prices for
computer games. The average price was $30.96. Comp USA came in
second because it's average for computer games was $35.99.
Circuit City had an average of $36.99. Babbages was the most
expensive with an average of $47.99. Therefore, we accept our
hypothesis which stated that Wal-Mart would have the lowest
computer game prices.
VII. APPLICATION:
This project can apply to the real people by explaining to them
the least expensive place to purchase computer games.
TITLE: Pizza Prices
STUDENT RESEARCHER: Genevieve Turco
SCHOOL: Mandeville Middle School
Mandeville, Louisiana
GRADE: 6
TEACHERS: John I. Swang, Ph.D.
I. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE:
I would like to do a consumerism research project on pizza
prices in Mandeville, Louisiana.
II. HYPOTHESIS:
My hypothesis states that Pizza Hut will sell the cheapest
pizza.
III. METHODOLOGY:
1. I finished my Scientific Research Contract.
2. I picked a research topic.
3. I wrote a Review of Literature about pizza, consumerism,
consumer rights, where pizza originated, what pizza is,
how food gets to stores and sale outlets, and quality
control systems.
4. From the Review of Literature, I developed a hypothesis.
5. Then I developed a methodology to test my hypothesis.
6. Then I started picking pizza outlets.
7. Call chosen pizza outlets and ask for manager.
8. Ask for ounces of cheese, dough and sauce.
9. Record information on data collection page.
10. Analyze data using charts and simple statistics.
11. Accept or reject hypothesis.
12. Write a summary and conclusion.
13. Apply findings to the world outside of our classroom.
V. DATA COLLECTION FORM:
Dominoes
Price $7.99 $9.99
Diameter 12" 14"
Weight 26 oz. 32 oz.
Price Per Ounce $0.31 $0.31
Average Cost Per Ounce $0.31
Papa John's
Price $5.99 $9.99 $12.99
Diameter 10" 14" 16"
Weight 19 oz. 42oz. 56 oz.
Price Per Ounce $0.32 $0.24 $0.23
Average Cost Per Ounce $0.26
Pizza Hut
Price $10.59 $12.59
Diameter 12" 14"
Weight 24oz. 35 oz.
Price Per Ounce $0.44 $0.36
Average Cost Per Ounce $0.40
Via Roma Cafe
Price $6.75 $8.74 $10.37
Diameter 12" 14" 16"
Weight 26 oz. 35oz. 44 oz.
Price Per Ounce $0.29 $0.27 $0.24
Average Cost Per Ounce $0.26
VI. ANALYSIS OF DATA:
From my research, I found that Pizza Hut sold the most expensive
pizza in Mandeville. Their price was $0.40 per ounce. Dominoes
sold the second most expensive at $0.31 per ounce. Papa John's
and Via Roma Cafe were the cheapest with a low price of $0.26
per ounce.
VII. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION:
From my research, I found that Via Roma Cafe and Papa John's
sold the cheapest pizza. Therefore, I reject my hypothesis which
stated that Pizza Hut would be the cheapest pizza parlor.
VIII. APPLICATION:
Now that I have learned that Via Roma Cafe and Papa John's sell
the cheapest pizza, I will go there from now on and post my
research on the Internet. I will also try to tell my friends
and spread the news around at community organizations.