For more information contact:
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Science Section:
1. Gender Equity in Science Textbooks
2. An Analysis of Electromagnetic Field Strengths
3. Louisiana Oysters: Are They Safe to Eat?
4. Does an Iguana Prefer Heat?
Math:
1. Does The Divisibility Rule For Three Work For Other
Numbers?
2. Is the Formula For Finding the Area of a Triangle Always
Accurate?
SCIENCE SECTION
TITLE: Gender Equity in Science Textbooks
STUDENT RESEARCHER: Kelly McGeever
SCHOOL: Cardinal OÕHara High School
Springfield, PA
GRADE: 11
TEACHER: Kay Lansing
I. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND HYPOTHESIS:
I want to find out more about gender equity in science
textbooks by examining the pictures in the textbooks. My
hypothesis is that, if science textbooks are tested for gender
equity, there will be more pictures of males than of females.
II. METHODOLOGY:
Materials: 15 assorted science textbooks, pen, paper.
Variables:
A. Manipulated: assorted grade levels, publishers, science
textbooks
B. Responding: number of pictures of males and females
C. Constant: the experimental procedure
Step by step directions:
1. Gather science textbooks.
2. Look at every picture on every page.
3. Determine how many people are represented in the picture.
If there is a crowd, count the people who are the focused
objects of the picture.
4. Determine the number of males and females in each picture.
5. Write a short description of the picture.
6. Determine the totals of picture of male and females in the
book.
7. Repeat the procedure with each textbook.
8. Determine the percentages of males and females pictured in
the textbooks.
III. ANALYSIS OF DATA:
In the fifteen science textbooks I tested for gender equity,
there were no textbooks that were gender equal in the
photographs. In the fifteen books there were a total of 971
pictures of humans. There was a total of 1733 people in the
971 pictures. Of the 1733 people in the pictures there were a
total of 1002 males and 731 females. These totals were
converted into percentages. 57.8% of the pictures depicted
males and 42.2% of the pictures depicted females.
IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION:
I have concluded that there is gender inequity in science
textbook illustrations. I found that older publications were
much more biased than those with newer copyrights. Although it
may not be possible to be completely equal in the pictures, the
results found in this experiment show a wide gap that needs to
be narrowed. I accept my original hypothesis because more male
photographs were used. If I perform this experiment again I
should expand my list of books, publishers and grade levels.
V. APPLICATION:
The inequities which I have discovered may influence girls to
stay away from science professions. Photographs can influence
people and should be monitored. Hopefully, there will be more
studies on the subject of gender equity in school to provide
males and females with a proper learning experience. The
editor, publishers, and photographers should become more
conscious of their work to provide equal opportunities for all.
I will write to the publishers of the books used in the study
to ask about their plans to provide more equitable gender
representation in the future.
TITLE: An Analysis of Electromagnetic Field Strengths
STUDENT RESEARCHER: David Schwartz
SCHOOL: Fairmont West School
Fairmont, West Virginia
GRADE: 9th
TEACHER: Terry Kerns
I. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND HYPOTHESES:
The purpose of this project is to study the electromagnetic
fields (EMFs) coming from common household appliances. These
are low frequency fields surrounding all items carrying AC
current. The strongest electro-magnetic fields are often found
around items with large coils of wire, such as motors or
transformers. In this project I wish to discover what items
have the strongest EMFs, and how those fields decrease with
distance.
The following null hypotheses and research question were
proposed:
1. The strengths of the EMFs will not vary with respect to the
different items tested.
2. The strengths of the EMFs will not change with increasing
distance.
Is it possible to design a model of an electromagnetic field in
three dimensions?
II. METHODOLOGY:
1. I positioned the Gaussmeter on an object at a point that
gave the highest reading, and recorded that data.
2. I then started at that position and took readings at 5
centimeter intervals away from the object.
3. I created a grid of 2 centimeter squares and placed it on an
AC adaptor. I then measured the field strengths at each point
on that grid.
4. I selected a specific Gauss reading and determined the
location of that reading over each grid point in terms of x, y
and z coordinates.
III. ANALYSIS OF DATA:
In my study, I found that different items tested had various
field strengths, and these strengths decreased as the distance
from the item increased. My tests showed that the field was
strongest over the center of the object. My data was used to
create a graph depicting the shape of a specific field.
Maximum
Item Strength 5cm 10cm 15cm 20cm 25cm 30cm
AC adaptor
(appliance off)>2000.0 332.0 98.1 36.3 16.5 8.8 5.0
AC adaptor
(appliance on) >2000.0 390.0 103.0 38.5 17.4 9.7 5.5
Blender >2000.0
CD player 19.5 3.4 1.9 1.1 0.9 0.6 0.5
Digital clock 139.3 39.7 12.6 5.1 2.4 1.7 0.6
Electric clock >2000.0 615.0 222.0 109.2 56.4 3.6 19.8
Fluorescent light
(center) 172.3 52.0 19.6 11.6 6.5 3.9 2.5
Fluorescent light
(end) 8.3 1.2 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.6
Incandescent lamp
(off) 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4
Incandescent lamp
(on, 100 W) 9.8
Incandescent lamp
(on, 75 W) 3.6 3.6 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.4
Microwave oven 1270.0 593.0 355.0 241.0 148.2 103.0 68.3
TV (top) 28.4
VCR 311.4 148.5 47.7 19.8 10.0 5.6 3.5
IV. CONCLUSIONS AND SUMMARY:
1. The strengths of the EMFs did vary with respect to the
different items tested. For instance, one electric clock had a
strength that was in excess of 2000 milliGauss while a VCR had
only 300+.
2. The strengths of the EMFs decreased as the distance
increased in the tests, but the decrease was not proportional
to the increasing distance.
3. From my tests, I discovered that it is possible to create a
three-dimensional model of an electromagnetic field. For
instance, the graph of the field strengths in a plane shows
that the strongest portion of the field was in the center of
the grid, which is above the appliance.
The nature of electromagnetic fields is similar to other forms
of radiation. For example, they vary depending on the source
and energy supplied to that source, and their strengths
decrease with distance. The shape of the field can also be
measured and thus modeled easily. My study has proved that it
is possible to gain an understanding of EMFs with relatively
simple instruments and procedures.
V. APPLICATION:
Despite the recent controversy over the effects of
electromagnetic fields in our daily environments, I see no
reason for most people to be alarmed. Only the strongest items
have far-reaching fields, and of these, few give long-term
exposure. Most objects in our environment do not present a
danger because we are not affected by their limited fields, nor
are we exposed to them long enough.
TITLE: Louisiana Oysters: Are They Safe to Eat?
STUDENT RESEARCHER: Emily LaRose
SCHOOL: St. Scholastica Academy
Covington, Louisiana
GRADE: 9
TEACHER: David Arbo
I. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND HYPOTHESIS:
The purpose of my research is to try and find out if raw
Louisiana oysters, that many people love, are safe to eat.
Studies have been done on the oysters to find out if they are
harmful to humans, and many of these studies contradict one
another. My hypothesis states that forms of salmonella and
e.coli bacteria will be present in the oysters I test.
II. METHODOLOGY:
I began my research by stating my hypothesis and doing a review
of the literature about the diseases caused by the eating of
raw oysters. With this information, I developed a methodology
and list of materials that would help me measure the amount of
bacteria present in oysters, the amount of the bacteria that
can be safely consumed, and the length of time needed to cook
the oysters so that they are safe to eat.
For materials, I used twenty raw Louisiana oysters, boiling
water for sterilization, a sterilized blender, an incubator,
sterile swabs, four petri dishes, and tryptic soy agar with 5%
sheep blood.
I began by sterilizing all equipment with boiling water for ten
minutes. I then took five of the raw oysters and placed them
in the blender until they were ground up. Then, using one of
the sterile swabs, I smudged a small amount of the liquid from
the oysters onto a petri dish. I then steamed five oysters
for one minute, another five for three minutes, and another
five for five minutes. I then ground up each of these groups
of oysters separately and smudged a small amount of the liquid
from each onto three different petri dishes. Next, I incubated
all four of the petri dishes for about forty-eight hours. Then
I counted the colonies and identified the types of bacteria
that were present in each petri dish. I also determined what
amount of each type of bacteria could be safely consumed.
III. ANALYSIS OF DATA:
The bacteria count in the raw oysters was much greater than in
the steamed oysters because the steaming did kill many of the
bacteria. However, the oysters that were steamed for three
minutes contained less bacteria than the ones that were steamed
for five minutes. This may have been due to the fact that I
had a random selection of unweighed oysters in each group of
oysters. Some of the oysters were larger than others and the
heated steam may not have penetrated as deeply into them.
Therefore the larger oysters may not have been as fully cooked
and the bacteria in them not fully killed, causing this result.
In the five types of colonies found, one was a vibrio which is
the worst bacteria and the second worst thing you could eat in
an oyster. Vibrio cause gastroenteritis that may lead to
bacturimia if the bacteria moves into the blood. The other
four colony were types of pseudomonas that aren't harmful to
humans unless you eat too many or have a health condition.
Both vibrio types and the pseudomonas types are naturally found
in the water that oysters are raised in, polluted or not.
Data Table
Number of organism types Number of colonies
Raw Oysters 5 types 100.000 +
Steamed for 1 min 5 types 100,000 +
Steamed for 3 min 1 type 1
Steamed for 5 min 2 types 6
IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION:
I conclude that cooking oysters substantially reduces the
amount of bacteria present in oysters. A person would have to
cook oysters until they were shriveled and small if they wanted
to destroy 99% of the bacteria present in oysters. The only
way to be sure you are not eating bacteria from oysters that
may compromise your health is to not eat oysters at all because
there are certain northeastern bacteria that aren't killed by
cooking. These are not a problem in Louisiana.
I reject my hypothesis. I did not find salmonella and e.coli
bacteria in the oysters I tested. I did find bacteria that
could make anyone sick not just those with compromised health
as well as forms of bacteria that are only harmful if ingested
in large quantities.
V. APPLICATION:
My project can be a source for people to turn to with questions
about eating oysters in Louisiana. For instance, during the
warmer summer months of the year, bacteria that are found
naturally in the waters of oysters beds reproduce at a greater
rate. Thus raw oysters eaten at these times will be more
likely to contain high levels of bacteria which could harm
healthy individuals if eaten in great quantity and individual
with compromised health conditions. My research indicates
that some individuals may want to stop eating raw oysters at
this time of the year or thoroughly cook them.
TITLE: Does an Iguana Prefer Heat?
STUDENT RESEARCHER: Kevin Carr
SCHOOL: Mandeville Middle School
Mandeville, Louisiana
GRADE: 6
TEACHER: Mrs. Maryanne Smith, M.Ed.
I. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND HYPOTHESIS:
My three month old iguana is a reptile. All reptiles are cold-
blooded and must have heat for their bodies to function
normally. My pet iguana has a heating rock in its terrarium.
I wanted to find out how much time the iguana spent on the
heating rock each day. I wanted to know if the iguana spent
more time off the rock or on the rock. My hypothesis was that
the young iguana would spend more time on the rock than off the
rock.
II. METHODOLOGY:
To test my hypothesis, I used the iguana inside of its
terrarium with the heating rock. I also prepared a balancing
scale to place under the heating rock. Wiring connected to a
battery operated clock. The clock was set at 12.00. When the
iguana crawled onto the rock, its weight caused the scale to
depress and activate the clock. The clock was checked three
times a day during a 24 hour period. The 24 hour period
started at 6.30 a.m. At each check time, the number of hours
was past 12.00 was recorded. At the end of the 24 hours, the
clock showed the total number of hours that the iguana had been
on the rock. The test was done for three days.
III. ANALYSIS OF DATA:
At the end of day 1, the clock reading was 10.11. This means
that the iguana's weight was on the rock for 10 hours and 11
minutes. The total for day 2 was 10 hours and 20 minutes. The
total for day three was 16 hours and 40 minutes. When I added
all the totals together and divided by three, the average
amount of time the iguana was on the rock 12 hours and 25
minutes.
IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION:
Since my iguana averages over 12 hours per day on the heating
rock, and since I know that the cold-blooded reptiles must have
heat, I will continue to keep a heating in the iguana's
terrarium. Since the average is over half the 24 hour time
period, I accepted my hypothesis which stated that the young
iguana would spend more time on the rock than off the rock. .
V. APPLICATION:
I can use this information when setting up a terrarium for any
cold blooded reptile. This information will help in making the
environment safer for any reptile.
Math Section
TITLE: Does The Divisibility Rule For Three Work For Other
Numbers?
STUDENT RESEARCHER: Amanda Senules
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 determine
if the proven divisibility rule for three works with other
numbers, like 2, 4, 5, 6, and 7. The divisibility rule for
three is that you add the digits of a number together, and if
the sum is divisible by three, the original number is divisible
by three. My first hypothesis states that the divisibility
rule for three works. My second hypothesis states that the
divisibility rule for three does not work with the number 2.
My third hypothesis states that the divisibility rule for three
does not work with the number 4. My fourth hypothesis states
that the divisibility rule for three does not work with the
number 6. My fifth hypothesis states that the divisibility
rule for three does not work with the number 7. My sixth
hypothesis states that the divisibility rule for three does not
work with the number 5.
II. METHODOLOGY:
First, I wrote my statement of purpose and a review of
literature on divisibility rules. Next, I developed my
hypothesis. I then developed my methodology to test my
hypothesis. After that, I made my data collection sheet. I
then began my experiment.
Step 1: First, I added the digits of the dividend 1,234 until
it made one digit. 1+2+3+4=10 1+0=1
Step 2: Next, I divided the sum 1 by 3.
Step 3: It did not divide evenly. The proven divisibility
rule for 3 stated that if three doesn't go evenly into the
digit divided from, the original number (in this case 1,234) is
not divisible by 3.
Step 4: I then performed long division to check. I repeated
the process with the divisors 2, 4, 5, 6, and 7. After that, I
randomly picked three other dividends and repeated the process.
My variable held constant was the process shown above. My
manipulated variables were the 6 different divisors and 4
different dividends. My responding variables were the answers
and if the process works on all experimental numbers.
After the experiment, I completed my analysis of data, summary
and conclusions, and application. Finally, I published my
research in the journal, The Student Researcher.
III. ANALYSIS OF DATA:
For my experiment, I randomly picked 4 dividends, 1,234, 8,046,
2,469, and 4,733.
Using the divisor 2 with the divisibility rule for three, I
found that it worked for one of the dividends, but not for the
other three.
Using the divisor 3 with the divisibility rule for 3, I found
that it worked for all of the dividends I used.
Using the divisor 4 with the divisibility rule for 3, I found
that it worked for 3 of the dividends, but not for the other
one.
Using the divisor 5 with the divisibility rule for 3, I found
that it worked with all of the dividends I used.
Using the divisor 6 with the divisibility rule for 3, I found
that it worked for 3 of the dividends I used, but not for the
other 1.
Using the divisor 7 with the divisibility rule for 3, I found
that it worked with all of the dividends I used.
With the 4 randomly picked dividends, the divisibility rule for
3 worked with the odd divisors I used and not the even.
V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION:
After doing my experiment, I found that with the dividends I
used, the divisibility rule for three works with the divisors
3, 5, and 7, but not with the divisors 2, 4, and 6.
In conclusion, my experiment did not prove a lot. For example,
none of the dividends I used were divisible by 5, and the
chances of the digits adding up to a digit divisible by 5 are
one out of nine. If I would have used a dividend divisible by
5, it probably would have proven that the divisibility rule
does not work with the divisor 5. For example: 1,235 would
become 1+2+3+5=11 1+1=2
Five does not go into two evenly, so, according to the
divisibility rule for three, 5 won't go into the original
number evenly. Really, 5 does go into the number. I have just
proven that the divisibility rule does not work with the number
5.
To prove a divisibility rule right, you must test it with
thousands of dividends.
With the dividends I used, I accept my first hypothesis which
stated that the divisibility rule for 3 works. I accept my
second hypothesis which stated that the divisibility rule for 3
does not work with the divisor 2. I accept my third hypothesis
which stated that the divisibility rule for three does not work
with the number 4. I accept my fourth hypothesis which stated
that the divisibility rule for three does not work with the
number 6. I reject my fifth hypothesis which stated that the
divisibility rule for 3 does not work with the number 7. I
reject my sixth hypothesis which stated that the divisibility
rule for three does not work with the number 5.
V. APPLICATION:
I can apply my findings to every day life by telling people not
to use a divisibility rule they made up without thoroughly
testing it first. I can also tell people not to use a
divisibility rule for one divisor with another divisor.
TITLE: Is the Formula For Finding the Area of a Triangle
Always Accurate?
STUDENT RESEARCHER: Michael Phillips
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 see if the
formula for finding the area of a triangle is always accurate.
The formula for finding the area of a triangle is A = 1/2 bh.
My hypothesis states that the formula for finding the area of a
triangle will always be accurate on all triangles that I test.
II. METHODOLOGY:
First, I wrote my statement of purpose and hypothesis. Then I
reviewed the literature on triangles and area. Next, I wrote a
methodology to test my hypothesis.
My manipulated variable was the size of the triangles and the
angles of the triangles. My responding variable was the answer
to the formula. My variable held constant was the formula.
I drew six triangles of different size on 1 cm graph paper.
Then I computed the area of each triangle using the formula.
Next, I found the actual area of each triangle by counting the
number of square centimeters within it.
I then analyzed the data, wrote my summary and conclusion, and
applied my findings to the world outside of my classroom. Then
I published my findings in a national journal.
III. ANALYSIS OF DATA:
For the right triangle, the measurement of the area with the
formula was 16 sq. cm. and the actual area was 16 sq. cm. For
the acute triangle, both measurements of the area were 10 sq.
cm. For the obtuse triangle, both measurements of the area
were 10 sq. cm. For the scalene triangle, both measurements
of the area were 12 sq.cm. For the equilateral triangle, both
areas were 1.5 sq. cm. For the isosceles triangle both areas
were 12 sq. cm.
IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION:
In my research, I discovered that the formula for finding the
area of a triangle worked on all kinds of triangles.
Therefore, I accept my hypothesis which stated that the formula
would always be accurate.
V. APPLICATION:
I could apply my findings to the world by using the formula for
finding the area of triangles, because it is easier and always
accurate.
© 1995 John I. Swang, Ph.D.