For more information contact:
THE E-DATABASE OF STUDENT RESEARCH is made possible through grants provided by the United States Department of Education, South Central Bell Telephone, American Petroleum Institute, Intertel Foundation, Springhouse Publishing Corporation, Graham Resources, Inc., Chevron Oil Company, Central Louisiana Electric Company, Louisiana State Department of Education, and National Science Foundation. Mandeville Middle School and the National Student Research Center thank these organizations for their generous support of education.
TABLE OF CONTENT
1. Laundry Bandits
2. Fingerprinting As a Method of Identification
3. Does It Take Bread Longer to Mold in the Sun or Shade?
4. Do Air, Water, and Oil Mix?
5. Relative Humidity
6. The Effect of Gravity On Rolling Objects of Equal Weight
and Different Size
7. How Fast Can a Plant Grow In Loud Conditions?
8. The Insulating Capabilities of Different Fabrics
9. Fabric and Fire
10. The Transfer of Momentum Between Colliding Objects
11. What Substance Is Most Effective For Cleaning Teeth?
TITLE: Laundry Bandits
STUDENT RESEARCHER: Neil Lande
SCHOOL: WindyCreek Homeschool
Wynnewood, Pennsylvania
GRADE: 1
TEACHER: Nancy Lande
I. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND HYPOTHESIS:
Sometimes when I take my dirty clothes off and put them into
the laundry basket, they are inside out. But then when my
clothes come out of the dryer, they are the right way again. I
wanted to find out how that happens--if clothes can turn around
all by themselves when they get washed and dried. I guessed
that all of the underwear in my experiment would turn around
during the washing and drying of them.
II. METHODOLOGY:
I picked 5 underpants and 5 T-shirts to try, because they are
what I usually take off inside out. (Actually I should have
done socks too, because they always come off inside out!) I
put only my 10 experiment clothes into the wash all the same
way and I chose to start with them all the right way so I could
tell what would happen to them. I used cold water, a small
load setting and a regular wash cycle each time. Then I took
the clothes right from the washer and put them into the dryer
without even checking them. After I emptied out the lint tray,
I put them by themselves into the dryer and dried each load for
one half hour. When the dryer went off, I opened it and
counted which ones had turned around inside-out. I wrote it
all down on a chart that my mom made for me. Before I put them
back into the washer for the next trials, I made sure that
everything was turned the right way first.
III. ANALYSIS OF DATA:
I found out that out of the 50 times that T-shirts were washed
and dried only 2 of them turned inside-out. But out of the 50
underpants that I washed, 30 of them turned inside out, which
was more than half, but not all of them like I thought.
IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION:
Every time you put 5 T-shirts into the wash, you can expect
that they usually won't turn around in the wash (4%). But
every time you put 5 pairs of underpants in the wash you can
find that 3 of them should turn around in the wash (60%). I
think it makes a difference on what things will turn around in
the wash. I was wrong about my idea that all the underwear
would turn by itself. But I think I was sort of right that
underpants will turn. What the best thing is to do about socks
though, I have no idea!
V. APPLICATION:
If you have to fold your own laundry, then you should probably
take your T-shirts off the right way, but you don't have to
worry about how you take off your underpants. If it is someone
else who folds the laundry, then they shouldn't blame you if
some of your laundry comes out inside-out and gives them more
work to turn them back again!
Title: Fingerprinting as a Method of Identification:
Student Researcher: Adam Hester
School: Ridgewood Middle School
Shreveport, LA
Grade: 7
Teacher: Mrs. Hoaas
I. Statement of Purpose and Hypothesis:
I want to know more about how fingerprints are use for
identification. I would like to explore the different types of
fingerprints to evaluate their differences as well as the ways
they are alike among members of a family unit. My hypothesis
states that fingerprinting is a fool-proof method of
identification and that even members of the same family will
have distinct differences in their fingerprint impressions.
II. Methodology:
First, I will write my statement of purpose, conduct a review
of the literature, and develop my hypothesis. I will then
fingerprint different members of my family to investigate the
differences and similarities of their fingerprint patterns. I
will record my observations on my data collection sheet.
Next, I will conduct an analysis of my data. Finally, I will
accept or reject my hypothesis and write my summary and
conclusion.
III. Analysis of Data:
I fingerprinted all five members of my family. I observed that
each set of fingerprints was different, even though they each
contained arches, whorls, and loops. All five sets had
similar characteristics, but the patterns were in a different
sequence, changing the entire impression of the print.
IV. Summary and Conclusion:
All five sets of fingerprints were different. Each member of
my family was printed using identical methods and supplies,
but each set of prints had different characteristics and
patterns. Therefore, I accept my hypothesis which stated that
no two people have identical fingerprints and that
fingerprinting is a fool-proof method of identification.
V. Application:
If I fingerprinted all of the students a Ridgewood Middle
School, I would find students with similar fingerprint
patterns, but would not find any two students with identically
matched prints.
Title: Does It Take Bread Longer To Mold In The Sun Or In The
Shade?
Student Researchers: Jessica Bird and Courtney Byrd
School: Ridgewood Middle School
Shreveport, Louisiana
Grade: 7
Teacher: Mrs. Hoaas
I. Statement of Purpose and Hypothesis:
We want to see how long it takes for bread to mold in the sun
and in the shade. We hope to find out which molds first. We
believe it will take the bread in a sunny place longer to mold
than the bread in a shady place.
II. Methodology:
First, we plan on writing our statement of purpose. Second, we
will conduct a review of literature. Third, we will develop a
hypothesis. We will then take two pieces of bread and dampen
them. Afterwards, we will place the bread in both sunny and
shady places. Last, we will record our observations.
III. Analysis of Data:
We placed three pieces of bread in a sunny place. The bread
had four drops of water on it. We observed that in a shady
place the mold grew faster. The mold on the bread in a sunny
place grew two days later.
IV. Summary and Conclusion:
The bread in the shady place molded first because it was more
moist in the shade and mold needs lots of moisture to grow.
Therefore, we accept our hypothesis which was that mold would
grow first in the shady place.
V. Application:
If we had three loaves of bread, we would know to freeze two
loaves so that the bread will not mold and become useless.
Title: Do Air, Water, and Oil Mix?
Student Researchers: JoRae Anthony and Rebecca Dufrene
School: Ridgewood Middle School
Shreveport, LA
Grade: 7
Teacher: Mrs. Hoaas
I. Statement of Purpose and Hypothesis:
We want to know if air, water, and oil mix, and why or why not.
We also want to know which one will sink to the bottom, float
to the top, or stay in the center then they are all added
together. We think air will rise to the top, oil will stay in
the center, and water will sink to the bottom.
II. Methodology:
First, we will write our statement of purpose, conduct a review
of the literature, and develop our hypothesis. Then we will
pour half a cup of oil and half a cup of water into a large
cup. After that we will shake it so see if they will all mix
together. We will perform this process six different times.
After recording and analyzing our data, we will accept our
hypothesis and write our summary and conclusion.
III. Analysis of Data:
We put the oil and water in a cup and shook it up. Then we
performed this same process six different times. Each time
water sank to the bottom, the oil floated in the middle, and
the air in the cup rose to the top.
IV. Summary and Conclusion:
Each time we repeated this process the outcome was the same.
Therefore, we accept our hypothesis that air rises to the top,
oil stays in the center, and water sinks to the bottom.
V. Application:
If we put oil in a cup first, then poured water in, the oil
would still float to the center. And if we put water in first
then oil, the oil would still float to the center. Therefore,
we know that air, water, and oil will never mix.
Title: Relative Humidity
Student Researcher: Michael Aubrey
School: Ridgewood Middle School
Shreveport, LA
Grade: 7
Teacher: Mrs. Hoaas
I. Statement of Purpose and Hypothesis:
I want to know more about what relative humidity is. I also
want to know why relative humidity changes. Does it change
because of temperature or altitude? My hypothesis states that
relative humidity will change when the temperature changes.
II. Methodology:
First, I will write my statement of purpose, conduct a review
of the literature, and develop my hypothesis. Then I will use
a psychrometer and psychrometer chart to determine the relative
humidity in my house. I will also show how relative humidity
can change with a changing barometric pressure with a
mathematical formula. I will then record my observations on my
data collection sheet. Last, I will accept or reject my
hypothesis and write my summary and conclusion.
III. Analysis of Data:
I took a psychrometer and set it up. As the fan turned,
blowing the other side of the thermometer, I recorded the wet
bulb depression. I subtracted the wet bulb depression from the
official temperature and got my percent relative humidity. I
did this four times. On the first trial, I got 74% relative
humidity. The day after that, I got 19% relative humidity. On
the last two days, I got 24% relative humidity.
IV. Analysis of Data:
The relative humidity did change. While the ambient
temperature and the barometric pressure changes the relative
humidity will always be different. Therefore, I accept my
hypothesis which stated that the relative humidity would change
when the temperature changes.
V. Application:
If I were going to tell the weather station the percent of
relative humidity everyday for a week, I would have to change
it everyday unless the ambient temperature was the same on
those days.
Title: The Effect of Gravity on Rolling Objects of Equal
Weight and Different Sizes
Student Researcher: Nikki Gauthier
School: Ridgewood Middle School
Shreveport, LA
Grade: 7
Teacher: Mrs. Hoaas
I. Statement of Purpose and Hypothesis:
My purpose is to discover the effect of gravity upon rolling
objects of equal weight and different size. I want to know if
a larger object rolls faster than a smaller object. My
hypothesis states that a small object will roll faster downward
than a big object of the same weight when both are let go from
the same height.
II. Methodology:
First, I will write my statement of purpose, then my review of
the literature, then my hypothesis. I will get three balls of
the same weight, but different size. Then I will get a small
plank to roll the balls on and make an incline plane. My dad
will put the first one on top and let it roll down the plank.
I will stand at the bottom with a stop watch and time it from
start to end. We will do the same for the next two balls.
Then I will record my observations on my data collection sheet.
I will repeat this experiment seven times. Next, I will accept
or reject my hypothesis and write my summary and conclusion
along with my application.
III. Analysis of Data:
Each ball rolled down the 9' 7" plank seven times. I clocked
them each time. I observed that all three of the balls
rolled to the bottom in approximately the same time of 2.15
seconds.
IV. Summary and Conclusion:
All three of the balls rolled to the bottom in the same amount
of time. It doesn't matter about the size because gravity
pulled them down in the same time. Therefore, I reject my
hypothesis which stated that the smallest ball would roll
faster.
V. Application:
If two snowballs of different size, but equal weight, roll down
a hill, I'll know to move out of the way of both of them
because they're both going to hit me at the same time.
Title: How Fast Can a Plant Grow in Loud Conditions?
Student Researcher: Victoria Lamb
School: Ridgewood Middle School
Shreveport, LA
Teacher: Mrs. Hoaas
I. Statement of Purpose and Hypothesis:
I want to know the fastest way to grow a plant. I want to know
if plants grow faster in a quiet room or in a noisy room. My
hypothesis states that a plant in a quiet room will grow
fastest because its surroundings will be very soothing and not
irritating.
II. Methodology:
First, I will write the statement of purpose, conduct a review
of literature, and develop my hypothesis. Then I will get two
plants and place one in a quiet room and one in a noisy room.
I will give them the same amount of water and sunlight. Then I
will measure how quickly the plants grow, record my data,
analyze my data, write my summary and conclusion, and my
application.
III. Analysis of Data:
The plant in the noisy room grew one-half of a centimeter. The
plant in the quiet room grew one centimeter. The plant in the
quiet room grew twice as much as the plant in the noisy room.
IV. Summary and Conclusion:
I have come to the conclusion that plants grow better in quiet
rooms.
V. Application:
If I am going to grow lots of plants, I will need a quiet place
for them to grow.
TITLE: The Insulating Capabilities of Different Fabrics
STUDENT RESEARCHER: Emily R. Pointer
SCHOOL ADDRESS: Marlton Elementary School
8506 Old Colony Drive S.
Upper Marlboro, Maryland 20772
GRADE: 5
TEACHER: Mrs. Bea Vance
I. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND HYPOTHESIS:
At a pervious Science Fair, I saw a project I liked about how
colors affected heat absorption. That made me wonder about
fabrics and their ability to insulate. Based on research at
the library, my hypothesis stated that when different fabrics
are exposed to a heat source under the same conditions, wool
would insulate a thermometer from heat better than cotton,
denim, silk, and a wool blend.
II. METHODOLOGY:
I covered a thermometer with one of five different fabrics --
cotton, denim, silk, wool, and a wool blend. I then exposed
the thermometers to a heat source for two minutes, 75 times. I
used five identical light fixtures in a series as a heat
source. I used all new bulbs from the same package. The light
fixtures all worked off the same switch so they all went off
and on at the same time. The thermometers were all exactly
alike and mounted on wooden pegs at the same distance from the
light fixtures.
III. ANALYSIS OF DATA:
In 75 tests, cotton produced the smallest average increase in
temperature at 13.99 degrees. Wool also did very well with an
average increase in temperature of 14.96 degrees. The wool
blend was third, with a mean rise in temperature of 15.55
degrees. Denim had a mean increase of 16.45 degrees. Silk was
last, with an average increase in temperature of 18.27 degrees.
IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION:
In my experiment, cotton insulated the best. Wool was the
second best. Therefore, I reject my hypothesis which stated
that when different fabrics are exposed to a heat source under
the same conditions, wool would insulate a thermometer from
heat better than cotton, denim, silk, and a wool blend. The
results of individual tests varied a lot and did not entirely
support my hypothesis. A home economics teacher I interviewed
said that the weave and thickness of the thread used to make
the material could make a difference. I also learned that
pockets of still air can be excellent insulators. Since I had
not tried to ensure that the fabrics was always snug against
the thermometers, it is possible that, in some tests, air
pockets between the fabric and the thermometer affected test
results. If I were to do additional testing, I would try to
get fabrics of the same thickness. I would also ensure that
each fabric was wrapped tightly to the thermometer so that
there was no chance of an air pocket influencing the results.
V. APPLICATION:
People who travel a lot need to know how different materials
insulate them form the weather so they know what clothing is
best for the places they visit.
TITLE: Fabric and Fire
STUDENT RESEARCHER: Crystal L. Ballinger
SCHOOL ADDRESS: Marlton Elementary School
8506 Old Colony Drive S.
Upper Marlboro, Maryland 20772
GRADE: 5
TEACHER: Bea Vance
I. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND HYPOTHESIS:
I chose to do this project because I have two baby cousins and
I'm interested in their safety. I hoped to discover which
fabrics are most flame retardant. Based on my interviews and
research about flame resistant fabrics, my hypothesis stated
that the 100% polyester fabrics will always be safer in a fire
than the 100% cotton and the 50%-50% blends.
II. METHODOLOGY:
I purchased eight different kinds of fabric. I cut each fabric
into twenty-four 4-1/2" squares. I gathered the other
materials in preparation for the experiment. The manipulated
variable was the kind of fabric. The responding variables were
the rate at which the fabrics caught on fire and how they
extinguished. The variables held constant were the size of
each fabric piece, the temperature of the room and fabric, and
the distance of the source of fire to the fabric. Room drafts
from doors and windows were controlled and the same testing
area was used throughout the experiment.
III. ANALYSIS OF DATA:
We tested five different kinds of 100% polyester fabrics, a
100% cotton fabric, and two fabrics that were 50% cotton and
50% polyester. The polyester was somewhat inconsistent in the
rate at which it caught on fire, but it always extinguished
quickly and easily. The cotton fabric and blends were much
more difficult to extinguish and burned more quickly. I
realized that the extinguishing factor was equally as important
as the time each fabric took to catch on fire.
IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION:
After analyzing all the data, I found polyester to be the
safest fabric because it extinguishes quickly and easily, often
by itself. Although it could cause a burn as the fabric melts
to plastic, it would be much safer than the cotton fabrics
which quickly and easily burned out of control. The safest
kind of fabric seems to be a flame retardant 100% polyester
knit. It took the longest amount of time to catch on fire and
it extinguished quickly and easily. Therefore, I accepted my
hypothesis.
V. APPLICATION:
I can apply this information to real life by encouraging my
aunts and others to be very careful about children's clothes
and to select polyester whenever possible. When children are
young, it is very important to put the safest kind of clothing
on them, especially at night. Fortunately, children's sleep
wear is regulated for flame resistance by the U.S. government.
TITLE: The Transfer Of Momentum Between Colliding Objects
STUDENT RESEARCHER: Adam Stimatz
SCHOOL ADDRESS: Marlton Elementary School
8506 Old Colony Drive S.
Upper Marlboro, Maryland 20772
GRADE: 5
TEACHER: Bea Vance
I. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND HYPOTHESIS:
I wanted to know more about what happens when two objects
collide. I wanted to know what happens to the momentum of one
object when hit by another object. My hypothesis stated that
the momentum of an object will be transferred to an object it
hits and that the momentum of the first object will be captured
in the momentum of both object after the collision.
II. METHODOLOGY:
First, I wrote my problem statement, conducted a review of
several books on physics, and wrote my hypothesis. To test my
hypothesis, I built a pendulum board which would hold two
weights from a single pivot point. I marked several angles of
measure form 0 to 40 degrees. I obtained several round lead
sinkers weighing 12 and 16 ounces and strung them with lengths
of wire to the same radius at the center of mass. I varied the
weight of the struck and moving object and the angle from which
the moving object was released. I wrote down the responding
variables which were the angles the striking and struck weight
went through after collision. I repeated this 66 times for
each combination of weight and angle tested. From my data, I
calculated a measure for the initial momentum of the moving
weight at impact and the momentum of both weights after
collision. I used these to calculate the average initial and
final momentums for each combination I tested.
III. ANALYSIS OF DATA:
The product of the mass of each object and the angle it passed
through were calculated for each trial. It was necessary to
add the calculated momentum for both weights after collision
and compare it to the momentum of the moving weight at
collision. From my data, I found that these compared favorably
across all the trials, with the largest difference being 7%
momentum unaccounted for and the smallest difference being 0%
momentum unaccounted for.
IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION:
Many trials at various combinations of weights and initial
momentums allowed me to observe the transfer of momentum from
one object to another. From my calculations, it became clear
that momentum is indeed transferred and more importantly, is
conserved in a closed system where no outside force can
intrude.
V. APPLICATION:
There are several ways to apply this knowledge. First, it is
clear that a smaller player in a contact sport can make up for
size with speed to move a larger opponent out of the way.
Similarly, in a sport like golf or baseball, swing speed can
make up for club or bat weight, or conversely, weight can be
used to make up for slow swing speed.
Title: What Substance Is Most Effective For Cleaning Teeth?
Student Researcher: Blake Boutte
School: Belle Place Middle School
4401 Loreauville]Road
New Iberia, LA 70560
Grade: 8th
Teacher: Mrs. Charlotte Olivier
I. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND HYPOTHESIS:
The purpose of my project was to determine which tooth cleaning
substance is most effective in protecting teeth from sugars and
acids that demineralize tooth enamel, thus causing tooth decay.
My hypothesis was that toothpaste containing fluoride would be
the most effective tooth cleaning substance.
II. METHODOLOGY:
To test my hypothesis, I collected 15 previously impacted and
unexposed molars from an oral surgeon. Other materials
included 12 petri dishes, lemon juice (to serve as an acid),
cola (to serve as a sugar), fluoridated toothpaste,
nonfluoridated toothpaste, tartar control toothpaste, baking
soda, mouthwash, water (for the controls), and 1 toothbrush.
To conduct the research, I placed a molar in each petri dish.
The dishes were divided into two groups of six each. Cola was
poured to cover each of the molars in the first group. Lemon
Juice was poured to cover each of the molars in the second
group. Each of the molars was brushed twice daily; in the
morning and at night, with one of the different tooth cleaning
substances: fluoridated toothpaste, non-fluoridated, tartar
control toothpaste, baking soda, mouthwash, and water.
Observations were made and data was recorded daily.
III. ANALYSIS OF DATA:
Over the course of the three week observation period, the
molars in both of the groups that were brushed with fluoridated
toothpaste were the only ones that did not show signs of
decalcification and decay. All of the remaining molars showed
signs of decalcification and decay in varying degrees. Areas
containing soft spots and pitting began to appear as early as
day seven of the research in the group being brushed with
water.
IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION:
I concluded that acids and sugars are both highly destructive
to tooth enamel. Baking soda did neutralize the effects of the
acids in the lemon juice, but was not the best choice because
it contained no fluoride and is too abrasive to be used on a
regular basis. The tartar control toothpaste (which contained
fluoride) removed the stains from the molars exposed to the
cola better than the other substances and it prevented tooth
decay. Both the mouthwash and the water, which were non-
fluoridated, were not good tooth cleaning substances. The
greatest extent of deterioration occurred in the molars brushed
with these cleaning substances. Fluoridated toothpaste proved
to be the most effective tooth cleaning substance in my stud.
V. APPLICATION:
My research findings should help people to be able to prevent
tooth decay if they choose the correct tooth cleaning
substance.
© 1995 John I. Swang, Ph.D.