Brittany+Blog+1

= = toc Back to Student Blogs

=Your Blog=

Make sure to follow the instructions on the Student Blog Page

8/24/2007
Find an web article from a reputable news website that contains information about any type of projectile. The article must relate to some science topic (not war, guns, etc.) Write a short (1 paragraph) summary of the article and then describe how anything you have learned in the past week about projectile motion might relate to it (second short paragraph). Finish with a citation to the web article. Enter all of this under "Entry" below.

//Entry:// Ziolo’s European Deli has the workers of Ziolo and her two sons. One day a man walked in and grabbed a man and demanded money from the register. Ziolo didn’t have any weapon near her. Instead, she grabbed a muffin that was wrapped in plastic, and threw it at the man that was robbing the deli. The man eventually was arrested. This article relates to projectile motion, because when Ziolo threw the muffin into the air, it had an angle. Since it had an angle it would be considered a projectile motion. In class we conducted an experimet by shooting "guns" called air blasters. We measure the angle and the distance of each shot. This was a projectile Motion experiment.

Klein, Lisa. __Connecticut Business News Journals__. 26 Aug 2006. 26 Aug 2007 <[|http://www.conntact.com/article_page.lasso?id=41223>.]

//Comment 1: It sounds like a good story to use for projectile motion. You should add more information about angles, and the in class experiment though. There are not any spelling errors, which is good. The citation is missing the name of the article, so you should go back and add that to it. Don't use the word 'we' in the 2nd paragraph. Overall if you add more information, then it will be better. It was a satisfying experience.// -Eric S

Comment 2:

9/24/2007
Reflect upon the mystery density cube experiment. Create a long paragraph addressing these questions:

1.) Was the scientific method necessary in this experiment? If not, why? If so, why? 2.) What made this experiment difficult? or was it easy? 3.) Is density very important in finding the identity of an unknown substance? . //Entry:// For doing this experiment the experimenter does not need to do the scientific method, because for doing this experiment the person does not have to do anything in a specific order. This experiment was difficult because trying to prove why the guesses the experimenter made were right was hard. They had to look up different densities of all different minerals. Yes, the density is important to find in an unknown substance, if someone is trying to find out what substance it is, they can just find the density, and look it up.

//Comment 1:// //I think that Brittany wrote an outstanding paper due to her opinion. She explains herself throughly in a good long paragraph. When Brittany said "the experimenter does not need to do the scientific method, because for doing this experiment the person does not have to do anything in a specific order" I do not understand because you have to have a hypothesis to get the final answers. Brittany had great spelling and most of her sentences made sense. Good job! Outstanding work!// ~Sydney

Comment 2:

10/16/2007
What is a flame test in your own words? How does this relate to the use of chemicals in fireworks? Make sure to include your MLA citations you may not use Wikipedia! . //Entry:// A flame test is where you have an open flame, and you see what color each chemical or which element is by the flames changing color. You get a medal stick and get the bottom of it covered in CHL. After doing that, you put the stick on the flame, and the flame should change color, this is cleaning the tip of the medal stick. This relates to the use of chemicals in fireworks because, fireworks also have different colors in them. Since they have different colors, they must have two different chemicals mixed with eachother to make the sparks turn different colors.

//Comment 1://

Comment 2:

11/1/2007
Go to this site: http://www.visionlearning.com/library/module_viewer.php?mid=55. Click on "Watch the Reaction with Sodium and Chlorine" In your own words and in third person, create a blog entry describing the reaction and explaining what is happening in terms of the bonding. Write a long paragraph. Explain in detail.

Entry: This reaction is weird. When Sodium is added to Chlorine it immedietly gets caught on fire in chlorine. The sodium stays on fire. The sodium gets caught on fire because there is so much energy through the bond. This reaction is an ionic bond because Sodium is a metal and Chlorine is a nonmetal. When you put a metal and a non metal together it always is a ionic bond.

Comment 1: Immediately is spelled wrong. That's the only grammer mistake you made. You did a good job talking about bonds, and why its an ionic bond. But what happens to the atoms? You might want to add a sentence or two about that. I would give you a low A or a high B, becuase you did well talking about the bond, but you mispelled a word, and you might want to say something about what happens to the atoms.

-Eric S

Comment 2: As Eric said "immediately" was spelled wrong. The grammer was well done for the most part. When you say "The reaction was weird," it was not the strongest introduction sentence. Sodium is a positive and Cholorine is a negative. It is better to say that than to say it is nonmetal and metal. Sodium does not get caught on fire, but it gets ignited. Also the writing could have been a little enough. Overall, I would give it a B- because of the lack of length. -Cannon

Entry 2: Sodium is a metal, and Chlorine is a non medal, which automatically makes this an ionic bond. When Sodium is dropped into Chlorine, Sodium immediately ignites in flames, while in a liquid. The Sodium atom loses an electron to each of the Chlorine atoms. The lose of the electron from the sodium atom is what causes there to be energy in the bond. Since there is so much energy in the bond, that is what makes the sodium ignite into flames when dropping down into the Chlorine liquid.

11/8/2007
What was your favorite project, experiment or topic this trimester and why? (projectile motion, density cube experiment, podcasts, chemical reactions, flame tests, etc.) You can also comment about the snakes. What do you think that you excelled at this trimester? How could you have improved your performance in Science 7? (Make sure to check your spelling and grammar).

//Entry:// My favorite project of this trimester was the chemical reactions because I liked seeing what happened when you mixed different chemicals together. I think it was cool that we got to do things like burning chemicals. When I first heard we were going to get snakes in the class room, I did not like that idea, but now I think they are very awesome to have in the science room. I think I excelled most when we had group projects. I could improve my performance in Science 7 by learning what we were learning in class more, and studying them better.

//Comment 1: Perfect! -Caroline H//

Comment 2: Brittany, every day when you come to class you have great ideas. You are always very helpful and cheerful. You always put this science class in a fabulous mood. You always start our days out with a laugh. Thanks! -Sydney R

_

12/18/2007
Our next unit is about electricity and electronics. In third person write a long paragraph about what you know about electricity and what questions you might like to have answered in our electricity unit. If you could investigate any subject area related to energy in the home, electricity, electronics, computers, what kind of investigation would you carry out?

Entry: Some things that I know about electricity are that it makes things work. When there’s something with a cord that you have to plug in, that means that it needs electricity to make it work. Most portable things or electronics need electricity to work. A question I would have is how electronics are made. If I could investigate on any subject area related to energy in my home, it would probably be electronics like TVs. I would want to see what was inside the tv. I would also want to see things like iPods. -Brittany W.

Comment 1:

Comment 2:

1/3/2008
Our next unit is about electricity and electronics. Observe the following graph, Graph 1 and write an analytical paragraph describing what it means. Make sure to address what trends are observed; how things change over time, etc. Write at least five sentences for the following questions. Write in third person. Directly cite data and identify the graph (1). 1.) Which electricity source in the US has increased the greatest amount over the time period shown in the graph? 2.) Which of the sources listed below directly contribute to global warming? Provide evidence and explain using the Internet (MLA citation). 3.) Describe the overall trends from 1972 to 1985 regarding the US's sources of electricity. [|This graph can also be seen at this LINK.]

Entry: The electricity source in the US that has increased the greatest amount over the time period is coal. As seen in graph above coal seems to have improved the most.Coal went from zero trillion kilowatt hours, to around 1.5 and 2 trillion kilowatt hours. The other electricity sources all stayed the same, they went up and down multiple times, but never just went up. The other electricity sources stayed around the zero trillion kilowatt hours.

Coal and natural gas contribute the most to global warming. Carbon dioxide gets put into our airs, when something such as natural gas and coal are being burned. Carbon dioxide is just one of the gases that is put into our air. When is being burned it is called "fossil fuel". When so much of these "fossil fuels" are put into our air it makes there be a lot of C02 in the air too, and because of this it changes the global climate.

From 1972 to 1985 the sources of electricity varied in the amount of trillion kilowatt hours they had. Hydroelectric power was the only electricity source that stayed the same. Coal is the electricity source that went up the most in trillion kilowatt hours. Petroleum and natural gas and nuclear electric power went up the second most. The motion of these sources are what creates most of the electricity.

4 Jan 2008 <[|http://www.ecobridge.org/content/g_cse.htm>.]

4 Jan 2008 .]

Comment 1: Brittany, good job! You did a wonderful job staying in third person and referencing to the years. You didn't make any references to the graph, however, so you might want to include that. You followed directions well, except that your citations are not in the proper MLA format. If you need help with that, you can use the MLA citation maker on Ms. Todd's website (that's what I do). Your thoughts make sense and seem very logical to me. You did a really good job on your blog! - Nicole A.

Comment 2: Brittany, you did a good job keeping your writing in third person. You did not reference to the graph or directly reference the data. Even though you did not do these few things, you have good and correct information. You answered that question that was assigned but you did not back it up. You did not add your thoughts to the data, you just wrote the correct information. Overall, you didn’t add all of the information to back it up but your information was correct. Pretty good job! -Sydney

Comment 3: "REFERENCE GRAPH From 1972 to 1985 the sources of electricity varied in the amount of trillion kilowatt hours they had. Hydroelectric power was the only electricity source that stayed the same PROVIDE DATA. Coal is the electricity source that went up the most in trillion kilowatt hours DATA. Petroleum and natural gas and nuclear electric power went up the second mostDATA. The motion of these sources are what creates most of the electricity.SUMMARY SENTENCE SHOULD BE MORE SPECIFIC" -JT

1/8/2008
Please read the paragraph below about energy use to create electricity from 1972-1985 in the US. Observe that the graph is referred to, there is an introductory statement, supporting statements are backed up with data, and that their is a concluding sentence. This would have been a well written paragraph for question 3 in our previous blog entry.

"As seen in Graph 1, there were four sources of electricity production in the US from 1972-1985. These sources were coal, petroleum/natural gas, nuclear electric power, and hydroelectric power. From 1972-1985, the US needed greater and greater production of electricity from these combined resources. This best example of this is that during these years, coal increased from 0.5 trillion kilowatthours to roughly 1.5 trillion kilowatthours. During this same time period hydroelectric sources remained approximately the same at 0.3 trillion kilowatthours. There was a slight increase in nuclear electric power sources from 0.1 trillion kilowatthours to 0.3 trillion kilowatthours during this same time period. Finally, petroleum and natural gas showed the greatest amount of fluctuation during this time period staying about the same from 1972-1980 at 0.4 trillion kilowatthours but then deceasing to 0.3 trillion kilowattthours by 1985. Thus, although greater and greater amounts of resources were needed to produce electricity during this time period, coal accounted for the greatest increase in use." - JT

//**Using the above paragraph as a model, describe the changes in electricity production sources from 2000-2005. Make sure that you reference the graph (Graph 1). Make sure all statements are backed up with data. Make sure you have an introductory sentence and a concluding sentence that provide an overall summary/statement.**//

Entry: As seen in Graph 1, there was various amounts of how much each electricity source was used. The four main sources used were Coal, Nuclear Electric Power, Petroleum and Natural Gas, and Hydroelectric Power. From referring to the Graph 1, it is obvious that Coal was used the most from 2000-2005. In 2000-2005 it went up from about 1.5 to 2 trillion kilowatthours. Unlike coal Hydroelectric Power was used barely. Graph 1 shows that Hydroelectric Power went up from 0 to about 0.2 and then went back down to 0. Petroleum and Natural Gas was the next source that was used the most. As seen in the graph above you can see that from 2000-2005 it went from 0.5 to around 0.8 killowatthours. Nuclear Electric Power stayed around 0.5 from 2000-2005. The overall electricity source that was used from 2000-2005 was Coal.

Comment 1: Brittany your blog is well written. You wrote very well in 3rd person and you included important and useful information. Something that you could include to make your blog better is to be more specific. When you are talking about each of the sources of electricity in the United States get into more detail. You have some brief answers in your blog that are correct but that you could go into more detail about the increases and decreases from 2000-2005. You figured out what information was most important to use in your blog and only included it. Great job overall on your blog. - Caroline H.

Third Entry: As seen in Graph 1, there was WERE various amounts of how much RE-WORD each electricity source was used. The four main sources used were Coal, Nuclear Electric Power, Petroleum and Natural Gas, and Hydroelectric Power. From referring to the Graph 1, it is obvious that Coal was used the most from 2000-2005. In 2000-2005 coal had went up and then came back down and stayed about the same, but when it went up, it went up to around 2 UNITS AND DATA. Unlike coal Hydroelectric Power was used barely. Graph 1 shows that Hydroelectric Power went up from 0 to about 0.2 and then went back down to 0 WHERE ARE THE UNITS! After falling down to zero again it rose back up 0.1, barely UNITS AGAIN. Petroleum and Natural Gas was the next source that was used the most. As seen in the graph above you can see that from 2000-2005 it THEY went from 0.5 to around 0.8 killowatthours. Nuclear Electric Power stayed around 0.5 UNITS from 2000-2005. Overall, Coal was the most used electricity source from the years 2000 to 2005 PUNCTUATION PLEASE PROOF YOUR WORK AND KEEP WORKING ON YOUR SCIENTIFIC WRITING. -JT

2/05/2008
What is a watt? How do you calculate the amount of electrical power that is used in a circuit? Finally, if a lamp with a 200 watt lightbulb burned for 24 hours straight (you forgot and left it turned on), how many kilowatt hours would it use? Make sure to write in complete sentences and in third person. Explain how you calculated the amount of kilowatt hours that would be used in the question above.

Entry: A watt is what power is measured in. To calculate the amount of electrical power that is used in a circuit you do Power = Voltage times amps. If there was a 200 watt light bulb that was being burned for 24 hours straight that means there would 4.8 kilowatt hours. The next thing that should be done is 200 times 24. When you multiply 200 times 24 you get 4,800. You divide 4,800 by 1,000, which ends up being 4.8. In each kilowatt its 1,000 that means that it would be 4.8 kilowatt hours.

Comment 1: Brittany, good job with spelling and punctuation. All of your information is correct but I think you could probably go into more detail on why you do this. Next time use more units but overall you did a pretty good job.

Good job-- Sydney

Comment 2:Brittany, great job but it would be Power = Voltage x Current __not amps. One thing that I would do better is to go into futher into detail about why you did what you did to solve the problem. You did a awsome job writing this blog and I really liked reading it! -Alex M.__

_

2/28/2008
This trimester we started by finishing up our chemistry unit by doing an acid/base experiment. After this, we started our electricity/electronics unit in which we first made basic series and parallel circuits with buzzers, speakers, motors, and lights. We applied ohm's law to these experiments. Following this, we started working on the Radioshack Electronics Kits where we made complex circuits that had a variety of functions- blinking LEDs, screeching speakers, analog to digital converters, etc. The technology we used this trimester included the pH probes that we connected to our computers to get the pH of household chemicals, using the wiki to create an class test review sheet, the Radioshack Electronic Kits, and creating collaborative lab reports in the wiki for our electronics unit (instead of a formal lab report).

__//In this blog prompt, please write a paragraph long entry (5-6 sentences with a intro and concluding sentence) that addresses what you enjoyed during this trimester and what you have learned. You can also comment on what you would like to improve upon for next trimester or what was difficult for you. Feel free to comment on our snakes- Peppermint and Diablo if you would like to as well as the technology that you enjoyed this trimester. Please check your spelling and grammar as this blog entry may appear in your end of trimester comment. You may want to write it in Microsoft Word to check the spelling, etc. and then copy it in the blog.//__

Entry:

This trimester in Science 7 I enjoyed the Radio Shack circuit building the most. I have never worked with anything like it. Also working with partners made this activity a lot more fun. I think that having a snake a snake out while working was cool. I also like the acids and bases activity. It was fun to work with all these different liquids. This trimester was so much fun and I enjoyed everything that we did.

Comment 1:Brittany you helped me alot in Science 7 with the circuits and the labs. You brought joy and happyness to the class with your great personality. Thanks a lot buddy! -Eric M

Comment 2:

4/22/2008
Go to: [|The Tech Museum: Robotics]. Spend 10 minutes browsing the information and museum. Answer the following blog prompt in complete sentences and in third person. Create a full paragraph. If in the future machines have the ability to reason, be self-aware and have feelings, then what makes a human being a human being, and a robot a robot? Explain. Are there any kind of robots that shouldn't be created? Or that you wouldn't want to see created? Why?

Entry: If in the future if robotics became like humans, it would not be the same. Humans are able to make choices on their own, which would probably not be able to happen with robots. Also humans are able to move, have thoughts, and basically do what they want to. Robots have to be told what to do, which limits them to what they can do. All kinds of robots should have been created, no matter what they are made for. All robots are helpful for at least one thing, so none should have no been created.

Comment 1:

Comment 2: