Experimental Design B/C

[Kenshi Takahashi]

What was the hardest one you were given?

Not sure who this was directed to or if it's asking specifically for chem prompts, but the hardest prompt I've seen is one that asked you to investigate turbulence. I think a good number of teams got tiered because they weren't sure how to define turbulence, so their entire experiments ended up being irrelevant to the prompt. Relevance to the prompt is key!!

I once saw teams get tripped up on surface tension because they thought measuring amplitude of waves resulting from dropping objects in water counted. Not really...

Also, those in which no topic has been assigned but you are given random materials are difficult because you often cannot devise a meaningful IV and DV with them.

One last thing.
YES! In a way connection to the prompt is the most important component of your score. Even if you have a great experiment with everything in the rubric, you'll get tiered and be placed under all the teams who do address the prompt.
That's how my Experimental Design team placed. We did horribly at invitationals (this was before we actually sat down and were seriously studying for ED. We were so bad at it we even left out the hypothesis in our experiment!). I think we got around a 60 - 70% on the test, and there were plenty of the super competitive teams also doing ED. However, all the good teams left out the connection to the prompt which is why we placed although we did so horribly.
Just a thing to remember. Make sure to connect your experiment to the prompt!

[watermydoing14]

Update from Washington State: the experimental design was a chem experiment like I thought it would be (if your state website ever says that gloves will be provided.... you know it's a chem experiment). They had us find the molarity of a solution of NaOH, and they gave proper materials to do a titration. Our A team got 10th place whoops because we thought it would be weird to do different iterations of an independent variable I guess?? Our B team got 2nd and all they did was a titration but they changed the volume of HCl that they used in the flask for their independent variable. I guess this just goes to show that anything could happen in experimental design... titration was literally the last thing we expected for a chem experiment. I would suggest practicing titration if you've never done it before

[Fluorine]

I guess this just goes to show that anything could happen in experimental design... titration was literally the last thing we expected for a chem experiment. I would suggest practicing titration if you've never done it before

To say at Florida states Exp. design was the weirdest thing I have ever done. So before the state director announced the experiment would focus on the topic of Optics, however usually in the past this just means the topic is focusing on angle of incidence, reflection or something similar. But I think our team knew we were in trouble when we saw that the event was taking place in an actual university optics lab. The test started with calculating focal length of lenses. And then the actual experiment involved having to calculate the colored version of an image hidden in a covered box. To do this you had to diffract white light and then hit the image in a dark box with Red, Blue, Green light. And then use a program to weight the lights to reassemble the real colored image. For our team this went horrible cause for one we were not really prepared for optics and then the lens diffraction part was way harder than the event supervisor made it sound. Overall, I was really annoyed as I understand you can incorporate certain fields into expriemental design which is what makes it a super fun event, however converting it to a full out Optics test really ruined the event for me. So yes you never know what you are going to get in Exp. Design..... for real.

[watermydoing14]

I guess this just goes to show that anything could happen in experimental design... titration was literally the last thing we expected for a chem experiment. I would suggest practicing titration if you've never done it before

To say at Florida states Exp. design was the weirdest thing I have ever done. So before the state director announced the experiment would focus on the topic of Optics, however usually in the past this just means the topic is focusing on angle of incidence, reflection or something similar. But I think our team knew we were in trouble when we saw that the event was taking place in an actual university optics lab. The test started with calculating focal length of lenses. And then the actual experiment involved having to calculate the colored version of an image hidden in a covered box. To do this you had to diffract white light and then hit the image in a dark box with Red, Blue, Green light. And then use a program to weight the lights to reassemble the real colored image. For our team this went horrible cause for one we were not really prepared for optics and then the lens diffraction part was way harder than the event supervisor made it sound. Overall, I was really annoyed as I understand you can incorporate certain fields into expriemental design which is what makes it a super fun event, however converting it to a full out Optics test really ruined the event for me. So yes you never know what you are going to get in Exp. Design..... for real.

I really wish that event supervisors would keep the spirit of the event of the actual design of experiments and not on having background knowledge in a myriad of science topics. I also get really confused when the event supervisors give you a question to investigate.... isn't that part of the rubric?

[Fluorine]

I guess this just goes to show that anything could happen in experimental design... titration was literally the last thing we expected for a chem experiment. I would suggest practicing titration if you've never done it before

To say at Florida states Exp. design was the weirdest thing I have ever done. So before the state director announced the experiment would focus on the topic of Optics, however usually in the past this just means the topic is focusing on angle of incidence, reflection or something similar. But I think our team knew we were in trouble when we saw that the event was taking place in an actual university optics lab. The test started with calculating focal length of lenses. And then the actual experiment involved having to calculate the colored version of an image hidden in a covered box. To do this you had to diffract white light and then hit the image in a dark box with Red, Blue, Green light. And then use a program to weight the lights to reassemble the real colored image. For our team this went horrible cause for one we were not really prepared for optics and then the lens diffraction part was way harder than the event supervisor made it sound. Overall, I was really annoyed as I understand you can incorporate certain fields into expriemental design which is what makes it a super fun event, however converting it to a full out Optics test really ruined the event for me. So yes you never know what you are going to get in Exp. Design..... for real.

I really wish that event supervisors would keep the spirit of the event of the actual design of experiments and not on having background knowledge in a myriad of science topics. I also get really confused when the event supervisors give you a question to investigate.... isn't that part of the rubric?

I know exactly it does ruin the spirit of the event. Again you can for sure give you a certain theme to focus on and I like that, but don't restrict the event down so they is only one possible lab that can be done. One of my favourite parts of this event is that it rewards thinking creatively and making simple and stupid experiments that other people may not think of.

[alexamezaga1]

To say at Florida states Exp. design was the weirdest thing I have ever done. So before the state director announced the experiment would focus on the topic of Optics, however usually in the past this just means the topic is focusing on angle of incidence, reflection or something similar. But I think our team knew we were in trouble when we saw that the event was taking place in an actual university optics lab. The test started with calculating focal length of lenses. And then the actual experiment involved having to calculate the colored version of an image hidden in a covered box. To do this you had to diffract white light and then hit the image in a dark box with Red, Blue, Green light. And then use a program to weight the lights to reassemble the real colored image. For our team this went horrible cause for one we were not really prepared for optics and then the lens diffraction part was way harder than the event supervisor made it sound. Overall, I was really annoyed as I understand you can incorporate certain fields into expriemental design which is what makes it a super fun event, however converting it to a full out Optics test really ruined the event for me. So yes you never know what you are going to get in Exp. Design..... for real.

I really wish that event supervisors would keep the spirit of the event of the actual design of experiments and not on having background knowledge in a myriad of science topics. I also get really confused when the event supervisors give you a question to investigate.... isn't that part of the rubric?

I know exactly it does ruin the spirit of the event. Again you can for sure give you a certain theme to focus on and I like that, but don't restrict the event down so they is only one possible lab that can be done. One of my favorite parts of this event is that it rewards thinking creatively and making simple and stupid experiments that other people may not think of.

I think anyone who participated in experimental design at Florida's state competition can agree that they were not expecting what they got. Of course because they had previously released the topic was optics, everyone was expecting to be given lasers and prisms or some refracting mechanism; however, they ended up DESIGNING the experiment for us and telling us to figure out how to do it ourselves. This completely took away from the point of the event (letting competitors derive their own experiment from a topic and materials given), and I really think it should've been thrown out. I know that the supervisor and volunteers just wanted to let us have fun with this specific optics topic - which, admittedly, I did - but I don't believe they realized what experimental design was as an event nor what every competitor was going in there expecting.

[Fluorine]

I think anyone who participated in experimental design at Florida's state competition can agree that they were not expecting what they got. Of course because they had previously released the topic was optics, everyone was expecting to be given lasers and prisms or some refracting mechanism; however, they ended up DESIGNING the experiment for us and telling us to figure out how to do it ourselves. This completely took away from the point of the event (letting competitors derive their own experiment from a topic and materials given), and I really think it should've been thrown out. I know that the supervisor and volunteers just wanted to let us have fun with this specific optics topic - which, admittedly, I did - but I don't believe they realized what experimental design was as an event nor what every competitor was going in there expecting.

I agree that the intentions were good. However if anything they could have just done an optics trial event. Rather than doing what they did honestly which was removing experimental design and creating a optics/physics lab event.

[Sciencegeekgirl]

For nationals, does anybody know if it is going to be Stations or a straight Experiment? (Division B)

Also would the best way to prepare just be doing tests and practicing with your team?

Thanks in advance.

[asthedeer]

For nationals, does anybody know if it is going to be Stations or a straight Experiment? (Division B)

Also would the best way to prepare just be doing tests and practicing with your team?

Thanks in advance.

I'd say it'd have to be a straight up experiment--I see no possible way Stations are possible in Experimental Design, especially at a Nationals level (I have not done ExD at Nationals before, this is mere speculation.)

Yes, I'd say so. Know the nuances of each of your teammates and know the rubric well.

[Fluorine]

For nationals, does anybody know if it is going to be Stations or a straight Experiment? (Division B)

Also would the best way to prepare just be doing tests and practicing with your team?

Thanks in advance.

I'd say it'd have to be a straight up experiment--I see no possible way Stations are possible in Experimental Design, especially at a Nationals level (I have not done ExD at Nationals before, this is mere speculation.)

Yes, I'd say so. Know the nuances of each of your teammates and know the rubric well.

Last year it was an experiment with a topic. (Pretty sure it was packing efficiency). So yes straight up experiment no Florida state 2016 stuff