My order number 116704 is rejected after getting feedback saying it was unoriginal. now I have already selected another topic to be done again. the topic is can water boil faster when salt is added or not?
Science Experiment Topic Ideas List Below are some topic ideas for the science experiment task. You do not have to choose one of the below topics (you can if you would like); these topic ideas (below) are here to help with ideas for this task. Getting Course Mentor feedback or input on your idea before doing the experiment is encouraged. Remember when planning your science experiment, formulating your specific testable question, and laying out variables, you must have quantitative data (data in numbers) as opposed to qualitative/descriptive/subjective data. For this task, your dependent variable (what you measure) must be quantitative (numeric) in nature. NOTE: If you choose to do a life science experiment involving an organism (living thing), the experiment must not involve any vertebrate organism; (Vertebrates are animals with a backbone- this includes: mammals-such as humans, dogs, cats, horses, mice; vertebrates also include: birds; fish; reptiles; amphibians). Science Experiment Topic Ideas: Seed germination Plant growth Food preference of invertebrates Habitat use of invertebrate Movement of invertebrates Growth rates of invertebrates Effectiveness of antimicrobial disinfectants Bread mold growth Decomposition rates Chemical reaction rates Paper airplane design Bounce height of different balls Catapulting objects Parachutes Magnet strength Insulators Sound conduction Heat conduction Conducting, generating or storing electricity Friction Freezing, melting or evaporation rates Heating or cooling rates Erosion pH changes 2/10/23, 11:02 AM WGU Performance Assessment https://tasks.wgu.edu/student/010397482/course/25720011/task/573/overview 1/8 BRP1 — BRP TASK 1 NATURAL SCIENCE LAB — C683 PRFA — BRP1 COMPETENCIES 114.03.1 : Academic Research The graduate evaluates academic sources for their credibility and relevance to a chosen research topic on a natural world phenomenon. 114.03.2 : Scientific Inquiry The graduate accurately executes the process of scientific inquiry through experimentation in the natural world. 114.03.3 : Drawing Conclusions The graduate draws conclusions based on academic research and scientific inquiry. INTRODUCTION For this task, you will design, conduct, and report on an experiment in the natural sciences. The natural sciences include biology, chemistry, physics, earth sciences, and astronomy, but exclude computer science/simulations or the social sciences (e.g., psychology, sociology, economics). The purpose of this task is for you to demonstrate your understanding of the scientific method from research and design to reporting of results. Your experiment must involve a testable hypothesis where a variable is manipulated. Although you are welcome to test multiple hypotheses, one is sufficient. If your experiment contains multiple hypotheses or variables, each one should address the criteria stated in the associated rubric aspect. Your experiment should demonstrate a basic scientific principle and does not need to lead to a new scientific discovery. Be sure to incorporate appropriate safety precautions when designing and executing your experiment. Experiments conducted on vertebrate organisms (including humans) are strictly prohibited by WGU policy. Before conducting your experiment, select a field of natural science of interest to you. Read from a variety of sources (e.g., WGU learning resource, internet articles, books) to narrow your interest to a specific experimental topic. For a list of possible science experiment topic ideas, refer to the “Topic List” attachment. Identify at least two reference materials that explain the scientific principles that motivate the experiment you will conduct; these will be included in your lab report's literature review section. Prepare a lab report with the following sections: ? Introduction and Literature Review ? Hypothesis ? Methods TASK OVERVIEW SUBMISSIONS EVALUATION REPORT 2/10/23, 11:02 AM WGU Performance Assessment https://tasks.wgu.edu/student/010397482/course/25720011/task/573/overview 2/8 ? Results ? Conclusions ? Sources REQUIREMENTS Your submission must be your original work. No more than a combined total of 30% of the submission and no more than a 10% match to any one individual source can be directly quoted or closely paraphrased from sources, even if cited correctly. An originality report is provided when you submit your task that can be used as a guide. You must use the rubric to direct the creation of your submission because it provides detailed criteria that will be used to evaluate your work. Each requirement below may be evaluated by more than one rubric aspect. The rubric aspect titles may contain hyperlinks to relevant portions of the course. The experiment must be in the natural sciences—not computer sciences or the social sciences (e.g., psychology, sociology, economics). No simulations and no experiments on vertebrate animals (including humans) are permitted. Section I: Introduction and Literature Review A. Summarize how at least two reference materials relate to the basic scientific principles of your experiment. Each reference material must come from a different source. Be sure to describe how the references provide a foundational background for the experiment you will conduct. Section II: Hypothesis B. Make a hypothesis(es) to predict the effect of a manipulation of an independent variable on a quantitative dependent variable. C. Justify your hypothesis(es) based on prior research and known scientific principles. Section III: Method D. Describe the independent variable(s); include the following information: • a description of how the variable(s) will be manipulated • a description of experimental conditions, if applicable E. Describe the dependent variable(s); include the following information: • a description of how the variable(s)will be quantified, including units of measure • a description of how the variable(s) will be recorded F. Describe at least one external, confounding variable and how it will be controlled. Be sure to justify how your method of controlling that variable will mitigate any confounding effect on observed results. G. Describe your materials and measurement tools in enough detail that a reader would be able to replicate the experiment. 2/10/23, 11:02 AM WGU Performance Assessment https://tasks.wgu.edu/student/010397482/course/25720011/task/573/overview 3/8 H. Describe your experimental procedure in enough detail that a reader would be able to replicate the experiment. Section IV: Result I. Summarize the quantitative data gathered from each experimental manipulation. Be sure to highlight the key findings and trends. J. Create a visual representation (i.e., data table, graph, chart) for the data you gathered from each experimental manipulation. Be sure that you choose a method of visual representation that effectively communicates the main findings of your experiment (e.g., exact measurements, trends over time, differences across categories, proportions). Make sure your visual representation clearly represents data for each quantified variable, and be sure to label and align your data accurately. Remember also to choose a scale that fits the range of the data and represent your data points precisely and accurately. Section V: Conclusions K. Discuss whether your hypothesis(es) was confirmed, refuted, or partially confirmed. Be sure to describe the observed results supporting your conclusion. L. Describe at least one uncontrolled, confounding variable that could have influenced your observed results and any ways the experiment could be improved. M. Discuss how your experimental results relate to the references presented in the literature review. Section VI: Sources N. Acknowledge sources, using in-text citations and references, for content that is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized. File Restrictions File name may contain only letters, numbers, spaces, and these symbols: ! - _ . * ' ( ) File size limit: 200 MB File types allowed: doc, docx, rtf, xls, xlsx, ppt, pptx, odt, pdf, txt, qt, mov, mpg, avi, mp3, wav, mp4, wma, flv, asf, mpeg, wmv, m4v, svg, tif, tiff, jpeg, jpg, gif, png, zip, rar, tar, 7z RUBRIC CRITERIA FOR SUBMISSION: NOT EVIDENT The experiment is not in the nat- ural sciences, or is a computer APPROACHING COMPETENCE N/A COMPETENT The experiment is in the natural sciences—not computer sciences or the social sciences, and does https://lrps.wgu.edu/provision/91967983 2/10/23, 11:02 AM WGU Performance Assessment https://tasks.wgu.edu/student/010397482/course/25720011/task/573/overview 4/8 A:REFERENCES B:HYPOTHESIS C:JUSTIFICATION OF HYPOTHESIS simulation, or the experiment in- volves a vertebrate animal. not involve computer simulations or experiments on vertebrate animals. NOT EVIDENT A summary of 2 reference mate- rials is not included in the Introduction and Literature Review section. APPROACHING COMPETENCE The summary includes 1 refer- ence material and logically ad- dresses how it relates to basic scientific principles and lays the groundwork for the experiment, or it includes 1 or more refer- ence material but does not logi- cally address how the materials relate to basic scientific princi- ples and provides a foundational background for the experiment, or the summarized materials come from the same source. COMPETENT The summary includes at least 2 reference materials from differ- ent sources and logically ad- dresses how the reference mate- rials relate to basic scientific principles and provide a founda- tional background for the experiment. NOT EVIDENT A hypothesis is not provided. APPROACHING COMPETENCE A hypothesis(es) is provided, but the prediction described is not quantifiable, it does not involve the manipulation of an indepen- dent variable on a quantitative dependent variable, or the hy- pothesis(es) does not give a clear confirmation or refutation. COMPETENT The hypothesis(es) clearly de- scribes a quantifiable prediction. The hypothesis(es) involves the manipulation of an independent variable on a quantitative depen- dent variable. The hypothesis(es) is worded such that the results give a clear confirmation or refutation. NOT EVIDENT A justification of the hypothesis is not provided, or the justifica- tion is not based on prior re- search and known scientific principles. APPROACHING COMPETENCE The justification does not logi- cally connect the hypothesis to prior research and scientific principles, or reference to prior research and scientific principles COMPETENT The justification logically con- nects the hypothesis to prior re- search and scientific principles. Reference to prior research and scientific principles is summa- https://lrps.wgu.edu/provision/91967983 https://lrps.wgu.edu/provision/91967983 https://lrps.wgu.edu/provision/91967983 2/10/23, 11:02 AM WGU Performance Assessment https://tasks.wgu.edu/student/010397482/course/25720011/task/573/overview 5/8 D:INDEPENDENT VARIABLE E:DEPENDENT VARIABLE F:CONFOUNDING VARIABLES is directly quoted with no fur- ther explanation from the candidate. rized in the candidate’s own words. NOT EVIDENT No independent variable is de- scribed, or there is no descrip- tion of the manipulation of the independent variable. APPROACHING COMPETENCE The description incorrectly identifies the independent vari- able(s). The description of inde- pendent variable(s) manipula- tion lacks the clarity needed by a reader to replicate the experi- ment, or the manipulation is un- suitable for the variable. If ap- plicable, the description incor- rectly includes how experimen- tal conditions differ. COMPETENT The description correctly identi- fies the independent variable(s). The description of independent variable(s) manipulation is clear enough to be replicated by a reader, and the manipulation is suitable for the variable. If applic- able, the description includes how experimental conditions differ. NOT EVIDENT No dependent variable is de- scribed, or there is no descrip- tion of how the dependent vari- able will be quantified and recorded. APPROACHING COMPETENCE The description incorrectly identifies the dependent vari- able(s). The description of how the dependent variable(s) will be quantified and recorded does not include units of measure or lacks the clarity needed by a reader to replicate the experi- ment. The quantification of the variable, the units of measure, or how the variable will be record- ed is unsuitable for the variable. COMPETENT The description correctly identi- fies the dependent variable(s). The description of how the de- pendent variable(s) will be quan- tified and recorded includes units of measure and is clear enough to be replicated by a reader. The quantification of the variable, the units of measure, and how the variable will be recorded are suit- able for the variable. NOT EVIDENT No confounding variables are described. APPROACHING COMPETENCE The description incorrectly identifies any number of exter- nal, confounding variables. Or, COMPETENT The description correctly identi- fies 1 or more external, con- founding variable and describes how it could impact the experi- https://lrps.wgu.edu/provision/91967983 https://lrps.wgu.edu/provision/91967983 https://lrps.wgu.edu/provision/91967983 2/10/23, 11:02 AM WGU Performance Assessment https://tasks.wgu.edu/student/010397482/course/25720011/task/573/overview 6/8 G:MATERIALS H:EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE I:DESCRIPTION OF RESULTS the description does not de- scribe how the confounding variables could impact the ex- perimental manipulation. Or, the description does not correctly justify how the suggested method of controlling the con- founding variable would effec- tively mitigate any confounding effect on observed results. mental manipulation. The de- scription justifies how the sug- gested method of controlling that variable would effectively miti- gate any confounding effect on observed results. NOT EVIDENT A description of materials and measurement tools is not pro- vided, or the materials described are not relevant to the experiment. APPROACHING COMPETENCE The description of materials and measurement tools is incom- plete or is not detailed enough for a reader to replicate the experiment. COMPETENT The description of materials and measurement tools used to com- plete the experiment is complete and detailed enough for a reader to replicate the experiment. NOT EVIDENT A description of the experimen- tal procedure is not provided. APPROACHING COMPETENCE The description of the experi- mental procedure is incomplete or is not detailed enough for a reader to replicate the experi- ment. The description does not clearly indicate the frequency of measurement or does not indi- cate the tools used at each step. COMPETENT The description of the experi- mental procedure is complete and detailed enough for a reader to replicate the experiment. The description of the procedure in- cludes details of the frequency of measurement and the tools used at each step. NOT EVIDENT A written description of results is not provided. APPROACHING COMPETENCE The written summary of the re- sults does not focus on observed quantitative measurements, or is illogical, or fails to highlight key findings