Horry Georgetown Technical College Viva Paper Towel vs Bounty Paper Towel Lab Report
Design Your Experiment Viva Paper Towel vs Bounty Paper Towel • • • • • Hypothesis- Different paper towels have different strengths. Viva is the stronger paper product compared to Bounty because it is made of cloth like material, Although the Bounty brand has more advertisement of being the strongest, Viva is more durable and absorbent because if its cloth like fibers. Independent Variable- Viva Paper Towel Brand, and Bounty Paper Towel Brand. Dependent Variable- Clear lustre Stones Quantifiably Test -The number of stones each product can hold, giving both will be soiled with the same amount of liquid solution. The hypothesis is about what is the stronger product. Prediction: Viva will uphold the most stones, both wet cloth like material, and Bounty will not because it is more paper based Product List Bounty Paper Towel- Rectangle (same height and same width) (11.0in x 6.0in) Viva Paper Towel-Rectangle (same height and same width) (11.0 x 6.0in) Water-measurement (mL syringe) Clear lustre stones- Same in diameter and weigh (weight 6grams) Glass Jars (width)4.5in x (height)5.5in Heavy duty rubber bands (to secure the paper towels over the jars) • • Comparison Control: I will measure the strength of both brands Viva vs. Bounty to see which brand is better, based on the strength of which of the two brands can hold more weight. Firstly, with water and then by adding to same amount of water, the testing the strength. Consistency Control- I will be adding the same about of water to each paper towel, the stones are the same in weight and diameter. I will be adding the stones one by one and recording the number of stones it takes to break through each brand of paper towels. Procedure (Actual Treatment) 1. 2. 3. 4. Be sure to perform each trail separately. Attach the paper towel to the jar, by securing it with a rubber band. Wet each paper towel with the same amount of water, using a full 5mL syringe Allow the water to completely be absorbed within the paper towel by waiting 1 minute after dispensing the water onto the paper towel. 5. Add the Clear Lustre Stones one-by-one to the paper towel. 6. Record the number of stones that it takes to break through the paper towel 7. Repeat steps 1-6 for the second trail. The Results Viva Paper Towel- held 136 stones before breaking through. Bounty Paper Towel- held 76 stones before breaking through.
| Excellent | Good | Fair | Poor | ||
| Main Postinga | 45 (45%) – 50 (50%)
Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.
Supported by at least three current, credible sources.
Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
40 (40%) – 44 (44%)
Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.
Supported by at least three credible sources.
Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
Responds to some of the discussion question(s).
One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.
Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.
Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
Post is cited with two credible sources.
Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
Contains some APA formatting errors. |
0 (0%) – 34 (34%)
Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately.
Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.
Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.
Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
Contains only one or no credible sources.
Not written clearly or concisely.
Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
|
| Main Post: Timeliness | 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)
Posts main post by day 3. |
0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not post by day 3. |
|
| First Response | 17 (17%) – 18 (18%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
15 (15%) – 16 (16%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
13 (13%) – 14 (14%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.
Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited. |
0 (0%) – 12 (12%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are missing.
No credible sources are cited. |
|
| Second Response | 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
12 (12%) – 13 (13%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.
Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited. |
0 (0%) – 11 (11%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are missing.
No credible sources are cited. |
|
| Participation | 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days. |
0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days. |
|
| Total Points: 100 | |||||