Paper Airplane Experiment
I chose to do the same paper airplane design, on three different sizes of paper. The results are as follows:
Plane #1 (11×17) had an average distance of 2.074m
Plane #2 (11×8) had an average distance of 1.418m
Plane #3 (8×5.5) had an average distance of 5.618m
The hypothesis, if I use a larger piece of paper then the airplane will fly farther because of the weight of the plane, is rejected. The data shows that the smallest plane flew the farther, rather than the largest plane as I thought. The results of this investigation are useful because if I want to make a paper airplane in the future or for a future experiment, I now know how to control the distance. I can do this by using a smaller piece of paper to create a smaller plane, as the one that went the farthest in this experiment. This investigation can be improved on by perhaps making different designs, rather than different sizes of paper, in order to see if it is the design or the size of the paper that allowed the smallest plane to fly the farthest. One question that could be taken into consideration is how to calculate and consider human error that may have occurred.
I learned that there is some human error that can occur, although the same person threw all of the planes, it is not possible to throw it the same way every time. I also learned that it can be difficult to throw the plane perfectly straight, and that could have been the design that was chosen, or human error. Next time I would try using the same size of paper and different designs, to definitively see if it was the design that I chose or the size of paper that created the results.
Scientific Method Reflection
Core Competency Critical Thinking
How does the artifact you selected demonstrate strengths & growth in the thinking competencies?
In what ways might you further develop your thinking competencies?
The paper airplane experiment shows growth in my thinking skills because I had to determine what may cause certain things to happen within my experiment and eliminate anything that may have interfered. I also had to determine what the results of the experiment meant, as well as finding that my hypothesis was incorrect and determining the results of the experiment. I can further my thinking competencies by continuing to use critical thinking during and after experiments and projects, as well as picking apart any variables that may have caused the experiment to be flawed, such as human error.