It works.

Month: April, 2013

Preview Exam/Assessment

Q11: Answer = 4, not 3. I know its graph four because I intended to select graph four (it was the only bar chart that modeled the situation). Unfortunately I am quite possibly the silliest of all the gooses (geese?) and wrote down 3 because the formatting led me to believe number 3 represented answer number 4

Q13: Answer = 3, Not 0. As it turns out, “0” is not a valid response for questions number 1 – 5. 0 was the answer, however. Again it would appear that this error stemmed from silliness.

Q15: Answer = 3, Not 0. See reasoning above.

Q16: Answer = 4, Not 2. Or was it 4? I’ll double check with the answer sheet after this, as I’m currently typing this up while the 194 kids do their practicals. I forgot to take the total area under the curve. Rookie mistake. No silliness here, just pure amateur hour.

Q17: Answer = 4, Not 2. Same reasoning as above.


Attached is my redacted exam: Redacted_PUM

I figured instead of doing just one quiz I would get practice doing several daily assessments and then one open ended assessment question. I tried to give the students just enough information to make them think about all the different possible questions that could be derived from the little information they had.


Two screencasts covering How To Optics!

Youtube links are coming soon.


Youtube is silly. See below for Vimeo.


Here’s the Optics SMART Board activities! I’m very glad I chose this module, as it was very fun to make solutions to these. I also really like how the module steps students through how to build trigonometric reasoning abilities. This is an incredibly important skill that is glossed over, and students are left to just “get better” with it instead of actually being taught how to reason through problems.

Anyway, here’s the smartboard file.

Data acquisition

Rather than using logger pro, I opted for using my smartphone’s accelerometer.  I attached it to a vertical spring/hanger system and taped my phone (at the center of mass) to the hanger. From there, it was just a matter of setting the acquisition time and data file. Attached is the data, here is the graph after editing

Z axis acceleration vs Time

Z axis acceleration vs Time


I did some tricky analysis to make the period appear longer, just so it was easier on the eyes. The data is surprisingly consistent. I have included the excel file so you can the data pre-prettification. Its interesting to see the whole spread of the data collection.




Here this would be incredibly useful for students investigating the period of the object. Had they drawn force/motion diagrams previously, using the smartphone (since at least one student will have one at each group) is a quick, easy, and cool way of testing their models.


Dynamics 1.6

In the dynamics section there was a rather poorly drawn example of how to go from a freebody diagram to a force diagram. At first I thought this was intentional (so students could see an actual sketch) but after further reasoning I decided this was not an appropriate time to use a terrible diagram.

Energy 1.1, 1.2

I made this invention sequence (plus the following one) two or three years ago with pen and paper, then scanned. Obviously this left a lot to be desired. So I decided to rework these. Both the weightlifting index and the car washing index is meant to help students invent the idea of a product quantity. Hopefully these designs are clearer.


Created, Energy 1.7

There was a word problem in the energy unit where a cart sliding down a ramp had work done on it by a string, thus further increasing its chalk smashing potential. I decided this was in need of a diagram.


ReworkedInventionSequences <powerpoint >