The method allowed for the collection of sufficient
reliable data, but many different types of errors may occur. The measuring instruments including digital
scale, test tubes, and ruler were all carefully chosen by the class in order to
have a minimum amount of errors.
Types of Errors
What could go wrong?
Possible ways to improve
Every group used a different potato. Since we don’t
know where the potatoes came from we don’t know if they were taken from the
same place, age, are some older than other. The age of the potato can
determine some of its properties which would affect the data, especially the
Have every group use the same potato or just have
every group do all the glucose concentrations on their own if time allows it.
Plugging in a wrong number in the calculator when
calculating the percent change or rounding the numbers wrong. Some standard
deviation values are higher than others which may be a result of random
errors in terms of calculations of the percent mass change. (Example: 0M
standard deviation is 9.59)
Do it yourself, don’t wait for other people to calculate
it and share results because they may make a mistake. Also, always double
check on calculations/rounding numbers because one wrong calculation can lead
to another and then the collection of wrong data, even providing wrong information.
Measuring mass with the digital balance scales.
If it is not plugged right, or if it is not
restarted and put on zero, this may affect the results because something may
appear lighter or heavier.
Being aware of our surroundings is key because
something this small can change an important number that can affect the whole
lab. Stay aware and concentrated at all times.
Since every group was measuring for their glucose
concentration, we had no control over each other. We wouldn’t know if another
group accidentally put 12ml of glucose instead of 10ml because they weren’t looking
at the beaker from eye level, for example.
-or writing down the wrong number in the class
shared data tables.
It would probably be better, if time allowed it, for
every group to do everything (every glucose concentrations), no class shared
data because many errors can occur this way.
These possible errors
may affect the data collection at some stage or another and cause for uncertainty
in the results. However, on the other hand, the R2 value on the
graph is relatively high (R2=0.89825) which means that the collected
data is 89.8% a good fit for the linear model. Therefore, only around 10% of
the data collection could have been impacted by outside factors which means
that overall the method allowed for the collection of sufficient and reliable
Furthermore, the final
number that was calculated for the osmolarity of the potato tissue is reliable
because many different trials were done with different glucose concentrations
which allowed for the collection of sufficient data. However, the data could
definitely become more precise if for example, more glucose concentrations were
added. The data is consistent because
with each glucose concentration the higher it is, the more the percent change
in mass decreases. This applies to all trials except that in 0M glucose concentration
where the potato’s mass increased. All measuring instruments were used
carefully and allowed everyone to collect valid data that was supported by
This lab investigated
osmolarity in potato tissue and looked at how due to osmosis the mass of the
potato pieces either increased or decreased. It would be a good idea to have
more glucose concentrations in order to observe even bigger differences with
more trials for more accurate results. Moreover, it would be beneficial to have
every group do every concentration because then our observations are more and more
coherent. It would also be interesting to observe what would have happened if
they were left in the glucose for longer. Furthermore, the process of osmosis
and what else it can affect except mass would be an interesting topic for