KSU Smartphone Powered Efficient Water Disinfection System at Point of Use Portfolio

For this task, you will make sure you have followed the following instructions in developing your portfolio project before submission. 1- Identify the research question and rationale posed by the article. 2- Provide a hypothesis and null hypothesis that applies to question (and papers associated) 3- Discuss the scientific rigor of the articles associated with your question ( ie critically analyze and compare and contrast the articles) 4- Analyze the data provided in both papers to determine whether or not this accepts or rejects you null hypothesis (You must explain why and reference the data in this section) 5- Generate a conclusive scientific theory from the articles you are provided with and explain the assumptions of the theory identified. 6- Provide a conclusion, in which you must relate the findings of the the journal articles and provide areas of future research.

Portfolio project
Portfolio Project
• The purpose of the portfolio project is to provide an assessment in which
you are able to demonstrate your understanding and application of the
CILOs.
• The individual portfolio project will be measured against all four course
intended learning outcomes;
1. Explain observations. [PILO 1.1]
2. Interpret assumptions. [PILO 1.1]
3. Evaluate sources. [PILO 2.3]
4. Propose hypothesis. [PILO 4.4]
How to conduct your portfolio project
• You must choose one of the research articles to answer for your
portfolio project.
• Once you have chosen a scientific article – post your choice on the BB
discussion board to inform your instructor.
• Portfolio projects should cover all CILO criterion and include
references
Students must choose one research article to
base their portfolio project on
1. Caffeine and physical performance
• https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0059561
2. Substance addiction in KSA
• https://medcraveonline.com/MOJAMT/MOJAMT-06-00145.pdf
3. GM tomato to treat cancer
• https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0175778
4. Smartphone-powered efficient water disinfection at the point of use
• https://www.nature.com/articles/s41545-020-00089-9
Students Portfolio project should follow the
structure below and cover all points
• Identify the research question and rationale posed by the article
• Provide a hypothesis and null hypothesis that applies to question (and papers associated)
• Discuss the scientific rigor of the articles associated with your question (ie critically analyse and compare and
contrast the articles)
• Analyze the data provided in both papers to determine whether or not this accepts or rejects you null
hypothesis (You must explain why and reference the data in this section)
• Generate a conclusive scientific theory from the articles you are provided with and explain the assumptions of
the theory identified.
• Provide a conclusion, in which you must relate the findings of the the journal articles and provide areas of
future research
Feedback
• Remember this is a summative assignment
• Meaning you cannot receive formal feedback on your answers
• Copying and pasting from each other or online sources is not
acceptable
• Plagiarism will result in a grade of Zero – all work should be your own
• 1st of April 1pm is the deadline for submission
CHAIN SPECIFICATION
CS07 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY AND ANALYSIS: SCIENCE
Course Intended Learning Outcomes (CILOs)
Students will be able to:
1.
Explain observations. [PILO 1.1]
2.
Interpret assumptions. [PILO 1.1]
3.
Evaluate sources. [PILO 2.3]
4. Propose hypothesis. [PILO 4.4]
Course Difficulty: 4.25
CILO Elaboration
CILO 1: Explain observations.
Maps to PILO:
•
Primary – 1.1 (Knowledge: Science and Mathematics)
Core question:
How well can students identify patterns from observations and formulate theories to
explain those patterns?
Competencies:
For this CILO, students demonstrate an ability to discern patterns in various forms of
information (e.g. morphology, or shapes and forms; numbers, words and other symbols;
abstract ideas, etc.) and to relate these patterns to a given research question. Students
will generate insights from these patterns leading to a generalizable and testable theory,
which they will use to explain, support, or challenge aspects of published scientific
research (the discussion of the published scientific literature can also look at how existing
research supports or challenges the student’s observational findings and proposed
theory).
VERSION 2
16
JUNE 2020
CHAIN SPECIFICATION
CS07 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY AND ANALYSIS: SCIENCE
Table 9: Natural Sciences 2 CILO 1 Criteria
Competencies
Criteria
Discerns patterns composed of multiple
elements or points of information, describes
the pattern (e.g. nature, features, repeatability,
predictive value), and discusses the relevance
of the pattern to a given research question.
Observation
Derives insights from patterns by interpreting
patterns to for generalized and testable theory
that explain a phenomenon and uses this
theory to inform discussion of a published
scientific paper.
Theorization
Table 10: Natural Sciences 2 CILO 1 Performance Standards
Criteria
Unsatisfactory
Baseline
Developing
Good
Exemplary
Observation
Does not
identify any
pattern.
Identifies
one relevant
data point.
Identifies
multiple
relevant
data points
…and links
observations
to describe a
pattern
…and discusses
relevance to
research
question.
Does not
interpret the
observations.
Gives
description
that covers
one aspect of
the pattern.
Derive
multiple
insights
from the
pattern
…and
construct
generalized
rule that
explains
phenomenon
…and embed
explanation in
a discussion of
published
literature.
[1.1.2]
Theorization
[1.1.4]
Context:
While Natural Sciences 1 focused on deductive reasoning (using theories to solve
problems and assess explanations), Natural Sciences 2 shifts the focus to inductive
reasoning. Inductive reasoning begins with observations, and from those observations
draws conclusions and generalized theories or rules to explain the observed
phenomenon. Here, students start with pattern recognition: they must look for patterns
and information in data, whether that data is born of experimentation, field observations,
or culled from desktop research. Pattern recognition is presented as the first step in the
inductive reasoning process that can generate new theory, so the focus here is not on
testing abstract pattern recognition as a skill per se, but in embedding the idea of
observations and patterns in the derivation of ideas, insights and theories. These ideas
behind the creation of new theory within the natural sciences are an important in the
context of the abundance of theory that exists within the concurrent Social Sciences
courses Criminology and Criminal Psychology and which both demand that students use
these theories to explain observations. Pitching this CILO – in terms of the data, patterns,
VERSION 2
17
JUNE 2020
CHAIN SPECIFICATION
CS07 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY AND ANALYSIS: SCIENCE
research questions and theories under consideration – at the right level for students in a
particular class will be instrumental in providing these skills with a firm foundation.
CILO 2: Interpret assumptions.
Maps to PILO:
•
Primary – 1.1 (Knowledge: Science and Mathematics)
Core question:
How well can students explain the assumptions a theory makes and assess the limits they
place on the theory’s explanatory power?
Competencies:
For this CILO, students demonstrate deep understanding of the nature of theory and
theorizing by explaining assumptions inherent in of a range of natural science theories
and exploring how this might affect the utility of the theory. The explanatory power of a
theory is linked to, among other things, its universality (or ambit) and its precision. To
demonstrate competency, students must cite a theory and explain multiple assumptions
it makes along with the limitations these assumptions pose on the utility of the theory (i.e.
its explanatory power). They must also explain why these limitations do not invalidate the
theory. In addition, they must use the theory to draw conclusions relevant to a given
research question and explain how, in particular case being considered, assumptions are
met or breached and the effect this has on the theory’s validity.
Table 11: Natural Sciences 2 CILO 2 Criteria
Competencies
Criteria
Explain the scope of application, or explanatory
power, of multiple theories and discuss why
these limitations of applicability do not
disprove a theory or invalidate its usefulness.
Limitations
Use theory to draw insight in response to a
research question and explain how
assumptions are met or breached with respect
to a given research question and what a breach
of assumptions tells us about the validity of a
theory.
Conclusions
VERSION 2
18
JUNE 2020
CHAIN SPECIFICATION
CS07 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY AND ANALYSIS: SCIENCE
Table 12: Natural Sciences 2 CILO 2 Performance Standards
Criteria
Unsatisfactory
Baseline
Developing
Good
Exemplary
Limitations
No assumption
identified.
One
assumption
described.
Multiple
assumptions
described
…and the
way these
limit
explanatory
power
explained
…with a
discussion of
why the
concept
remains valid
despite these
limitations.
No conclusion
derived.
One
conclusion
derived.
Multiple
conclusions
formed with
respect to
given
research
question
…and
explaining
how
assumptions
are met or
why
divergence is
of limited
consequence
…with areas of
uncertainty
and future
research
identified.
[1.1.3]
Conclusions
[1.1.4]
Context:
Testing assumptions is a recurrent theme in science. All models and theories have them;
sometimes they are implicit, sometimes explicit. Teasing out both what the assumption is
and how it affects the explanatory power of the theory is important if we are to know
when and where a theory can be applied. This CILO explicitly builds on ideas presented in
both CILO 2 of Natural Sciences 1 and CILO 1 of Quantitative Applications in Security
Sciences. It also prepares students for the downstream forensics courses, in which
students must select the most appropriate test and procedure given environmental
factors (i.e. they must pick the method most appropriate to a context). The skill is also
demanded throughout the Social Sciences chain, which runs concurrently to the two
natural science courses.
CILO 3: Evaluate sources.
Maps to PILO:
•
Primary – 2.3 (Cognitive Skills: Research)
Core question:
How well can students assess the quality of published sources in terms of explanatory
power, accuracy and scientific rigor?
VERSION 2
19
JUNE 2020
CHAIN SPECIFICATION
CS07 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY AND ANALYSIS: SCIENCE
Competencies:
For this CILO, students will check the accuracy of claims made in published sources
against multiple, independent, high-quality references; they should be able to look up
associated references; compare claims made in a source with those in unrelated sources;
compare authorship and data sets of different sources to establish independence; and
review the style of application to establish quality and authority. Students should assess
the method, data, analysis and authority of sources and evaluate their explanatory power
by thinking through best practice in performing experiments and collecting data, the
challenges in conducting valid data analyses, and the extent to which assumptions limit
the usefulness and accuracy of the theory.
Table 13: Natural Sciences 2 CILO 3 Criteria
Competencies
Criteria
Refer to multiple, independent, high-quality and generally
accepted sources to check accuracy of claims in source
under investigation.
Accuracy
Evaluate theories for scientific rigor (i.e. method is sound,
data is valid and fairly presented, analysis is appropriate, etc.),
authority (i.e. peer-review vs book chapter vs textbook), and
explanatory power (i.e. its usefulness in a variety of contexts,
limitations caused by assumptions, accuracy of predictions).
Evaluation
Table 14: Natural Sciences 2 CILO 3 Performance Standards
Criteria
Unsatisfactory
Baseline
Developing
Good
Exemplary
Accuracy
No critique
provided.
Claims
checked
against
once source.
Claims
checked
against
multiple
sources
…and the
quality of
those
sources
explained
…and
divergences
among, and
relevant
questions raised
by, sources
discussed.
Does not
evaluate
theories.
Evaluate the
scientific
rigor of one
source.
Evaluate the
scientific
rigor of
multiple
sources
…and
assess
authority
of
sources
…and their
explanatory
power discussed.
[2.3.2]
Evaluation
[2.3.2]
Context:
Good science tests theory, challenges assumptions, and critiques sources; this skepticism
is a foundational aspect of scientific thinking. The idea of evaluating theories and sources
VERSION 2
20
JUNE 2020
CHAIN SPECIFICATION
CS07 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY AND ANALYSIS: SCIENCE
was introduced in CILO 3 of Natural Sciences 1 but is here further developed with more
challenging performance standards that require students to engage in the critical
analysis of scientific literature. Support is provided in the development of this skill through
CILO 3 of the concurrent Written and Oral Communication course, Critical Inquiry.
Combined, these CILOs establish the student’s ability to evaluate and challenge what is
written.
CILO 4: Propose hypotheses.
Maps to PILO:
•
Primary – 4.4 (Communications, Information Technology, Numerical Skills:
Quantitative Reasoning)
Core question:
How well can students apply quantitative reasoning to first generate hypotheses and
then draw conclusions from numerical data?
Competencies:
For this CILO, students need to identify relationships among relevant elements or
variables that allow the formulation of a qualitative description (i.e. hypothesis) that is
then refined to a more precise quantitative expression (i.e. equation). They should use the
equation to produce a numerical response to the problem at hand and interpret that
number to form a conclusion. Both the equation itself and the conclusions gained from
using it should be discussed with reference to literature. At the heart of this CILO lie
quantitative reasoning competencies: qualitative relationships as expressed in a
hypothesis must be recast as quantitative relationships expressed as an equation;
conclusions must be drawn from the interpretation of simple numerical results. In both
cases – the derivation of the expected relationship and the conclusion from testing that
expectation – students must embed their discussion in the literature, in similar fashion to
that required in CILO 1.
VERSION 2
21
JUNE 2020
CHAIN SPECIFICATION
CS07 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY AND ANALYSIS: SCIENCE
Table 15: Natural Sciences 2 CILO 4 Criteria
Competencies
Criteria
Formulate equations that express expected
relationships in numerical terms by first
describing a hypotheses in qualitative terms.
The hypothesis and equation should be
explained in terms of both the rationale behind
the student’s thinking and the support found
in the published literature.
Hypothesis
Use numerical data to perform relevant
calculations using the proposed equation and
then use the results to draw a conclusion in
response to the initial hypothesis. This
conclusion should be related to the published
literature and ideas for further research should
be raised.
Conclusions
Table 16: Natural Sciences 2 CILO 4 Performance Standards
Criteria
Unsatisfactory
Baseline
Developing
Good
Exemplary
Hypothesis
Does not
generate a
hypothesis.
Formulates
qualitative
hypothesis
to address
issue.
Formulates
quantitative
equation to
express
hypothesis
…and
explains
rationale
behind
hypothesis
and
equation
…with
reference to
appropriate
literature.
Does not use
equation.
Applies
equation to
relevant
data.
Formulates
conclusion
based results
of equation
…and relates
to relevant
research
literature
…and suggests
steps for
further
development
of the topic.
[4.4.5]
Conclusions
[4.4.4]
Context:
Science is driven by information, most often quantitative data. What is the force of the
explosion? What is the speed of the car? What is the rate of spread? These are
quantitative questions that require numbers. This CILO combines the ideas behind CILO 1
(explanation of observations) with quantitative reasoning skills. It also explicitly builds on
the CILOs from Natural Sciences 1: performing a calculation correctly is subsumed within
the baseline performance standard (NS1: CILO 4), as is the formulation of a hypothesis
(NS1: CILO 1). These quantitative reasoning skills will be used in concurrent Social Sciences
chain courses and the downstream courses in the Security Sciences cluster.
VERSION 2
22
JUNE 2020