I have always found engaging with fellow students to be helpful in learning new topics together. I am hoping that the time planned in the lecture for small group discussion will benefit most, if not all, students.

Am I assuming correctly that we will discuss both plant and animal cells, individually, as well?

I think it is entirely possible for multiple people to view a situation in multiple ways. In fact, I think it happens all the time in real life. There are many factors that can lead to this, such as one's upbringing and thought process, one's context of the situation, as well as the perception of the witnesses and what they infer to be happening. For example, you may think of an instance where a homeless woman steals food from a grocery store. One may view this as a careless, dishonest act that proves a problem of morals and integrity, while another may view it as an act of desperation and view the problem to be that of homelessness and poverty in their community. Further, some may see it as both, or maybe something entirely different. In sum, I believe everything can be up for interpretation when those viewing one situation are different, with their own thoughts and perceptions. In an academic setting this can also be seen, there can be many different interpretations of an unclear problem on a test or homework assignment, leading to many different student answers. If a a problem or question is vague and open ended, more problem solving is required, making the answer or the path to find the answer possibly different for different people. Overall, problem solving is a skill that looks different for everyone and takes practice.

Having the study guides will be a huge help in figuring out what of the lecture material is still no as clear to me and what I need to go back and review in more detail. I'm happy we have this resource almost as a checkpoint after each lecture to evaluate our understanding of the material as we progress in the class.

This makes me think of the vat-grown meat, where stem cells are taken from an animal, and are then treated to multiply, and eventually grow into a product that resembles meat.

Though ill-structured problems are more similar to problems in real-life situations, to be good at solving these problems, one needs to start with well-structured problems and gradually build into solving more complicated problems. In this way, one could begin with considering one factor at a time and learn how multiple variables interacts with each other and know that there could potentially be multiple answers. Therefore, practicing both types of problems would be essential to the success in this course, or any course.

I like how I am able to see my classmates' responses and see others' questions as well as my own. I like that I will be bale to check if others' have the same questions as me as well as see their thought process in understanding the reading material. I have used platform like this before in another class but not regularly and not for the purposes of further comprehending the lecture material. I am excited to use this platform to ask questions and see my peers' thought processes as well.

It is important to note how important biology is in not only about learning major concepts regarding the world we live in, but how we can use that information to help us improve our world so we can continue to thrive.

I have never been provided a study guide for lectures and am very curious to see what these look like and how effective they will be in helping me to study and retain information. I have only been given study guides for final exams etc. Do the simply ask questions regarding what was or will be gone over in lecture? Will vocabulary words be included within the problems asked within the guide to help solidify their definitions? How effective are these guides on their own? Should they be taken without the help of lecture notes and other materials?

In my chemistry class my professor tried to explain the discrete nature of all energies using a figure of a man walking up stairs (discrete) versus walking up a slope (continuous) to illustrate the difference of the two. That model worked in explaining that there are only certain levels of energies that could exist, yet the actual energy levels are not arranged evenly like stairs but in a way where the gaps between each level gets closer the further away from the ground state, which is where the model didn't work.

I have found that doing assignments and ensuring your understanding of new material the same day the material was introduced the most beneficial. Personally, reviewing new material the same day helps me to not only solidify the knowledge that I do understand, but rework and comprehend the lecture material that is not yet as clear. I find that when the most recent lecture is fresh in your mind its easier to grasp and make sense of the substance of the lecture. I also think waiting until the. last minute adds another note of stress that isn't necessary and can even make it harder to study or complete an assignment.

I like that we will be given a post-lecture study guide because I have a hard time creating my own questions and knowing what to review right after class. This will help me understand which concepts are more difficult for me to grasp so I can focus more on those. I can also see myself going back to them when I am reviewing for the midterms and the final to make sure I understand the concepts from one lecture before moving on to another lecture.

I really hope this occurs frequently throughout the quarter. I think it's really cool that us students can have an impact on what content is being reviewed during lecture, and I think that this will not only motivate students to be active on discussion assignments, but it will help content understanding as well.

I fell victim to this mindset in a past class, and I can say from personal experience the statement "because the answer choice "makes sense"" is very true in how many people see reviewing study guides. Reviewing a study guide that way is not so much understanding the material as it is memorizing the correct answer for a very specific question (which you are not likely to be asked about on an exam) .

I agree that constant self testing is extremely important to ensuring you understand all the material covered. This allows you to figure out which concepts are your weakest and focus on those concepts more so that you don't fall behind when future topics build on previous ones. Even areas that you find easy will benefit from constant self testing because if you find a concept easy at one point, you might not study it as deeply, leading to you forgetting it. These active studying techniques, versus simply re-reading your notes, will help you retain more information in the long run, especially as we approach midterms because you have already been actively studying the material since you learned it and you won't need to rush to try to memorize all the information (which is almost impossible for BIS2A where you need to understand the processes, and not just vocabulary terms).

I've previously had a class that had pre-lecture assignments and quizzes, and I found that they tremendously helped my understanding of what was being taught in lecture. I'm curious to see if the same will happen this quarter as well. I'm also curious to see if other students find pre-lecture assignments beneficial or tedious?

This action is crucial during the learning process that many seem to neglect, if done correctly it will provide many with beneficial learning and boost critical thinking. I think this is a very important point to keep in mind for all classes as it is always better to ask rather than stay clueless!

It is essential to be able to solve unseen problems before by using similar knowledge found in class. I think mastery over this skill is great to succeed in any exam as it allows you to know how to answer a question rather than hope to be asked the exact question studied for.

I fully agree with this! I feel like as a whole, we always think that whenever we get called on we need to know the answer fully in order to answer the question, which is totally wrong. I believe no matter whether the answer is correct, half true, or even fully wrong, we learn so much. In fact, when an answer to a question is wrong, its better than the answer being correct. I believe when someone answers a question wrong, it gives an opportunity to actually work through the problem, and actually figure out what the correct answer is, and why its correct.

This is such an important fact to note down. A lot of people, even including myself sometimes forget how applicable the subject of biology is to lots of everyday topics and areas. Sometimes I forget biology is not just associated with medicine and the medical area, but also affects community work, upcoming technology, and modern day art as well.

Self testing by completing a practice quiz/test/questions fully and without looking at notes is very helpful because when you go over the answers after, you have an idea of what you already know, what questions you can reasonably infer the answers to, and where you need more work. I find that looking at the answers after every question makes me less likely to try as hard because I can just assure myself that I would get it right in hindsight.

I find that helping others understand the material is my favorite way to study because it allows me to understand concepts in a way that makes sense in my vernacular, and I can help others learn at the same time. I think also looking at models gives you real-world examples to attach concepts to, which helps me to remember it on tests later.

Creating connections between topics from what I've read previously has, if I remember correctly, been proven to be one of the most effective ways of learning and truly understanding new material since the connections between ideas not only can make them easier to learn but the connection can also make it easier to retain that information.

I think its really nice that the aspect of anxiety is discussed in this part since its the main reason that I often don't outwardly participate in lectures since the sudden pressure of speaking can sometimes make me blank on the topic at hand so I appreciate that it was outwardly stated that it is alright to say "I don't know".

I think this part of the text is really interesting since in the medical field I feel like we've seen rudimentary versions of these since they can "grow" new ears in say a patient arm but they're just a prosthetic and aren't truly functional. With what they're claiming in the article however would be truly revolutionary and beneficial to those suffering with chronic illnesses or people with disabilities.

Sometimes I am amazed on how far this scaling goes in terms of the amount of cells in one person outnumbering the total human population ever born by multiple times.

I find it exciting on how things we see in sci-fi movies such as regenerating limbs can be found in some animals like axolotls and other topics can already be found crawling around on this planet.

I think that many forget that these classes are still teaching about the real world by using real life examples. For instance, I would see my high school classes as just a class to get by rather that seeing in the deeper core to them. So far, I can tell this class will teach a lot of in real life problems and solutions.

I think this is very important for later references, and revision purposes. I had an art history class before in which the professor relied the absorbance rate of knowledge on students' notes taking efficiency by not posting any worded ppts online, which resulted in a devastating scoring in the later exams. I am saying that the test score reflects the low efficiency in transmitting knowledge from professor to the students, which is a direct resulting from not posting lecture contents later after the class. And I absolutely agree with the decision to post lecture slides, and recordings online.

I believe this center should serve as a extremely important resource in terms of learning/establishing concepts from lectures or understanding some confusing ideas.

I think it is of priority to deduct the correct information, including independent variables, conditions, and dependent variables from whether a rational, a question, or a set of facts; It is important to get an accurate, and precise presumption or take it as a basis for later construction of details and further questions.

I think the ability of providing a lineage of questions that surrounds a specific question, with rational deduction, or an underlying implication should be a crucial part to participate in the lecture's discussion.

In other classes, I experienced success when I set my own deadline by which I would review a set amount of the content. Having post-lecture study guides makes keeping deadlines and a sense of discipline much easier. Also I've never had questions accompanying each lecture, so I'm very excited about that! I think it will much studying for exams much easier.

I can see how this ties to BIS002B in that we learned about polygenic and pleitropic traits, as well as epistasis. BIS002A seems to look less at the effects of that, and more so at the root of what causes them.

I really like the idea of having pre-lecture study guides. In my previous classes, I had to come up with my own ways to prepare for the upcoming lecture. As I was predicting what might be covered, sometimes I would spend too much/too little time on certain nuances, reducing efficiency. Given that the instructors themselves will be creating these study guides, I look forward to being more effective with my pre-class studying!

I couldn't more strongly agree with this! I've had amazing experiences in the past connecting basic concepts I learned in class with more complex ideas. An example of this can be seen with a nutrition class I took at community college. A few of our lectures touched on the nutrient-gene interface and disease prevention. This prompted me to look into how these 2 concepts can be fused, leading me to nutrigenomics. When I'm reading papers on this concept, I can usually use the knowledge I learned in that course as these scientific papers build off of what I learned. I'm very excited to see how I can connect the principles I learn in BIS 2A to other ideas.

This really highlights how biology and chemistry are such interconnected fields and how either one can not be fully understood without understanding the other. After taking BIS2B last quarter and focusing on biology on a larger scale, I'm excited to explore biology on much smaller scale in this class by focusing on the atomic level.

Having learned the concept of 'schema' in my high school's psychology course, I think the mental models should mean the same thing as schema: we either assimilate new knowledge to pre-existing mental structures or we accommodate new knowledge to form new structures. These mental structures play essential roles in increasing the speed of memory encoding and recalling. Even though sometimes schema may cause memory distortions since it's based on pre-existing notions, with enough rehearsal, this could be avoided.

Some of my previous chemistry professors have used anthropomorphism to describe the strength of bonds between atoms. For example, they described how certain atoms were "more greedy for electrons" to describe electronegativity. While this simplified complex vocabulary and made the concept easier to understand, it was not scientifically accurate, since atoms are not actually "greedy". Using these anthropomorphistic terms to scientifically prove ideas would technically be incorrect and in more advanced chemistry courses I am expected to use more complex terms. The tradeoff in this case would be that I understood the concepts much more easily, but I was not exposed to the complex vocabulary.

I'm seeing the emphasis on sketching and drawing in this class for quite a few times now, and I'm getting a sense that learning through visualization would be a key skill in understanding the materials in this class.

To me, the term mental mode refers to a method of visualizing and organizing the concepts I've learned. It is important for learning because it provides an additional level to understanding the information, instead of just through words or blocks of text. It accompanies those words with diagrams, pictures, and processes, allowing me to more deeply engage with the information I have learned.

I've always learnt molecular biology at a very microscopic level only. How would a shift of perspective apply to micro and macro levels of biology simultaneously? And where can we see them in the real world?

I completely agree with this statement here. I feel that sometimes there is this impression that biology is about memorization, but in reality, that is not completely accurate. While there is definitely some memorization, it is mainly about problem-solving. This is especially because pure memorization would never pave the way for new discoveries and innovations; it does not allow us to make connections and use those connections to solve greater problems. I've realized that problem-solving is definitely challenging, but through enough practice and deliberate effort I can improve my problem solving skills, and this class is an opportunity for me to do so.

The post-study guide is new to me. So far I've only had classes that gave study guides at the end of every unit, I wonder how having one after every lecture would make a difference in my learning process.

This is where I see the "connection of dots" in the learning process of the bis2 series happening. After taking bis2b and 2c with heavy focuses on diversity in evolution and the tree of life, I wonder how far we will go in terms of zooming in the focus on molecular level diversity in bis2a.

With these key differences between the two process, we can see one is used to eliminate answers, while one is used to create them. When is it the right time to use each? how does one differentiate between the two in choosing which one is needed in a given situation? What situation calls for a design challenge process and what calls for a scientific method? When I think of scientific method, I think of a simple experiment with independent and dependent variables etc. in order to find the correlation between two things in a real life situation. While for the design challenge, I think of creating some kind of device or other solution to solve a real world problem. What other situations can be used for each and how does one decide?

These steps remind me of my previous BIM1 class as we were given a problem to solve as well as similar steps to use to brainstorm, design, and create a device to help solve this problem. We used the waterfall design process to formulate a needs statement and user needs, design input, design process, design output, and final product. culminating with verification and validation of the devices properties and effectiveness. These steps heavily reminds of what my group and I had to do in order to complete our design project. I am interested to see them applied here!

The falsifying of a hypothesis proves that the two things tested were not in affect of one another. One action or trait did not affect or impact another action or trait. However, a null hypothesis is one that is assumed to be true until proven wrong in an experiment. Null hypotheses assume there is no reaction between two variables and that one does not affect the other. Therefore a falsified null hypothesis is like a double negative, making the tow variables in fact related and affecting one another. Thus meaning the same thing as a proven hypotheses.

This reminds me a lot of the book "Drugs for Life" by Joseph Dumit. This book is about the pharmaceutical companies and how facts become circulated and widely accepted when in reality consumers should aim to contest them or at least be skeptical of them more often. In the book readers see the bias behind pharma facts that are circulated, and the manipulation of data that us turned into an everyday fact. Thinking this way about biology also puts these facts into question as it is a good idea to always look at the context in which any fact was collected as well as make observations about if what was assumed in order to produce such a fact.

So if we as humans are unaware of many biases we have based on our own experiences, how does one create/formulate these new questions and observations to make? How does one become aware of their biases and simple assumptions they are making? How often does this happen? If humans are so conditioned in their environment to accept what they are so familiar with, what kinds of questions are we not asking, and how do we begin to ask them?

It sounds like both the Design Challenge and scientific method will be used in class to understand hypothesis. Since I'm not familiar with the Design Challenge it might take a bit to become accustomed to the process. But it sounds like it'll be useful.

Not one explanation can indeed fit every case of a problem. At some point, the explanation created may fail a category as it was only created to solve a select few variables according to the problem at hand.

There is a clear difference between the two methods as one eliminates possible answers and one creates solutions to problems. Both are needed to solve an experiment which is why we use both to full proof a proposed hypothesis.

The Design Challenge forces students to better comprehend the material. We're not just going along with the information but are having a deeper level of understanding.

In experiments, it is important to remember to be as accurate as possible. Errors in data can lead to incorrect conclusions. This is why repeated trials is crucial to ensure the reliability of data.

Science is always changing and there are new discoveries constantly. In past classes in the BIS series, the professors repeatedly say the information they give us in lecture will probably change in a decade. It's important to understand that the ideas in science and biology aren't solidified, but are open to change.

This is a bit of an odd case as even without much light in "the sunny part" both cases presented grew at the same height. Even if one had a limited light source, which shows that our null hypothesis for that area can not be rejected. However, in comparison, the "Shady part of the yard" cases between a plant covered with shade versus one provided with extra light, the one with extra light grew more. Which can allow us to reject the null hypothesis if it follows the t-test guidelines.

So, our alternative hypothesis would have to change for both groups since one area was not affected by the light but the other was. So the only variable we can change is the area these plants reside and conclude if there is some sort of difference when presented with different amounts of light in their respective area in the yard. To find the limiting resource these plants need to increase in height.

Biases are all around us; even when we believe them not to be. No matter the situation sometimes we are biased against or for an idea. That is why it is important to take into account all the biases and human errors that could occur through a studied experiment. If the experiment is passed, it could be debunked easily due to bias used by the scientist.

Since a plant in the sunlight was the same height as one in the shade right next to it, I could conclude that the amount of sunlight a plant is exposed to does not affect its height. This conclusion would lead me to consider other possible explanations for the difference in plant growth by thinking what other variables could potentially affect plant growth, observing the yard, and determining where those variables could lie. Since plant height varied in different areas of the yard, it's possible that the soil composition is different in those areas and is affecting plant growth. I would design an experiment using that as the independent variable.

The shade structure acts as the control in this experiment, since the independent variable is the amount of sunlight the plants are exposed to. The shade structure allows us to see the effects of No Sunlight on the plants and use it as a point of comparison. Based on the hypothesis that there is a positive correlation between sunlight exposure and plant height, the plants under the structure will be the shortest.

The design challenge can also be a way for students to have a more clean understanding of material. Creating questions helps students think about the material, and gives the instructor a signal of how much and how well the student actually knows the material as well.

Making accurate measurements are crucial. The more accurate the results from your experiments are, the more accurate your conclusion from your experiment is going to be. It is important to make sure that you are doing work with detail, because it can really affect your results with your dependent and independent variables.

I agree with piece of the text. The idea that creating a question for an observation can actually be one of the more challenging parts of the scientific method. I believe in order to ask a question, you actually need to have a good idea/understanding of what material you are observing. The more you know what you are studying, the better, and more concise questions you are going to be asking.

The mirror contraption could be used to test for the light the plant receieves while keeping the temperature of the soil under the plant the same.If you have the shade structure, then no light will reach the plants, so the mirrors allow the soil temperature to remain consistent, while distributing shade to some plants, and light to some plants.

The two processes are interconnected in real world application (though they are separate they are both needed in order to fully have a well rounded experiment such as in the scientist example or to fully assess and help a patient such as in the physician example).

I did this and got one wrong because I said salami and bread are "countable foods." That was wrong, so it appears that context matters when observing, because I interpret bread and salami in countable slices, whereas the person making the quiz may not have imagined them that way. Bias really does play a role in our observations.

From what I gathered it (the design project) seems like the foundation step to what will become what was discussed above in the article and will help us garner the skills to make the educated and meaningful questions that are the cornerstone of scientific discovery. It forces you to look at the problem verses just making an observation.

This reminds me of an article I read earlier today, talking about how the Big Bang Theory may need to be revised with the discovery of galaxies larger than they should be if the timeline of the Milky Way's development is what we base the ages of galaxies off of. I think something we often forget in science is that most concepts are just theories, and that theories can still be changing, since we learn new things every day.

Without questioning what we don't and what we "do" know there would never be any new discoveries about the world around us. If it weren't for people questioning the way the world worked years ago we wouldn't have made the discoveries required to have advanced in society the way we have. Regardless if their findings were later disproven, the fact that they had a desire to know a meaningful reason as to why things exist is what mattered. Or at least that's what I took from this segment and from prior classes. The whole point of science isn't to be right or better put, to have your hypothesis to be correct, but rather to test what we know and expand our knowledge of what we don't.

accurate, indicating the closeness of a set of data to a standard data; precision, indicating the closeness of two sets of datas' closeness.

This is to say that the experiment's controlled environment limited the variables that the experimenter intended, which is very crucial.

Since the plants under the shade are around the same height as the plants in the sunny area, we can conclude that the amount of sunlight the plant receives does not affect the plant height. This result would lead us to accept our null hypothesis that the amount of sunlight the plant receives does not have a significant correlation to plant height.

This is an interesting point here because I was not familiar with the design challenge before reading this. After reading the purposes of each, I understand the benefits of both and importance of each. Based on my understanding it seems that the scientific model is essential to make testable predictions and come up with explanations for certain phenomena, while the design challenge is more focused around using the concepts learned through the scientific model to come up with new solutions.

I completely agree with the other ideas mentioned that there are multiple factors that could affect the plant height, other than the just the amount of sunlight. I had a similar idea that the soil could be a factor because it is possible that in the initial experiment (without the shade structure) the soil could have been less nutrient rich in the shaded area than the sunlight rich area and that could have been the affecting factor, rather than the sunlight. To ensure that the soil type and, as a result, nutrient level, is a control variable we would create a shade structure to adjust sunlight level while keeping the soil the same. Then in this setting, if we determine that the shaded plants are shorter than the unshaded, we can be slightly more confident that it is the amount of sunlight that is affecting the plant height, not the soil nutrient level.

The null hypothesis would suggest that there is no correlation between the amount of sunlight the plant receives and the height of the plant. The alternate hypothesis would, on the other hand, suggest that there is a correlation between the amount of sunlight the plant receives and the height of the plant. In order to determine if there is a significant correlation between amount of sunlight and plant height and to either accept or reject our null, we would have to use statistical analysis techniques such as a t-test. - Null Hypothesis: An increase in the amount of sunlight the plant receives, does not correlate to a significant increase in plant height. - Alternate Hypothesis: An increase in the amount of sunlight the plant receives, does correlate to a significant increase in plant height.

I find the process akin to the Socratic method of questioning on a procedure level. Both focuses on testing a statement's objectiveness, and correctness. Both based on a singular question, derives a implication from it, verify the implication, gives solution to the answer. However, we should not see them as distinctive methods to solve a single question, we should use them subsequently. Socratic method is useful in determining a question's independency, fundamentality, and eventually testability. The socratic method requires the question provider's effort in deciding whether the question is basic, or compound in terms of singular or multiple independent variables are involved in the first place. This is verified by further dividing the prior question to more precise and accurate descriptions of a process or a system with clearer statements of independent, and dependent variables. Once the verification step is over, the Socratic Method also implies that the user should rely on the quotations from established sources to first establish the assumed foundations. After that when we incorporate the scientific method to verify the correctness of the original assumed answer to the question. Eventually we need to incorporate Socratic Method again for further development of the question.

intensity = radiant/radiation (energy) density? radiation energy vs radiation energy density? intensity is proportianoal to num of photons

speed?

answer

To increase water solubility, we would want polar functional groups, since polar molecules are soluble in polar water. Some polar functional groups are alcohols, carboxylic acids, and aldehydes.

When we talk about hydrogen bonds, that is an intermolecular interaction between a very electronegative atom (O,N,F) and hydrogen. The partial positive charge would be on the hydrogen and the partial negative charge would be on the very electronegative atom. Electronegativity refers to an atom's ability to attract electrons, so a more electronegative atom (partial negative charge) is more likely to accept electrons than give them up, making it the hydrogen bond acceptor, while the less electronegative atoms (hydrogen) with the partial positive charge is more likely to give up electrons, making it the hydrogen bond donor.

I learned about electronegativity and types of bonds in previous chemistry courses, but it is so interesting to see that these concepts can be applied to biology. I am so curious to see how we can apply the concepts of electronegativity and the strength of bonds to biology. It seems that based on varying degrees of electronegativity there are different bonds and interactions are present. The greater difference in electronegative would be ionic bonding and the smallest difference in electronegative would be nonpolar covalent bonding.

From Carbon 1, we would see the greatest "pull' of electrons from the oxygen (more electronegative) and smallest "pull" of electrons from the hydrogens (less electronegative). In other words, there is a partial negative charge on the oxygen and partial positive charge on the hydrogens, causing an overall dipole moment toward the oxygen. From Carbon 2, we would see the greatest "pull' of electrons from the nitrogen (more electronegative) and smallest "pull" of electrons from the hydrogen (less electronegative). In other words, there is a partial negative charge on the nitrogen and partial positive charge on the hydrogens, causing an overall dipole moment toward the nitrogen.

I think this sentence ties into how vocabulary plays a major role in BIS002A because I never knew this was what this was called, and thinking of the word sphere helps me envision this as a 3D image, which I didn't do previously due to the fact that most images are shown as 2D.

I would expect to see about 109.5 degree bond angles, but since there is a more polar bond between carbon and oxygen, the oxygen may be closer, and since oxygen has a higher electronegativity, I would expect more of the electron density to be around the oxygen.

I would propose that ionic bonds are very strong and require much energy input to break, but that in water, these bonds dissociate easier due to the polarity of water. The polarity of water and its ability to dissolve ionic compounds plays into how bodies function with dissolved minerals and salts.

Does anyone know if this also includes alpha particles?

In this section, the focus is on small group communication which involves interactions between three or more people. These individuals are connected through a common purpose, mutual influence, and a shared identity. While many communication skills from two-person interactions (dyadic communication) can be applied to small groups, the complexity of group interaction requires some adaptations and additional skills. The discussion includes characteristics, functions, and types of small groups.

How is that possible? So are these rankings? Ratios? These numbers were constructed somehow, I think that statement is a little too ambiguous

I wonder if all gases can solidify! I looked it up and I suspect the answer is yes

I guess that goes to show how exaggerated and unrealistic our models have to be. If we’d drawn the ratio between orbitals and the nucleus more accurately, we’d completely lose sight of the nucleus

I always appreciate when professors make us interact with the material more than just memorizing vocabulary words. I’ve definitely noticed with classes that require problem-solving strategies rather than pure memorization on homework and exams, I always finish the term feeling like I actually learned/remembered things. When tests require straight memorization I often forget most of the material shortly after the exam is over.

I once had a professor tell me that a good way to see if you understand the material is if you can explain it to a 5-year-old. I definitely have found that this is true, for anyone can memorize and spit back out an explanation from a textbook; however, explaining it in simpler terms takes mastery of a topic to break it down into an easy-to-understand concept. I always do this in my head when I’m studying to make sure I am comprehending the material properly.

This is one of the many reasons genomics is so fascinating to me—something as seemingly simple as a grain of rice has (correct me if I’m wrong) more genes in its genome than a human being! I wonder how many, if any, are protein-encoding.

Whenever my mom is driving the two of us somewhere, we have a tendency to be sort of directionally challenged and miss turns and whatnot. Driving 8 hours to move into my dorm room was a bit of a nightmare. Personally, I think it's partially her fault too for not listening to me very well, but I've since learned that to avoid both getting lost and any lectures from my mother, I need to be very clear and precise about the directions I give. Instead of a "turn right at the light," I'll have to say "turn right on X street in Y miles." It saves us both the headache.

I am intrigued by this comment, since it demonstrates how biology and science in general can be applied anywhere, even in places outside of earth. For example, we are able to determine what minerals and elements a planet contains and also if they display similar traits to Earth. As mention on this sentence, this will help us find life on other planets and help us understand if other planets are habitable.

This reminds me of a comic I once saw, where two people are looking at a number on the ground from different angles. One person, at one end of the number, says it's a "6" while the other, from the opposite side, claims it's a "9". I think the point of drawing was to show how perspective influences how you view something, which is certainly true and especially so in situations where there is no definitive answer you can look to.

But it also makes you think: someone else, some other third party, painted that number on the ground. Whoever put it there had an intention behind it and surely had their own idea on what it was (a 9 or a 6). Not to mention, it's always important to take into account the greater context- is there other text beside the number to which you can align yourself with and figure out how it should be read? When put next to, say for example, a 4, the "9 or 6" loses its ambiguity and it can only be one of the two.

As a student who has not taken a biology class on these systems since approximately 5 years ago, (and not a great class at that), this is a little daunting to me. I hope that I can find or be provided with some good resources of models and images that I can refer to. I think that the combination of both new concepts and new visual ideas will be difficult but I hope that the in-class sketches with the sketch pads will be beneficial. In my experience, getting hands-on with the information helps you in long run in terms of recall.

While this can seem a little daunting at first, I know that it definitely helps. Repeated exposure to the information as well as metacognitive reflection on what strategies work/which don't, help as well. One strategy I like to use is diversifying what daily approach I use. For example, one day I make a Quizlet and do the reading for the next day. The next day, I study my Quizlet, and take notes from the podcast. On another day, I'll complete my homework assignment. By studying in this way I avoid burning out on just one area/avoid redundant work.

Last quarter, in BIS2C, I found that drawing actually helped me quite a bit when it came to understanding concepts. Sure, I could've very well just memorized which characteristics belonged to which taxa, but that tactic wouldn't have helped me grasp the concept in a larger, evolutionary sense. Instead, by physically drawing out the phylogenies and marking the branches where certain traits evolved, I was able to better understand and visualize how everything linked together.

This seems to be an integral part of biological sciences and I can really see the intersections between the biochemical reactions we'll learn about in this class and other classes I've taken like BIS2B and ANS1. I think the gut microbiome is very interesting, especially in ruminants, so I'm interested in learning more about how the digestive system works on the cellular level.

A mental model for me consists of questions, assumptions, images, examples, information (both already known and new), and inferences/conclusions. It's my own version of the scientific method so that I can confidently talk about and explain a topic because I understand it. I think it's important to learning because it expands the question-and-answer style of teaching/learning. It helps us go more in depth in a topic so that we can view it in different forms and perspectives while still forming a connection to other topic/ideas so in return, more learning and exploration is involved.

The change in this class to go from simply memorization to understanding the process may be difficult. Memorizing information isn't difficult but understanding the process will take more time and comprehension.

Reviewing lecture material immediately after class make the information more solidified on the brain. Later when studying for exams not as much studying is needed for lectures because the information would be memorized better. This is why it's beneficial to go over lectures after class.

I find it interesting to see the similarities and differences between each class in the BIS series. BIS2C touched a little bit at the microbial level but focused primarily on plants and animals on phylogenetic trees. While BIS2A focuses only on the microbial level.

I find the layout of this class to be interesting. Since the class uses socratic teaching, being prepared for lectures is vital to do well. The podcast and post-study guides will be useful to demonstrate a clear understanding of the material in class.

This is something I need to work on and possibly others need to as well. It shows that listening to your classmates can assist you to learn more about the topic and improve your answer in the process.

I believe it holds a lot of truth as to learn a new skill, questions must be asked to discover more about the subject at hand or understand the wrongs and rights. As well, asking questions helps create/transfer more knowledge that even knowledgeable professors and students in biology may not have known.

being more vocal in class is something that i've really been trying to work on, especially in some of my faster paced classes, since it's intimidating to speak up and slow things down or get it wrong. i'm excited to try and grow my confidence in this class :)

Wait but what’s a Design Challenge? What are we designing and how is it challenging?

This idea, I heard it from someone in the past: When students are struggling to pay attention in class, you generally assume that the problem is the way the lecture was presented. Actually, what if the class is right before lunch, so everyone is hungry? What if the air conditioning is really low, making them sleepy? The problem is not always as obvious as you might think

Note to the authors, I like how the more advanced vocabulary is further elaborated upon. I didn’t need it now but I know that, eventually, it’ll be incredibly helpful

I think some statements are subjective. When I say “I got a good grade” it could mean anywhere from ‘I got a full score’ to ‘I barely passed the class.’ If the class is exceptionally difficult, maybe you’d use the latter

I am very curious where this is true in a more abstract field like math or computer science. The best I can come up with is “my program is looking for the max value” but that doesn’t feel anthropomorphic enough, that’s literally what is being done

To me, a mental model is like a mind map. It’s a way to organize/structure my thoughts into key ideas and eventually elaborate with pictures, questions, and so on. Without a mental model, I am not building connections with what I knew before. Thus it’s harder to realize the significance of what I hear in class or how it would fit the bigger picture

Preview: 1. Go over pre-lecture materials 2. create NOTES 3. List Questions During Class: 1. Active listening 2. Take short notes or key points 3. Ask Questions After Class: 1. Add details and highlights to NOTES 2. Do Post Lecture materials 3. Reflect by self-testing

To be falsified is to prove that the statement/claim is false. In this case, the null hypothesis would indicate that the new drug does not have any influence over blood pressure. So, if the experiment had falsified the null hypothesis, then her experiment showed that there was an influence on blood pressure by the new drug. Falsification is critical to the scientific method because it acts as a step towards a "more accurate" explanation by eliminating what is not accurate.

Typo: place

Maybe it takes a certain amount of sunlight to see the effects?

We assumed our tools were accurate at measuring height and perfectly shading the plants. Also that the weather from last summer was the same. Also that the watering between all the plants was consistent. Your results must have been reliable!

I assume the state of the ground and soil could have influenced the height of the plant. Thus, shading will eliminate light from some of plants that share the same soil. The shade should cause the plants to grow shorter

Null hypothesis: the height of our tomato plant is not affected by sunlight. Alternative hypothesis: the height of our tomato plant is affected by sunlight

It does somewhat bother me, how could you say that two patients are one and the same? Even if we try to make their environment as identical as possible, they are still different. Unless we replicate ourselves genetically, this is an impossible statement to make. With that said, I can kinda foresee how statistics can accommodate this problem

The independent variables are factors that we assume can affect blood pressure. We want to keep them consistent so that when we introduce the drug, we can verify if the drug does influences blood pressure. I like to think if y is the change in blood pressure, x is the influence of the drug, and z is the influence of independent variables, then y = x + z where we keep z constant and plug in different scenarios for x to see if y changes. If y remains constant, then it must be true that y = z and we can eliminate x from the equation. note These are not an actual math equation, I made them up to give a better sense to what independent and dependent variables are. Also, = is misleading but I meant to say ‘is changed based on x and z’

I think the null hypothesis states that there is no correlation between two events or attributes. Falsifying this statement (proving that this statement is false) means that the two events are related. Proving whether or not events are related helps us eliminate bias

triste

triste

esta

estas

esta

estan

estoy

esta

estan

esta

esta

estamos

estais

esta

estan

esta

agreed

yes it is very important to have designated people for certain tasks

im excited to learn how!

i think this is why high school was so torturous at times.

i agree

to review later

This is when critical literacy comes to play. It helps you understand what you're reading better

There is no "one size fits all" rule. Some words have exceptions to the rules of literacy.

wrongs

phonics instruction and self-reflexivity

I'm Here! I can't wait to get to know everyone. This class is going to be fun.

[(2(56.5)+(-53.1)]-[104.6] should be divided

and it should be

(0-[-795.8])-(0-[-748.1)]) / [(2(56.5)+(-53.1)]-[104.6]

A system of psychological theory and therapy that aims to treat mental conditions by investigating.

i need help cant figure out how the answers are correct

a metric unit of length equal to 10 meter.

is the minimum energy required to remove the most loosely bound electron of an isolated gaseous atom, positive ion, or molecule.

that is exciting!

communication studies also include things like listening and perception which reminds me of how in speech class we learned about how in order to have a conversation there needs to be some sort of listening and response

notable people who studied philosophy and communication

Ionic bonds is the electrostatic force of attraction between oppositely charged ions formed by loss or gain of electrons to achieve noble gas electronic configuration. The electrons are transferred from one to another.

I believe face-to-face communication is still highly valued in personal and professional relationships. Personally I believe it's easier to hold a FtF conversation, there's less awkward silence and the conversations flow better.

Some ways that CMC reduces stress in my life include being able to communicate with people from a distance and having access to helpful resources and information online. However, CMC can also increase stress in my life through addictions like social media, misinterpretation of messages, and the pressure to always be accessible. Overall, I believe CMC adds more stress than it reduces in my life.

In a typical day, I use the following types of CMC:

1. Email
2. Text messages
3. Instant messages
4. Video chat
5. Voice chat
6. Social media

I use email to communicate with colleagues and clients, and I use text messages to communicate with friends and family. I use instant messages to communicate with colleagues and clients, and I use video chat to communicate with friends and family. I use voice chat to communicate with colleagues and clients, and I use social media to communicate with friends and family.

"the reactivity series is a series of metals, in order of reactivity from highest to lowest. It is used to determine the products of single displacement reactions, whereby metal A will replace another metal B in a solution if A is higher in the series. Activity series of some of the more common metals, listed in descending order of reactivity."

What is the kcc Community?

The main focus for this branch of psych.

Collaborate all points used to develop the definition into the conclusion

use instances that fit with your definition in the body paragraphs

Establishing a function context from the beginning will help the readers understand and minimize confusion

Pick a topic that can be discussed at length, and make sure that you have enough to talk about

Include different aspects of the terms' definitions in other paragraphs in the essay

define your term in the thesis

First step: introduce the term (broadly)

Important as there narrow in on what is to be talked about and keeps the idea to be narrowed in on to what limits the subjects is applied.

Throughout the rest of the essay explain your reasoning and rational ideas for your definition. Try to avoid using the dictionaries definition as it is limiting

Try to focus and take into the context in which you are using your term and then develop the concept.

Important to note and use in which it is valued

context is important to included into your essay to add clarity

No two "normal" brains are the same.

Pros and Cons? Is it worth it?

This makes me think of lobotomies.

It is interesting to think about the many different variables involved in something as simple as seeing words on a screen and the different tasks the brain is involved in for processing those words. It is not as simple as recognizing the word and it's meaning!

torceduras

PCC --> 1 alc to ald 2ald to ket

This study sounds scary in a way considering, this could potentially control your emotions such as anger, fear, and sadness.

se refiere al paquete foreign

I wonder how long has human developed the ideal of monogamy relationships?

Sometimes desirable traits could be detrimental to the individual's survival, making it counter-productive: Like deer growing too large antlers because they're desirable for the species, resulting in death due to antlers being stuck on terrains. I wonder if there has been any species that had been endangered or driven to extinction due to this interaction?

Is it the same for everyone on the spectrum? How drastic are the structural/physical differences on neurotypical and atypical people?

this zero does not belong there

Does anyone know if a memorandum for the exercise exists?

very imp

The lack of closure when someone cannot attend the funeral.

en la investigación experimental, variamos los predictores para ver si tienen efecto en los resultados (outcomes)

esta distinción tiene que ver con el grado de intervención del investigador en el estudio

La confiabilidad es necesaria, pero no suficiente

Confiabilidad está relacionado con la repetibilidad o consistencia de una medición

Las escalas de Likert no necesariamente son de intervalo, no hay un cero natural (entonces serían de intervalo), pero la distancia entre 1 y 2, no necesariamente es la misma que entre 2 y 3, etc... Se podría decir, más bien, que las escalas de likert son de cuasi-intervalo

• las escalas nominales y ordinales son siempre DISCRETAS
• las escalas de intervalo o de relación pueden ser DISCRETAS o CONTINUAS