Explicit science instruction
This investigation uses supplied or simulated evaporation data. Compare liquids under the same modeled temperature, exposed area, and observation interval.
Calculate change or normalized evaporation rate, graph the result, then compare the ranking with structural IMF predictions.
If the ranking conflicts with the prediction, preserve the mismatch and examine size, geometry, uncertainty, and measurement conditions.
Vocabulary: evaporation rate; normalized data; uncertainty; prediction; residual.
Worked example with reasoning
Synthetic data show Liquid A loses 2.0 g in 10 min while similar-volume Liquid B loses 0.8 g under the same modeled conditions. A greater loss rate is consistent with weaker cohesive attraction, but the molecular structures are needed before assigning a mechanism.
Guided question
How would unequal exposed surface area weaken the causal interpretation of an evaporation comparison?
Independent work
- Calculate evaporation rate for each supplied liquid.
- Graph rate versus a structural descriptor.
- Compare observed order with IMF predictions.
- Record one mismatch, uncertainty, and revision.
Investigation / Data Lab
Preserve raw evaporation data, calculated rates, graph, structural prediction, uncertainty, and one revision.
Misconception check
A data trend should test an IMF model, not be forced to agree with it.
Formative understanding check
Why preserve an unexpected evaporation result?
Reveal response
It may reveal a confounder, model limitation, or additional structural factor.
Mentor evidence conference
Ask Archaemenes to test whether your structure–property claim controls competing variables.
Teacher guidance
Foundation: Calculate rates with a scaffold.
Core: Integrate structure and controlled data.
Extended: Assess whether a mismatch is more likely model limitation, uncertainty, or confounding.