Exit Check 7.5 - Assessing Bias

7.5.1

What claim is being made about electronic devices like Radios and WiFi?

Today we live in an omnipresent world of charged particles emitted by electronic devices; electromagnetic fields, WLAN and radio waves.  These particles penetrate our bodies and heat the water in our body tissues.

• The electromagnetic radiation these devices use can damage us by transferring heat

• Electromagnetic fields are used to boil water in a radio

• Electronic devices like Radios and WiFi can affect the way we think

• Electronic devices like Radios and WiFi can cause us to become addicted.

Answer explanation

This question links to success criteria 7.5.1: I can identify the claim and evidence presented in a resource.

If you got it correct place a check mark in the question results section. If you got it incorrect place an X in that section. If this was a redemption question, cross out the one X and replace it with a check mark.

Tags

NGSS.HS-PS4-4

7.5.1

What evidence is provided To support the claim that the Coolibar Tee protects from UV light?

This $32 Coolibar girl’s Rash Guard is embedded with titanium dioxide and promises a UPF of more than 50.  Meaning less than 1/50th of UV radiation can penetrate the fabric.  When consumer reports put it to the test the Rash Guard did deliver.  It measured a UPF of 174, more than three times the protection it promised.

• The shirt is embedded with titanium dioxide

• UPF 50 means it only allows 1/50th of the UV radiation through the shirt

• The shirt promised 50 UPF and actually provided 174 UPF when tested

• The shirt costs $32

Answer explanation

This question links to success criteria 7.5.1: I can identify the claim and evidence presented in a resource.

If you got it correct place a check mark in the question results section. If you got it incorrect place an X in that section. If this was a redemption question, cross out the one X and replace it with a check mark.

7.5.1

What Claim is being made? To help the reader understand how the StemRAD 360 tries to protect first responders from Gamma Radiation?

Since most deaths are caused by bone marrow failure the StemRad 360 Gamma has been specifically designed to protect the body's bone marrow stem cells found mostly in the pelvic region.   By layering proven protection materials precisely over critical stem cell concentrations the StemRad 360 Gamma dramatically increases user survivability in highly radioactive environments.

• Most deaths from gamma radiation exposure are caused by bone marrow failure.

• The body's bone marrow stem cells are mostly found in the pelvis

• The StemRAD 360 uses layered protection.

• The StemRad360 dramatically increases survivability in radioactive environments

Answer explanation

This question links to success criteria 7.5.1: I can identify the claim and evidence presented in a resource.

If you got it correct place a check mark in the question results section. If you got it incorrect place an X in that section. If this was a redemption question, cross out the one X and replace it with a check mark.

7.5.2

Which of the following sources would be the most authoritative and therefore the most likely to be trustworthy?

• A scientific study that shares its data and procedure for you to review

• A student's report which mentions specific data

• A news report which mentions scientific studies

• A user review on Yelp

Answer explanation

This question links to success criteria 7.5.2: I can assess the source and evidence provided for authoritativeness and accuracy.

If you got it correct place a check mark in the question results section. If you got it incorrect place an X in that section. If this was a redemption question, cross out the one X and replace it with a check mark.

Tags

NGSS.HS-LS4-1

7.5.2

Which of the following sources is providing the best quality information?

• Mr. Dirksen says, "Gamma light has the highest frequency, so it carries the most energy and is the most dangerous"

• The Veritasium YouTube channel says "Microwaves are not ionizing radiation, so they are always safe"

• My friend who took this class last year says "My TV remote uses infrared light, which is actually very dangerous."

• Cousin Gary says, "Red is the color of danger, so red light must carry the most energy"

Answer explanation

This question links to success criteria 7.5.2: I can assess the source and evidence provided for authoritativeness and accuracy.

If you got it correct place a check mark in the question results section. If you got it incorrect place an X in that section. If this was a redemption question, cross out the one X and replace it with a check mark.

Tags

NGSS.HS-PS4-4

NGSS.HS-PS4-3

7.5.2

Which of the following sources is least likely to provide accurate and authoritative information on the topic of electromagnetic radiation?

• A university's science department website.

• A science text book.

• A YouTuber that makes educational videos about science.

• The nice person you met in line at Starbucks.

Answer explanation

This question links to success criteria 7.5.2: I can assess the source and evidence provided for authoritativeness and accuracy.

If you got it correct place a check mark in the question results section. If you got it incorrect place an X in that section. If this was a redemption question, cross out the one X and replace it with a check mark.

7.5.3

Which of the following might be a good reason to conclude that the person who wrote the following was not an authority on electromagnetic radiation?

5G cell phone technology uses higher frequencies than 4G. That means they will put us at higher risk for cancer. I, for one, am not on board!

• Because I don't agree with this person.

• The person compared 5G to 4G

• The person did not write enough.

• The person is making an emotional argument instead of focusing on fact and reasoning

Answer explanation

This question links to success criteria 7.5.3: I can draw conclusions about the validity and usefulness of a provided resource.

If you got it correct place a check mark in the question results section. If you got it incorrect place an X in that section. If this was a redemption question, cross out the one X and replace it with a check mark.

Tags

NGSS.HS-PS4-4

NGSS.HS-PS4-3

7.5.3

Which of the following might be a good reason to conclude that the person who wrote the following was not an authority on electromagnetic radiation?

I've been testing StemRad’s 360 Gamma and man it's a real game-changer.  It's easy to wear.  It’s comfortable to move around and in fact it allows complete freedom of movement.

• Because nothing allows for complete freedom of movement

• The pictures of the StemRAD360 do not look comfortable

• Because I do agree with this person.

• The claims are focused on things unrelated to electromagnetic radiation

Answer explanation

This question links to success criteria 7.5.3: I can draw conclusions about the validity and usefulness of a provided resource.

If you got it correct place a check mark in the question results section. If you got it incorrect place an X in that section. If this was a redemption question, cross out the one X and replace it with a check mark.

7.5.3
Which of the following might be a good reason to conclude that the person who wrote the following was not an authority on electromagnetic radiation? (scroll down if needed)

Not only humans and animals are shielded by harmful radiation but plants and food too.  Whether mobile radio waves or WLAN, any particles that come in contact with the torus field can no longer cause any harm to you or your family.  The Qi Home Cell provides you with all around protection allowing you to communicate with absolute peace of mind when you are using your cellphone or any other electronic devices.  

• I do agree with this person

• I do not agree with this person

• I'm not sure what a "torus field" is

• Photons associated with radio waves do not cause harm to the body even without this device.

Answer explanation

This question links to success criteria 7.5.3: I can draw conclusions about the validity and usefulness of a provided resource.

If you got it correct place a check mark in the question results section. If you got it incorrect place an X in that section. If this was a redemption question, cross out the one X and replace it with a check mark.

Tags

NGSS.HS-PS4-4

7.5.3

Which of the following might be a good reason to conclude that the person who wrote the review to the left can be trusted on the topic of electromagnetic radiation?

• They called the product a piece of art.

• They correctly state that you cannot block an electromagnetic frequency and still receive a signal on that same frequency

• They mention the name of a famous physicist. (Faraday)

• They claim to have a PhD in Physics

Answer explanation

This question links to success criteria 7.5.3: I can draw conclusions about the validity and usefulness of a provided resource.

If you got it correct place a check mark in the question results section. If you got it incorrect place an X in that section. If this was a redemption question, cross out the one X and replace it with a check mark.