Inside the learning · An educator-created example
What would make
you change your mind?
A small experiment can reveal a large difference between describing evidence and claiming to explain it. Work through the example at three levels of challenge.
01 · Predict before explaining
Two samples.
One tempting conclusion.
Imagine two samples of warm water, both starting at 40 °C in an ambient temperature of 20 °C. The table gives invented values for one illustrative run per sample. These are not observations from Jasper or results from a learner.
Before looking at the numbers, write what you would need to know to compare two insulating arrangements fairly. Do not test cold exposure on a person.
Synthetic teaching data · n = 1 per sample
| Time (min) | Sample A (°C) | Sample B (°C) |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | 40 | 40 |
| 5 | 36 | 38 |
| 10 | 33 | 36.5 |
| 15 | 30 | 35 |
| 20 | 28 | 33.5 |
Solid blue: A. Dashed copper: B. Axis begins at 0 °C. No measurement uncertainty is supplied, so none should be invented.
02 · Choose a defensible claim
What do these
numbers establish?
03 · Deepen the inquiry
One question.
Three levels of challenge.
Calculate and describe
A falls by 12 °C. B falls by 6.5 °C. After 20 minutes, B is 5.5 °C warmer. State the interval and units; do not call the difference statistically significant.
Your evidence: a labelled table, checked subtraction and one bounded conclusion.
Design a fair comparison
Keep water volume, cup geometry, starting temperature, ambient conditions and instrument procedure comparable. Plan independent repeated runs and vary one intended factor. Record all trials and departures from the plan.
Your evidence: a method another person could repeat and an explanation of at least one confounder.
Test a model and its limits
For a simple cooling model, compare the excess temperature T − 20 at each time. If exponential cooling were suitable, a graph of ln(T − 20) against time would be approximately straight. Do the two series warrant that model? What additional measurements would help?
Your evidence: a model comparison, a justified uncertainty discussion and a revised claim. The model is an approximation, not a universal law for clothing or bodies.
04 · The tutorial
A better objection.
A better explanation.
Initial claim: B stays warmer, so its insulation caused the improvement.
Tutor’s question: What else could differ, and what have we actually observed?
Revision: In these supplied values B cools less. A repeated comparison with controlled conditions would be needed to investigate the cause.
Authored teaching exchange. It is not a quotation from a real tutorial or a student testimonial.
Give the work a use
Turn the example into a clear one-page explanation for a consenting reader. Ask what they think the graph proves. Revise the explanation if it leads them to an unjustified conclusion.
Assessment looks for accurate calculation, transparent evidence, a serious objection, an independent revision and care for the reader. It does not reward confidence unsupported by evidence.
Explore the academic materials