English Studies Reflection paper Essay Example for Free

English Studies Reflection paper Essay One should assume that in taking an Intro to English course that they would be formally and informally introduced to English. However, that assumption escaped me. I didn’t know that we would explore so many avenues for English as a major, but I’m pleased that we did. This journey through the various areas of English has both enlightened me and piqued my interest. While I entered into this course feeling very confident with the path that I wanted to travel, I am now a bit more open-minded about additional ways to reach my destination; which is English Education. As an English teacher I can see the roles that each area of study that we covered could potentially play in education for me as well as my future students. When I consider Publishing Studies and what it has to offer, I immediately think of projects I could assign my students. Publishing studies takes a book in its skeletal state and constructs all the layers until it becomes a live and fully functioning piece of art. Publishing studies in a sense is the production phase of the books we read. It is where the book goes to develop. It starts with the brains of the operation or the writer. Once the writer creates the manuscript it is then passed on to the heartbeat of the process. There are various organs within that cause the heart to function. Those organs include the designer of the cover, the designer of the layout and even the editors. The area of production studies is a well-oiled machine working to produce the fully developed body of the writers’ creation. However, without linguistics what words would the writer use to even create such a masterpiece?

Jefferson Essay Essay Example for Free

Jefferson Essay Essay Thomas Jefferson played a very important role in the history of the United States. Jefferson is most famously known for writing the Declaration of Independence. Thomas Jefferson talked many times about African-Americans in America. Where they equal to white people? How were whites and blacks different? What about slavery? Thomas Jefferson had an opinion on all of these subjects, but much of what Thomas Jefferson said was later contradicted with his own words. What did Thomas Jefferson mean when he said that all men were equal? Well, many people would agree with what it means today in modern times. Today the statement, all men are created equal means; all men and women whether black, white, tall, short, fat, or skinny were all created equal. That is not necessarily what it meant in the 1700s. Blacks were enslaved and worked hard while wealthy white men did nothing of the sort. Justice Thurgood Marshall said, â€Å"The blacks were so far inferior, that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect†¦ and that the Negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit. This excerpt shows that in that time blacks were not treated the same as whites and clearly did not have the same rights. Conor Cruise O’Brien’s book confirms this belief as he takes a quote from Thomas Jefferson himself: â€Å"It is accepted that the words ‘all men are created equal’ do not, in their literal meaning, apply to women, and were not intended by the Founding Fathers to apply to slaves. † This shows that when Thomas Jefferson talks abo ut all men being created equally he means to say white men. The meaning of the word expatriation is as follows; to leave one’s native country to live elsewhere (Merriam-Webster). Jefferson wanted to send the blacks that were descendent of the original slaves back to Africa. The deal here was Africa was no longer their native country. This act was known as expatriation. The southern courts believed that slavery violated the natural rights of blacks and although slavery was allowed and legal it was immoral and unjust. Thomas Jefferson made it known that he supported the abolishment of slave trading. He said the following to Congress; â€Å"withdraw the citizens of the United States from all further participation in those violations of human rights which have been so long continued on the unoffending inhabitants of Africa. † By this Jefferson means that the people of the United States should stop the enslavement of blacks so that they no longer violate the human rights and stop offending the people of Africa. In this way Jefferson’s reasons for promoting expatriation and understanding for the natural rights of blacks were consistent. He wanted to send the blacks back because he wanted to stop offending the people of Africa. Jefferson believed that blacks and whites were very different. He said that he believed that blacks were originally their own race and became distinct by time and certain circumstances. According to Jefferson blacks came from their own species but were from the same general genus that is the human race. He said that blacks were inferior to whites in mind and body. This can be said to mean that whites were possibly better looking people or that they were more fit. It could have been said to mean that whites were smarter than blacks because they had an education that the blacks did not have. Jefferson did not believe blacks were men. â€Å"Men,† was said to be referred to as only white men. Samuel Eliot Morison says in his book; â€Å"In his views (Jefferson) blacks were not men. † The possession of individual rights was mainly determined by one’s race or skin color. Blacks had no rights early on in the 1700s but began to become free in the early 1800s. A wealthy white male had all rights; he was allowed to do what he wanted so long as it was just. A black man was free and eventually gained simple rights due to the belief that the United States was violating human rights. I do not believe that expatriation could have been a helpful solution to the problem of slavery in America. I believe this because if the slaves would have gone to Africa they would be gone, but there is no saying that the lazy southern farmers would not have brought in slaves from other places. They would have gotten so used to not having to work that they would not be able to start working again. I think that they would possibly keep indentured servants as permanent slaves or enslave poor people. I’m sure that expatriation would not solve the problem of slavery, at least not immediately. As I stated in the beginning, Jefferson’s view changed greatly throughout the course of his lifetime. Later in his life he began to appreciate black people more because of all their hard work. Also, he realized that blacks were the same as whites in that they were to be given human rights and that the people of the United States had been violating their rights from the very beginning. Jefferson also saw that blacks were men, and that really God created all men equal, black and white. Thomas Jefferson certainly lived an intriguing life. He lived during a time where slavery was legal. He lived during a time when slavery began to die out. Jefferson was part of the reason why blacks are free today. Although his beliefs shifted throughout the duration of his life he ended on the good side, the side that was just. He began to believe that all men are created equal with a literal meaning.

Political Views on Slavery in the US

Political Views on Slavery in the US Mark Dawod Political Compromise DBQ Economics, politics, and society played the biggest roles when it came to making the compromise of slavery agonizingly difficult for the north and south. Economics played its role when it came to making compromise between the two opposing  forces difficult. For one, the Souths society depended on slavery to make their economy prosper,  it was basically the foundation to their entire economy. So much so that they resented a free society (Doc 6). Herald, who was quoted in the New York Tribune in 1856 stated, Free society! We sicken at the name, in which he would go on bashing the north along with their greasy mechanics and filthy operatives. The purpose of this article was to show the Souths hatred toward a society without slaves, which is reliable because without those men laboring in their fields, they would all be living in poverty. Although the Norths economy was prospering and catching up, it was nothing compared to the Souths economy, ranked number four worldwide. During the Second Great Awakening, antislavery movements became more and more common, which angered the South. The Declaration of the National Anti-Slavery Conventio n (Doc 2) wanted to abolish slavery, saying that all laws allowing slavery would therefore be null in void before God. Their purpose for writing this report being that slavery was morally wrong, and therefore it should be terminated once and for all, also since this was written by a small group of people for all to read, I think it was fairly accurate concerning their true beliefs on slavery. This was something the South surely would not have agreed with, however, the Resolution of the Pinckney Committee (Doc 3) was more likely approved by them as it was more like their mindset. Pinckneys Committees Resolution was to keep any further action against slavery from taking place, basically they did not want any more petitions, memorials, propositions, etc. relating to slavery. This documents audience, being the house of representatives, and Pinckneys background with South Carolina, makes this document biased because he was likely a slave owner himself. Differing political views also made compromise difficult. For example, the imbalance of states would lead to angry southerners, or northerners, and cause much more devastating occurrences, for instance, Bleeding Kansas. Popular Sovereignty was strongly supported by the South, and when it was declared that Kansas would not be a slave state, Southerners resented and went ahead making their own legislature in the state, which eventually led to the death of many persons who inhabited Kansas. This wasnt the only time the South resented the federal government. Senator Henry Clay of South Carolina, in his speech to the Senate (Doc 1), argues that South Carolina has the right to defeat certain laws it deems unconstitutional. Since South Carolina believed so heavily in states rights, and that their audience was the Senate, it was likely very biased to support their motives in keeping their slaves and not being absurdly taxed. In Daniel Websters speech to the Senate (Doc 4), he attempts to spe ak as an American, he sides with the south when it came to the North not fully fulfilling their constitutional duties because they refused to follow the Fugitive Slave Act. He also went on to describe how it would be morally impossible to separate the north and south. Since Daniel Webster took the side of both forces, and had the point of view of an American citizen, this source can be considered reliable in viewing the situation from both halves of the country. In Abraham Lincolns speech at Alton, Illinois (Doc 7) he attempts to defend politicians describing how northern politicians and officiers shouldnt be blamed for this difficulty regarding the issue of slavery, but this same power that operates in the minds of these men, is also all around them, in books, religions, and morals. One of these books being Uncle Toms Cabin. Society and the differing beliefs among the common people also played a big role in making compromise difficult, Uncle Toms Cabin, a true story about a slaves experience in the South sparked a major outbreak in antislavery believers, their motives to end slavery suddenly became stronger. The Dred Scott decision also had differing views, for example, the Northern abolitionists saw this as a conspiracy, being that the South had set this up to forever keep slavery in their society as these African American men had no constitutional rights as they were not even citizens, not only that, but they were considered white mans property. The South, however, applauded this Supreme Court decision, as once and for all-or so they thought-they would be able to keep their slaves. Depicted in the illustration in Document 5, Sumner is being attacked by Brooks for verbally attacking Democrats, who the south despised. The purpose of this illustration was likely to depict how the South would result to suc h childish actions to get what they desired. Brooks wasnt just applauded by the South, he was praised, which would make this illustration a reliable forefront to the Souths internal motives. This difficulty in compromising between two differing forces can also relate back to Britains control over the colonists. They wanted, by any means, to tax the colonists as they thought they had the right to do whatever they wanted since the colonies basically belonged to them. This connects back to the issue of slavery and coming to a compromise because each side tried to make it so that they had control and keep what they desired, they would even come to such desperate actions such as starting battles and hitting one another with canes, just as the colonists kept moving west of the proclamation line and the british soldiers being given the right live in any colonists house. Both situations would also eventually lead to a war, required to make peace.

Morality and Computer Games, Where do you draw the line? :: essays research papers

  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Many people are fine with computer games for various reasons. Computer games promote education by helping draw people to computers and using educational games.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Computer games help gain attention from people who do not normally use computers. Games are a great way to teach people not only how to use computers, but also that computers are not hard and can actually be fun and handy to use. There are all different types of games that can be used to do this, so everyone can be attracted through some type of game.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Games not only can be used to teach people about computers, but also anything else that can be thought of! Games are used throughout many schools to supplement teaching subjects from typing to science and even english. Educational games are extremely effective and efficient because through appealing to the student they can learn more because they are interested in what they are doing. For example, I can tell you about all sorts of diseases threatening settlers during the origin of America simply from playing Oregon multiple times in elementary school.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The conflicting view with the effectiveness of computer games is that some people view them to be too effective in some areas. The problem is that some people have trouble separating fantasy from reality. When this problem persists, computer games are seen to promote violence and hostility Violent media was blamed for the Columbine High School shootings. Some argue that this type of media is getting too real and desensitizing the human perception of death of violence.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Obviously from the above material we can conclude that violent computer and video games are only suitable for those who can actually separate the fantasy from reality. The problem is finding a way to police this distribution of material. Music has tried the stickers for â€Å"explicit content†, however it is up to the parents to decide what their children can handle and what they should not listen to. Sometimes parents don’t even know their children’s boundaries when it comes to this type of media. If parents can’t even figure it out, how are we? Another complication is that it is not just children we have to police.

An Argument Against a Presupposition Essay -- Political Science

In The American Democracy and Its National Principle, Herbert Croly makes an eloquent and poignant case for adopting a nationalistic frame of mind. According to Croly, we are rapidly approaching a junction where we must choose between the traditional values, measures and mind set of our past or embrace the opportunities of the future. As a people we should realize that the future holds great promise, and that is why we should focus on empowering a centralized system of governance that replaces the antiquated approach to governance: regional centricity whose players are driven by their self-interest rather than the common good. This may sound like nationalism but this is an inadequate assessment. To Croly, nationalism is a much grander thing. Nationalism requires substantially more than â€Å"merely† centralizing the government; there must be a shift in how people see themselves, from a collection of states into a single American people. Nationalism is a philosophical ide al that far outstretches any tangible thing. Nationalism requires a unified frame of mind focused on a single point of governance. Croly’s opinion, while not revolutionary, was still regarded with suspension by many people in 1909 (the year Croly’s essay was published). People who were wary of a nationalistic government and a unified frame of mind had a good argument against Croly’s essay. Much of this essay focuses on this argument against Croly’s presuppositions regarding the â€Å"progressive† outcome of nationalization. First off, Croly bases everything in his argument on the claim that the â€Å"national interest† is predicated on democratic principles (as cited in Eisenach, p19). This is why people should have nothing to fear from a nationalistic government: i... ...al level (Eisenach, viii). I do not buy the argument that consolidating more power into the national government invariably leads to progress. At the same time, Croly‘s argument against nostalgic dogma is well founded and enlightened. Indeed, there are several interesting points Croly makes about the ramifications of inaction and indifference regarding amending the constitution. However, it was evident to me after reading the essay that his call for progressivism had, at best, several logical flaws and, at worst, paralleled fascism to an alarming degree. Works Cited Croly, H. (1909). The American Democracy and Its National Principle. (as cited in Eisenach, p#) References to the introduction section are in roman numeralsEisenach. (2006). The Social and Political Thought of American Progressivism. Hackett Publishing Company, Inc. (Eisenach)

Storming of the Bastille :: essays research papers

The characteristics of a group are determined by its elements. The mob that stormed the Bastille on July 14th, 1789 was a group of citizens that were fierce, enraged, and blood-thirsty. To the people of Paris, the Bastille was a symbol of brutality and totalitarian power. It was hated because of the many stories that had emerged from its walls of horrible torture and brutality. To the people of Paris who stormed the Bastille, the prison which was the symbol of the absolute monarchy which France had been suffering under for so long. They were tired of being treated unfairly and not having a voice in most of the political affairs during the time period. They wanted "life, liberty, fraternity" and were determined to fulfill their wishes of a fair ruling system by means of force or agreement. Unfortunately, citizens had to resort to the use of force to gain what the felt lacked. Later on that day, a delegation was invited into the prison by the Governor of the Bastille, Bernard de Launay. DeLaunay then invited the delegation to lunch with him. When they did not return the mob became angry, fearing that they had been detained. A second delegation was sent forth. These soon came out again with the message that the Governor had adamantly refused to surrender. The delegates also had the information that the cannon were unloaded. This piece of news was all that the mob needed to urge them on. "...But the fury of the crowd continued to increase and their blind wrath did not spare de Launay's escort...Exhausted by his efforts to defend his prisoner...he had to seperate from M. de Launay...Hardly had he sat down when, looking after the procession, he saw the head of M. de Launay stuck on the point of a pike...The people, fearing that their victim might be snatched away from them, hastened to cut his throat on the steps of the Hotel de Ville..." The mob rushed into the prison’s courtyard. Some individuals were not as ruthless as others. "...Those who came in first treated the conquered enemy humanely and embraced the staff officers to show there was no ill-feeling..." However, several of the protestors were hurt as they attacked soldiers from the army. "....The people, transformed with rage, threw themselves on the sodiers..." Fierce fighting followed and carried on into the evening. Finally the mob got their hands on some cannons.

Thermochemistry Laboratory Report Essay

Abstract The purposes of these three experiments are to determine the heat capacity of a calorimeter and with that data, confirm Hess’s Law and observe enthalpy changes within reactions. By measuring the change in temperature that occurs with the interaction of two different reactants, we were able to determine both the calorimeter constant and the change in enthalpy of a given reaction. The results were rather mixed, as some numbers more closely resembled the theoretical values than others did. Introduction The first experiment is devoted to finding the calorimeter constant for a polystyrene cup. Whenever a reaction takes place inside a calorimeter, some heat is lost to the calorimeter and its surroundings. In order to achieve maximum accuracy, we must know exactly how much heat will be lost, so that the results of the next two experiments will be as correct as possible. The equation used to determine it is a simple manipulation of the overall heat of the reaction equation, which is: Overall Heat = – [(Sp.Ht. hotwater * Mass of water * Change in temperature) + (Sp.Ht. coolwater * Mass of water * Change in temperature) + (Cp calorimeter * Change in temperature)] Since an error is bound to happen during the experimental process, three calculations were done to find an average. This experiment is vital to the success of the following two thermochemistry experiments. The second experiment, entitled Hess’s Law, is a simple confirmation of said law. To do so, we take three reactions, where one of them is the same as the other two, and measure the heats of reaction for each of them. Hess’s Law states that the heat of reaction of the one reaction should equal to the sum of the heats of reaction for the other two. The three reactions used in this experiment are: (1) NaOH(s) ïÆ'   Na+(aq) + OH-(aq) (2) NaOH(s) + H+(aq) + Cl-(aq) ïÆ'   H2O(l) + Na+(aq) + Cl-(aq) (3) Na+(aq) + OH-(aq) + H+(aq) + Cl-(aq) ïÆ'   H2O(l) + Na+(aq) + Cl-(aq) In order to find the heat released by each reaction, we used a variant of the overall heat of a reaction equation, which was q = – [Sp.Ht. * m * Change in temp.]. In  addition to finding the change in enthalpy, change in entropy was also calculated using theoretical values in given reference tables. Finally, the overall free energy released was calculated using the equation: Change in free energy = Change in enthalpy – (Temperature * Change in entropy). All of this is then used to verify Hess’s Law by calculating the percent error involved in the experiment. The third experiment, called Thermochemistry: Acid + Base, combines the concepts of the previous two experiments. The main concept is to observe the change in enthalpy that results from the various reactions between strong and weak acids and bases. There were four reactions used in this experiment, and they are: (1) HCl(aq) + NaOH(aq) ïÆ'   NaCl(aq) + H2O(l) (2) HCl(aq) +NH3(aq) ïÆ'   NH4Cl(aq) (3) HC2H3O2(aq) + NaOH(aq) ïÆ'   NaC2H3O2(aq) + H2O(l) (4) HC2H3O2(aq) + NH3(aq) ïÆ'   NH4C2H3O2(aq) By monitoring the change in temperature that results from the reaction of an acid and a base, it is possible to calculate the overall energy for each reaction, also known as ∆H rxn/mole of limiting reactant. This experimental value can be compared with the theoretical to determine how accurate the experiment was. The lower the percent error, the more accurate we were at calculating the energy involved in each reaction. Experimental In order to do any calculation for energy, we first had to find the calorimeter constant. In order to do that, we first took and weighed a polystyrene cup (our calorimeter) and added approximately 100 g of warm water to it. The actual measurements are recorded in Table 1-1. The mass of the cup with the water in it were recorded to find the exact mass of the water added. Next, a cylinder was weighed, like the cup, and about 48 mL of cool water was added. The total was weighed and recorded in the same table. Afterwards, temperature sensors connected through a LabPro device were suspended in the two containers and the calculator’s DataMate program was used to record temperature over a 90 second time interval. After a few seconds of data collection from the separate liquids, they were mixed  together and stirred with the sensors until there was no time left. By using Graphical Analysis, a graph of the data was printed, displaying temperature vs. time. Tangent lines were drawn on the graph in order to determine the initial and final temperatures of the two liquids. The above procedure was repeated two more times for the sake of precision. Finally, we calculated the calorimeter constant using the formula listed in the Introduction section. Even though we conducted an experiment to find the heat capacity of a calorimeter, we were given a new value for the constant for experiment 2, due to inaccuracy in our results. For the lab called Hess’s Law, we first started by setting up the calculator to collect temperature data again. The procedure is the same as the one used in the last experiment, except that the time interval is set to 4 minutes. Next, we obtain a polystyrene cup to use as our calorimeter and fill it with 100 g of water. The cup is placed within a 250-mL beaker to keep it in a sustained environment. A temperature sensor is placed in the water and is stabilized. Then, we obtained solid NaOH and weighed about 2 grams to the nearest thousandth decimal point. This value is recorded, along with all other data in Table 2-1. Afterwards, data collection begins and after about 15 seconds, the NaOH is added to the water. The resulting solution is stirred for the duration of the time interval and by using Graphica l Analysis a graph is produced. This procedure is repeated twice more for 0.5 M HCl in place of water for one trial, and then 1.0 M HCl and 1.0 M NaOH solution for the third trial. All of the measurements are recorded in the table mentioned above. For the final experiment, the procedure is very similar to its predecessors. We began by initializing the LabPro and DataMate to collect temperature data over time (this time it is a 180 second interval). First, we measure as close as we can to 50 g of a base of our choice in a 100-mL graduated cylinder. A temperature sensor is placed in the cylinder. Next, we weighed 100 g of a chosen acid in the calorimeter. The calorimeter is placed in a 1000-mL beaker for stability and a temperature sensor is submerged in the acid. After the sensors have a chance to equilibrate, we started to collect data. When about 15 seconds have passed, we poured the base into the  calorimeter with the acid and stirred for the duration of the time with both sensors. Then, when time was up, we used Graphical Analysis to print the resulting temperature vs. time graph. This processed is repeated three more times until every combination of strong and weak acids and bases is used. Analysis The data we recorded for the first experiment appears to be accurate, though drawing tangent lines to find final and initial points has its inherent inaccuracy. Using the formula discussed in the introduction, our equation turned out like the following: 0 = – [(47.166 g * 4.184 J/g °C * 16.561  °C) + (98.874 g * 4.184 J/g °C * -9.4139  °C) + (Cp calorimeter * -9.4139  °C)] Cp calorimeter = -66.522 J/ °C The average of the three obtained values is as simple as adding them all together and dividing by three, the number of values, which looked like this: (-66.522 + 348.619 + 225.669)/3 = 169.255 J/ °C. This number is much higher than the default value we were given for the next lab, which was only 15.0 J/ °C. For the Hess’s Law experiment, the numbers looked much better. The first thing we did with the data was solve for the change in temperature, which was just final temperature minus initial temperature. The result gave us something like this: 23.9  °C – 19  °C = 4.9  °C. Second, we calculated the heat released by each equation, which is shown as this: q = – [Sp.Ht. * m * ∆t] q = – [4.18 J/g °C * 99.524 g * 4.9  °C] q = -2.038 kJ Then, the heat lost to the calorimeter was calculated using the formula q = – [Cp * ∆t]. From that, we found that q = – [15.0 J/ °C * 4.9  °C] = -0.0735 kJ. Next, the total ∆H was found by adding both values of q above, which just equals -2.1115 kJ. In order to find ∆H/mol NaOH, we had to find how many moles were used in each reaction based on the mass of NaOH weighed and recorded in Table 2-1. The format for finding the number of moles looked  like the following: 2.0810 g NaOH * (1 mol NaOH / 40 g NaOH) = 0.052 mol NaOH. This value is used to divide the ∆H to find the ∆H/mol NaOH value, which equaled -40.606 kJ/mol. Using the ∆H of Reaction 2 as the theoretical value, and the combined ∆H values of Reactions 1 and 3, we can find out our percent error, which is shown below as: % error = abs ((theoretical – experimental) / theoretical) * 100 % error = abs ((79.56 – 94.87) / 79.56) * 100 % error = 19.24 % The above values can all be found on Table 2-1. The above process was repeated with data collected from the whole class, which yielded a 14.47 % error. Finally, using theoretical numbers, we calculated ∆H, ∆S, and ∆G for reaction 2. For the first two, a similar equation of sum of products minus sum of reactants equals ∆H and ∆S respectively. ∆G is calculated using the formula in the introduction, which looked like ∆G = -98.8 – 298(0.0580) = -116.062 kJ/mol. With the data collected in the third experiment a multitude of calculations were carried out. All of the following data can be found in Table 3-1. First, we solved for ∆H rxn, which is the same as the overall heat equation described in the introduction. The calculation looked liked the following: ∆H rxn = – [(4.184 J/g °C * 98.781 g * 4.35  °C) + (4.184 J/g °C * 48.5133 g * 4.0  °C) + (15.0 J/ °C * 4.35  °C) ∆H rxn = -2.68 kJ Next, we needed to calculate the limiting reactant for each reaction, which was just the reactant that yielded the least product. The method for determining it is like so: 98.781 g HCl * (1 mol HCl / 36 g HCl) * (1 mol NaCl / 1 mol HCl) * (1 g NaCl / 1 mol NaCl) = 2.744 g NaCl 48.5153 g NaOH * (1 mol NaOH / 40 g NaOH) * (1mol NaCl / 1 mol NaOH) * (1 g NaCl / 1 mol NaCl) = 1.213 g NaCl Then, we take the ∆H rxn above and divide it by the moles of limiting reactant, which we discovered above (since each solution is 1.0 M, the moles used is the number of grams divided by 1000). This new ∆H rxn / moles of limiting reactant is the experimental value to be compared to the theoretical value obtained with given numbers. Comparing these two values using the % error equation above, the % error of one of the reactions comes out to be just 1.25%. The rest of the numbers can be observed in Table 3-2. This concludes all of the calculations that were involved in all of the experiments. Conclusion The results of this experiment were a mix of both very accurate and nowhere close. For the first experiment, the values for the calorimeter constant were very imprecise, ranging from negative values to ten times greater than the theoretical 15.0 J/ °C. This is most likely due to a series of miscalculations and human error. In experiment two, the numbers were far more favorable, with a 19.24 % error for our data and a 14.47 % error for the entire class. This number still seems too high to justify the verification of Hess’s Law and should probably be redone with more care in consistently measuring reactants, but other than that, the experiment was completed well enough. The results for the final experiment are also quite mixed. While some experimental values had only a 1.25 % error, others were grossly erroneous with about 65.1 % error. The most inaccurate data was the ones collected for the reaction of a weak acid and a strong base, which yielded an obviously flawed 300 % err or. For the results that were inaccurate, the source of error was most likely to due a miscalculation on my part, possibly in the calculation of the theoretical values, or the experimental for that matter. Much more care must be taken when repeating this lab, for the possible errors are numerous. The purpose of these three labs were to observe the nature of heat and reactions, which the experiments do rather nicely. The procedures described do an excellent job describing the purpose of each step, though they are easy to do incorrectly. In the end, the experiments yielded mediocre results, a mixed bag of incredibly accurate to just very wrong. Thermochemistry is indeed a rather elusive topic, but these experiments make it much more tangible.