Comments I wish I could write on these labs...because I am an asshole. An overworked, asshole TA.
Your overall hypothesis is that the trees in 2011 will have a greater radius than the same trees in 2006? LMFAO. Of course they will be bigger. They're trees. They grew because time happened.
Remember when I sat with you for 20 minutes in class and explained EXACTLY how to write up your Results? Why did you delete everything I practically wrote for you and write incorrect crap?
Oh, I see your prediction states that radial growth should be greater in 2011. Then immediately after that you write a sentence where you say the exact, precise opposite. Are your parents maybe brother and sister?
Oh you want to contest your B minus? Here's a 1000 word email on the myriad ways you were indeed wrong. Fine, I will change your mark. To the lower one that you actually deserve.
You predict "a difference" between the two treatment groups? But you don't say what that difference might be? We've got a genius on our hands! Thanks for communicating zero useful information though.
You used the word 'aforementioned' in an ecology lab? Really? You are a douchebag.
It's totally cool that you chose a citation from 2011 to go along with your definition of intraspecific competition. I'm so sure science came up with that concept in the past 11 months.
Listen to the little squiggly red line! He's telling you you're spelling it WRONG!!!
Repeat after me: If the p value is greater than 0.05, it is NOT significant. NOT. NOT. NOT. This is the fourth time you've made this mistake, are you even reading my comments?? Sigh. Definitely not. I probably should have stopped caring 3 labs ago, I know.
Under the subheading "Discussion" you write... nothing. I truly wish I could give you bonus marks for failing this lab just to give me less work to do. So considerate of you!
Remember when I sat with you for 20 minutes in class and explained EXACTLY how to write up your Results? Why did you delete everything I practically wrote for you and write incorrect crap?
Oh, I see your prediction states that radial growth should be greater in 2011. Then immediately after that you write a sentence where you say the exact, precise opposite. Are your parents maybe brother and sister?
Oh you want to contest your B minus? Here's a 1000 word email on the myriad ways you were indeed wrong. Fine, I will change your mark. To the lower one that you actually deserve.
You predict "a difference" between the two treatment groups? But you don't say what that difference might be? We've got a genius on our hands! Thanks for communicating zero useful information though.
You used the word 'aforementioned' in an ecology lab? Really? You are a douchebag.
It's totally cool that you chose a citation from 2011 to go along with your definition of intraspecific competition. I'm so sure science came up with that concept in the past 11 months.
Listen to the little squiggly red line! He's telling you you're spelling it WRONG!!!
Repeat after me: If the p value is greater than 0.05, it is NOT significant. NOT. NOT. NOT. This is the fourth time you've made this mistake, are you even reading my comments?? Sigh. Definitely not. I probably should have stopped caring 3 labs ago, I know.
Under the subheading "Discussion" you write... nothing. I truly wish I could give you bonus marks for failing this lab just to give me less work to do. So considerate of you!