PROJECT 1: Properties and Behavior of Matter
Fry Bread Experiment

A.	For the first project, our group experimented with the leavening agent in a fry 
   bread recipe. The fry bread recipe used by our group consisted of water, flour, salt, and baking powder. We made three different types of fry breads. The first kind had the original ingredients listed above, the second had all the ingredients except for baking soda instead of baking powder, and the third had all the ingredients except for yeast instead of baking powder. The following includes the questions, expectations, procedures, results, and conclusions of the experiment completed by my group.
1.	Question- What would happen if we substituted the baking powder with yeast or baking soda, when cooking fry bread?
2.	Expectations- The baking soda will make the fry bread flat because it does not contain the same ingredients as the baking powder. The yeast will cause the fry bread to expand and become puffy because yeast causes things to rise. There will more than likely be more air bubbles in the fry bread that contains yeast, due to the rapid expansion. There will be a heavier density in the fry bread with baking soda because the middle of the fry bread will not expand and will become heavy. Due to the predicted weight of the fry bread with baking soda, the fry bread will sink to the bottom of the oil. The baking soda will cause the bread to become darker in color due to its contents.
3.	Procedure- The materials that are used for this experiment include flour, salt, baking powder, baking soda, yeast, vegetable oil, a metal bowl, a large spoon or ladle, paper plates, and a heating plate. There are three different types of dough to be made. One is made with baking powder as the leavening ingredient, and the other two are to be made with yeast and baking soda as the leavening ingredients. As the first two types of dough are being prepared, start preparing the yeast and heat the oil in order to bring it to a boil. To prepare the yeast, let the temperature reach 110 degrees and add a teaspoon of sugar, then add the yeast package. Let the yeast mixture sit until it doubles. 
After all three types of dough are prepared; make flat pancake-size dough pieces from each type of dough. Once the oil is boiling, drop one dough piece from each type of dough into the metal bowl. Be sure to keep track of the location of each dough piece in the bowl. Time the dough pieces to see how long it takes for them to cook. Observe to see how each dough piece cooks. When the pieces are ready to be taken out, use a ladle or large spoon and place them on a paper plate. Be careful not to touch the hot oil or the fry bread as it is taken out of the bowl. Notice the scent that the fry bread is giving. Repeat this process until you are out of dough.
The measurements for the ingredients included the following:
* 1 cup of flour   * ½ teaspoon of salt   * ½ cup of water   
* 1 ½ teaspoons of the leavening ingredient (b.p., b.s., or yeast)
* 1 quart of vegetable oil
4.	Results- 	Our group followed the procedures listed above to the best of our 
   ability. We mixed the ingredients together and then waited for the yeast to    double. We watched the yeast bubble, eat the sugar, and become thicker. The yeast was not doubling in size like we expected it to; therefore, we decided to complete the dough with yeast at another time. We had the other two types of dough ready to be fried. 
	We began by dropping the baking soda fry bread into the oil. It did not rise to the top of the bowl very fast, and we ended up flipping it over after about 30 seconds. That piece of fry bread was done in 1 minute and 9 seconds. When we took it out of the bowl, it seemed much thicker than what our group thought it would be. Its color was a dark brown, and it appeared to be hollow on the inside. When the group tasted this fry bread, we agreed that it had more of a bitter, saltier taste to it.
	Our group then added a baking powder piece of fry bread. This piece rose to the top of the bowl much faster and we flipped it over after about 2 minutes. It appeared to react more in the oil by bubbling, and took a total of 3 minutes and 12 seconds to cook. The color of this piece was a light brown, and it seemed thicker. When the group tasted it, we thought it had a more bland taste to it.
	One member of our group completed the yeast fry bread at her home and brought it for our group the next class period. When completing this part of the experiment, she notes that the yeast dough was full of air pockets. She said that because of this, uneven browning occurred. This type of fry bread only took 1 minute and 50 seconds to cook. After it was done, it tasted crunchy on the outside and like bread on the inside. When the group tasted this type of fry bread, we agreed that it was not as bland as the baking powder fry bread, but not as salty as the baking soda fry bread. 
5.	Conclusions- The conclusions to this experiment are:
Prediction- The baking soda will make the fry bread flat, and the yeast will make it puffy. 
Actual Result- There was not a big difference in the thickness or thinness of the fry bread. This meant that the leavening ingredient did not have a huge effect on the expansion of the fry bread.
                     Prediction- There will be more air bubbles in the bread with yeast.
                    Actual Result- There were more air bubbles in the bread with yeast. 
This was probably because the yeast is a living ingredient that reacts when mixed with sugar, which caused the sir bubbles to occur.
Prediction- There will be a heavier density to the fry bread made with baking soda.
Actual Result- There was no difference in density between the three types of fry bread. This meant that the baking soda did not cause the bread to become too heavy to float in the oil.
Prediction- The baking soda will make the bread darker in color.
Actual Result- The baking soda did make the bread darker than the other two types of bread. An ingredient in the baking soda that is not in the yeast or the baking powder probably caused this.
•	It should be noted that the temperature of the oil could have been different from 
the time we started this experiment, to the time we ended it. 
      To summarize the conclusion to this experiment, I would say that by altering one simple ingredient in a fry bread recipe could make a huge difference in the outcome of the fry bread. Altering the leavening ingredient can change the color, smell, taste, texture, and size of fry bread. It’s amazing to think that one very small ingredient can make a huge difference on the outcome.
B.	Children’s Idea’s and Thinking
         For the idea of “chemical reactions in fry bread”, I chose to interview an 11-year-old girl named Sara. The following script is the conversation Sara and I had about chemical reactions and how fry bread is related to that.
Me: “Sara, what is the first thing you think of when you hear the words chemical reaction?” (I was trying to determine her ideas of the concept).
Sara: “ That’s like when you mix two chemicals together. We do that in Science class.”
Me: “That’s right. But do you think it has to be two chemicals, or can it be any two substances?”
Sara: “How can it be a chemical reaction if it’s not two chemicals?” 
Me: “Well, what if I told you that making bread is a chemical reaction?”
Sara: “It is? How?”
      I went on to explain to Sara that you don’t necessarily have to mix two chemicals to get a chemical reaction. I then decided to explain to her that in our groups, we made fry bread. I told her about the ingredients that were in fry bread and asked her how she thought the fry bread with yeast, baking soda, and baking powder would turn out. She told me that the one with yeast would be very puffy, and that the one with baking powder would be flat, and the one with baking soda would be thin and crispy like a potato chip. When I told her the results to our experiment, she seemed very surprised. I encouraged her to go home and try this experiment with her mother and father. I cautioned her about being careful with the hot oil, and to only perform this experiment with an adult. 
	The conversation I had with Sara was very interesting to me. In the Learning in Science book, it states that children’s ideas are strongly influenced by their egocentric view of the world. When I asked Sara what she thought of when she heard the words chemical reaction, she said that it is when two chemicals are mixed together. She has not yet reached the understanding that chemical reactions do not involve just two chemicals. Also in the Learning in Science book, it states that children’s ideas are strongly held. That’s why Sara questioned me when I asked her if a chemical reaction could occur with any two substances. 
	When I asked Sara how she thought the ingredients in the fry bread would turn out with yeast, baking soda, and baking powder, I was impressed with her responses. She obviously associated yeast as something that causes an object to rise. She also said that the baking powder would cause the bread to be flat, and that the baking soda would cause it to become thin and crispy. This told me that Sara must have some knowledge about cooking with leavening ingredients. I also think that she associates baking powder, baking soda, and yeast with cooking and not necessarily science. Hopefully by having this discussion with her, I have helped her in connecting cooking with science.
C.	Ideas and Concepts in the History of Science
           According to Professor Fred L. Wilson of the Rochester Institute of Technology, the idea of “rationalism” appears to have come from mythology with the Greeks. The Greeks originally assumed that nature would “play fair” and expose its complicated secrets and not change attitude or position mid-play. This particular Greek optimism has never left the human race. From all of this, human beings needed to create an orderly system for learning how to determine the underlying laws from the “observed” data. Ancient scientists, however, based a lot of scientific information simply on their theories, and not as much on observation and exploration. In order to accomplish this, they needed to establish rules of argument, or “reason”. With reason comes intuition about what might happen, and then scientists would strictly rely on their “reasoning and intuition” instead of thoroughly observing and testing how something might turn out.
	In completing the fry bread experiment, my group expressed very humanistic behaviors before and during the experiment. Our group first created an organized system of what we wanted to test and how we wanted to test it. We then established rules of argument or “reason” about how the experiment would turn out (The fry bread with the yeast will turn out puffy because yeast causes things to rise). When it came down to it, I thought that nature would “play fair” in a sense by having everything turn out just the way we thought it would, with no scientific surprises along the way. Even in today’s world, people still think and act like ancient scientists.
D.	Contemporary or standard contemporary science does not differ tremendously from ancient science. The big difference from ancient to contemporary science is the amount of experimentation completed in today’s science. Experimentation and testing of ideas and theories is the modern and most thorough way to get an accurate result, either proving or disproving a hypothesis. Contemporary scientists would probably think that the fry bread experiment completed by my group was organized and thorough in what we were trying to accomplish. I asked Darren Nguyen, a chemist at Quintiles how he would complete the fry bread experiment by altering the leavening ingredients. He responded with “ I would take the three different types of dough and fry them to see if my results were accurate with what I predicted.” That’s exactly what my group did. We were careful in watching the effects of the different leavening ingredients on the dough, and how different or similar they were from each other before, during, and after we completed the experiment. 
             Science used to be looked at as something that was based on theories that could never be changed or altered. These theories were based on presumptions and predictions that the scientists made with no regard to extensive experimentation. Now we know that science can be proven just as it can be disproved. Extensive experimentation is absolutely necessary when trying to prove an idea or theory. In the article “Baking Better Cookies Through Chemistry” the author talks about how using different kinds of flour, can affect not only the taste of the cookie, it also affects the color, texture, and spread of the cookies. How did the author find all of this out? We know by the pictures and descriptions that she gave us; she probably tested and proved this to be true. Modern scientists want to be able to prove that their theory is true.
E.	The idea of testing the leavening ingredients in fry bread taught me much more than I thought it would. I must admit, when we started this particular experiment I looked at it as a cooking project, and it took me awhile to get into the mode of looking at it as a scientific experiment. I found it amazing that by mixing flour, water, salt, and a leavening ingredient, you can get such a tasty result. By altering a 1 ½ teaspoon leavening ingredient, it surprised me that this small alter in ingredients can make an enormous difference in the way that the fry bread turned out. 
            My way of thinking during and after the project was much like a modern scientist. Our group thought of a question we wanted answered, and we answered it through fairly extensive investigation and experimentation. We answered our question not just by theories and predictions, we continued on with it by using a hands-on investigation. In the Learning in Science book it states that because children are so egocentric in their views of how things work, they need hands-on proof it order for their ideas to change or grow. Not only will the children prove or disprove their ideas, they will learn much more through this type of investigation. They will become critical thinkers. Adults, teachers, scientists, and children all need hands-on investigations so that they can see and work with what they are questioning.  If there’s no actual proof that a theory is true, the chances of their ideas and theories changing is not good. I have learned that this goes the same for children and adults. We are all curious humans, and we all want answers. By human nature, we have formed our own ideas and theories about how things work. The only way to see if we are correct is to get involved in a hands-on investigation that will allow us all to become “true scientists”.
F.	Bibliography
Child Interview-Sara Ely, (Field notes included in project) Saturday, 9/8/01, 9:00AM, 6328 Kentucky, Raytown, Mo (Sara’s house).

Professional’s Insight- Darren Nguyen, (Quote included in project) Sunday, 9/9/01, 2:00 PM, 131 Woodbridge Lane, Kansas City, Mo (Parent’s house).

Professor Fred L. Wilson  Science and Human Values  Rochester Institute of Technology  www.rit.edu, posted 8/23/96, accessed 9/9/01 at 5:00 PM.

Shirley O. Corriher  Baking Better Cookies Through Chemistry  Fine Cooking Online www.taunton.com/fc/features/foodscience/10cookies.htm, accessed 9/7/01.

Bradford B. Blaine The Historian “The Foundations of Modern Science in the Middle Ages: Their Religious, Institutional, and Intellectual Contexts.” Fall 1998.

R. Osborne, P. Freyberg  Learning in Science: The implications of children’s science  Reed Publishing, Birkenhead, Auckland. 1985.

Missouri Show-Me Standards

	The fry bread experiment was a scientific project that dealt with the processes of scientific inquiry. By formulating and testing the question that our group asked, we acquired a solid foundation in the Science section of the Missouri Standards. The following is the standard that my group acquired knowledge in:
7.	Processes of scientific inquiry (such as formulating and testing hypothesizes).
This particular experiment also meets the standards of Goal #1, 2, and 3.
Under Goal #1, the following areas were met:
1.	Develop questions and ideas to initiate and refine research. We did this by developing our question and initiating an experiment to figure out whether or not leavening ingredients can have a huge effect on the outcome of the fry bread. 
2.	Conduct research to answer questions and evaluate ideas. Our group met this goal because we conducted research about leavening ingredients and the history of science in order to evaluate our ideas about the experiment.
 4.  Use technological tools and other resources to locate, select, and organize 
       information. I met this goal because I used the computer, the Internet, the library, and textbooks in order to locate materials that could enhance the research I was conducting on my project. 
Under Goal #2, the following area was met:
3.	Present perceptions and ideas regarding works of the arts, humanities, and sciences.  I met this goal by presenting the ideas and perceptions of ancient and modern day science. By learning and sharing the ideas of ancient and modern science, I was also able to create my own ideas and perceptions about science.
In Goal #4, the following area was met:
6.	Identify tasks that require a coordinated effort and work with others to complete those tasks.  I was able to meet this goal by working cooperatively in a group to complete the experimentation of fry bread leavening ingredients. By participating in this group project, I was able to listen to others and give my opinion whenever it seemed necessary. We all worked together to complete the experiment successfully.