So far, in our study of cells, we have been using textbook diagrams, illustrations, and photographs of cells and their organelles. This week we will be looking at cells from actual, living organisms. I think you will notice a difference or two.
Your assignment this week is to write a reflection comparing and contrasting the picture cells (so to speak) with the real live cells. What is the same? What is different? What have you learned by looking at the real cells? What questions do you now have.
As usual, you will post your reflections by Friday and then post at least 3 comments by next Monday.
71 responses so far ↓
1
Pooky star
// Mar 21, 2007 at 2:59 pm
Similarities: They look the same.
Cells do the same funtions as the book says they do.
Cells survive the same as the book says they do.
Differences: The book is boring and the cells in the pictures dont move.
Under the microscopes, the cells are intrsting and they are alive!
The book explains how the cells work and function.
You cant really read the cells or comunicate with the cells under the microscope so you wont know how or what they do without reading the book.
what I have learned by looking at the real cells, is that real cells are really cool to look at and are really small.
I dont realy have any questions, I would just like to look at the cells more.
2
Hotdawg911
// Mar 21, 2007 at 4:27 pm
Hotdawg911 CELLS
There are many differences between the book and the cells underneath the microscope. For one thing, the ones underneath the microscope don’t really have a color, while in the book, cells look different colors like green, red, yellow, or brown. Also, the cells are actually moving underneath the microscope, but in the book, they are dull and they stay in one spot.
The cells are similar because they function the same why as they do in the book, and because in both places, the cells are still really small and survive in a certain way.
I have learned that cells can be very interesting in real life;moving around, eating etc. Also I learned that cells need to be magnified a lot to be visible, and that looking at cells can be very interesting.
3
smellymelly
// Mar 21, 2007 at 6:15 pm
There are many differences between seeing the cells in the book and seeing the cells under the micorscope. When you look in the book it is not live or interesting looking at pictures in the textbook. It is boring to sit and look at the textbook, but the text book shows colos and digrams. It is not fun but it gives a better exampel.
4
smellymelly
// Mar 21, 2007 at 6:18 pm
I hit “abschicken” by mistake… sorry here is the rest of my article don’t pay attention to #3
5
smellymelly
// Mar 21, 2007 at 6:29 pm
There are many differences between seeing the cells in the book and seeing the cells under the microscope. When you look in the textbook it is not as interesting looking at pictures compared to looking at the cells under the microscope. It is boring to sit and look at the textbook, but the text book shows colors and diagrams. It is not fun but it gives a better examples. Some things that you cannot see under the microscope you can see more clearly in diagrams and pictures in the textbook.
When you look at the cells when the are under the “compound microscope” it looks so cool you can see the cells moving. When I went home today I told my family all about science class today I learned so much about cells, and what they looked like up close. It was a very cool veiw to see, you could see all of the cells swimming or rolling around or however the moved.
I don’t have any questions, I just thought it was very cool to look at the cells
6
laugh-Cackle-SHOP!
// Mar 21, 2007 at 7:46 pm
A Family In Space
Information:
This article was written by Emily Sohn on March 21, 2007 and was found on the website address: http://www.sciencenewsforkids.org/articles/20070321/Note3.asp
Summary
This article talked about how many objects orbiting around in the Kuiper Belt are alike, almost like a family. The first of these items discovered was called 2003 EL61, because of its unusual, texture and shape. Many theories were talked about on why these objects looked so strange and why they looked alike.
Reflection
To be frank I thought this article was quick and simple. It was very short with one picture though at the same time pretty clear with word I was able to understand. I cannot really judge this article, for nothing really came out to me (bad or good) and I was with no feeling when I finished. There is no way I shall remember this article in 10, 5 or even 2.
7
monkey girl
// Mar 22, 2007 at 9:57 am
Looking at cells in books is good because you can see the cells all the time doing there cell stuff .
Looking at cells in books is bad because you do not see real live cells you just see pictures of them.
Looking at cells in microscopes is good because you can see the cells in real time doing there cell stuff.
Looking at cells in microscopes is bad because you have to weight just to see the cell and weight even longer to see to do something.
-monkey girl
8
Coolcat12
// Mar 22, 2007 at 10:05 am
The differences between the cells ihe shape and looking at the in the microscope and the text book is that the text book is in 2-d and in real life it isn’t 2-d. In the microscope you can see it up close but you can also see it up close but it is in 2-d. They do not look alike they look different because looking throgh the microscope is in real life and looking in the books is 2-d pictures. Also because the pictures sometimes aren’t in color but under the microscope it is in color so you think that you got the answer wrong.
9
jwhackdaddy
// Mar 22, 2007 at 12:12 pm
The difference between cells in a textbok or picture, and the real thing is that in a textbook it is usually a painting, or drawing, and obviously they don’t move. I wonder if they have any of the sences that we have, or how much mileage they cover in their lives. I bet not even one. I also wonder if they have parties with tiny pizza, or soda. Or if they spend time with their cell parents. I bet they don’t. That would stink. But they probaly don’t have feelings. I learnedthat cells can be different. Some fast, some slow, or don’t even move. Some big, some small. I also think they should invent a microscope with a camera attached to it. Or one that you type in cell’s cerial number, and the microscope finds it, and tracks it. Maybe I can invent one. It would be pretty fun to be a scientist.
10
jwhackdaddy
// Mar 22, 2007 at 12:14 pm
Monkey girl- Good job stating what was good about seeing cells in a microscope, and one in a book
11
jwhackdaddy
// Mar 22, 2007 at 12:16 pm
coolcat12- i like how you took your ideas of what’s good and bad, and supported it with evidence.
12
jwhackdaddy
// Mar 22, 2007 at 12:20 pm
smellymelly- good for you for being honest and telling the truth. It’s much better than blabbering on about how looking through a microscope can be so fun
13
Hotdawg911
// Mar 22, 2007 at 12:26 pm
To Smellymelly- Nice job on your report! It was well written and you explaind your answers thoughtfully.
14
Hotdawg911
// Mar 22, 2007 at 12:30 pm
To jwhackdaddy- Your report was fun to read and i liked how thought about the pizza and parties.
15
Hotdawg911
// Mar 22, 2007 at 12:32 pm
To Pooky Star- Your report was well written, but I think that the report was supposed to be artical form.
16
purplepower94
// Mar 22, 2007 at 2:49 pm
There are several similarities and differences between real cells and picture cells. One similarity is that the have the same basic exterior. However, on real cells, we can’t see what it is going on inside with all the organelles. In the book we have a magnified diagram of the inside of the cells. Another thing that is obviously different is that the real ones move around and are alive. I really hadn’t thought about the cells moving when we looked at pictures of them.
Under a microscope the cell is magnified so it kind of looks like a plain insect. Pictures can tell us more about how complex the cells actually are. Seeing them under the microscope was also a little more confusing, partly because we kept thinking their food was the cell, and partly because I didn’t necessarily expect cells to be that way based on pictures. The main similarity they have is that they both are supposed to be the same thing. The book represents the same functions the cell has, and some of them do have a similar look. None of the information we see in the book is different from what a real cell is but it seems different seeing it under a microscope.
17
purplepower94
// Mar 22, 2007 at 2:56 pm
I hit submit before I was finished, here are my questions:
Are the pictures in the book exactly what the cells really look like inside? How do they know what the organelles look like? Also, are the cells colored the same because to me most of the cells under the microscope do not look very colored like they show them in the book? I wonder if there is a way to just look at an oraganelle under the microscope and how people would be able to do that?
18
Monkeyspy
// Mar 22, 2007 at 3:16 pm
Looking at the cells showed me that the cells are Really Really small and sometimes there hard to see.
I think they look exstreamely cool. My favorite one was the spiked ball looking one that you showed the class on the internet on 3-22-07. And from 3-21-07 to 3-22-07 the cells changed by alot. And i really injoyed looking at all the cool cells.
19
Hotdawg911
// Mar 22, 2007 at 4:34 pm
I just realized i messed up! Ignore comment 15, and instead read this: To Pooky Star- Your report was well written, but I think that the report was supposed to be in essay form.
20
Rocket Man
// Mar 22, 2007 at 4:39 pm
Cells up Close
A lot of the cells are different sizes and shape. The way they move to is different to. A lot of them move in a very wriggly way and some move in a sluggish kind of way. Some of the cells move at the same pace. Sometimes there was more than one cell in the sample glass.
What I learned for looking at the cells is that they all eat and move in different ways. I thought it was very interesting to watch the cells move around. Considering the way they move I would think that these cells must eat in different ways.
I thought that the pictures were a lot different for the real cells that we saw. The real cells were different kinds of shapes instead of being a circle or star shaped. You weren’t really able to see the different organelles in the real cell as you able to see them in the pictures. The pictures showed what colors the organelles are, but you can’t see that with the real cells. The pictures tell you where everything is located and what it is, but with the real cells you really can’t recognize or locate the organelles. I thought this was great to be able to look at cells.
21
bigfoot
// Mar 22, 2007 at 5:01 pm
I think that some cells do look a like and some don’t. The ameba looks the same. The pictures are a lot more colorful then the real live one. I liked looking at the live ones. Because they are moving and you see how they live. The pictures are a lot bigger, that made me think that they were bigger. I learned that the cells move like a fish. The amebas look like tadpoles and swim like them too. I never new that cells looked like weird things. Like one looks like a squish ball and one looks like dinosaur. I wonder how the cells are made. I also want to know how the cells eat.
22
maximumpower
// Mar 22, 2007 at 5:30 pm
To start off, your looking at a drawing, a still object, not a moving, living thing. It is though,what it looks like.
Allthough I wasn’t able to see the real life cells, from what I saw from the prodjects we did, they are prity cool. I would have liked to have seen them move.
23
Striking Ferret
// Mar 22, 2007 at 5:38 pm
Striking Ferret
3/22/07
Some things that are different when you look at a cell under a microscope is that it looks more real and it moves, but it is not as detailed and big as when you look at it in the textbook.
Some things I think are the same is that it kind of looks the same under the microscope as it does in the textbook. The textbook sometimes has real pictures but even pictures don’t show what it really looks like.
Overall I think that the textbook is pretty different than when you look at cells under the microscope.
24
Striking Ferret
// Mar 22, 2007 at 5:39 pm
to maximumpower:
I thought your report was very well thought out and planned
25
Striking Ferret
// Mar 22, 2007 at 5:40 pm
To bigfoot:
i thought your report was really good and exactly what Mr ardito wanted us to do
26
Striking Ferret
// Mar 22, 2007 at 5:41 pm
To Rocketman:
I thought you did a great job on your report and it was very well described
27
JAM
// Mar 22, 2007 at 8:02 pm
When looking at cells under the Microscope you can see how the cells move. In the text book you see the color of the cells. You also can see the details of the cells. The shape of the cell looks the same in the text book and under the microscope. I learned how real cells move. The only question I have is when are we going to look at more cells under the Microscope?
28
bigfoot
// Mar 23, 2007 at 6:10 am
to:smellymely
I think you did a good job. I toled my parents too.I think it is boring too.I like how your artical discribed how they move.good job!!!
29
bigfoot
// Mar 23, 2007 at 6:13 am
to:jam
You did a realy good artical. I liked looking at the cells too. It was very good JAM.
30
bigfoot
// Mar 23, 2007 at 6:18 am
To: striking ferret
Yiu did an asum job. I think the same thing about under the microsop. It was very well writen. GOod job.
31
Hotdawg911
// Mar 23, 2007 at 11:48 am
To striking ferret- You explained your point of view very well. Good job.
32
monkey girl
// Mar 23, 2007 at 11:49 am
to strikeing ferrit
I agree
33
monkey girl
// Mar 23, 2007 at 11:55 am
to jwhackdaddy
Intresting I wonder if cells like peperoni
34
Pooky star
// Mar 23, 2007 at 11:55 am
To smellymelly great report.
35
monkey girl
// Mar 23, 2007 at 12:03 pm
to Rocket Man
I liked how you showed both sides of the problem
36
Pooky star
// Mar 23, 2007 at 12:10 pm
To Rocket Man good, I liked looking at the cells too.
37
Pooky star
// Mar 23, 2007 at 12:11 pm
To purplepower94 I liked your report, I thougt that the food were cells too.
38
purplepower94
// Mar 24, 2007 at 12:23 pm
To Rocket Man:
Your report was very good. I thought it was good how you described the cells under the microscope and them compared them with the pictures. It made it easy to tell what you were talking about. Nice job.
39
purplepower94
// Mar 24, 2007 at 12:25 pm
To Monkey Girl:
I really liked the way you said the good and bad things about the pictures and the real cells. I think that is a great way to compare and contrast. Well done.
40
purplepower94
// Mar 24, 2007 at 12:28 pm
To Hotdawg911:
Your explanation was very well written. I agree with most of the things you said about the similarities and differences and think you did a very nice job explaining what you thought.
41
Rocket Man
// Mar 24, 2007 at 12:52 pm
TO: CoolCat12
I thought you did a great job explaining how you can see the cells better through the microscope and how the text book was different from the real cell.
42
Rocket Man
// Mar 24, 2007 at 12:58 pm
To: StrikingFerret
I thought you were very descriptive when you explained the differences of the textbook and the actual cell.
43
Rocket Man
// Mar 24, 2007 at 1:05 pm
To: JAM
I thought you explained how real the cells really are when you look at them through a microscope oppose to a textbook.
44
nickigrad
// Mar 24, 2007 at 1:20 pm
simalarites: they are bot the same. The cells have the same function.
45
nickigrad
// Mar 24, 2007 at 1:23 pm
Tocoolcat12
I like how you told us how the cells are easer to see when you look into the microcope.
46
maximumpower4334
// Mar 24, 2007 at 4:14 pm
to striking feret
I thought you did a great job wording a lot of things. Nice job.
47
stink chesse
// Mar 25, 2007 at 7:53 am
The cells in the book and the cells under a microscope are very different. One thing that was really different was the color. In the books the cells are different colors whereas under a microscope the cells are one color and the same color. I think the book made them colors so you can see the different parts of a cell. Another big difference was movement, the cells in the book are stationary but the cells under the microscope move, and in different ways. The book has no way of showing movement and I found it very cool how each cell would move differently.
They are similar because in the book and under the microscope they do the same functions. In each you can also see how small they are. I learned from looking under a microscope how cells move and I found that very interesting.
48
stinky chesse
// Mar 25, 2007 at 7:54 am
To JAM: really good lob. I agree with you.
49
stinky chesse
// Mar 25, 2007 at 7:55 am
To hotdawg 911: very well writen!! I wrote alot of the same things.
50
stinky chesse
// Mar 25, 2007 at 7:55 am
to Rocket Man: Good job, I never really thought about the shapes of the cells.
51
PizzaPlace8:00
// Mar 25, 2007 at 8:22 pm
This week’s weekly science article report is a challenge for me. This is because honestly, I find cells boring. I think they are boring in textbooks and even more borig in real life. But I will do my very best to make this report as interesting as possible.
I think there is almost nothing the same about real cells and the ones in the books. I do not think they look alike, for real cells are not at all colorful, and I do not think they act alike, because the cells in the books don’t move.
And surprizingly, I think that looking at the cells in the books is more helpful, and I learned so much more from the books than I did from the microscope. I had trouble getting a clear image through the microscope and the the textbooks also point different details out, while the real cells just zoom by the screen.
If you are going to research cells, I would recomend reading textbooks rather than looking at real ones. After all, they look prettier in the books!
52
PizzaPlace8:00
// Mar 25, 2007 at 8:24 pm
Rocket Man, Great job! You’re report had great details and really showed off the effort you put into it. I think that the size of you’re report was great too. It wasn’t too long, yet you could tell it took you longer than 2 seconds. If I were going to give you any advice it would be to create a better intro, just pull the reader in. Besides for that, it was real great. Keep it up!
53
PizzaPlace8:00
// Mar 25, 2007 at 8:26 pm
Smelly Melly, Good work. I compleatly agree with everything you said. I think you did a great job explaining your point of view and did a great job creating an article worth reading. Keep it up!
54
PizzaPlace8:00
// Mar 25, 2007 at 8:29 pm
Monkey Spy, Good job. Although your article was interesting, I didn’t really understand what you were talking about. Next time you write an article, read it over a few times to make sure it makes sence. But I think it was good and even though I didn’t get it, it seemed like you really understood what you were saying and that’s a good thing too. If the author has no clue, how would anyone else? Keep up the good work.
55
PizzaPlace8:00
// Mar 25, 2007 at 8:30 pm
Monkey Spy, Good job! Although your article was interesting, I didn’t really understand what you were talking about. Next time you write an article, read it over a few times to make sure it makes sence. But I think it was good and even though I didn’t get it, it seemed like you really understood what you were saying and that’s a good thing too. If the author has no clue, how would anyone else? Keep up the good work.
56
PizzaPlace8:00
// Mar 25, 2007 at 8:30 pm
Oh, oopsies. I kind of repeated myself, didn’t I? Sorry!
57
Jam
// Mar 25, 2007 at 9:28 pm
Bigfoot good article i liked that you asked alot of questions
58
Jam
// Mar 25, 2007 at 9:32 pm
Rocketman well written easy to understand article. good job.
59
Jam
// Mar 25, 2007 at 9:33 pm
Pizzaplace I like your honesty good report.
60
BY:smellymelly TO: Pooky star
// Mar 26, 2007 at 6:34 am
Great reflection, you used a lot of good detail on what was different!
61
BY:smellymelly TO: PizzaPlace8:00
// Mar 26, 2007 at 6:37 am
Good job, this article was worth reading. Keep up the good wrok!
62
BY:smellymelly TO:hotdawg 911
// Mar 26, 2007 at 6:40 am
Good job, you put some much work into this article. It was so cool to read your article. Keep up the good work.
63
Monkeyspy
// Mar 26, 2007 at 6:18 pm
Jam:
Nice Job i really liked that u mentioned the details in the text book. keep up the good work!
64
openthis99
// Apr 10, 2007 at 4:44 pm
It was realy cool to see alive cells to see how they move and what they really look like. But the ones in the book have much more detail also they tell you some things about the cells while looking under a micorsocp it is just there and alive moving. i learend what real cells look like under the micorscope and how they moved
65
openthis99
// Apr 10, 2007 at 4:46 pm
bigfoot good article nice questions you asked and how you have an open mind
66
openthis99
// Apr 10, 2007 at 4:47 pm
good articl stink chesse
67
openthis99
// Apr 10, 2007 at 4:48 pm
good job hotdawg 911 you put a lot og good work in your articl
68
laugh-Cackle-SHOP!
// Apr 11, 2007 at 7:01 am
Looking at cells in real life is much better than in the text books. The colors are deeper, the actions are swift and ability to zoom in on one specific one is pretty nice too. I mean seure cells may not be the most exciting thing to look at during class, but I’d still rather be doing it to live then in a book.
69
laugh-Cackle-SHOP!
// Apr 11, 2007 at 7:07 am
-Openthis99
Good thinking, I never looked at it in that angle.
70
laugh-Cackle-SHOP!
// Apr 11, 2007 at 7:10 am
-JAM
Very thought our article. You gave good points to both sides.
71
laugh-Cackle-SHOP!
// Apr 11, 2007 at 7:12 am
-Smellymelly
Way to stand up for your own oppinoin. MYbe your right.
P.S. Try to fix up your grammar!
Leave a Comment