We have recently graphed information about the colonies. Below you will find graphs and questions displayed. You must answer the question by posting a comment in your class period post. Use only your first name.
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Period 4 Comment here on Population Pie Graph Comparison
There are several differences between the two graphs. One is that there are several new colonies such as South Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Georgia. All the colonies went up in population a considerable amount. All of them went up at least 50%. Many changes ranks in biggest in population but Virginia is still the most populated.
Three conclusions come to me after comparing these two graphs. One of them is that there was more colonies in 1750 than in 1650. Another one is that the states that were in 1650 had gotten bigger between 1650 and 1750. My last conclusion is that most of the states that were one of the smallest states in 1650 were still one of the smallest states in 1750.
In both charts Virginia has the largest population. On the first chart there are some missing colonies, this is because those colonies didn’t exist yet. On the first chart Delaware had the smallest population but on the second chart Georgia had the smallest population. Emily
Here are my following conclusions that I drew from these two graphs. In 1650 Connecticut and New York had the same population amount. I also noticed that in the 1650’s they hadn’t discovered 5 colonies: North Carolina, South Carolina, Pennsylvania, Georgia, and New Jersey. The smallest colony in the 1650’s was Delaware, and the smallest colony in the 1750’s was Georgia. Those are the three conclusions I drew about these two graphs. alexandra
One conclusion I can make about the two graphs is that the people had alot of babies in 100 years. I can make this conclusion because every state raised their population by at least 20,000 people. Another conclusion I can make is that alot more people moved into the states from Europe, or other continents. Lastly, I think that the population increased alot because people weren’t killing as many people in this time period. In conclusion I think this is why the population increased alot. Keith
I think that the first reason why the graphs are different because the population doubled from 1650 to 1750. Second the colonists had children so the population increased because of that. Last the population of Virgina's population more than doubled from 1650 to 1750. Ryan
In 1650 there were fewer colonies that were formed than in 1750. Also in 1650 Virginia had more land than in 1750. Delaware and New Hampshire had about the same population in 1750. Rhode Island grew bigger in 1750 than in 1650. Carmela
I realized that the population has increased drastically. From 1650 to 1750 the population has nearly tripled in some places. I also think that the population increased because more and more pilgrims came to America. Nick
A comparison to the population of 1650 and 1750 was that Virginia was always the highest population. There weren’t as many colonies in 1650 than in 1750. The last conclusion is that the smallest population in the 1650’s was Delaware and in the 1750’s it was Georgia. Cassie
Well the biggest difference that I noticed for the graph in 1650 and 1750 is that in 1650 there wasn’t 13 colonies yet. The population at least tripled for every single one. Virginia, Connecticut, New York, Delaware, Maryland, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire were the only colonies on both graphs. In 1650 there were only 8 Colonies. In both graphs Virginia has the biggest population. There are plenty more things to say about this graph but this is all I have to say for now. D.J.
There are three comparisons I can make from these two graphs. One conclusion is that in 1750, more states grew and more states were becoming developed. Secondly, Massachusetts had one of the biggest population in 1650 and 1750. Lastly, as time went on more people were living in 1750 than in 1650. That’s why there was more population in 1750. These are my conclusions.
There are many conclusions I can draw from comparing the two graphs. One thing is that the population of each colony dramatically rose. Also, there are much more colonies. Virginia is still the largest colony. This is what I can conclude from comparing the two graphs. Sam
From the two graphs a conclusion I can draw is that in 100 years the colonies developed very well. I can draw this conclusion because from 1650 to 1750 the population went way up. Also there were only 8 different populated colonies in 1650. In 1750 there were 13. In conclusion from these graphs I can draw the conclusion that the colonies developed very well.
The three conclusions I can draw from the two population graphs is that Delaware has the smallest population out of both. Also, Virginia has the biggest population. Another conclusion I can make is that in the 1650’s there weren’t as many colonies. These are the conclusions I can make. kristin
There are many conclusions that you can make from comparing these two graphs. I am going to name just three. One comparison is that in the 1650’s there were less colonies then in the 1750’s. Another thing I noticed was that from 1650’s to the 1750’s Connecticut grew in size. Connecticut grew about 107,200. Finally one last thing I noticed was that Massachusetts got a lot bigger then it was. It went from 15,600 to 188,000. These are the comparisons I made between these two graphs. lauren
Virginia is bigger in 1750. Massachusetts also got bigger by about 18,000. Connecticut’s population went a huge amount. Basically, in 1750, every population went up. Virginia is the biggest in both years. New Hampshire population went up by 26,000. Maryland’s population went up a huge amount as well. In 1650, there was less of a population but in 100 years, the population increased a whole lot. dirtbikerider
I can conclude from this graph that each colony has a population increase of at least 5,000 in the one year. The largest colony was Virginia in both years. The smallest colony is Delaware in 1650. Georgia is the smallest colony in 1750. Now, Georgia is much bigger than Delaware. I can also conclude that there are 5 more colonies in 1750. -Basile
The population in 1650 was much smaller than it is in 1750. The population went up a lot over time. In 1650 Delware had the smallest population. But, in 1750 Georgia had the smallest population. Viginia had the largest population in 1650 as well as in 1750. In 1650 Delware has 600 less people than rhode island. Allie
Three conclusions from these graphs are that in 100 years 71,400 people came to New Jersey. In 1650 and 1750 Georgia had the highest population. In 100 years 72,600 people came to New York. Those are three conclusions from the two graphs.
There are many conclusions you can draw from these graphs. One thing is that Delaware was the smallest state in 1650 but in 1750 the smallest state was Georgia. Another thing you can see from these graphs is that Delaware grew by 28500 people in 100 years. Finally you can tell that Virginia is the biggest state in both graphs. You can tell many things from these graphs. Diana
virgina was the biggest colonie. the population changed in 100 years. virgina is still the biggest colonie 1750, more states grew and more states were becoming developed.
From these two graphs, I can conclude that the people from the colonies in 1650 probably weren’t the people that started some of the 1750 colonies. I can tell this because as the populations of the 1750 colonies raise, so do the 1650 colonies’ populations. I can also conclude that the settlers that were making new colonies were making stops in Virginia because it has the largest population, so there are probably many people that settlers could trade with there. Also, I can conclude from the two graphs that many people came to Delaware. Between 1650 and 1750 the population in Delaware went from 200 people to 28,700 people, this means that Delaware multiplied its population by over 143 times in just 100 years. -Brett
There are several differences between the two graphs. One is that there are several new colonies such as South Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Georgia. All the colonies went up in population a considerable amount. All of them went up at least 50%. Many changes ranks in biggest in population but Virginia is still the most populated.
ReplyDeleteGin Gin
Three conclusions come to me after comparing these two graphs. One of them is that there was more colonies in 1750 than in 1650. Another one is that the states that were in 1650 had gotten bigger between 1650 and 1750. My last conclusion is that most of the states that were one of the smallest states in 1650 were still one of the smallest states in 1750.
ReplyDelete-Mango
In both charts Virginia has the largest population. On the first chart there are some missing colonies, this is because those colonies didn’t exist yet. On the first chart Delaware had the smallest population but on the second chart Georgia had the smallest population.
ReplyDeleteEmily
Here are my following conclusions that I drew from these two graphs. In 1650 Connecticut and New York had the same population amount. I also noticed that in the 1650’s they hadn’t discovered 5 colonies: North Carolina, South Carolina, Pennsylvania, Georgia, and New Jersey. The smallest colony in the 1650’s was Delaware, and the smallest colony in the 1750’s was Georgia. Those are the three conclusions I drew about these two graphs.
ReplyDeletealexandra
One conclusion I can make about the two graphs is that the people had alot of babies in 100 years. I can make this conclusion because every state raised their population by at least 20,000 people. Another conclusion I can make is that alot more people moved into the states from Europe, or other continents. Lastly, I think that the population increased alot because people weren’t killing as many people in this time period. In conclusion I think this is why the population increased alot.
ReplyDeleteKeith
I think that the first reason why the graphs are different because the population doubled from 1650 to 1750. Second the colonists had children so the population increased because of that. Last the population of Virgina's population more than doubled from 1650 to 1750.
ReplyDeleteRyan
In 1650 there were fewer colonies that were formed than in 1750. Also in 1650 Virginia had more land than in 1750. Delaware and New Hampshire had about the same population in 1750. Rhode Island grew bigger in 1750 than in 1650.
ReplyDeleteCarmela
I realized that the population has increased drastically. From 1650 to 1750 the population has nearly tripled in some places. I also think that the population increased because more and more pilgrims came to America.
ReplyDeleteNick
A comparison to the population of 1650 and 1750 was that Virginia was always the highest population. There weren’t as many colonies in 1650 than in 1750. The last conclusion is that the smallest population in the 1650’s was Delaware and in the 1750’s it was Georgia.
ReplyDeleteCassie
Well the biggest difference that I noticed for the graph in 1650 and 1750 is that in 1650 there wasn’t 13 colonies yet. The population at least tripled for every single one. Virginia, Connecticut, New York, Delaware, Maryland, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire were the only colonies on both graphs. In 1650 there were only 8 Colonies. In both graphs Virginia has the biggest population. There are plenty more things to say about this graph but this is all I have to say for now.
ReplyDeleteD.J.
There are three comparisons I can make from these two graphs. One conclusion is that in 1750, more states grew and more states were becoming developed. Secondly, Massachusetts had one of the biggest population in 1650 and 1750. Lastly, as time went on more people were living in 1750 than in 1650. That’s why there was more population in 1750. These are my conclusions.
ReplyDeleteMatt
There are many conclusions I can draw from comparing the two graphs. One thing is that the population of each colony dramatically rose. Also, there are much more colonies. Virginia is still the largest colony. This is what I can conclude from comparing the two graphs.
ReplyDeleteSam
From the two graphs a conclusion I can draw is that in 100 years the colonies developed very well. I can draw this conclusion because from 1650 to 1750 the population went way up. Also there were only 8 different populated colonies in 1650. In 1750 there were 13. In conclusion from these graphs I can draw the conclusion that the colonies developed very well.
ReplyDelete~ Courtney
The three conclusions I can draw from the two population graphs is that Delaware has the smallest population out of both. Also, Virginia has the biggest population. Another conclusion I can make is that in the 1650’s there weren’t as many colonies. These are the conclusions I can make.
ReplyDeletekristin
There are many conclusions that you can make from comparing these two graphs. I am going to name just three. One comparison is that in the 1650’s there were less colonies then in the 1750’s. Another thing I noticed was that from 1650’s to the 1750’s Connecticut grew in size. Connecticut grew about 107,200. Finally one last thing I noticed was that Massachusetts got a lot bigger then it was. It went from 15,600 to 188,000. These are the comparisons I made between these two graphs.
ReplyDeletelauren
Virginia is bigger in 1750. Massachusetts also got bigger by about 18,000. Connecticut’s population went a huge amount. Basically, in 1750, every population went up. Virginia is the biggest in both years. New Hampshire population went up by 26,000. Maryland’s population went up a huge amount as well. In 1650, there was less of a population but in 100 years, the population increased a whole lot.
ReplyDeletedirtbikerider
I can conclude from this graph that each colony has a population increase of at least 5,000 in the one year. The largest colony was Virginia in both years. The smallest colony is Delaware in 1650. Georgia is the smallest colony in 1750. Now, Georgia is much bigger than Delaware. I can also conclude that there are 5 more colonies in 1750.
ReplyDelete-Basile
The population in 1650 was much smaller than it is in 1750. The population went up a lot over time. In 1650 Delware had the smallest population. But, in 1750 Georgia had the smallest population. Viginia had the largest population in 1650 as well as in 1750. In 1650 Delware has 600 less people than rhode island.
ReplyDeleteAllie
Three conclusions from these graphs are that in 100 years 71,400 people came to New Jersey. In 1650 and 1750 Georgia had the highest population. In 100 years 72,600 people came to New York. Those are three conclusions from the two graphs.
ReplyDeleteAnthony
There are many conclusions you can draw from these graphs. One thing is that Delaware was the smallest state in 1650 but in 1750 the smallest state was Georgia. Another thing you can see from these graphs is that Delaware grew by 28500 people in 100 years. Finally you can tell that Virginia is the biggest state in both graphs. You can tell many things from these graphs.
ReplyDeleteDiana
virgina was the biggest colonie. the population changed in 100 years. virgina is still the biggest colonie 1750, more states grew and more states were becoming developed.
ReplyDeleteJoe smo
From these two graphs, I can conclude that the people from the colonies in 1650 probably weren’t the people that started some of the 1750 colonies. I can tell this because as the populations of the 1750 colonies raise, so do the 1650 colonies’ populations. I can also conclude that the settlers that were making new colonies were making stops in Virginia because it has the largest population, so there are probably many people that settlers could trade with there. Also, I can conclude from the two graphs that many people came to Delaware. Between 1650 and 1750 the population in Delaware went from 200 people to 28,700 people, this means that Delaware multiplied its population by over 143 times in just 100 years.
ReplyDelete-Brett