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 8 Comment here on Population Pie Graph Comparison
This is a response to the population graphs. The Virginia colony had the highest population in both graphs. There were new colonies discovered from 1650 to 1750. Massachusetts has the second highest population in both graphs. Those are some comparisons about the two graphs. Andrew
By looking at these graphs you can make a couple of conclusions. One conclusion is that in the 100 years between 1650 and 1750, many more colonies were started. Another conclusion is that the bigger colonies in 1650 were still big in 1750. For example Virginia and Massachusetts were both the two largest colonies in both 1650 and 1750. One last conclusion you can make is that the colonies’ population increased by a huge amount. An example of this is Virginia whose population raised by about 200,000 people. Thos are the conclusions I can make about this graph.
There are many things you can conclude between the 1650 and the 1750 graph. Between the 100 years, each state grew in population. This was a huge change in each state. I can also conclude that the biggest states had the most amounts of people. This makes sense because obviously people would try to get the biggest amount of land possible. Lastly, the populations in both Massachusetts and Virginia still were the two biggest states in 1650 and 1750. Thes4e are only some conclusions I can make about the two graphs. Thomas
There are many conclusions you can draw by comparing the two graphs. One is that the population of the thirteen colonies changed drastically between 1650 and 1750. One obvious way they developed is that all of the colonies’ populations got significantly bigger over the 100 years. For instance, Delaware went from being just 200 people to being 28,700 people. Also, many more colonies were born during the 100 year period. But some things stayed constant. For example, Virginia stayed the most populated state, with Massachusetts in second place. Also, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Delaware remained the state with the least amount of people. That is how the 13 original colonies’ populations changed from 1650 to 1750. Caitlin
From comparing these graphs I can conclude that there were 5 states added between 1650 and 1750. I can also see that many more people lived in the Colonies in 1750. This means that more people wanted to move to the new lands. In comparing these graphs I found that Virginia’s population multiplied by more than 12. Virginia had the highest population on both graphs.
One conclusion that can be made by looking at this graph is that more colonies were formed into the 100 years. Another conclusion that can be made is that the population increases a lot in the colonies that were first there in 1650. Also that Virginal still had the biggest population from 1650 to 1750. Another conclusion that I made by looking at this graph is that the population of Massachusetts stayed the 2nd highest from 1650 to 1750.Those are the conclusions that I made by looking at these two graphs. David
In this graph, we can see that there were more colonies in 1750. The highest number of people in 1650 was close to one of the smallest numbers in the population of 1750. The colonies in the first graph were all generally in the north, while some colonies in the second graph were in the south. The lowest population in 1750 was 26 times larger than the lowest population in 1650, 200. From looking at the graph, we can see that Virginia’s population grew over 200,000 in only 100 years. There are many conclusions we can draw from looking at the two graphs.
The graph from 1650 and the graph from 1750 are very different. The graph from 1750 shows that the population raised drastically in a short period of time. In some colonies the population rose by more than 200,000! This shows that more people moved to the colonies during those 100 years. -Michael
There are many things that changed from the 1650s to the 1750s. First of all, in the 1650s there are only 8 colonies. In the 1750s there are all 13 colonies. Also, the populations are a lot larger in the 1750s. It’s probably like that because more and more people came over to the colonies. -Michele
One conclusion I can draw from this is that there was more states in 1750. Also I can conclude that Virginia was the most populated colonies in both graphs. Another thing I can conclude from this is that all the colonies in the first graph were from the north and theren was none in the south.
My first conclusion I can make is that in 1750 the populations had grown quite a bit compared to 1650. I can also conclude that Virginia stayed the colony with the biggest population even after the great population increase. This is important because it means that the most people who came over to America went to Virginia. Also I can conclude that Delaware stayed the colony with the least population through the great population increase. This shows that people did not like to live in Delaware.
When I look at this graph, the first obvious comparison I can make is that in 1750, there were more states than there were in 1650. From this, I can conclude that over the course of 100 years, the settlers started spreading out, and colonizing more land. Another comparison I can make is that in both graphs, Virginia and Massachusetts are the most populated states. They were among the first states colonized, so it makes sense for their populations to be the greatest. A third comparison I can make is that from 1650 to 1750, Rhode Island, Delaware, and New Hampshire’s populations all went up. But they are smaller than North Carolina and South Carolina, both of which were colonized after them. I can conclude that this is because those states were both in the south, which has good land for farming. willa
In this graph we can see that the colonies inceased in amount but shrunk in size from 1650-1750. Also we can see that the largest populatin from 1650 is very small compared to the largest amount in 1750. Another thing I can compare on these graphs is that Virginia is still the largest colony in matters of population. Also you can see that unlike in 1650 Delaware no longer has the smallest population. One final comparison is that in 1650 New York and Connecticut were the most similar and in 1750 New York and North Carolina have the two most similar populations. Those are the comparisons I can draw from this graph. -casey
There are many differences between the graph explaining the population of the American colonies in 1650, and the graph explaining it in 1750. First, there are many more colonies in 1750 than 1650, which started off with only eight. More colonies had formed, including colonies like New Jersey, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Pennsylvania, making a total of thirteen. In addition, the total population increased from only 49,300 people to 1,170,800 people. Third, the smallest colony of 1650, Delaware, was no longer the smallest colony in 1750. The smallest colony in 1750 ended up being Georgia. The largest colony in 1650, Virginia, multiplied in size by a little more than twelve by 1750. Katie
There are several conclusions that can be drawn about the difference between these two graphs. First, the population of the colonies overall increased extremely. Delaware, was the least populated colony in 1650, had a population of 28,700 in 1750 (almost double the size of the most populated colony in 1650). Also, there were 5 more colonies- Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania- added from 1650-1750. Finally, I can conclude that Pennsylvania was most likely founded only slightly after 1650. I inferred this because even though it was one of the 5 new colonies, it had the 4th highest population.
I can conclude from these two graphs that the population in many areas changed over time. One example of this is that Massachusetts got a lot larger in population. It went from 15,600 people in 1650 and then to 188,000 people in 1750. Secondly, more colonies were formed. Originally there were only 8 colonies, but as the years went on there ended up being 13. Lastly, I can conclude that overall in 1750 there were more people. -Alli
From the information on these two graphs, there are some conclusions that are easy to make, once they are closely examined. One of these conclusions is that states were developed in the course of 100 years. In 1650, there are only 8 colonies being compared on the graph. However, on the next graph there are 5 more colonies that have been added to the graph. Another conclusion is that people began moving around America by 1750. I know this because the colonies are much greater in population, and there are more. Finally, a third idea that I get from reading these graphs is that Europeans began coming to America. Each colony grew in size, no matter how big its size.
There are a few conclusions you can draw from comparing the population of the 13 colonies in 1650 and the population in 1750. For example, the first thing you can see is that in 1650 Virginia was the most populated colony, and in 1750 Virginia was still the most populated colony. Also, Delaware was one of the least populated colonies in both charts. The last thing you can see from these graphs is New Hampshire grew in population. These are three things you can easily see by looking at the two graphs. -Becca
From these graph I can draw three conclusions about the population growth from 1650 to 1750. One conclusion I can draw from these graphs is that more colonies were formed. From 1650 to 1750 five more colonies had been established. A second conclusion I can draw from these graphs is that all the eight colonies, in 1650, had grown tremendously. For example, in 1650 Virginia had18, 700 people and in 1750, there were 231,000 people living in Virginia. A final conclusion I can make about these graphs is that Georgia was most likely one of the later colonies established because only 5,200 people were living there. This means that it hadn’t been there long enough for more people to settle there. ~Sarah
There are many conclusions I can draw by comparing the two graphs. In 1650, Virginia had the largest population of 18,700. In 1750, Virginia remained the highest populated colony with a total of 231,000, meaning it increased by over twelve times. I also observed, that there were more colonies established in the between the years 1650 and 1750. In 1650 there were 8 colonies, but by 1750 there were, what we refer to today, as the 13 colonies. Finally, I noticed that the population in general increased. In 1650 the colonies had a total of 35,300. In 1750, the colonies had a total of 1,170,800, an increase of 1,135,500. ~Korynne~
There are a few conclusions I can draw from this graph. Since there were fewer people from 1650 to 1750 in places such as Virginia, the colonies must have decreased their boundries and split up. This would aslo explain the reason for new colonies appearing like Connecticut and Pennsylvania. Also, more people must have come to the new world because the population greatly increased from 1650 to 1750. In 100 years, the population grew by about 135,000 people in Rhode Island. Finally, both North Carolina and South Carolina must have formed sometime shortly after 1650 at the same time. They both were not in the 1650 population graph, however in 1750 each had a very similar population. They could have at one time been a whole colony that split in two for various reasons. Tyler
One conclusion I can draw from these two graphs is that in 1650 the Europeans only founded eight colonies and in 1750 the founded thirteen colonies. Another conclusion I can draw from these two graphs is that in 1650 the Virginia was the most populated colony, holding 18,700 people. In the second graph of 1750, Virginia is still the most populated colony, but is now holding 231,000 people. This shows that from 1650 to 1750 there was a major population increase. One last conclusion I can draw from the graphs is that in 1650 Massachusetts was the second most populated colony, holding 15,600 people. In 1750 Massachusetts is one of the least populated states, but is holding 33,200 people. These are the conclusions I drew from theses two graphs.
In 1650 the graph only showed eight of the Thirteen Original Colonies. There were only eight colonies settled in 1650 when the other five were not all fully settled until 1733. The eight colonies only had the population of 49,300, when the thirteen colonies had a much larger population of 1,290,500. Most of the colonies in the 1650 graph were in the north while 6 colonies in the second graph were in the south. Another conclusion that can be made from these graphs is the similarities of populations of the colonies in 1650 and 1750. Virginia is the most populated in each of the graphs also in both graphs, Massachusetts is following. The populations all increased but the most populated colonies increased at a steady enough rate, that they stayed the most populated.
This is a response to the population graphs. The Virginia colony had the highest population in both graphs. There were new colonies discovered from 1650 to 1750. Massachusetts has the second highest population in both graphs. Those are some comparisons about the two graphs.
ReplyDeleteAndrew
By looking at these graphs you can make a couple of conclusions. One conclusion is that in the 100 years between 1650 and 1750, many more colonies were started. Another conclusion is that the bigger colonies in 1650 were still big in 1750. For example Virginia and Massachusetts were both the two largest colonies in both 1650 and 1750. One last conclusion you can make is that the colonies’ population increased by a huge amount. An example of this is Virginia whose population raised by about 200,000 people. Thos are the conclusions I can make about this graph.
ReplyDeleteJames
There are many things you can conclude between the 1650 and the 1750 graph. Between the 100 years, each state grew in population. This was a huge change in each state. I can also conclude that the biggest states had the most amounts of people. This makes sense because obviously people would try to get the biggest amount of land possible. Lastly, the populations in both Massachusetts and Virginia still were the two biggest states in 1650 and 1750. Thes4e are only some conclusions I can make about the two graphs.
ReplyDeleteThomas
There are many conclusions you can draw by comparing the two graphs. One is that the population of the thirteen colonies changed drastically between 1650 and 1750. One obvious way they developed is that all of the colonies’ populations got significantly bigger over the 100 years. For instance, Delaware went from being just 200 people to being 28,700 people. Also, many more colonies were born during the 100 year period. But some things stayed constant. For example, Virginia stayed the most populated state, with Massachusetts in second place. Also, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Delaware remained the state with the least amount of people. That is how the 13 original colonies’ populations changed from 1650 to 1750.
ReplyDeleteCaitlin
From comparing these graphs I can conclude that there were 5 states added between 1650 and 1750. I can also see that many more people lived in the Colonies in 1750. This means that more people wanted to move to the new lands. In comparing these graphs I found that Virginia’s population multiplied by more than 12. Virginia had the highest population on both graphs.
ReplyDeleteMateo
One conclusion that can be made by looking at this graph is that more colonies were formed into the 100 years. Another conclusion that can be made is that the population increases a lot in the colonies that were first there in 1650. Also that Virginal still had the biggest population from 1650 to 1750. Another conclusion that I made by looking at this graph is that the population of Massachusetts stayed the 2nd highest from 1650 to 1750.Those are the conclusions that I made by looking at these two graphs.
ReplyDeleteDavid
In this graph, we can see that there were more colonies in 1750. The highest number of people in 1650 was close to one of the smallest numbers in the population of 1750. The colonies in the first graph were all generally in the north, while some colonies in the second graph were in the south. The lowest population in 1750 was 26 times larger than the lowest population in 1650, 200. From looking at the graph, we can see that Virginia’s population grew over 200,000 in only 100 years. There are many conclusions we can draw from looking at the two graphs.
ReplyDelete*Shirley
The graph from 1650 and the graph from 1750 are very different. The graph from 1750 shows that the population raised drastically in a short period of time. In some colonies the population rose by more than 200,000! This shows that more people moved to the colonies during those 100 years.
ReplyDelete-Michael
There are many things that changed from the 1650s to the 1750s. First of all, in the 1650s there are only 8 colonies. In the 1750s there are all 13 colonies. Also, the populations are a lot larger in the 1750s. It’s probably like that because more and more people came over to the colonies.
ReplyDelete-Michele
One conclusion I can draw from this is that there was more states in 1750. Also I can conclude that Virginia was the most populated colonies in both graphs. Another thing I can conclude from this is that all the colonies in the first graph were from the north and theren was none in the south.
ReplyDeleteGARDNER
My first conclusion I can make is that in 1750 the populations had grown quite a bit compared to 1650. I can also conclude that Virginia stayed the colony with the biggest population even after the great population increase. This is important because it means that the most people who came over to America went to Virginia. Also I can conclude that Delaware stayed the colony with the least population through the great population increase. This shows that people did not like to live in Delaware.
ReplyDeleteMatt
When I look at this graph, the first obvious comparison I can make is that in 1750, there were more states than there were in 1650. From this, I can conclude that over the course of 100 years, the settlers started spreading out, and colonizing more land. Another comparison I can make is that in both graphs, Virginia and Massachusetts are the most populated states. They were among the first states colonized, so it makes sense for their populations to be the greatest. A third comparison I can make is that from 1650 to 1750, Rhode Island, Delaware, and New Hampshire’s populations all went up. But they are smaller than North Carolina and South Carolina, both of which were colonized after them. I can conclude that this is because those states were both in the south, which has good land for farming.
ReplyDeletewilla
In this graph we can see that the colonies inceased in amount but shrunk in size from 1650-1750. Also we can see that the largest populatin from 1650 is very small compared to the largest amount in 1750. Another thing I can compare on these graphs is that Virginia is still the largest colony in matters of population. Also you can see that unlike in 1650 Delaware no longer has the smallest population. One final comparison is that in 1650 New York and Connecticut were the most similar and in 1750 New York and North Carolina have the two most similar populations. Those are the comparisons I can draw from this graph.
ReplyDelete-casey
There are many differences between the graph explaining the population of the American colonies in 1650, and the graph explaining it in 1750. First, there are many more colonies in 1750 than 1650, which started off with only eight. More colonies had formed, including colonies like New Jersey, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Pennsylvania, making a total of thirteen. In addition, the total population increased from only 49,300 people to 1,170,800 people. Third, the smallest colony of 1650, Delaware, was no longer the smallest colony in 1750. The smallest colony in 1750 ended up being Georgia. The largest colony in 1650, Virginia, multiplied in size by a little more than twelve by 1750.
ReplyDeleteKatie
There are several conclusions that can be drawn about the difference between these two graphs. First, the population of the colonies overall increased extremely. Delaware, was the least populated colony in 1650, had a population of 28,700 in 1750 (almost double the size of the most populated colony in 1650). Also, there were 5 more colonies- Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania- added from 1650-1750. Finally, I can conclude that Pennsylvania was most likely founded only slightly after 1650. I inferred this because even though it was one of the 5 new colonies, it had the 4th highest population.
ReplyDeleteDan
I can conclude from these two graphs that the population in many areas changed over time. One example of this is that Massachusetts got a lot larger in population. It went from 15,600 people in 1650 and then to 188,000 people in 1750. Secondly, more colonies were formed. Originally there were only 8 colonies, but as the years went on there ended up being 13. Lastly, I can conclude that overall in 1750 there were more people.
ReplyDelete-Alli
From the information on these two graphs, there are some conclusions that are easy to make, once they are closely examined. One of these conclusions is that states were developed in the course of 100 years. In 1650, there are only 8 colonies being compared on the graph. However, on the next graph there are 5 more colonies that have been added to the graph. Another conclusion is that people began moving around America by 1750. I know this because the colonies are much greater in population, and there are more. Finally, a third idea that I get from reading these graphs is that Europeans began coming to America. Each colony grew in size, no matter how big its size.
ReplyDeletematthew
There are a few conclusions you can draw from comparing the population of the 13 colonies in 1650 and the population in 1750. For example, the first thing you can see is that in 1650 Virginia was the most populated colony, and in 1750 Virginia was still the most populated colony. Also, Delaware was one of the least populated colonies in both charts. The last thing you can see from these graphs is New Hampshire grew in population. These are three things you can easily see by looking at the two graphs.
ReplyDelete-Becca
From these graph I can draw three conclusions about the population growth from 1650 to 1750. One conclusion I can draw from these graphs is that more colonies were formed. From 1650 to 1750 five more colonies had been established. A second conclusion I can draw from these graphs is that all the eight colonies, in 1650, had grown tremendously. For example, in 1650 Virginia had18, 700 people and in 1750, there were 231,000 people living in Virginia. A final conclusion I can make about these graphs is that Georgia was most likely one of the later colonies established because only 5,200 people were living there. This means that it hadn’t been there long enough for more people to settle there. ~Sarah
ReplyDeleteThere are many conclusions I can draw by comparing the two graphs. In 1650, Virginia had the largest population of 18,700. In 1750, Virginia remained the highest populated colony with a total of 231,000, meaning it increased by over twelve times. I also observed, that there were more colonies established in the between the years 1650 and 1750. In 1650 there were 8 colonies, but by 1750 there were, what we refer to today, as the 13 colonies. Finally, I noticed that the population in general increased. In 1650 the colonies had a total of 35,300. In 1750, the colonies had a total of 1,170,800, an increase of 1,135,500.
ReplyDelete~Korynne~
There are a few conclusions I can draw from this graph. Since there were fewer people from 1650 to 1750 in places such as Virginia, the colonies must have decreased their boundries and split up. This would aslo explain the reason for new colonies appearing like Connecticut and Pennsylvania. Also, more people must have come to the new world because the population greatly increased from 1650 to 1750. In 100 years, the population grew by about 135,000 people in Rhode Island. Finally, both North Carolina and South Carolina must have formed sometime shortly after 1650 at the same time. They both were not in the 1650 population graph, however in 1750 each had a very similar population. They could have at one time been a whole colony that split in two for various reasons. Tyler
ReplyDeleteOne conclusion I can draw from these two graphs is that in 1650 the Europeans only founded eight colonies and in 1750 the founded thirteen colonies. Another conclusion I can draw from these two graphs is that in 1650 the Virginia was the most populated colony, holding 18,700 people. In the second graph of 1750, Virginia is still the most populated colony, but is now holding 231,000 people. This shows that from 1650 to 1750 there was a major population increase. One last conclusion I can draw from the graphs is that in 1650 Massachusetts was the second most populated colony, holding 15,600 people. In 1750 Massachusetts is one of the least populated states, but is holding 33,200 people. These are the conclusions I drew from theses two graphs.
ReplyDelete**Elena**
In 1650 the graph only showed eight of the Thirteen Original Colonies. There were only eight colonies settled in 1650 when the other five were not all fully settled until 1733. The eight colonies only had the population of 49,300, when the thirteen colonies had a much larger population of 1,290,500. Most of the colonies in the 1650 graph were in the north while 6 colonies in the second graph were in the south. Another conclusion that can be made from these graphs is the similarities of populations of the colonies in 1650 and 1750. Virginia is the most populated in each of the graphs also in both graphs, Massachusetts is following. The populations all increased but the most populated colonies increased at a steady enough rate, that they stayed the most populated.
ReplyDeleteSandy