No need to apologize! It's all a bit bewildering in the beginning. You want to do it all perfectly, but it's new territory. Don't be afraid to make mistakes: you learn from them.
Dropping a .2 kilogram mass from 1.5 m to me means the distance traveled is always 1.5 m, so I must assume there is more going on. Did you drop it from 1.5 m and record the time it took to fall on to something that was varied in height ? For a correct 'advice'on how to deal with the measurement uncertainties it is in fact important to know precisely how the experiments were conducted: what was measured for every observation, what was measured only onde, what factors were taken from elsewhere and so on.
This is because in experiments there are statistical errors (they may be reduced by repeating the measurement: an average is determined more accurately than one single observation) and there are systematic errors: a value for g of 9.81 may in reality be 9.82 but you use the same value every time you use g, so it doesn't average out"".
Never mind: if the mass is dropped, the initial kinetic energy is zero and all mechanical energy is potential energy from gravity. I think that the estimated accuracy of 1 mm is way too optimistic for the distance dropped - but it's up to you.
There is a conservation law that says mechanical energy is constant (provided there is no friction eating away from the energy). With a steel ball in ai you can reasonable well ignore the friction.
You have an intial energy mgh as the product of ##m\pm \Delta m##, ##h\pm \Delta h## and ##g \pm \Delta g##. Now: you measure m only once, h for the start only once (?) and g is the same for all measurements. Then what? Where does "distance traveled is always changing as well as the height" come from ? And where does the error in time come in ?
--
You can see I'm a researcher: you ask for the answer to one question and what you get back is a whole bunch of other questions

!
--