RUBRIC FOR FORMAL LAB REPORTS
| 1 Beginning or incomplete | 2 Developing | 3 Accomplished | 4 Exemplary | Score | |
| Introduction | Very little background information provided or information is incorrect (0.5 pt) | Some introductory information, but still missing some major points (1 pt) | Introduction is nearly complete, missing some minor points (2 pt) | Introduction complete and well-written; provides all necessary background principles for the experiment (4 pt) | 4 pt |
| Experimental procedure | Missing several important experimental details or not written in paragraph format (0.25 pt) | Written in paragraph format, still missing some important experimental details (0.50 pt) | Written in paragraph format, important experimental details are covered, some minor details missing (1 pt) | Well-written in paragraph format, all experimental details are covered (2 pt) | 2 pt |
| Results: data, figures, graphs, tables, etc. | Figures, graphs, tables contain errors or are poorly constructed, have missing titles, captions or numbers, units missing or incorrect, etc. (0.5 pt) | Most figures, graphs, tables OK, some still missing some important or required features (1 pt) | All figures, graphs, tables are correctly drawn, but some have minor problems or could still be improved (2 pt) | All figures, graphs, tables are correctly drawn, are numbered and contain titles/captions. (4 pt) | 4 pt |
| Discussion | Very incomplete or incorrect interpretation of trends and comparison of data indicating a lack of understanding of results (0.5 pt) | Some of the results have been correctly interpreted and discussed; partial but incomplete understanding of results is still evident (1 pt) | Almost all of the results have been correctly interpreted and discussed, only minor improvements are needed (2 pt) | All important trends and data comparisons have been interpreted correctly and discussed, good understanding of results is conveyed (4 pt) | 4 pt |
| Conclusions | Conclusions missing or missing the important points (0.25 pt) | Conclusions regarding major points are drawn, but many are misstated, indicating a lack of understanding (0.5 pt) | All important conclusions have been drawn, could be better stated (0.75 pt) | All important conclusions have been clearly made, student shows good understanding (1 pt) | 1 pt |
| Spelling, grammar, sentence structure | Frequent grammar and/or spelling errors, writing style is rough and immature (0.25 pt) | Occasional grammar/spelling errors, generally readable with some rough spots in writing style (0.50 pt) | Less than 3 grammar/spelling errors, mature, readable style (1 pt) | All grammar/spelling correct and very well-written (2 pt) | 2 pt |
| Appearance and formatting | Sections out of order, too much handwritten copy, sloppy formatting (0.25 pt) | Sections in order, contains the minimum allowable amount of handwritten copy, formatting is rough but readable (0.50 pt) | All sections in order, formatting generally good but could still be improved (0.75 pt) | All sections in order, well-formatted, very readable (1 pt) | 1 pt |
| References
| Many references from the text are not cited and listed in the references section. formatting generally good but could still be improved (0.25 pt) | Some references from the text are not cited and listed in the references section. formatting generally good but could still be improved (0.50 pt) | All references from the text are cited and listed in the references section. formatting generally good but could still be improved (1 pt) | All references from the text are cited and listed in the references section. Correct format is used (2 pt) | 2 pt |
FORMAL LAB REPORTS: Written communication has been the standard for disseminating scientific achievements and new knowledge for centuries. A lack of good writing skills would be a severe handicap for any scientist, regardless of skill at the bench.
Individual lab report. This lab report will be on Ex. 2.9. Effect of Temperature on Microbial Growth.
This lab report is worth 20 %
Formal lab reports are written in the same format that microbiologists use throughout the world for publishing their own research results. Each paper is expected to contain:
Title and name of investigator (.i.e you)
Introduction. Describe the background of your experiments. The introduction should supply sufficient background information to allow the reader to understand and evaluate the results of the experiment without needing to refer to previous publications on the topic. The introduction should provide the rationale for the experiment. Above all, you should state briefly and clearly the purpose of the experiment. Choose REFERENCES carefully to provide the most important background information. Much of the introduction should be written in the PRESENT TENSE, because you will be referring primarily to your experiment and the established knowledge relating to it at the start of your work.
Materials and Methods. Refer to the protocol in your lab manual (and cite the reference). DO NOT COPY THE PROTOCOL IN YOUR LAB MANUAL. EVEN THOUGH YOUR GROUP TESTED ONLY ONE BACTERIA AT THE DIFF temperatures, Please write the Materials and Methods as though you tested all the bacteria. Describe the experiments that were carried out, the data you collected, and the experimental details (materials and methods employed). Describe any alterations you made in the published protocol. Note, the materials and methods section should not be a list, but rather, written in normal prose style (paragraph form).
Results. Results should be presented both in written prose and in the form of graph and/or tables. The reader of your report should be able to understand the results by reading the text you have written by itself, or by studying the graphs/tables by themselves. Data in graph form is usually more useful. The data presented is not the raw data you collect in class, but rather data that has been fitted into graphic form. PLEASE USE ALL THE DATA GENERATED BY THE CLASS FOR THIS EXPERIMENT
Discussion. In this section, the results are interpreted and put into perspective. The results, however, should not be repeated here!
More gists on the discussion:
The discussion should discuss the results
point out any exceptions or lack of correlation in your results; define unsettled points
show how your results and interpretations agree with previously published work. You need references for this.
discuss the theoretical implications of your experiment as well as any practical implications (if there is)
state your conclusions are clearly as possible
summarize your evidence for each conclusion.
Conclusion/s. The significance of findings should must be clearly described in this section.
- References cited. Any information that is not the direct results of your own experimentation.
Use MLA format. Do not CITE Websites, only scientific articles.
HERE ARE SOME FAQS for the LAB REPORT:
- In our methods and materials section, to which extent should we describe aseptic technique? I talked about using a loop(ensuring flaming of the loop) or sterile pipette and mouths of the tubes between each inoculation.
THAT SHOULD BE GOOD.
- My results section includes a table, a graph, and an image of the subcultures so the reader can understand how we designate a turbidity value. I do not discuss the individual results of each temperature for each organism– just a brief overview– because that data is available to view in the tables and graphs. Should I include more information to make my results section longer?
MAKE SURE YOU DESCRIBE THE TRENDS IN THE RESULTS SECTION FOR EACH ORGANISM.