COMMENTS ON LAB REPORT
6/10 = A report was turned in, but
has very little to do with science, scientific procedures or scientific
thought.
7/10 = A report that
loosely followed the scientific format of reporting and was unclear on main
points.
8/10 = A report that was organized
well and main points were either unclear or some how undeveloped. Usually the data was not used to refute or
support a clear hypothesis/prediction or the discussion was lacking depth, focus
or biological significance.
9/10 = A report that was organized
well and main points were clear and compelling. Reported data clearly made the authors main arguments and the
discussion was thoughtful and interesting.
10/10 = A report that not only fit the
criterion of a 9/10, but additionally made a clear, unique and original
argument.
OVERALL COMMENTS:
q The report included a thorough
summary of entire investigation, and good discussion of results in a larger
context.
q The report was complete, cogent and
original. Well done!
q A few units or terms were used
inaccurately.
q Focus report on observation/data
collected in your study or activity.
q Report actual data values in text,
then cite specific Figure/Table # that show complete data set, including values
to which you just made reference.
q Too extraneous or redundant. Using
outside information to support your data is important, when relevant. But lab
reports are about your new data. Stay focused on main points that data
supported or refuted.
q Some graph labels and captions were
unclear, incomplete, or missing.
q Re-organize general hypothesis/principles
and specific predictions/assumptions in order to focus reader on main
points.
q Support all claims/assertions with
justification with your data, esp. if statistical test were used.
q Data interpretation was not entirely
accurate.
q Discussion/conclusion was incomplete
or not thoroughly developed.
q Lacked cohesion. Needed transitions,
focus and/or conclusion tying it back to main point(s).
q Latin names in italics: 1st
Vinca minor then V. minor.