The following rubric indicates how points are determined for laboratory reports. All reports include the assessment of grammar, vocabulary, organization, and coherence. Reports also include a point for double-spacing. Double-spacing is necessary to provide space for editorial comments.
| 1. [i] Image or [s] sketch or [dr] drawing | |
|---|---|
| 3 | image, sketch, or drawing that is clear and informative with correct labels OR image fully appropriate to laboratory, original, explanatory, captions as appropriate |
| 2 | Sketch is clear and complete, only a minor issues such as a mislabel, unoriginal, or lack of a necessary caption |
| 1 | Sketch is confusing, unclear, not well done, or inappropriate image |
| 0 | Omitted |
| 2. [d] Data (often in a table of results) | |
| +1 | per variable or correct data element |
| 3. [t] Data table format (where appropriate) | |
| 3 | Clear, concise, well thought out, informative, labels and units in the head |
| 2 | Missing borders or other minor format inconsistencies, or missing units in the head |
| 1 | Incomplete, runs off edges of page, lacks minimal margins, or missing two or more elements such as borders and units |
| 0 | Omitted |
| 4. [g] Data display: Graph | |
| 3 | Correct graph type, correct axis labels |
| 2 | Missing a label or other element, or reversed x and y axes on an xy scattergraph |
| 1 | wrong graph type(s), or plotting the wrong data, or wrong result on graph, or otherwise incorrect |
| 0 | Omitted |
| 5. [a] Data analysis: mathematical and/or statistical analysis | |
| +1 | per correct analysis item. e.g. slope, intercept, linearity, conductivity, using mean of multiple measures, extending dependent variable to domain limits, conversion calculations, other calculated or derived results. Values must include correct units. Theoretically cited values must include citation of source. Citation format is minimalized. See sample laboratory for an example. |
| 6. [c] Conclusions – Content | |
| Each student must write their own individual conclusion. I want to assess each individual student's reasoning and writing ability. Where a lab team writes and submits a single common conclusion, the conclusion points are split between the team members. | |
| 5 | Thoughtfully put together, well-reasoned, logical, sensible. Fully complete and thorough summary of the findings of the laboratory. Correct usage of vocabulary, appropriate use of scientific concepts. Discusses potential sources of error and how these were controlled. Includes background research on the laboratory subject. Cites appropriate text book information related to laboratory. |
| 4 | Moderately well reasoned. Relevant and adequate answer to the task set with only a single gap or missing task item. |
| 3 | For the most part answers the task set, though there may be gaps or redundant information, or the conclusion is essentially tangential to the experiments, or based on misconceptions, or incorrect conclusion, muddled |
| 2 | Conclusion of little relevance to the laboratory, major gaps, or overly short such as to be incomplete, Confusing, or highly incomplete, or illogical, or made confusing by serious grammar problems, or merely restated the procedure, or a variant of a non-specific and vague "I learned a lot in this laboratory" |
| 1 | Bears little relation to the task set, unclear, very confusing, not well reasoned, extremely tangential, or extraordinarily weak. Almost incomprehensible, or a single (one to two) sentence conclusion |
| 0 | Omitted |
| 7. [f] Format | |
| +1 | Double spaced |
| +1 | Appropriate margins, clean layout, no widow headings, nor orphan table rows |
| [G] Grammar and Syntax [-2 if conclusion too short to judge grammar properly] | |
|---|---|
| 5 | No errors of grammar or word order. Correct use of tense. |
| 4 | Some errors of grammar or word order but communication not impaired. |
| 3 | Fairly frequent errors of grammar or word order; occasional re-reading necessary for full comprehension. |
| 2 | Frequent errors of grammar or word order; efforts of interpretation sometimes required on reader's part. |
| 1 | Very frequent errors of grammar or word orde; reader often has to rely on own interpretation. |
| 0 | Errors of grammar or word order so severe as to make comprehension virtually impossible. |
| [V] Vocabulary [-2 if conclusion too short - taken as evidence of vocabulary limitations] | |
| 5 | Appropriate terms used consistently, clear command of vocabulary with a focus on correct usage of physical science vocabulary, no misspelled words. |
| 4 | Occasionally uses inappropriate terms or relies on circumlocution; expression of ideas not impaired; or a few misspelled words. |
| 3 | Uses wrong or inappropriate words fairly frequently; expression of ideas may be limited because of inadequate vocabulary, or many misspelled words. |
| 2 | Limited vocabulary and frequent errors clearly hinder expression of ideas. |
| 1 | Vocabulary so limited and so frequently misused that reader must often rely on own interpretation. |
| 0 | Vocabulary limitations so extreme as to make comprehension virtually impossible. |
| [O] Organization | |
| 5 | All sections present in the proper order. Material exceptionally well organized. Conclusion well structured with introductory and concluding phrases. |
| 4 | One section out of sequence or omitted. Material well organized; structure could occasionally be clearer but communication not impaired. |
| 3 | Multiple sections out of sequence, some lack of organization; re-reading required for clarification of ideas. For example, tables and graphs printed from a spreadsheet and then stapled to the back of a lab write-up printed from a word processing program. |
| 2 | Multiple sections omitted. Little or no attempt at connectivity, though reader can deduce some organization. |
| 1 | Individual ideas may be clear, but very difficult to deduce connection between them. |
| 0 | Lack of organization so severe that communication is seriously impaired. |
| [C] Cohesion [0 if text too short to judge cohesion] | |
| 5 | Consistent choices in cohesive structures. Ideas flow logically. Conclusion remains on topic. Connector words assist the reader. |
| 4 | Occasional lack of consistency in choice of cohesive structures and vocabulary but overall ease of communication not impaired. |
| 3 | Patchy, with some cohesive structures or vocabulary items noticeably inappropriate to general style. Ideas tend to be disconnected from each other. Reads more like an outline than a coherent essay, or written as a list of answers to questions without connector words and phrases generating a choppy, disjoint style |
| 2 | Cohesive structures or vocabulary items sometimes not only inappropriate but also misused; little sense of ease of communication. Connector words and phrases confuse and mislead the reader, but sense can be made of the conclusion. |
| 1 | Communication often impaired by completely inappropriate or misused cohesive structures or vocabulary items making it difficult to make scientific sense of the conclusion. |
| 0 | A 'hodgepodge' of half-learned misused cohesive structures and vocabulary items rendering communication almost impossible. |