Universal Rubric for Lab Reports - College of Charleston

[Pages:10]Universal Rubric for Lab Reports

developed by

Briana Timmerman

University of South Carolina Department Biological Sciences

For more information, please contact: Briana Timmerman

timmerman@schc.sc.edu

The rubric was developed as a means of measuring how well students are achieving the stated curriculum goals of the USC Biology Curriculum (). The rubric was created and refined in consultation with a wide variety of faculty, instructors and educational specialists, both within and outside the department (see acknowledgements page). The criteria were selected as the minimum framework one would expect to see in any good biology lab report or other scientific communication. The levels of student performance are intended as a roadmap of the probable learning trajectory of a typical undergraduate student. The "Proficient" level describes the performance we would hope an exceptional undergraduate or beginning graduate student would achieve. Instructors are encouraged to select and use only the criteria and levels of student performance that they feel are relevant to their student population and assignment goals. A scoring guide (rubric plus examples of student work at each level of performance) has also been developed and is available upon request. Feedback or comments would be most appreciated if sent to Briana Timmerman at the contact information listed above. The Rubric underwent formal reliability testing (Timmerman et al. 2007) producing a three rater reliability score of g = 0.85 using biology graduate students as raters and generalizability analysis. Further details are also available from Briana Timmerman.

Please cite as: Timmerman, B.E., Johnson, R.L. and Payne, J. 2007. Development of a universal rubric for assessing students' science inquiry skills.

National Association of Research in Science Teaching 2007 Annual Meeting New Orleans LA, April 15-18th

Support for this project was provided by NSF Award 0410992 to Timmerman.

p. 1

Criteria Introduction: Context Demonstrates a clear understanding of the big picture; Why is this question important/ interesting in the field of biology?

Not addressed

? The importance of the question is not addressed.

? How the question relates within the broader context of biology is not addressed.

Novice

Intermediate

Proficient

? The writer provides a ? The writer provides ? The writer provides

generic or vague

one explanation of

a clear sense of why

rationale for the

why others would

this knowledge may

importance of the

find the topic

be of interest to a

question.

interesting.

broad audience

? The writer provides ? The writer provides ? The writer describes

vague or generic

some relevant

the current gaps in

references to the

context for the

our understanding of

broader context of

research question(s). this field and

biology.

explains how this

research will help fill

those gaps

Introduction: Accuracy and relevance

Content knowledge is ? Background

accurate, relevant and

information is

provides appropriate

missing or contains

background for reader

major inaccuracies.

including defining

? Background

critical terms.

information is

accurate, but

irrelevant or too

disjointed to make

relevance clear

? Primary literature

references are absent

or irrelevant. May

contain website or

secondary references

websites or review papers are not primary

? Background omits ? Background

? Background

information or

information may

information is

contains

contain minor

completely accurate

inaccuracies which omissions or

? Background

detract from the

inaccuracies that do

information has the

major point of the

not detract from the

appropriate level of

paper.

major point of the

specificity to provide

? Background

paper.

concise and useful

information is

? Background

context to aid the

overly narrow or

information has the

reader's

overly general (only appropriate level of

understanding.

partially relevant).

specificity to provide ? Primary literature

? Primary literature

relevant context.

references are

references, if

? Primary literature

relevant, adequately

present, are

references are relevant explained, and

inadequately

and adequately

indicate a reasonable

explained.

explained but few.

literature search.

Criteria

Not addressed

Hypotheses: Testable and consider alternatives

Hypotheses are clearly ? No hypothesis is

stated, testable and

indicated.

consider plausible

? The hypothesis is

alternative explanations

stated but too vague

or confused for its

value to be

determined

? A clearly stated, but

not testable

hypothesis is

provided.

? A clearly stated and

testable, but trivial

hypothesis is

provided.

Novice

Intermediate

p. 2 Proficient

? A single relevant, ? Multiple relevant, ? A comprehensive

testable hypothesis is testable hypotheses

suite of testable

clearly stated

are clearly stated.

hypotheses are

? The hypothesis may ? Hypotheses address

clearly stated which,

be compared with a

more than one major

when tested, will

"null" alternative

potential mechanism, distinguish among

which is usually just

explanation or

multiple major

the absence of the

factors for the topic.

factors or potential

expected result.

explanations for the

phenomena at hand.

Hypotheses: Scientific merit

Hypotheses have

? Hypotheses are

? Hypotheses are

scientific merit.

trivial, obvious,

plausible and

incorrect or

appropriate though

completely off topic.

likely or clearly

taken directly from

course material.

? Hypotheses indicate ? Hypotheses are

a level of

novel, insightful, or

understanding

actually have the

beyond the material

potential to

directly provided to

contribute useful

the student in the lab

new knowledge to

manual or

the field.

coursework.

Criteria

Not addressed

Novice

Methods: Controls and replication

Appropriate controls

? Controls and/ors

? Controls consider

(including appropriate

replication are

one major relevant

replication) are present

nonexistent,

factor

and explained.

? Controls and/or

? Replication is

replication may have

modest (weak

If the student designed

been present, but just statistical power).

the experiment:

not described or

? Controls and/or

replication were

described but were

inappropriate.

Intermediate

p. 3 Proficient

? Controls take most ? Controls consider all

relevant factors into

relevant factors

account

? Controls have

? Controls include

become methods of

positive and negative differentiating

controls if

between multiple

appropriate

hypotheses.

? Replication is

? Replication is robust

appropriate (average

(sample size is larger

sample size with

than average for the

reasonable statistical

type of study).

power).

If the instructor designed ? Student fails to

the experiment:

mention controls

and/or replication or

mentions them, but

the description or

explanation is

incomprehensible.

? Student explanations ? Student evidences a

of controls and/or

reasonable sense of

replication are

why controls/

vague, inaccurate or

replication matter to

indicate only a

this experiment

rudimentary sense of ? Explanations are

the need for controls

mostly accurate.

and or replication

? Explanations of why these controls matter to this experiment are thorough, clear and tied into sections on assumptions and limitations

Methods: Experimental design

Experimental design is ? inappropriate

likely to produce salient ? poorly explained /

and fruitful results (tests

indecipherable

the hypotheses posed.)

Methods are:

? appropriate ? clearly explained ? drawn directly from

coursework

? not modified where appropriate

? appropriate ? clearly explained ? modified from

coursework in appropriate places

? or drawn directly from a novel source

(outside the course)

? appropriate ? clearly explained ? a synthesis of

multiple previous approaches or an entirely new approach

p. 4

Criteria

Not addressed

Novice

Intermediate

Proficient

Results: Data selection

Data are comprehensive, ? Data are too

? At least one relevant ? Data are relevant, ? Data are relevant,

accurate and relevant.

incomplete or

dataset per

accurate and

accurate and

haphazard to provide

hypothesis is

complete with any

comprehensive.

a reasonable basis

provided but some

gaps being minor. ? Reader can fully

for testing the

necessary data are ? Reader can fully

evaluate validity of

hypothesis

missing or inaccurate evaluate whether the

writer's conclusions

? Reader can

hypotheses were

and assumptions.

satisfactorily

supported or rejected ? Data may be

evaluate some but

with the data

synthesized or

not all of writer's

provided.

manipulated in a

conclusions.

novel way to provide

additional insight.

Results: Data presentation

Data are summarized in ? Labels or units are ? contains some errors ? contains only minor ? contains no mistakes

a logical format. Table

missing which

in or omissions of

mistakes that do not ? uses a format or

or graph types are

prevent the reader

labels, scales, units

interfere with the

graph type which

appropriate. Data are

from being able to

etc., but the reader is

reader's

highlights

properly labeled

derive any useful

able to derive some

understanding and

relationships

including units. Graph

information from the relevant meaning

the figure's meaning

between the data

axes are appropriately

graph.

from each figure.

is clear without the

points or other

labeled and scaled and ? Presentation of data ? is technically correct

reader referring to

relevant aspects of

captions are informative

is in an inappropriate but inappropriate

the text.

the data.

and complete.

format or graph type

format prevents the ? Graph types or table ? may be elegant,

? Captions are

reader from deriving

formats are

novel, or otherwise

Presentation of data:

confusing or

meaning or using it.

appropriate for data

allow unusual insight

indecipherable.

Captions are missing

type.

into data

or inadequate

? includes captions

? has informative,

that are at least

concise and complete

somewhat useful.

captions.

p. 5

Criteria

Results: Statistical analysis

Statistical analysis is

?

appropriate for

hypotheses tested and

appears correctly

?

performed and

interpreted with relevant

values reported and

explained.

Not addressed

No statistical analysis is performed. Statistics are provided but are inappropriate, inaccurate or incorrectly performed or interpreted so as to provide no value to the reader.

Novice

Intermediate

Proficient

? Appropriate, accurate ? Appropriate

? Statistical analysis is

descriptive statistics

inferential

appropriate, correct

only are provided.

(comparative)

and clearly explained

? Inferential statistics

statistical analysis is ? includes a

are provided but

properly performed

description of what

either incorrectly

and reasonably well

constitutes a

performed or

explained.

significant value and

interpreted or an

? Explanation of

why that value was

inappropriate test was

significant value may chosen as the

used.

be limited or rote

threshold (may

? Appropriate, correct

(e.g. use of p ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download