Skip to main content
iRubric: BICD 145 Lab Reports rubric

iRubric: BICD 145 Lab Reports rubric

find rubric

edit   print   share   Copy to my rubrics   Bookmark   test run   assess...   delete   Do more...
BICD 145 Lab Reports 
BICD 145 Lab Reports
Rubric Code: FAA4B3
By lpgiese
Ready to use
Public Rubric
Subject: Biology  
Type: Writing  
Grade Levels: Undergraduate

Powered by iRubric Grading Criteria for Lab Reports
  Poor

(N/A)

Needs Improvement

(N/A)

Good

(N/A)

Very Good

(N/A)

Excellent

(N/A)

TITLE
4 pts

Conveys Lab Experiments and Conclusions Appropriately
Poor

Substantially incomplete. (0-1 pts)
Needs Improvement
Good

Average - basics covered. (2-3 pts)
Very Good
Excellent

Complete. Excellent quality. Concise (4 pts)
Abstract
10 pts

Big picture, purpose, method, results, conclusion
Poor

missing several directives, unclear, major errors (0-1 pts)
Needs Improvement

Major errors, lacking 1-2 directives or most are not stated clearly or concisely (2-3 pts)
Good

minor errors in several errors (4-6 pts)
Very Good

slightly lacking in clarity and conciseness (7-8 pts)
Excellent

Clearly stated purpose/question, method, results, conclusion and related to big picture (9-10 pts)
INTRODUCTION
16 pts

Background including references, Questions, Hypotheses, Justification for experiments/report (tie background to rest of report)
Poor

Unclear. Major errors and omissions. (0-4 pts)
Needs Improvement

Major errors. Lacking a 1-2 directives (5-7 pts)
Good

Minor errors in two or more areas. (8-11 pts)
Very Good

Minor errors in one area. (12-14 pts)
Excellent

Clearly stated Background leading into the Question, Hypotheses, & Justification. (15-16 pts)
METHODS
16 pts

Sections with headings for sequence of events. What, Why, How for everything possible. Could someone else repeat your experiments based on your descriptions.
Poor

Unclear, Major errors and omissions. (0-4 pts)
Needs Improvement

Major errors, missing several directives (like why various things are done or used). (5-7 pts)
Good

Minor errors in two or more areas. (8-11 pts)
Very Good

Minor errors in one area. (12-14 pts)
Excellent

Clearly stated methods, materials, descriptions, and sequence of events with headings separating different techiniques (15-16 pts)
RESULTS
16 pts

Observations, Descriptions, Calculations Figures/Tables (labeled with appropriate legends/captions, referred to properly intext)
Poor

Unclear, major errors and omissions. (0-4 pts)
Needs Improvement

Major errors and missing 1-2 directives (5-7 pts)
Good

Minor errors in two or more areas. (8-11 pts)
Very Good

Minor errors in one area. (12-14 pts)
Excellent

Clearly stated results: Observations, calculations, descriptions, text refers to findings in data (figures/tables/calculations) (15-16 pts)
DISCUSSION
25 pts

Conclusions based on hypotheses, possible errors, if no errors occurred. Discussion of principles, significance and techniques. Relation to background with references. Suggestions for improvement.
Poor

Conclusions unclear and disorganized. Critical thinking skills not applied. Major omissions in discussion. (0-12 pts)
Needs Improvement

Conclusions unclear and disorganized. Lack of in-depth analysis. Lacking 1-2 directives in discussion. (13-15 pts)
Good

Clearly stated conclusions. More in-depth analysis would improve paper. Minor omissions in discussion. (16-20 pts)
Very Good

Clearly stated conclusions. Critical thinking applied to discussion. Minor omissions/errors in discussion. (21-23 pts)
Excellent

Clearly stated conclusions. Critical thinking applied to discussion of principles, significance and techniques. All directives met. (24-25 pts)
References
8 pts

Alphabetical, Cell format, referred to in text properly, appropriate types of references
Poor

Major errors or omissions, did not follow directives, lacking references, lack of or poor paraphrasing (0-1 pts)
Needs Improvement

Major errors, lacking in 1-2 directives, references used are insufficient, poor paraphrasing in some cases (2-3pts)
Good

contains all required fields but minor errors, references used appear sufficient (4-5 pts)
Very Good

one minor/general error but almost perfect (6-7 pts)
Excellent

perfect in fulfilling all directives appropriately (8 pts)
OVERALL
5 pts

Cohesion and Organization (logic and flow) Grammar, spelling. Format followed.
Poor

Chaotic. Detracts from presentation. Guidelines not met. Major errors in language usage. (0 pts)
Needs Improvement

Disorganized. Errors in communication. Major errors in both guidelines and grammar and spelling. (1-2 pts)
Good

Average organization, some areas could be better organized. Minor errors in both guidelines and grammar and spelling. (3 pts)
Very Good

Clearly organized. Smooth presentation. Minor errors in either guidelines or grammar and spelling. (4 pts)
Excellent

Cohesive, Consice, Organization enhances presentation. Guidelines met. Proper grammar and spelling. (5 pts)
Totals for columns
100 pts

Poor
Needs Improvement
Good
Very Good
Excellent



Keywords:
  • experimental design and write up

Subjects:

Types:

Discuss this rubric




Do more with this rubric:
Preview

Preview

Preview this rubric.
Edit

Edit

Modify this rubric.
Copy

Copy

Make a copy of this rubric and begin editing the copy.

Print

Print

Show a printable version of this rubric.
Categorize

Categorize

Add this rubric to multiple categories.
Bookmark

Bookmark

Bookmark this rubric for future reference.
Assess
Test run

Test run

Test this rubric or perform an ad-hoc assessment.
Grade

Grade

Build a gradebook to assess students.
Collaborate

Collaborate

Apply this rubric to any object and invite others to assess.
Share
Publish

Publish

Link, embed, and showcase your rubrics on your website.
Email

Email

Email this rubric to a friend.
Discuss

Discuss

Discuss this rubric with other members.
 

Do more with rubrics than ever imagined possible.

Only with iRubrictm.


Copyright © 2024 Reazon Systems, Inc.  All rights reserved.
n60