| General Lab Report Grading Rubric for
Introductory Physics Labs at UNC-CH |
|
Revised: 6/24/03 |
|
|
Name: __________________________ |
|
Lab: ___________________________ |
|
| This
grading rubric provides a general guideline for evaluating physics lab
reports. |
| The
weight assigned to each of the categories below is the same for all labs
(numbers in bold); |
| however,
the maximum point value for each component may vary depending on the
experiment and instructor. |
|
Score |
|
|
|
|
| Pre-lab |
15 |
15 |
|
correct answers to questions -
partial credit given as appropriate |
|
|
| Cover page |
5 |
|
|
1 |
|
title |
|
|
1 |
|
lab section and TA |
|
|
1 |
|
names of experimenters - author and
lab partner(s) identified |
|
1 |
|
date lab was performed
(not due date of report) |
|
1 |
|
Honor pledge and signature |
|
|
|
| Abstract |
10 |
|
|
2 |
|
purpose - statement of lab
objective(s) and physics principle(s) investigated |
|
2 |
|
procedure - brief summary of
investigation and the equipment used |
|
2 |
|
results - numerical values of key
results, with uncertainties |
|
2 |
|
conclusion and implications -
evaluation of results and lessons learned |
|
1 |
|
clear overview of lab |
|
|
1 |
|
less than 200 words (half a page,
typed) |
|
|
| Data analysis |
40 |
|
| and results |
|
5 |
|
clear presentation of data for all
required exercises |
|
5 |
|
data presented in tables - proper
title, column headings, units, uncertainties |
|
5 |
|
graphs properly constructed, titled,
axes labeled, units, parameters interpreted |
|
2 |
|
values labeled with words or
appropriate symbols |
|
5 |
|
results within range of typical values |
|
|
2 |
|
values reported with proper sig.
figs. (precision consistent with uncertainty) |
|
5 |
|
reasonable uncertainty estimates for
each measurement and calculated result |
|
3 |
|
appropriate units for each reported
value |
|
5 |
|
sufficient number and range of data
values |
|
3 |
|
sample calculations |
|
|
|
| Discussion |
30 |
|
|
5 |
|
summary of results |
|
|
4 |
|
agreement with predictions or other
lab groups? (uncertainty considered) |
|
2 |
|
if discrepancy, most likely reason
(justified by specific evidence) |
|
2 |
|
primary source of error correctly
identified |
|
5 |
|
discoveries, lessons learned,
suggested extensions or improvements |
|
5 |
|
overall clarity and explanation |
|
|
5 |
|
answers to discussion questions |
|
|
2 |
|
reasonable discussion length of 1 -
2 pages |
|
|
| Total = |
100 |
100 |
|
|
|
| Comments: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
