Final paper grading rubric is used as a guide for improving your draft 1.  Not all categories of the rubric will be used for this draft

Final paper grading rubric is used as a guide for improving your draft 1.  Not all categories of the rubric will be used for this draft.  The grade shown will not be included in the calculation of your lab grade and is used as a guide.  Your final grade for these sections could be higher or lower based on your review and corrections.  Review the Paper section of the lab syllabus.

Practice upload two days before closing of the assignment will add two points to the grade.

Rubric

Lab Final Paper 23 (1)Lab Final Paper 23 (1)CriteriaRatingsPtsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeTitle PageFormatted correctly with all required contents.3 to >2.0 ptsProficient2 to >0.0 ptsNeeds ImprovementNeeds careful review of required contents. Some contents missing or formatting issues0 ptsUnsatisfactoryTitle page missing3 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeTitleConcisely explains major theme of the project. Title is original.3 to >2.0 ptsProficient2 to >0.0 ptsNeeds ImprovementNeeds careful review of category statement. Some contents missing or needs improvement of how it is stated.0 ptsUnsatisfactoryTitle missing3 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAbstractOne paragraph. No more than 250 words.
Concisely states the objectives, methods, results and conclusions.10 to >7.0 ptsProficient7 to >0.0 ptsNeeds improvementNeeds careful review of category statement. Some contents missing or needs improvement of how it is stated.0 ptsUnsatisfactoryAbstract missing10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIntroductionThree paragraphs.
 

1. General background information about the topic that links to the specific objective(s) of the experiment. Citations in APA format.
 

2. Specific information about the enzyme tested.
Accurately presents the specific objective(s) of the experiment. Provides a very brief summary of the methods(s) used. Citations in APA format.
 

3. States null and alternative hypotheses. States a specific prediction for each plant tested.15 to >13.0 ptsProficient13 to >0.0 ptsNeeds ImprovementNeeds careful review of category statement. Some contents missing or needs improvement of how it is stated.0 ptsUnsatisfactoryIntroduction missing15 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMaterials and MethodsGives enough details to allow for replication of each required protocol. Clearly states the positive control and experimental groups for each plant tested. Clearly states results of standardization experiments and any adjustments to mixing tables.
 

Links the four parts of the experiment so that the reader can see the purpose of each.
 

Correct use of citations in APA format.
 

Effectively organizes this section with subheadings for each protocol.15 to >13.0 ptsProficient13 to >0.0 ptsNeeds ImprovementNeeds careful review of category statement. Some contents missing or needs improvement of how it is stated.0 ptsUnsatisfactoryMaterials and Methods missing15 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeResultsAll required graphs are presented.
Microsoft Excel is used to create graphs
Each graph opens with a quantitative summary of major trends.
Each graph has all required components.
Graphs are presented in the same order as the protocols in the Materials and Methods section.
Appendix section placed after Literature Cited section
All tables of raw data are presented in the same order as the graphs and have all required components.25 to >20.0 ptsProficient20 to >0.0 ptsNeeds ImprovementNeeds careful review of category statement. Some contents missing or needs improvement of how it is stated or presented.0 ptsUnsatisfactoryResults and Appendix sections missing25 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDiscussionTwo paragraphs
 

Interprets results. Supports conclusions using quantitative results as evidence. Relates quantitative results to structural changes to peroxidase. Citations in APA format.
 

Compares results to hypotheses stated in the Introduction. States whether hypotheses were accepted or rejected and why. Compares results to findings of other scientists (primary sources).15 to >13.0 ptsProficient13 to >0.0 ptsNeeds ImprovementNeeds careful review of category statement. Some contents missing or needs improvement of how it is stated.0 ptsUnsatisfactoryDiscussion missing15 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeLiterature CitedCitations follow APA format and are cited in the body of the paper. Required number of primary and tertiary sources.4 to >2.0 ptsProficient2 to >0.0 ptsNeeds ImprovementNeeds careful review of category statement. Some sources missing . Formatting issues.0 ptsUnsatisfactoryNo citations provided4 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeGeneralPaper is written in scientific style, direct and to the point. Chemical formulas accurate and formatted correctly.
Spelling and grammar are correct.
Sentence structure is accurate.
Correct use of active and passive voice.10 to >7.0 ptsProficient7 to >0.0 ptsNeeds ImprovementNeeds careful review of category statement. Some contents missing or needs improvement of how it is stated.0 ptsUnsatisfactoryNo paper submitted10 pts
Total Points: 100PreviousNext