School of Life & Medical Sciences Set it out like Andrei showed in tutor meeting GUIDELINES FOR FULL LABORATORY REPORTS GENERAL POINTS A report should be subdivided into sections, namely Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results, Discussion and References. The report should be written, using the past tense passive as a record of what was done (e.g. a 100 cm3 solution was prepared not “I prepared a 100 cm3 solution” or “Prepare a 100 cm3 solution”). Conciseness, clarity and logical presentation are important as well as correct punctuation. Generally, SI units must be used. The report should be word processed. Data should be presented using Excel for Level 1 (Semester B) and Level 2. TITLE Quote the title as it appears in the practical booklet and include the code shown on the Module Guide, your full name, cohort code, practical group, the name of the lecturer who is going to mark the work and the date of the practical exercise. ABSTRACT The abstract (100 words approx) is a summary of the practical report and will be written after the report has been completed though it comes first in the report. It should be clear and comprehensible in its own right. The abstract should introduce the topic in the first sentence and present the main conclusion in the last sentence. The abstract should also report the results achieved including important quantitative data. The method should not be described, references must not be cited, and abbreviations must be defined. Do not subdivide the abstract. INTRODUCTION The introduction puts the work into context and considers the basic principles on which the work is based. It explains the rationale for the study. Do not simply repeat the introduction written in the schedule. It should be correctly referenced. The introduction concludes with the aim of the experiment. MATERIALS AND METHODS The experimental method should contain sufficient detail to enable someone else to repeat your experiment(s). However, when the method/protocol is provided for you in the practical schedule, it is sufficient for you to state “The methods used were as described in the schedule with the following amendments/details/specific features”. Write one or two sentences summarising the method. Do not repeat the schedule, but do indicate any amendments or relevant details. Specific details of the method used, in addition to the generic description as it appears in the schedule, should be added e.g a table of preparation of dilutions. Do not include trivial details. Give origin and full name of experimental organisms (where appropriate). Italicise specific and generic names, e.g Bacillus subtilis, Escherichia coli. Once used the generic name may be abbreviated to a recognised form, e.g B.subtilis, E.coli. If writing by hand underline the name eg Escherichia coli. Do not begin a sentence with a number. RESULTS The results section should include text, to lead the reader through the data, describing the main features of the results, referring to relevant figures and tables. Select the most suitable means of presenting results, tables or figures or even a description of the result in text. Figures may include: graphs histograms pie diagrams drawings of organisms photographs traces Carefully select axes, scales, dimensions, symbols etc. NB. Drawings of organisms should have the magnification or scale shown. Label axes of graphs clearly; give clear titles to columns and rows of tables; anotate diagrams and traces. Be consistent with the number of significant figures used. Do not express data to more significant figures than can be accurately measured. Always include the units of measurement. Sequentially number figures and tables. Give each table an appropriate title and each figure a suitable legend. By convention, the figure number and legend go underneath a figure whereas table number and title go above a table. Each title and legend should be fully comprehensive so that they are understandable without reference to the text. Refer to tables and figures in the text. Briefly draw the reader’s attention to the important points in tables and figures etc. Acknowledge the origin of the results with explanation if necessary e.g results from another student) results given by lecturer as students own experiment was unsuccessful. Present examples of traces if appropriate, fully annotated, labelled and titled. Use statistical analysis of your data where appropriate. DISCUSSION The discussion should include discussion of the results (not description as this has already been done in the results section). This is the section where the results are interpreted. Be logical, precise and critical. Explain the results obtained and comment on the significance of the data. Discuss your results in relation to previous knowledge and relevant literature and/or information provided in the introduction. Any mention of other people’s work should be correctly referenced. Indicate limits of experimental design i.e., critically appraise the experiment. Comment whether the aim of the practical was achieved. If you do not include a separate conclusion section, the final paragraph of the discussion should summarise your findings. REFERENCES The reference list should follow the faculty guidelines, you can find an electronic version on the Programme Studynet site. A quick guide to referencing is included in this document. Assessment Category Lev el School of Life Sciences – Assessment Criteria and Feedback for Laboratory Reports (L = level ; W = % weighting of each element) Overall presentation, structure and style 1 Clear introduction and abstract; fluency; 2 logical structure; following of guidelines, 3 ‘ease of reading’; spelling; grammar; Referencing Use of correct system; referencing within the text; accuracy of citations in the text and reference list. Use of literature Relevance of literature; appropriate depth/breadth and integration of literature. W % 25 20 15 1 5 2 5 3 5 1 10 2 10 3 10 Presentation of methods* and results 1 Accuracy; quality of results presentation; evidence of 2 understanding; calculations 3 Discussion Critical analysis; 1 integration of evidence; drawing of 2 conclusions. 3 45 35 25 15 30 45 Fail < 40% Third 40 – 49% Lower Second 50 – 59% Upper Second 60 – 69% Failure to follow guidelines of a full report; many grammatical and spelling errors; poor fluency; difficult to understand; lack of abstract; aims missing from introduction Limited or poorly conceived structure ; frequent grammatical and spelling errors; Brief or irrelevant introduction; poor abstract; incorrect/weak aims/objectives Structure is generally correct; grammar and spelling mainly good; recognisable academic style; introduction contains relevant information but may lack depth; abstract present but lacking quantitative data; aims of experiment clearly stated at end of introduction Recommended system used and generally conforms to faculty guidelines. A logical style; easy to read with reinforcement rather than repetition; very good grammar and spelling; good academic style that requires little correction; introduction is comprehensive and relevant; abstract contains quantitative results Recommended system used and almost completely conforms to faculty guidelines. No or little attempt to use either An attempt to use the the recommended system or an recommended system but alternative. frequent inaccuracies and inconsistencies. Little or no evidence of the use of literature or irrelevant literature used. Limited use of relevant literature Clear evidence of the use of an and presented with little or no appropriate range of sources. comment; inappropriate breadth and/or depth of sources. Literature appropriate to the depth/breadth and level of the assignment and interpreted accordingly. First 70% and above A logical, fluent, well-organised style which clearly leads the reader through the material facilitating a challenging argument; polished grammar and accurate spelling; introduction Recommended system used, fully conforms and accurately used. Highly developed critical approach to literature resulting in a fully substantiated argument; literature used such that the product may be suitable as a student resource for the relevant level (1,2 or 3) Few key points addressed; Some key results present. Most results present but may All results are presented and No errors in presentation of chaotic presentation of results; Little/no text to describe results. contain occasional errors in data explained clearly. There may be results. All calculations are poor or no figure legends and Incomplete figure legends and handling. Some text describing a few minor errors in data correct and data is correctly table headings; no or little table titles. Adaptations to results is present. Correct use of handling/analysis. Clear analysed. Written text is clear evidence of understanding. No methods not recorded. tables and figures. There is a methods (if appropriate) with full and easy to understand. Method comment on methods record of adaptations to methods detail. presentation (if required) is of used. Methods (if required) are near journal standard. clear but may lack detail. No or little evidence of analysis, Little attempt to analyse results Generally descriptive discussion Clear attempt to analyse/discuss Evidence of an evaluative discussion or reflection; incorrect obtained; poor interpretation but shows some evidence of results obtained. Some attempt approach throughout the or no conclusions. suggesting a low level of understanding of relevance of to put into the context of the discussion through which the understanding. data obtained. Conclusions are literature (if relevant). Clear reader is guided to clear and relevant. conclusions made. Shows appropriate conclusions; shows understanding of subject. a critical appreciation of the limitations of the experiment/techniques