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