AP Biology Mini-Poster Lab Rubric – Glacier Peak
Score
Title
Abstract
Research
Question
Background
Variables
Hypothesis
Procedure
Materials
Data
Conclusion
Advanced
(3)
Title indicates the nature of the
investigation, includes authors.
Adequately summarizes the main
features and results of the work
described more completely in the
poster.
Question is narrowly focused and
suggests how an answer might be
investigated. It is answerable.
Background clearly provides the
context, or whit is known, for the
research question.
Clearly and correctly identifies all 4
variables of a lab specifically and
measurably. Independent,
Dependent, (3) Controlled, Constant.
Clearly makes the investigation Valid.
Hypothesis is testable and specifically
predicts relationships between
dependent and independent
variables.

Accurately tests the
hypothesis.

Conducts at least 3 trials.

Vertical list format,
complete accurate and easy
to follow.

Includes safety.

Investigation is Reliable.
Complete detailed list of materials
presented in a vertical list format.

Data table contains
accurate, precise raw data
and summary reported in
correct units with title.

Data summarized in an
easy-to-read graph and/or
figures with correct
labeling.

Data summarized in a clear,
concise, logical manner.
Patterns identified and
described.



Scientifically valid, logical
conclusion - Claim,
Evidence, Reasoning.
Sources of error identified
and explained.
Students generate specific
question for future study
based on new knowledge
for their investigation.
Proficient
(2)
Title is somewhat indicative of the
nature of the investigation.
Provides a summary of work
described in the poster, missing
some main features and/or results
of the investigation.
Question is answerable but not
narrowly focused.
Needs Improvement
(1)
Vague and missing parts
Background provided but there is
little “tie in” to the nature of the
investigation.
Clearly and correctly identifies 3
variables of a lab specifically and
measurably. Independent,
Dependent, (3) Controlled,
Constant. Clearly makes the
investigation Valid.
Hypothesis is clearly stated. It
predicts the influence of one
variable on another.
Background is poorly stated and
provides little context for the
investigation.
Identifies variables but are
incorrect or inaccurate.





Attempts to test the
hypothesis.
Conducts at least 2 trials.
Steps in a paragraph,
complete accurate.
Includes safety.
Investigation is Reliable.
Materials are listed and appropriate.






Data table contains
accurate data, most units
labeled or implied. Title
trivial or absent.
Data displayed in a wellorganized graph and/or
figures with minor errors
in labeling.
Data reasonable but
somewhat unclear
summary of data. All
patterns not identified
and described.
Scientific conclusion –
Attempts to identify
Claim, Evidence,
Reasoning.
Sources of error
identified, not explained.
Students attempt to
create a question for
future study.
Total 30 points
The summary is unclear,
incomplete, or illogical.
Question is too broad and not
practically investigated.
Hypothesis is poorly stated and
doesn’t directly mention the
variables.

Does not address the
hypothesis.

Conducts at least 1 trial.

There are some steps
but not complete
accurate and easy to
follow.

Does not Includes safety.

Investigation is not
Reliable.
Materials are quite incomplete or
inappropriate for investigation.

Data table is inaccurate
confusing or incomplete.
Units missing. Poorly
labeled and/or title
absent.

Graph/Figures confusing
and/or sloppy.

Summary unclear,
illogical or missing.
Patterns in data not
identified.



Scientific conclusion –
illogical doesn’t identify
Claim, Evidence,
Reasoning.
Weak attempt to identify
errors, not explained.
Students make
inappropriate attempt at
a new question.
Missing
(0)