Kreutter: Physics Journal Club
You should use the following rubric to evaluate your work before you send it to me. Your written
summary/analysis should include evaluation of all aspects of the scientific method used in the paper.
Remember there’s not just one “Scientific Method” but the process is always similar even if the authors say
“hypothesis” instead of “prediction” and “procedure” instead of “testing experiment”.
Objective
0
2
4
6+
The WHY:
Question,
Problem,
Observation
Unable to correctly
identify
question/problem,
observations or no
attempt is made to do so
beyond paraphrasing the
title of the article.
Makes no attempt to
identify methods/testing
experiments used by the
authors.
Identifies
question/problem/observations
in own words but gives no
further explanation.
Identifies
question/problem/observations
in own words and makes an
attempt to explain relevance of
study.
Identifies
question/problem/observations
in own words and explains
relevance of study in detail.
(Extra points for doing a
background check.)
Makes some attempt to
identify methods/testing
experiments but omits key
details.
Identifies and explains most
details of methods/testing
experiments.
The WHAT:
Results
Unable to identify results
of experiment/study
Identifies results and relates
them to methods/design of
experiment/assumptions made
by authors.
More
WHAT:
Conclusion
Unable to identify
authors’ conclusions
Identifies results but does not
relate results to
methods/design of
experiment/assumptions made
by authors.
Identifies conclusion of the
authors, but does not explain or
interpret in own words.
Mechanics
Lacks appearance of
thought and effort; very
difficult to follow
because of organization
and errors
Work is readable but
disorganization and multiple
errors prevent total clarity.
Organization of summary and
evaluation is logical and clear;
few grammatical/spelling
errors.
Identifies and explains
methods/testing experiments
in great detail, including noting
controls, assumptions made,
and strengths/weaknesses of
experiment. (Extra credit:
suggestions for improvement in
study’s methods.)
Identifies results, relates them
to methods/design of
experiment/assumptions, and
explains how the data analysis
helps understanding of results.
Identifies author conclusion,
explains/interprets in own
words, and clearly evaluates
conclusions based on results
and experimental design. (Extra
credit: offers alternative model
for observed results and
suggests further testing
experiments to differentiate
between models and /or
discusses
implications/applications for
the results and conclusion.)
Well-organized , written clearly
and concisely, with no
significant grammatical or
spelling errors.
The HOW:
Methods,
Testing
Experiment
Design
Identifies conclusion of the
authors, explains/interprets in
own words, and makes an
attempt to evaluate the
conclusions drawn based on
results and experiment design.
Total: ________________/30 Note: You can earn far more than 30 points on this
assignment if you read the rubric and follow the guidelines.