Lab Project Report #2
Throughout the year we have been studying various science ideas in which we used the scientific method, and I had you complete a Lab Project Report related to physical and chemical changes at the beginning of the year as a pretest. This time I would like you to either redo your original lab experiment and report following the scientific method or you may choose a new testable question to experiment with. Remember the scientific method includes the following steps:
1.
Write a testable question. Be sure to identify the variables
(independent, dependent, and control) in your experiment and report.
2.
Research the ideas in your testable question.
3.
Write a testable hypothesis. Remember your hypothesis you also have the independent and dependent variable.
4.
Plan your experiment by writing a logical steps that keep you control variables constant and your independent variable is the only thing changing.
5.
Experiment and collect MEASURABLE data – conduct your experiment following your plan, record your data (qualitative and quantitative)
6.
Analyze and Draw Conclusions about your experiment. (Was your hypothesis right/wrong? How do you know you are right/wrong? What evidence do you have to support your conclusion? How does your experiment connect to the everyday world?)
7.
Write a report about your experiment in paragraph style. Be sure to include charts and graphs.
Due Date:
December 18, 2014
Scoring: see rubric on back – it is worth 100 points.

Rubric for Communicating in Scientific Manner
Criteria
Asking Questions and
Defining Problems
Developing and
Using Models
Planning and
Carrying Out
Investigations
Novice (70%)
Attempts to ask or state a problem or a scientific question about natural phenomena or designed systems but isn’t testable and lacks independent and dependent variables.
Experiment attempts to use models, diagrams, mathematical models, analogies, etc. to attempt an explanation of their prediction, relationships, and evidenced observed.
Material and procedure lack a logical sequence of steps to follow – confusing and lacks details and repetitiveness.
Apprentice (80%)
States a problem or asks a testable scientific question about natural phenomena or designed systems but has too many variables or is missing an independent or dependent variable, lacks clarity and details.
Experiment develops a simple model, diagram, mathematical representation to explain a prediction, relationships or evidenced observed – lacks details.
Level of Proficiency
Proficient (90%)
States a problem or asks a testable scientific question about natural phenomena or designed systems that is clear and understandable and contains an independent and dependent variable but may lack detail or insight.
Experiment develops a clear understandable model, diagram, mathematical representation, etc. that is adequate in explaining predictions, relationships or data observed.
Material and procedure is logical but steps may be missing or lacks details and repetitiveness.
Material and procedure are logical and include important experimental steps, detailed, some minor details may be missing – takes into account the value of repeated trials.
Distinguish (100%)
States a problem or asks a testable scientific question that contains an independent and dependent variable that is understandable, detailed and insightful about natural phenomena or designed systems.
Experiment develops a clear understandable model that is detailed and insightful in evaluating relationships, explanations, data observed and limitations of experiment.
Material and procedure are detailed, logical, and insightful. Experimental procedure is reliable and repeatable.
Analyzing and
Interpreting Data
Very incomplete or incorrect interpretation of trends, patterns, or comparisons of data indicating a lack of understand of results
Some results have been correctly interpreted and discussed, but partial and incomplete understanding of results is still evident
Almost all of the results have been correctly interpreted and discussed; only minor improvements are needed.
All important trends and data comparisons have been interpreted correctly and discussed; good understanding of results is conveyed.
Using Mathematics and Computational
Thinking
Use of measurable data is not conveyed or missing – lacks tables and/or graphs
Constructing
Explanations and
Designing Solutions
Attempts to use measurable data in the form of a table or graph but lacks clarity
Presents an illogical explanation for findings and doesn’t address question/problem – missing important points
Presents a conclusion where some of the results have been correctly interpreted and discussed but demonstrates partial or incomplete understanding of results - confusing
Uses clear measurable data that includes a table and/or graph but may lack repeated trials or tests that provide evidence of reliability and repeatability of experiment.
Uses insightful and detailed tables and/or graphs that provide a clear understanding of question/problem, is reliable and repeatable.
Presents clear logical scientific conclusion that addresses the problem/question but another better conclusion could have been stated, needs improvement
Presents all logical and insightful conclusions that demonstrate an excellent understanding of problem/question tested that demonstrates scientific reasoning, theory, and/or models that link experimental evidence with their problem/question.
Engaging in
Argument from
Evidence
Obtaining,
Evaluating, and
Communicating
Information
Conclusion lacks any experimental evidence that supports interpretation or understanding of problem/question asked.
Writing style is rough and hard to follow with incomplete sentences, frequent grammar and/or spelling errors, sloppy, disorganized
Attempts to use experimental evidence to support conclusion but lacks clarity and details.
Correct writing style is attempted and has some organization, readable but lacks details that aide in understanding, may contain some grammar, punctuation, and spelling errors , lacks cohesiveness
Uses research and experimental evidence correctly to support conclusions that aide them in their understanding of the problem/question tested, but explanation may lack some minor details.
Organized and clear writing style that is readable and detailed. Very few grammatical and spelling errors are present. May have an occasional lapse in cohesiveness.
Uses research and experimental evidence correctly to support conclusions that aide them in their understanding of the problem/question tested.
Demonstrates a clear argument or counter-argument that is based on data and evidence which supports an idea about the natural world or designed world.
Organized and insightful writing style that is extensively detailed, cohesive and well written. Grammatical and
Spelling errors almost non-existent. Uses credited research appropriately that aides in understanding.