Microbiology Research Project Lab Report Rubric
Abstract
(6 points)
Introduction
(10 points)
Materials/methods
(10 points)
Results
(24 points)
100%
1. Brief rationale for the experiment
2. Brief summary of the paper
3. Brief summary of the experiments
4. Brief summary of the data
5. Brief summary of discussion
6. Short and concise as possible
1. Title of the paper is relevant.
2. Gives relevant background information that is
complete and referenced.
3. States the purpose and the context of the
experiment.
4. States hypothesis that is based on research and/or
sound reasoning.
5. Brief summary of experimental work.
1. All materials used are listed.
2. Description of previously published techniques are
included and properly cited.
3. Detailed explanation of how to perform unique
techniques used, including sequencing techniques (PCR,
sequencing, etc), everyone should have this.
4. Lab could be easily repeated.
1. Sections are presented in a logical order, and easy to
see trends. NO analysis of results done.
2. Each section begins with an introductory sentence.
3. Contains appropriate images/tables, which summarize
the data.
4. Max score included for sequencing, plus MUST
contain a chromatogram for each sequence plus the
sequence text from the DFCI website.
5. Graphs/tables/photographs have appropriate labels
and titles.
6. Sections clearly explain what was done, including a
short paragraph explaining each graph or picture.
Boehm 2012
80%
60%
40%
0%
One of the
"excellent"
conditions is not
met.
Two of the
"excellent"
conditions are not
met.
Three of the
"excellent"
conditions not
met.
None of the
"excellent"
conditions are
met.
One of the
"excellent"
conditions is not
met.
Two of the
"excellent"
conditions are not
met.
Three of the
"excellent"
conditions not
met.
None of the
"excellent"
conditions are
met.
One of the
"excellent"
conditions is not
met.
Two of the
"excellent"
conditions are not
met.
Three of the
"excellent"
conditions not
met.
None of the
"excellent"
conditions are
met.
One of the
"excellent"
conditions is not
met.
Two of the
"excellent"
conditions are not
met.
Three of the
"excellent"
conditions not
met.
None of the
"excellent"
conditions are
met.
Discussion
(30 points)
References
(4 points)
Format
(6 points)
1. All data in discussion is present in results section, and
vice versa- tables/images cited.
2. Clear and logical interpretation of data.
3. Clear, convincing arguments for what the data means
and what types of bacteria are hypothesized to be
found. Discuss any BLAST results that don’t correlate
to Gram Stain results.
4. References are appropriately cited to back up data
analysis.
5. Clear link to research done in introduction.
6. Hypothesis was/was not supported.
7. Discussion of future directions and/or what you
would have done differently.
8. For sequencing results: please include them and
discuss significance.
9. Sources of error should be addressed throughout,
not in its own paragraph.
1. References are cited using appropriate format
(either APA or MLA).
2. Appropriate/reliable sources were cited.
3. At least two textbooks were used.
4. Sources were cited appropriately in the text (in text
citations).
1. All bacteria names are italicized.
2. Genus is capitalized, species is not.
3. Neat and organized.
4. Sections separated by headings; appendix included at
the end with raw data.
5. Few spelling/grammar errors
6. NO personalization.
Names:____________________
One of the
"excellent"
conditions is not
met.
Two of the
"excellent"
conditions are not
met.
Three of the
"excellent"
conditions not
met.
None of the
"excellent"
conditions are
met.
One of the
"excellent"
conditions is not
met.
Two of the
"excellent"
conditions are not
met.
Three of the
"excellent"
conditions not
met.
None of the
"excellent"
conditions are
met.
One of the
"excellent"
conditions is not
met.
Two of the
"excellent"
conditions are not
met.
Three of the
"excellent"
conditions not
met.
None of the
"excellent"
conditions are
met.
Grade: ________________ out of 90 points