121
Center for Research on Learning and Teaching
Sample Laboratory Report Rubrics
Giving students clear guidelines for what is expected in a lab report or how lab reports are evaluated will make your job of
grading much easier. On the next few pages are examples showing a generic laboratory report format that can be adapted
to fit your class needs and a disciplinary-specific guideline for a lab report.
Example #1 – Generic Formal Laboratory Report
(Adapted from Black, Gach, & Kotzian, 1996)
is example provides some general comments that apply to many kinds of laboratory reports. Use this as a template for
creating your own checklist or grading rubric to meet your laboratory needs. Note that it represents a score for the organiza-
tion of the report as well as the inclusion of the correct science content and the mechanics of writing (e.g., style, grammar,
spelling).
As a general rule, grading a report like this should include a scale that differentiates between demonstrated levels of per-
formance and provides students with feedback on what they need to do to get better. Try using “Exceeds Expectations” for
work that clearly represents a superb performance earning a 100% to 91%, (or an A+ to A grade); “Meets Expectations” for
works that meets the assignment requirements, in the 90%-81%, (or the A- to B range); “Towards Expectations” for work
that shows an application of developing skills with room for improvement, earning a score in the 80%-70%, (or the B- to
C grade range); and finally the “Does Not Meet Expectations” for incomplete, misapplied concepts, or incoherent ideas the
signals a performance less than desired and earning a score below 70% (in the D to F range.)
Laboratory Report Guidelines:
Title: e title of an experimental report should indicate the factors being manipulated, the effects or responses being
measured, the specific topic or organism under study, and the name of the researcher(s). Be as concise as possible. ___/1
Introduction: e introduction should provide a clear statement of the problem or questions addressed by your study. It
should give references to relevant reports by other workers and should include enough background information to make
your report understandable as an independent unit. ___/4
Materials and Methods: is section should (1) enable others to judge whether your techniques justify your conclusions,
and (2) provide enough information to allow your work to be repeated. Since your protocol was detailed in the lab manual,
a short outline or explanation and a formal reference to the lab manual will suffice. Include any deviations from the lab
manual protocol. ___/3
Results: Tables and figures, although important, are not enough for this section. Describe your results briefly, but indicate
trends in your data that will be discussed in the next section. Tables and figures should be numbered, labeled, and men-
tioned in the text. e dependent variables should be on the vertical axes and independent variables on the horizontal axes.
Linear, semi-log, or log-log graphs should be used where appropriate. ___/4
Discussion: e discussion should include an error analysis (or at least an estimate of uncertainties), any conclusions drawn
from your results, and whether your data are consistent with relevant models or hypotheses. ___/4
Summary: e summary should be a shorter version (1-2 paragraphs) of the paper for those who don’t want to read it in
detail. is section should be independent of the paper. Tell what you did, what happened as a result, and what you con-
cluded. ___/4
Literature Cited: Any facts or ideas that you did not generate yourself must be attributed to the source where you found
them (including other people). Indicate such references by inserting the author’s (authors’) name(s) and the date of publica-
tion at the appropriate place in the text and by listing a complete citation under Literature Cited. If any of the analysis was
done as a group effort, this should be indicated. All references cited MUST be mentioned in the text. See the lab manual
supplement for complete citation format. ___/3
GSI Tip: While it may take you additional time up front to create a grading rubric, the time you save when grading is
worth the extra effort.
122
University of Michigan GSI Guidebook
Scientific content: Is the reasoning accurate? Are all possible inferences made? No illogical inferences drawn?___/3
Style, grammar, and spelling ___/4
TOTAL ___/30
Example #2 – 200 Level Biology Class Laboratory Report
(Adapted from Marino, 2009)
is example rubric comes from a field course where students design and carry out their own research project. e labora-
tory report is a tool for communicating to the GSI what was done by the student and what students learned in relation
to the themes of the laboratory course. Note that this rubric also includes prompts for what components students should
include in their report for each section and how much each component is worth.
Laboratory Report—10 points possible
Introduction (2 points)
• Background (1 pt): Is context provided for the study?
• Hypothesis (0.5 pt): Is the hypothesis stated clearly, and is it well-justified?
• Predictions (0.5 pt): Are explicit predictions made that follow from the hypothesis?
Results (3 points)
• Graphs, charts, tables (1 pt): Are all relevant figures included? Are figures and axes labeled appropriately? Do they
only contain appropriate information? Are the tables redundant with the figures?
• Description in text (1 pt): Does the text adequately describe the results of the study?
• Statistics (1 pt): Are the appropriate statistics included for this study? (e.g., mean, standard deviation, test statistic,
p-value)
Discussion (5 points)
• Are the results related back to the hypothesis and predictions? (1 point)
• Is the general biological significance of the study discussed? (0.5 pts)
• Responses to questions in lab handout (1 point per question, 3 questions total)
• Independent thought (0.5 points): Did the student contribute ideas besides those discussed in lab?
Deductions
• Grammar (up to 1 point)
• Conciseness (up to 1 point)
• Cited at least 2 references (0.5 points per reference)
References
Black, B., Gach, M., & Kotzian, N. (1996). Guidebook for teaching labs for University of Michigan Graduate Student
Instructors. Ann Arbor, MI: Center for Research on Learning and Teaching, University of Michigan.
Marino, J. (2009). Grading rubric for biology 282. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
