Science Inquiry

Water

Product: Designing and Conducting an Experiment

Name: ___________________________

Date: _________

Achievement
 Categories  Distinguished  Noteworthy  Satisfactory  Informative  Little
Content, Focus and Purpose        
 Abstract
    10  8   6  0
 Introduction / Research
  19  17  15  11  0
 Materials
    3 2 1 0
 Procedure
 11 10 9 7 0
 Data & Analysis
 14 12 9 7 0
 Conclusion
 11 10 8 6 0
Works Cited / Consulted
   5 4 3 0
 Acknowledgments
   3 2 1 0
 Style and terminology    10 8 3 0
 Organizational structure   10 8 3 0
 Format, layout & conventions   10 8 3 0
Total Points =          
 Grade =  A = 100 - 90        
   B = 89 - 80        
   I = 79 - 00 , redo for credit        
 Comments:          

Descriptions of Achievement Levels

Content, Focus, and Purpose

 Noteworthy
  • Abstract was a detailed explanation of what you did, why you did it, how you did it, -"what you found, and what it means.
  • Introduction clearly states the purpose and your hypothesis; it reflects significant library -research.
  • Procedure developed by the student and is repeatable. Drawings add clarity to the -procedure.
  • Materials listed.
  • Data displayed in appropriate chart generated using computer spreadsheet or data base, -Proper units given for quantitative measurements, data listed in sequential order
  • Analysis reflects much thought to connect the past research to the experimental -Outcome, calculations of measured data appropriate to math abilities, visual display of -;data using computer spreadsheet, interpretation of results
  • Conclusion summarizes the hypothesis and results, gives possible explanation of -Unexpected results, suggests future changes to experiment for improved design, and -Suggest ideas for future study that are a direct result of doing this investigation.
  • Works cited / consulted includes a minimum of 5 sources and uses proper format for -citations.
  • Acknowledgments give credit in a respectful fashion.
    •  Satisfactory
  • Abstract summarizes what you did, why you did it, how you did it, what you found, -and what it means
  • Introduction clearly states the purpose and your hypothesis; it reflects adequate library -research.
  • Materials listed
  • Procedure enhanced by the student and is repeatable. Drawings add clarity to the -procedure.
  • Data displayed in appropriate chart generated using computer spreadsheet or data base, -Proper units given for quantitative measurements, data listed in sequential order.
  • Analysis reflects thought to connect the past research to the experimental outcome, -Calculations of measured data appropriate to math abilities, visual display of data using -Computer spreadsheet, interpretation of results
  • Conclusion summarizes the hypothesis and results, gives possible explanation of -Unexpected results, suggests future changes to experiment for improved design, and -Suggest ideas for future study that are a direct result of doing this investigation.
  • Works cited / consulted includes a minimum of 4 sources and uses proper format for citations.
  • Acknowledgments give credit in a respectful fashion.
    •  Informative
  • Abstract lacks a complete summary.
  • Introduction poorly states the purpose and your hypothesis; it reflects inadequate library -research.
  • Material list not complete.
  • Procedure lacking and may not be repeatable.
  • Data displayed in appropriate chart generated using computer spreadsheet or data base, -lacked proper units given for quantitative measurements, data listed in illogical order.
  • Analysis poorly connect the past research to the experimental outcome, calculations of measured data not appropriate, visual display of data using computer spreadsheet, lacked -interpretation of results.
  • Conclusion poorly summarizes the hypothesis and results.
  • Works cited / consulted includes a minimum of 2 sources and uses proper format for citations.
  • Acknowledgments given.
    •  Little
  • Abstract confusing and incomplete
  • Introduction lacks the purpose or your hypothesis; it reflects no obvious library -research.
  • Materials not listed.
  • Procedure difficult to follow.
  • Data not displayed in appropriate chart, lacked quantitative measurements, data listed in illogical order.
  • Analysis lacked interpretation of results.
  • Conclusion poorly summarizes the hypothesis and results.
  • Works cited / consulted reported incorrectly or is missing.
  • Acknowledgments missing

    • Style and Terminology
     Noteworthy
  • The style and tone reflect your engagement with the topic and a concern for the -audience.
  • The language is fully appropriate to both topic and audience.
    •  Satisfactory
  • The style and tone reflect your comfort with the topic, but do not suggest enthusiasm.
  • The language at times is inflated with jargon or is too simple for the topic.
    •  Informative
  • The style and tone reflect your discomfort and/or apparent indifference to the topic
  • The language tends to be too general to give the information needed; or it is so inflated that it's almost impossible to understand.

    • Organizational Structure
     Noteworthy
  •  Information is presented in a way that is both engaging and informative.
    •  Satisfactory
  •  Information is presented in a reasonably straightforward manner.
    •  Informative
  •  Lack of organization leaves the reader confused about what is most important.

    • Format, Layout and Conventions
     Noteworthy
  • You created a visually effective layout.
  • Graphics and typographic devices, if used, make the text visually appealing as the -context requires.
  • Editing is thorough.
    •  Satisfactory
  • You created a visually coordinated presentation with enough attention to layout, and typographic devices, when needed, to make the text readable.
    •  Informative
  • Attention to layout, graphics, and typographic devices is minimal.
  • Editing clearly needs work

    • Back to Science Inquiry: Water

    Page by Lisa McLoughlin and Ed Koske