Department of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering
Lab Report Evaluating Rubrics
4 —Excellent
Title and Author (3%) • Complete statement is
written, highlighting all the
objectives with excellent
grammar is used.
• Complete format is followed
for the author’s name.
Abstract (7%) • Abstract is well written
highlighting all the main
parts including results.
Excellent word choice and
grammar. Word limit is
strictly followed.
Key words (3%) • Perfect choice of keywords.
Introduction (12%) • Introduction is depicting an
extensive literature survey
with 5–6 number of citations.
• All the paragraphs are well
organized and completely
linked with the main
objective of the experiment.
• Highlighting the need for
these experiments in the real
world.
• Grammatically correct with
excellent sentence
structures.
3 —Good
• Complete statement is
written including all the
objectives but
grammatically not
correct.
• Format is followed but
with slight errors.
• All the main points are
included but some
discrepancies in the
grammar and content.
Word limit is followed.
• Appropriate choice of
keywords.
• Introduction is depicting
good literature survey but
number of citations can
be increased.
• The paragraphs are
organized and linked
with the main theme with
little discrepancies.
• Need the experiment is
also addressed.
• Little grammatical errors.
2 —Fair 1—Needs Improvement Score
• The statement is not • There is no statement,
addressing all the only the name of
experimental equipment is written.
objectives. • Format is not followed
• Format is not followed for author’s name.
for author’s names.
• Abstract is not • Only some points are
highlighting all the main discussed. Abstract is
points of the not giving any idea
manuscripts. about the
manuscript and the
word limit is also not
followed.
• Random choice of • Illogical choice of
keywords. keywords.
• Very little literature • Introduction is written
survey and citations. without literature
• The organization of survey.
writing needs • Very poor organization
improvement. of paragraphs and are
• Need for this experiment not at all linked with
is also not addressed the main theme of the
properly. experiment.
• Grammatical errors are • Need for the
present. experiment is not
addressed.
• A lot of grammatical
errors and sentence
structure is also very
poor.
Materials and Methods • Complete formulae and
(30%) scientific names of the used
chemicals are present along
with the names of suppliers.
• Complete calculations for
the preparation of the
solutions are provided.
• Complete name of the
equipment is present along
the name of the
manufacturer.
• Amounts and flow rates are
mentioned with complete
units.
• Unit consistency is followed.
• Experimental procedure is
well explained
comprehensively.
• Basic principle and
governing equations are
included and explained
clearly and efficiently.
Results and Discussions • All the observed readings
(30%) are tabulated and desired
quantities are calculated
and presented properly.
• Unit consistency is
maintained throughout the
calculations.
• Data points and results are
presented graphically with
proper title, legends (if
required), axis titles and units.
• Tables, graphs and schemes
are clear and easy to read
and interpret.
• All the readings and
calculated points are
presented up to 2 decimal
places, the sub scripts and
superscripts are properly
used throughout.
• Names of used chemical
are present with the
formulae but complete
format is not followed.
• Almost all calculations for
the preparation of
solution are provided.
• Name of equipment is
present but the name of
manufacturer is missing.
• Amounts and flowrates
are written.
• Unit consistency is not
followed strictly.
• Experimental procedure
shows little discrepancy.
• Basic principle and
governing equations are
included and discussed.
• All the observed readings
are tabulated and
desired quantities are
calculated but the
presentation is not up to
the mark.
• Unit consistency is
maintained.
• Data points and results
are presented
graphically but are not
titled properly.
• Quality and presentation
of tables, graphs and
schemes can be
improved.
• Some of the readings
and calculated points
exceeds the limit of 2 dp.
and sub scripts and super
• Used chemicals are not • All the used chemicals
mentioned properly are not mentioned.
with the formulae and • Incomplete and
supplier names. insufficient calculations
• Calculations for the for the preparation of
preparation of solutions solutions.
are incomplete. • Equipment is not
• Only the equipment named properly.
name is present. • Amounts and flow
• Some data about the rates are not
amounts and flow rates mentioned.
is missing. • Unit consistency is not
• Unit consistency is not followed.
fo0llowed. • Experimental
• Experimental procedure procedure is not
is not written properly. properly stated and
• Basic principle and some main steps are
governing equations missing.
are outlined but not • Basic principle is stated
discussed. but with major
discrepancies.
• Observed readings are • Incomplete readings
not tabulated properly and wrong
and there are errors in calculations.
the calculations. • Equations are not
• Unit consistency is not dimensionally
maintained. consistent and unit
• Graphical presentation consistency through
of results are very poor. out the calculations is
• Quality and also not maintained.
presentation of tables, • Graphs are missing.
graphs and schemes • Presentation of tables,
are very poor. graphs and schemes
• Presented readings are are very poor.
not exceeding the • All the data points are
decimal point limit. Sub exceeding the dp limit
scripts and super scripts and sub scripts and
are not used. super scripts are not
• Only some errors in the used at all.
desired results are • Errors in the results are
identified and the not identified.
 • Any errors and discrepancies
in the desired results are
identified and the possible
reasons are discussed
properly.
• All critical parameters of the
experiment are identified
and explained properly.
Conclusion (10%) • Conclusions are insightful, to
the point and fully based on
the experiment nature and
observed data points.
• Exhibits accuracy, precision
and fluency with a broad
range of vocabulary
including scientific
language.
References (5%) • All references are cited
properly with correct format.
scripts are also not used possible reasons are not • Critical parameters are
throughout. discussed. not identified.
• Almost all errors and • Critical parameters of
discrepancies in the the experiment are not
desired results are identified.
identified and the
possible reasons are
discussed to some
extent.
• Critical parameters of the
experiment are
identified.
• Conclusions are • Weak conclusion not • Conclusion is not
supported by the data; fully supported by the based on the
only minor improvements data. experimental results
are needed. • Vocabulary is weak and but just a random
• Efficient use of repetitious phrasing. discussion.
vocabulary but sentence • Incorrect vocabulary
structure needs and clumsy sentence
improvement. structure.
• All references are cited • Some references are • A lot of references are
but minor errors in the missing and the correct missing and formatting
format. format is not used. is also incorrect.
TOTAL