Assessment Criteria
Presentation
(Communication Institutional Rubric)
(Organization, Style/Structure)
Use of ICT
(Communication Institutional Rubric)
(Master ICT tools)
Critical Thinking
(Appraise, assumption and practical)
Calculations (problem solving)
(Innovation and Creativity)
Mark allocation for each category
Excellent
A brief concise summary or abstract about
the findings of the experiment followed by a
brief but concise introduction which
includes the importance of the experiment
with a clear hypothesis. The report is written
in past tense which includes any
amendments to the method. Results are
well tabulated and experimental data
presented with correct units of
measurements and significant figures.
Subheadings are used in the text when a
new idea is introduced. Discussion of results
with respect to other literature which
should be cited in the text. A clear concise
conclusion provided that link to the aims
and objectives of the experiment with
recommendations (if any). Proper
referencing of literature.
Report is type written. Graphs are drawn
using computer software and inserted in the
word text and labeled as figures without
headings and the chemical formulas are
correctly typed using Microsoft equation
editor and the text is formatted to show
uniformity. The graphs and equations are
appropriately cited in the text.
Experimental results are presented and
justified in the discussion. Justification of
results by citing references and briefly
explaining how the results were obtained.
Reference is made to post-lab question if
these are addressed in the main discussion.
Formula is written and each term in the
formula is defined with units. Explains which
terms in the formula are achievable through
experiments. Obtains the answer using the
formula and justifies the answer by
comparison with reported data
10-8
Milestone
There is abstract which is not concise and
too long. The introduction does not indicate
the importance of the experiment with a
very vague hypothesis. The report is written
with a mixture of present and past tense
with minor typographical and grammatical
errors. Experimental data are well presented
in tabulated and graphical form but without
units and incorrect number of significant
figures. Results have been discussed with no
citation of other literature. Literature has
not been cited in the text. Conclusion is not
linked to the hypothesis of the experiment
and the incorrect referencing of literature.
Report is type written with graphs drawn
using the computer software. Graphs are
not labeled as figures but have headings and
chemical formulas are inserted in the text
without the use of the Microsoft equation
editor. The text is not formatted.
Experimental results are presented but not
discussed with proper justification with
other literature. Post lab questions are
addressed separately without including
these in the main discussion.
Writes the formula and calculation provided
but explanation not provided why the
particular formula was used.
7.5-6.5
Benchmark
There are no abstract and no clear defined
sections in the report. There is no
hypothesis and no evidence of the
hypothesis being tested. Results are not
presented well in the report – no tables or
figures. The report is not written in past
tense with grammatical errors. No
discussion of results and no conclusion.
Literature used is not referenced or cited at
all in the text.
Mixture of computer software and
handwriting used to write the report. The
chemical formulas are handwritten and
graphs are not labeled as figures and not
cited in the text. The text is not formatted.
Present the results only and provides self
explanation to the obtained results without
cited justification. Post lab questions are not
answered at all.
Answer presented without the presentation
of the formula.
6-5