Science Lab Methodology
Lab Report Rubric –100 Points
Cover Page (5 pts)
5 points Name, proper title, lab
members, course, instructor,
date.
Abstract (5 pts)
5 points One paragraph summary of
the experiment with brie
mentioning of technique and
outcome.
Introduction (16-20 pts)
/background Good background information,
20 points gives reason for interest,
describes topic’s relevancy and
use, historical context or
development/discovery of
topic-at-least 3 references.
Method (8-10 pts)
10 points Well written in paragraph
format in 3rd person past tense
in a chronological
order.Relevant equations.
Result (16-20 pts)
20 points All the data presented in clear
tables, graph, chart, etc. and
summarized in a written
format. No interpretation of
data here.
Discussion (24-30 pts)
30 points Interpreting the result in your
own words in an objective
manner. Describe your result
not necessarily the expected
result. Discuss possible source
of errors and how it can be
eliminated.
Conclusion- (5 pts)
5 pts Report is summed up clearly
and concisely, overall format
of report “tells a story” and
conclusion supports this.
References (at-least 5) (5 pts)
5 points Consistent, clear use of
references-at-least 5, incorrect
bibliography citation formats.
(2-4 pts) (0-1 pt)
Missing one of the items. Missing/incomplete.
(2-4 pts) (0-1 point)
Missing minor points. Missing/incomplete.
(10-15pts) (5-9pts)
Lacking sufficient Missing significant
background information, portions of
poorly organized, English background
grammar or structure information, weak,
could use improvement. insufficient or
Not enough references. irrelevant. No
references
(5-7 pts) (2-4 pts)
Deficient in writing and not Poorly written. Don’t
following the format. understand the
procedure.
(10-15pts) (5-9pts)
Data not sufficiently Poor presentation of
presented in clear tables, the data.
graph, chart, etc. and not
summarized in a written
format.
(15-23 pts) (8-14 pts)
Result is not interpreted. Poor interpretation o
Deficient in understanding the result.
the result and possible
source of errors and
methods of improvement.
(2-4 pts) (0-1 pt)
Rambling/too long, new Weak, Incomplete,
information is introduced, missing.
doesn’t summarize or
represent thesis well.
(2-4 pts) (0-1 pt)
Less than 5 references, Missing/incomplete
Inconsistent formatting,
incorrect bibliography
citation formats