GRADING LABORATORY REPORTS

NOTE : Where reference is made to the Laboratory manual, it is referring to the current laboratory manual 

As per the Laboratory manual, Chem 351 and 353 reports are graded using letter grades and the grading is rotated through different TAs (i.e. your own section TA doesn't always grade your work).  The rotation serves several purposes :

Please note that this approach is taken in order to be fairer to all students in all laboratory sections.  

Further information on our expectations for experimental reports is also provided in the Laboratory manual - this is critical reading ! Ignore at your peril.

However, the general information provided below is to help you understand the basis of the letter grade assignments - it outlines the criteria the TAs will be using to grade your work.

First the University letter grade scale (see the University Calendar under "Academic Standing: Grading System").
At the end of the course, the letter grades will be converted to a numerical course mark using the scale shown in the table below.

U of C Calendar Description
Letter Grade
Chem 351/3 numerical Score
Excellent : superior performance, showing comprehensive understanding of subject matter
A
10 / 10
 
A/B
9 / 10
Good : clearly above-average performance with knowledge of subject matter generally complete
B
8 / 10
 
B/C
7 / 10
Satisfactory : basic understanding of subject matter
C
6 / 10
 
C/D
5 / 10
Minimal Pass : marginal performance
D
4 / 10
Fail : unsatisfactory performance
F
2 / 10

Before continuing, THINK about what the terms defining each of the letter grades means.

Criteria for grading reports:
 

A = Superior performance
  • demonstrates a confident, comprehensive understanding of the topic, procedures and results (background information supports and develops hypothesis, insightful explanations of procedures’ purpose, precise and thoughtful description of trends, lively, intelligent, interesting human voice)
  • interprets results clearly and thoroughly (clearly recognizes whether results support hypothesis; addresses unexpected results and explains them reasonably)
  • demonstrates insight in practical application of acquired knowledge; creative and critical thought is evident (original thought)
  • organizes ideas in a thoughtful way (clear topic sentences, smooth transitions, conclusions are tied to hypothesis and are based on evidence and arguments in the focused body of the paper)
  • presents data and cites literature technically correct (a few minor errors, if any)
  • writes clearly and concisely throughout (few, if any, errors in spelling, punctuation or grammar)
B = Clearly above-average performance
  • demonstrates a generally complete understanding of the topic, procedures and results (background information supports hypothesis; complete explanations of procedures’ purpose; precise description of trends; intelligent, interesting human voice)
  • interprets results thoroughly (recognizes whether results support hypothesis; addresses unexpected results and attempts to explain them reasonably)
  • demonstrates a practical application of acquired knowledge; creative and critical thought is present (attempted original thought)
  • organizes ideas in a generally complete way (clear topic sentences and transitions; conclusions are tied to hypothesis and are based on evidence and arguments in the body of the paper)
  • presents data and cites literature technically correct (minor errors)
  • generally writes clearly and concisely (minor errors in spelling, punctuation or grammar) 
C = Satisfactory performance
  • demonstrates a basic understanding of the topic, procedures and results (clear hypothesis; explanations of procedures; description of trends; interesting human voice). Lack of fully developed explanations and interpretations is evident
  • interprets results (writing suggests results support hypothesis; mentions unexpected results, however attempts to explain them are superfluous)
  • attempts to give a practical application of acquired knowledge (thought demonstrates good grasp of subject matter, but only an average ability to examine results critically and analytically
  • organizes ideas in a basic way (topic sentences; conclusions relate to hypothesis and are based on evidence in the body of the paper; some ideas may be out of place or do not flow well)
  • presents data and cites literature (minor errors)
  • demonstrates some basic errors in spelling, punctuation or grammar (e.g. incomplete sentences, etc) that obscure meaning 
D = Minimal Pass
  • demonstrates a marginal understanding of the topic, procedures and results (hypothesis, explanations of procedures and description of trends are presented in a trivial manner)
  • demonstrates some serious difficulties in conveying information when attempting to explain results
  • makes little effort to examine material critically or analytically
  • organizes ideas in marginal way (ideas may be disorganized and/or contain lots of extraneous material). Poor structure to argument is evident
  • presents data in a marginal format (e.g. student may use incorrect graph) and cites literature in a bibliography only (no attempt to cite references in the text)
  • demonstrates major errors in spelling, punctuation or grammar that seriously obscures meaning 
F = Fail
  • demonstrates an unsatisfactory understanding of the topic, procedures and results (lack of hypothesis; limited explanations of procedures; description of data without considering trends)
  • demonstrates inaccurate or incomplete information when attempting to explain results. Much of information may be incorrect or extraneous
  • makes no effort to examine material critically or analytically
  • organizes ideas in an unsatisfactory way (ideas may be disorganized and/or contain lots of extraneous material)
  • presents data in an unsatisfactory format and/or lacks literature citations (no attempt to cite references in the text or in a bibliography)
  • demonstrates major errors in spelling, punctuation or grammar that make report incoherent

Information prepared jointly by Dr. I.R. Hunt (Chemistry), Dr. H. Addy and B. Huddleston (Biological Sciences).