Written Lab Reports: A Grading Rubric

1
Written Lab ReportsA Grading Rubric
MAAPT Augsburg College, Minneapolis, MN 10/25/03

• Paul Knutson
• University of Minnesota

Bonni Hill, Osseo Sr. High Kimberly Carlson,
Minnetonka Sr. High
K. Heller P. Heller Physics Education Research
Group at the University of Minnesota
Acknowledgements Vince H. Kuo and Tom
Thaden-Koch for discussions and assistance
http//groups.physics.umn.edu/physed
Supported in part by NSF by grants 9651339 and
NSF/PHY - 0139099    
2
Outline

• Developing a rubric for grading
• introductory physics written lab reports
• Why is this worth doing?
• Introductory physics classes at U of Minnesota
• What questions do we want to address with the
  rubric?
• Process for developing the rubric
• The rubric
• Next steps

3
Why develop a rubric?

• The Physics Education Research Group at the
  University of Minnesota is involved in research
  and development of introductory physics courses
• Assessing and improving the introductory labs is
  one part of this research and development
• Written lab reports are an important component of
  the introductory labs

4
(Why develop a rubric?)

• Are Students learning something during the
  physics class including the labs?
• Do their skills change over time?
• How do we measure these things?

5
Some ways of measuring student knowledge

• Qualitative (Conceptual) Multiple Choice
  Questions
• Quantitative Problem Solving
• Expository Written lab reports

6
A key component of the introductory physics
classes at the University of Minnesota is Problem
Solving
We view writing laboratory reports as an
important part of a problem-solving based
instructional strategy
Students must organize their ideas, use
supporting information, and they must understand
the physics
Students must organize their ideas, use
supporting information, and they must understand
the physics
7
What kinds of questions should be addressed when
assessing lab reports?
8
General Criteria for evaluating technical
Reports(Dr. Lee-Ann K. Breuch, Dept. Of
Rhetoric, U of MN)

• Content What is the subject? What information
  needs to be included?
• Context What is expected in the discipline for
  this type of document?
• Audience To whom is the document written? How
  will it be used?
• Organization How can the information be best
  organized?
• Support What details, facts, and evidence can
  be used to illustrate main points? Are they
  accurate?

9
Should what we look for in a written lab report
be expanded?

• Content Does the writer use physics quantities
  with clarity and focus on the problem?
• Context Are equations and graphs used fluently
  and appropriately?
• Support Are statements supported by physics
  laws and principles?

10
Things to look for in a written lab report cont.
4. Correctness Are concepts used accurately
and appropriately?
5. Organization Is the material arranged so
that it is clear and makes sense?
6. Audience Is the report written
appropriately for the intended audience?
7. Mechanics Is the language accurate with
appropriate grammar and sentence structure?
New
11
Process for developing the rubric
Use criteria a first draft rubric Assess
written lab reports
Three of us worked this summer Bonni Hill, Kim
Carlson, and Paul Knutson (Bonni and Kim were
working under RET, an NSF sponsored program
Research Experience for Teachers)
12
Started with a rubric developed by Vince
Kuo Assessed a number of lab reports Compared
results Assessed more reports Repeated the
process!
13
Content - Looking for agreement among three
evaluators
Blue line Agreement Red line One level
difference
Note majority within one level difference in
agreement!
14
From earlier work by Vince Kuo Using a Different
rubric than the one shown on the last slides in
this talk
Topic of paper number 1) 1-D Kinematics 2) 2-D
Kinematics 3) Forces 4) Conservation of Energy
and Momentum 5) Rotational Kinematics 6)
Rotational Dynamics
15
(Resembles vision after reading too many lab
reports)
1.
16
General format used in coding forms
Prediction Content Context Support Data and
Results Content Context Support Correctness
17
(No Transcript)
18
(No Transcript)
19
Content
20
Context
21
Support
22
The complete rubric includes these criteria
4. Correctness Are concepts used accurately
and appropriately?
5. Organization Is the material arranged so
that it is clear and makes sense?
6. Audience Is the report written
appropriately for the intended audience?
7. Mechanics Is the language accurate with
appropriate grammar and sentence structure?
New
23
Next steps
Assess more written reports Make Adjustments in
the Rubric Look for progression of student skills
over time
References Vince H. Kuo, Talk AAPT, San Diego
winter 01 Paul Knutson, Talk AAPT,
Boise - summer 02 www.physics.umn.edu/groups/phys
ed Paul Knutson knut0199_at_umn.edu
24
The next seven slides show the still in
progress research rubric used to evaluate the
written lab reports. As the rubric is still a
work in progress comments and suggestions would
be appreciated. (The rubric used by the TAs is
right after the research rubric) (The content,
context, and support slides are identical to the
ones already shown.) knut0199_at_umn.edu
25
Content
26
Context
27
Support
28
Correctness
29
Organization
30
Audience
31
Mechanics
32
TA Guidelines for grading laboratory reports