Metabolic Biochemistry GST and the Effects of Curcumin Practical: Criterion-Referenced Marking Criteria Rubric

Transcription

1 Metabolic Biochemistry GST and the Effects of Curcumin Practical: Criterion-Referenced Marking Criteria Rubric You will be required to present class data in a laboratory report. In the week following the practical session there will be a tutorial covering elements of the report write up. Report submission will occur the week after the tutorial. The following rubric will be used as a guide to mark components of your report. The report demonstrates an understanding of the scientific concepts associated with the topic being studied. Weight 30%. The report is presented as specified in the provided guidelines within the Subject Manual. Evidence of background research (i.e. within the text and in the reference list). References are cited in the prescribed method. The statistical analyses have been performed correctly. The information within the report has been presented in a coherent and concise manner that is clear to the reader. Students have critically analysed the experimental results and associated literature to draw reasoned conclusions from the data. Weight 30%.

2 Disciplinary knowledge Outstanding report Excellent report Good report overall. overall. overall. Introduction Very well written Well written discusses GST and introduction. introduction. curcumin but does Concisely covers the Covers GST and not sufficiently function of GST and its curcumin well, but not cover them in detail tissue localisation, with a level of or insight. introduces curcumin and outstanding insight. Aims are poorly why curcumin might be Utilises published described. significant to the current literature Discussion is too study. appropriately. brief or does not Utilises published Includes well written cover all the literature with insight aims. Utilises published throughout the report Discussion is literature Includes aims that are comprehensive but adequately but appropriately written in needs to draw more on misses connections concise scientific manner. the literature to relevant to the Coherently and logically support arguments. current study. links the data obtained in Some minor Referencing is the current study to our referencing adequate. understanding of the inconsistencies. subject matter. Very well referenced. The report demonstrates an understanding of the scientific concepts associated with the topic being studied. Weight 20%. Satisfactory report overall. Introduction covers GST and curcumin, but is too brief and does not cover all the main points tested in the current study. Insufficient effort to draw upon the literature. Written without an understanding of all the concepts being examined. Some misconceptions about the experimental aims are evident. Discussion is very brief and shows some lack of understanding of the Referencing is minimal. Unsatisfactory report Report overall is missing vital information. Introduction does not cover GST and/or curcumin. Introduction is too brief Poorly written with a clear lack of understanding of the experimental aims. Parts of the results are missing. Discussion is too brief, with little reference to the Failed to utilised published literature Referencing is inadequate.

3 Professional skills The cover sheet and The cover sheet and Cover sheet and declaration have been declaration have declaration have completed. been completed. been completed. The report is presented as specified in the provided guidelines within the Subject Manual. Weight 10%. NB: Margins are to be at least 2.5cm top, bottom, left and right. Font is to be Times New Roman 12 point or Ariel 11 point. citable/topicpage/effective -writing Kept within the specified page limit. Table titles have been included above the tables. Figure legends have been included below the figures and are understandable in isolation of text. Used correct axis labels with appropriate units. Error bars included on the graph are representative of experimental standard deviation. Professional presentation with great attention to detail. Significant p-values indicated with an asterisk in the table and/or on the graph. Fonts used are appropriate Margins are within limits Good use of the impersonal tense (ie didn t use I, we our in sentences at all) Appropriate tenses used (typically past tense) Like HD level but lacking in some aspects of the presentation. Adequate and correct presentation of figures and tables. Figure legends and table titles not totally descriptive. References appropriately with only minor referencing issues. Fonts used are appropriate Margins are within limits Used the word we once or twice Tenses good Kept within the page limit. Table & figure titles not in the correct position. Figure legend/caption not present or inaccurate. Axis titles not descriptive, without units or labelled inappropriately. Error bars on the graph are excel generated (not representative of experimental standard deviation). Fonts used are inappropriate Margins are not within limits Used the word I once or twice Tenses good Have not, or only partially, completed the assignment cover sheet and declaration. Used excel to label graphs and placed title in the wrong position. Table titles in the wrong position. Titles of figures and tables read like sentences rather than descriptive titles. Figure axes not labelled adequately. Some information is not restricted to the appropriate section of the report, for e.g. a result or two is presented in the discussion section; a method is listed in Some inconsistencies in referencing (either within the text and/or the reference list). Regular use of personal references Tenses good Have not completed the assignment cover sheet and declaration. Figures or tables not included. Missing figures, tables or axis titles in graphs. Missing error bars on graphs. Significant amounts of information are not restricted to the appropriate section of the report, for e.g. results are presented in the discussion section; methods are listed in Exceeded the page limit Have not used references. Riddled with personal references Tenses all over the place.

4 Evidence of background research (i.e. within the text and in the reference list). References are cited in the prescribed method. Professional skills continued Evidence of sufficient, quality literature search (e.g. at least 7 relevant references). Used appropriate referencing style in text and for reference list. Evidence of sufficient, quality literature search, but not as in depth or relevant as HD. Too many references cited (e.g. greater than 20). Slight inconsistencies in referencing, or referencing style. Evidence of adequate literature search, but references not all relevant to the topic of study or incorrectly cited within the text (that is it does not correspond to the literature being discussed). Used referencing style in text but made a few errors in the reference list OR vice versa. Referenced poor sources (eg Wikipedia, text books). Less than 4 relevant references cited demonstrating a lack of research. Used referencing but included author initials in the in text citation. Several errors in referencing made. Missing references in reference list. Incorrectly referenced journal articles. No references. Did not use appropriate referencing style in text and/or for reference list.

5 Professional skills continued Correct t-test calculations Correct t-test on the correct data set. calculations on the Correct p-values. correct data set. Correct presentation of p- Correct p-values. values in scientific notation Correct presentation OR, simply p<0.05. of p-values in Correct and clear scientific notation explanation of values being OR, simply p<0.05. either significantly higher or lower and not just significantly different in all cases. The statistical analyses have been performed correctly. Have taken note of the regression analyses provided and justified the exclusion of the correct outliers accordingly. Have taken note of the regression analyses provided and justified the exclusion of the correct outliers accordingly. One aspect of analysis is ambiguous. For eg. Inadequate explanation of values being either significantly higher or lower; or missed explanation of some aspect of relevant, completed statistics. T-test performed correctly on selected data set. Correct p-values based on selected data set. One of the following aspects missing: - Incorrect presentation of p- values (scientific notation) - No (or incorrect) explanation of values being either significantly higher or lower - Have taken note of the regression analyses provided to justified the exclusion of outliers accordingly, but have selected the wrong outlier/s to reject. Adequate Statistical analysis undertaken to justify pass but some aspect incomplete. Did not take note of the regression analyses and did not exclude outlying data. Incorrect presentation of p-values (scientific notation). No (or incorrect) explanation of values being either significantly higher or lower. No statistical analysis performed Statistical analysis deficient Incorrect T- tests performed Inadequate T- tests performed. Incorrect interpretation of statistics undertaken. Incorrect p- values obtained.

6 Communication skills Easy to read. Well written but Base level writing. Only requires one read of not outstanding Little each section to be fully argument development of understood. present. argument. To the point (concise, does Good Verbose or too not waffle, not verbose). tables/figures. brief. Excellent sentence structure Minor Poor figures and and development of grammatical or tables. argument (story line). typographical Writing is not Excellent and clear errors. clear and contains figures/tables (correct axis some grammatical titles etc) that are errors. understandable without reading the text. The information within the report has been presented in a coherent and concise manner that is clear to the reader. Requires work to understand the flow of the argument (story). Verbose, or skirts the issue. Adequate figures/tables but not easily understood. Absence of axis titles or legends in figures and tables. Requires more than one read to understand the concepts presented. Repetitive. Poor sentence structure. Lack of flow to the argument (story). Figures/tables cannot be understood without reading the text. Contains many spelling and grammatical errors.

7 Enquiry and innovation Outstanding. Simply and nicely written. Uses some Base level Can explain why the Uses literature to support literature. understanding. levels of GST vary argument but not to level of Re-states results Little use of literature. between kidney and insight as HD. then states Hasn t drawn a link liver. Can explain the majority of the literature but between results and Can explain or results (see HD) but doesn t doesn t draw the literature. theorise how detail them all. two together using Discussion is very curcumin effects the logical argument. similar to functions of GST. Focuses on one Little explanation of Have used literature outcome more than reasons for to support these the others. Minor misconceptions explanations of of the effects GST results and drawn levels in liver and the link between kidney. literature and Evidence of a substantial search of the relevant literature through relevant citations. Students have critically analysed the experimental results and associated literature to draw reasoned conclusions from the data. Weight 30%. Failed to explain why GST levels differ between kidney and liver. Failed to explain why how curcumin might effect GST levels. Failed to explain why. Simply repeated No use of literature.