Marking criteria - unknown drug PDF

Preview

Summary

Download Marking criteria - unknown drug PDF

Description

BIOM3401 Identification of Unknown(s) Lab Report Marking Rubric

Introduction Briefly outline your strategy for identification including a figure demonstrating your planned approach. The use of a diagram or flow chart of your experimental plans is highly recommended and this is expected to be common within a lab group working together.

0% 0 points No background or strategy submitted in introduction, lacking reference support.

You should also have a table or diagram indicating the receptors present in the tissues tested, with a brief summary of the mechanisms of action for the drugs used in this study, supported by references. If you did not use a drug, you do not need to include its MOA in your report. A MOA is a brief account of what happens within a cell which has an activated receptor, or the specificity to an antagonist to block receptor activation. This may also be common within a lab group working together.

20% 2 points Superficial review of the topic, with multiple omissions or errors in key material; AND/OR No references used.

Semester 1 2021

40% 4 points

60% 6 points

80% 8 points

100% 10 points

Some points covered, with a few omissions; AND/OR Strategy superficially introduced; AND/OR use of irrelevant references to support rationale.

Most points covered well, but with inconsistent detail/depth; AND/OR Strategy may be unclear; AND/OR use of references minimal or incorrect, weakening rationale.

Points covered with good detail/depth; AND/OR strategy reasonably presented; AND/OR Good use of references to support introduction.

Points covered with clarity, great levels of depth/detail; AND Strategy clear and well presented; with consistently high standards of references cited.

10 points Results

0 points

3 points

6 points

9 points

12 points

15 points

Present your group’s results, and taking care in the labelling of figures, axes, units, etc.

No curves or tables of data provided.

Omission of more than one component, with significant

Omission of one or more results, and/or significant errors in results presented.

All results present, but with several errors in graphing and

All results present accurately shown in good quality

All results shown accurately and in high quality

BIOM3401 Identification of Unknown(s) Lab Report Marking Rubric Concentration-response curves are perhaps the best evidence of receptorspecific interactions of your unknown with receptors on the tissues. Back up data might include screen shots of data generated.

Semester 1 2021

errors in the others.

Supporting text is missing.

analysis; errors in Figure Legends or Table Headings. Text is of poor quality with multiple errors.

format with minor error(s); and/or Figure Legends and Table Headings lacking in detail to the extent that they cannot "stand alone" from text. Text is of good quality with minor errors.

format, with graphs having correct axes, Figure Legends and Table Headings having sufficient information to "stand alone", and text supporting the results is of high calibre.

3 points Major omissions in discussion with significant errors in basic experimental concepts, sources of error, and improvements to experimental design.

6 points Key elements of discussion present, but not to sufficient depth or not supported by literature references; some minor errors or omissions, and/or and no mention of sources of error or experimental improvement.

9 points Good effort discussion, with average use of appropriate references, and error addressed superficially and/or no attempt to explain experimental context of findings with

12 points Good quality discussion, with attempts to link experimental data with literature values and/or error discussed with reasonable depth as are future possible experiments to improve data.

15 points Superior quality, wellintegrated and referenced, placing experimental findings into literature context. Sources of error and future directions well covered and

While data should be shared between partners, figure legends should be written apart from your lab partners. Tables should also have clear headings, again, with your own wording. In addition to your figures and tables, you should have narrative text in the Results section that leads the reader through your findings. This is similar to what one finds in scientific papers.

15 points Discussion Explain to the reader what your data indicates by referring to named figures and tables, and relate the mechanisms involved to literature values, if possible. You will need to provide detailed mechanisms (if known) for your concluded unknown(s), and provide literary evidence for the receptors present on the tissues utilized (this may be in your introduction, and if so, you can refer the reader to it there).

0 points No discussion section submitted.

BIOM3401 Identification of Unknown(s) Lab Report Marking Rubric Show understanding of pharmacological and physiological antagonisms where appropriate.

Semester 1 2021

literature and/or superficial overview of errors and future directions.

Sources of experimental error discussed and recommendations for improvements to be mentioned.

presented with supporting literature; and Writing to a very high standard with minimal lack of clarity and error.

What do you think your unknown (include the numbers on your sample tubes each week) contains? Remember that it is the logical thought going into planning and analysis that is marked, not whether you get it right!

15 points Referencing Appropriate references used to support statements and information that is not "common knowledge" and consistent APA 7th Edition referencing style (See UQ Library for details. 5 points Presentation and Writing Quality: Spelling, punctuation, grammar, language used, appropriate diagrams, if any. Report is within a maximum of 1250 words (+/- 10%) including intext citations, and excluding electronic cover page, figures, legends, tables, legends and reference listing. Times New Roman or Arial fone, size 12

0 points Poor inappropriate references, with citation style errors. Web sites referenced. Minimal use of references in key areas of text.

2.5 points Some inappropriate references or incorrect use of chosen referencing style. References and citation style have some inconsistencies and mistakes in their use and formatting.

5 points Consistently good use of research references and citation formatting in-text and in the reference listing.

0 points Unreadable.

2 points Errors in more than one of the criteria, which affect communication; and/or length exceeded limitations by more than 20%.

4 points Good quality presentation across criteria; minor errors in criteria, which do not adversely affect understanding; length fine.

1 points Several errors in more than one of the given criteria, such that understanding of concepts is not discernable; length excessively exceeded limitations.

3 points Minor error(s) in one criterion which affects communication of concepts; or length exceeds limitations by more than 10%.

5 points High quality throughout the report, no errors in criteria, within length limit. High calibre of scientific writing, flow of argument,

BIOM3401 Identification of Unknown(s) Lab Report Marking Rubric font, 1.5 line spacing. 5 points

Semester 1 2021 spelling and grammar....