category of evaluation | proficient (3pts) | intermediate (2pts) | developing (or 'there') (1pt) | total-whiff (or 'not there') (0pt) |
Research question and day's agenda: | | | there (see NB10) | not there |
Location, filenames of saved data | | | there | not there |
Relevant All settings on apparatus | | | there | not there |
Tables of hand recorded data [1] | | | for tables all columns have descriptors and units, table headings include a description of how the data were taken (or is meaningful somehow and points to such a description....), each measurement is reported with an uncertainty | not all of that is there |
Graphs and plots | | | all graphs have legible axes labels including appropriate units, experimental data distinguished from modeling curves, experimental uncertainty of data points observable or discussed | not all of that is there |
experimental design or approach [2] | the experimental approach is
clearly, usefully explained at the beginning of the entry for the experiment (see NB10), and the research question clearly stated. Beyond this, i) refinements of the approach may prove necessary once the work is underway. These must be recorded too if necessary. Leave room at the top for these. ii) Procedures followed during the period of the experiment are recorded, both the stuff that proves correct and incorrect. If problems are encountered, if errors are discovered, these are visible in the record. iii) Sketches, block diagrams, including all apparatus and instruments used are present. The goal, a very holistic goal is this: If all the results can be reproduced and understood from the written record, the notebook has been proficiently and professionally kept. | One or two of these best practices have not been followed, leading to missing information and a bit of incompleteness. | a few of these items are missing; the lab notebook could not be relied upon to reproduce the results. | not there |
modeling results | includes i) calculations (exhibited, explicit), ii) sketches, iii) predictions and their `checks', both during and after data-taking, iv) modeling plots, v) estimates of `goodness of fit' and vi) its uncertainty (having to do with Goldilocks plots where appropriate), and vii) discussion explaining each of these, wherever they appear in the narrative of the lab notebook record. The goal is holistic: if the answer to the research question posed is clearly supported by modeling analyses in turn supported by the data taken, that the reasoning is explicit and exhibited, then the lab notebook record has been proficiently and professionally kept. | one or two of these elements of best practice with respect to modeling work are missing | a few of these elements are missing | not there |
uncertainty, discrepancy, and significant figures | Methodology of estimating uncertainty is described with specificity, best values and their significant figures are rounded and truncated in light of the uncertainty, discrepancies are compared with uncertainties wherever possible, and quantitative data driven conclusions are reached in light of these comparisons. | One or two of these best practice elements is missing
| a few of these elements are missing | not there |
abstract | quotes and interprets principal results, compares uncertainties and discrepancies (if that is possible), uses significant figures appropriately, and captures the essence of the methods used to obtain the results, which together supports or defends the given answer to the research question of the day. It is brief. | one of these elements is missing | two of these elements are missing | where is the abstract... |
|