Seperating Mixtures Lab Grading Rubric

Title Page
State the Problem
(10 points) / Title page format is correct and problem is stated scientifically 10 points / Title page is present but not formatted correctly and/or problem statement is plain.
6 points / No title page and/or problem is plain.
3 points / Either title page or problem statement is missing.
0 points
Hypothesis
(10 points) / Hypothesis is a clear statement written in correct format that is testable and relates to problem.
10 points / Hypothesis is included but is written in wrong format.
6 points / Hypothesis is included but is unclear and is not testable.
3 points / Hypothesis is not included
0 points
Materials
(5 points) / All materials needed are listed.
5 points / 1-2 necessary materials are excluded from list or not labeled properly.
2points / Materials are not included.
0 points
Safety
(5 points) / All necessary safety precautions are mentioned.
5 points / Safety precautions are mentioned, but not all.
2 points / No safety precautions are mentioned.
0 points
Procedures
(25 points) / Materials and amounts are identified. Steps are easy to follow and in correct form.
25 points / Materials are mentioned but without amounts. Steps are vague but in correct form.
17 points / Doesn’t provide enough information to represent an experimental procedure.
8 points / No materials or methods described
0 points
Observations/Data Table
(20 points) / Table is neatly labeled and filled in with values that have meaning and graph is present.
20 points / Table is included but is either not neat or values have no meaning and/or no graph labeled.
15 points / Table is included but is not complete or has many errors and/or no graph labeled.
10 points / Table and graph is not included.
0 points
Calculations (Mass and Percent Error)
(20 Points) / Starting mass and all ending masses labeled and also final total mass. % error correct.
20 points / Individual masses are missing and/or % error off.
10 points / Any masses missing and no % error calculation.
5 points / Calculations and Percent error missing.
0 points
Conclusion
(10 points) / Items 1-5 bulleted and explained in detail.
10 points / Items 1-5 complete but do not refer to scope of lab.
6 points / Items 1-5 incomplete or incorrect.
3 points / No Conclusion
0 points
Rough Draft
Rubric attached at the end(5 points) / Rubric & Rough Draft is included and complete.
5 points / Rough Draft is included but incomplete.
3 points / Rough Draft is not included.
0 points / No rubric
-3 points
Total /

Design Your Own Experiment

Boiling Point of Water

Jane Jones

Pre-AP Chemistry

Ms. Ramsey

3rd Period

Oct 2, 2017

Problem: To determine the boiling point of water within 0.01oC

Hypothesis: A digital probe recording to the 0.1oC will be more accurate than an ethyl alcohol thermometer with readings of 0.01oC.

Materials:

  • Digital probe 0.1oC
/
  • Ethyl alcohol thermometer 0.01oC
/
  • 500mL graduated cylinder

  • 500mL beaker
/
  • 300mL distilled water

Safety:

  • Use hot hands when handling hot glassware.
  • Wear closed toed shoes.

Procedure:

  1. The required materials were selected and taken to the workstation.
  2. Using a 500mL graduated cylinder, obtain 300mL of distilled water, then pour into the 500mL beaker.
  3. Place the beaker onto the hotplate and turn the setting to 8.
  4. Place the digital thermometer in the beaker and record the initial temperature.
  5. Record the temperature in 2 minute intervals for16 minutes after boiling began.
  6. Repeat steps 1-5 using the alcohol thermometer.
  7. Turn the hotplate off and allow the materials to cool.
  8. Clean lab station and equipment.
  9. Wash hands.

Observations/ Data:

Conclusion:

Address the following ideas using paragraph form. Be concise while answering the following questions and use transitions to connect the ideas.

1. Restate the purpose of the experiment (include independent (IV) and dependent (DV) variables.)

One format: The purpose of the experiment was to investigate the effect of the ____(IV)______on the _____(DV)______

Meets or Exceeds Expectations: The purpose of the experiment was to investigate the effect of nitrogen fertilizer concentration on the growth of corn plants by comparing the growth of corn plants subjected to varying concentrations of nitrogen based fertilizer.

2. What were the major findings? (Summarize your data and graph results)

Meets or Exceeds Expectations: A significant difference existed between the height of fertilized plants and non-fertilized plants. Plants receiving 2% to 5% nitrogen fertilizer concentrations showed an increase in the average height by10% over plants with <2% and >5% nitrogen fertilizer concentrations. The average height of the corn exposed to nitrogenous fertilizer concentrations between 2% and 5% was 22 cm and the average height of the plants exposed to nitrogenous fertilizer concentrations <2% and >5% was 20cm.

3. Was the hypothesis supported by the data?

One format: The hypothesis that (insert your hypothesis) was (supported, partially supported, or not supported.) Do not use the word “prove” – we do NOT prove hypotheses true in science.

Meets or Exceeds Expectations: The hypothesis that nitrogenous fertilizer concentration has no effect on plant height was not supported.

4. What were your errors & how could this experiment be improved?

Meets or Exceeds Expectations: This experiment was performed inside of a classroom where the temperature was not constant. Some plants were closer to the heat vent and may have been exposed to a different temperature than other plants. Perhaps this experiment could be improved by placing all plants equal distance from the heat vent. The experiment also relied on premixed fertilizer mixes. The mixes could have had incorrect concentrations. This experiment could be improved by testing the premade solutions to confirm the accuracy of the mix concentrations. / Below Expectations: This experiment would have been better if we had done it correctly – we did sloppy work and made careless measurements.
Below Expectations: This experiment would have been better if we had more time to do more trials.

5. What could be studied next after this experiment? What new experiment could continue study of this topic?

Meets or Exceeds Expectations: Additional investigations using additional concentrations would be a good additional experiment. Also, other crops could be subjected to the same experiment, such as beans and cucumbers. Perhaps scientists could use additional fertilizer mixes with different nutrients (e.g. phosphorous, potassium, etc).