BIOL1X07 Scientific Report 2022
Criteria Meets criteria Broadly addresses criteria Room for improvement Does not meet criteria
Title 3 pts 2 pts 1 pts 0 pts
Excellent descriptive and concise. Good title, but may be lacking an
important aspect of the study or
is not concise.
Title is lacking key information. No or uninformative title.
Introduction 10 pts 7.5 pts 4 pts 0 pts
Context of current study
established using relevant
scientific literature
Relevant literature cited, and in-
depth analysis provided to
establish the background and
context for the current study.
Relevant literature cited, and
some background context
explained.
Little to no relevant literature
cited, or little to no background
context provided.
Relevant scientific literature
absent from report.
Introduction 8 pts 6 pts 3 pts 0 pts
Significance of current
study
Excellent explanation of the
significance of the study provided
with appropriate links to the
literature.
Significance of the study is clearly
explained. Some literature cited
may be irrelevant or poorly used.
General or unclear significance of
this study and no literature cited
or literature poorly used.
No significance of current study
mentioned in report.
Introduction 4 pts 3 pts 1.5 pts 0 pts
Hypotheses Excellent hypotheses without key
information missing.
At least one hypothesis missing a
key detail.
Only one hypothesis present or
hypotheses present but missing
key details.
Hypotheses not present.
Results 8 pts 6 pts 3 pts 0 pts
Written description of
results
Results clearly, concisely and
objectively described; no
interpretation or methods.
Results from both experiments
present. May be slightly unclear,
and/or too short, or excessively
verbose. Minor inclusion of
interpretation or methods.
Results from one experiment
missing; presence of methods or
interpretation.
No written description of results.
Results 5 pts 3.5 pts 2 pts 0 pts
Statistics All statistical values (i.e. test
statistic, d.f., and p-value) and
post-hoc test for both
experiments clearly and concisely
presented and well-integrated
into the written description.
All values (i.e. test statistic, d.f.,
and p-value) and post-hoc test for
both experiments are accurately
reported, but not well integrated
into the written description.
Only statistics for one experiment
presented, or some values (i.e.
test statistic, d.f., and p-value,
post-hoc test) missing or
incorrectly reported.
No statistical values included in
results.
Results 8 pts 6 pts 3 pts 0 pts
Presentation of figures Clear presentation of all data in
figures with a caption that is
informative, clear and concise,
and correctly located below the
figure.
Data for both experiments is
presented in an appropriate way.
Some errors may exist in
formatting of the figure, or figure
captions are lacking key
information or are
inappropriately placed.
Data is incorrectly presented, or
figure missing for one
experiment. Raw data may be
presented and/or there is
excessive double presenting of
results.
No figures included.
Results 2 pts 1.5 pts 1 pts 0 pts
Reference to figures Figure references are well
integrated into the written
description of the results and are
clear, concise and sequential.
Figure references are integrated
into the written description of
the results, but are not clear or
concise or sequential.
Not all figure references are
integrated into the results
section.
No reference to figures.
Discussion 5 pts 3.5 pts 1.5 pts 0 pts
Interpretation of results
relative to hypotheses
Interpretation is insightful and
logically links back to both
hypotheses with minimal
restating of results.
Interpretation is clear with some
linkage to both hypotheses.
Results may be restated.
Results are restated with little or
poor interpretation and no link
back to hypotheses.
No interpretation of results.
Discussion 10 pts 7.5 pts 4 pts 0 pts
Discussion of biology of
experiment and effective
use of scientific literature
to analyse patterns from
current findings in the
context of past studies.
Biological implications from
current study are deeply
explored. Effective use of
scientific literature of past studies
as evidence for the discussion of
the biology / physiology.
Biological implications of findings
from current study are discussed.
Some use of scientific literature
of past studies as evidence for
the discussion of the biology /
physiology.
Minimal discussion of biological
implications of findings. Minimal
or no use of scientific literature of
past studies as evidence for the
discussion of the biology /
physiology.
No discussion of biological
implications of findings. No use of
scientific literature of past
studies.
Discussion 8 pts 6 pts 3 pts 0 pts
Evidence-based future
research directions
Future Research Directions (2)
are innovative and excellently
justified using biological
explanations that are well-
supported by literature.
Future Research Directions (2)
are presented with some
biological explanations supported
by literature.
Future Research Directions (1 or
2) are limited in scope and/or not
based on the scientific literature.
No Future Research Directions
present.
Discussion 4 pts 3 pts 1 pts 0 pts
Conclusion Conclusion includes clear and
concise summary that skilfully
highlights the significance of the
study.
Conclusion includes adequate
summary, and significance
mentioned.
Conclusion is present, but
summary may be weak and / or
significance may be lacking.
Conclusion is missing.
References 5 pts 3.5 pts 1.5 pts 0 pts
In-text citations and
reference list
Excellent presentation of in-text
citations and reference list as per
instructions with minimal or no
errors.
All references and in-text
citations are present, but may
contain some errors.
Inconsistencies between in-text
citations and reference list. Major
in-text citation errors; poor
presentation of reference list
(multiple errors).
In-text citations and/or reference
list missing.
References 5 pts 3.5 pts 1.5 pts 0 pts
Appropriate choice of
references
At least five references used and
most information was taken from
reliable scientific sources.
At least five references were used
and at least half but not all the
references reflect engagement
with reliable scientific sources.
No usage of references taken
from reliable sources and/or
fewer than 5 references present.
No references used.
Writing & Presentation 5 pts 3.5 pts 2 pts 0 pts
Grammar and spelling, use
of scientific and formal
language
Excellent spelling, grammar and
command of written scientific
language (2 or less errors).
Formal language used.
Good spelling, grammar and
command of written scientific
language (3-5 errors). Formal
language used.
Adequate spelling and grammar
and command of written
scientific language (above 5
errors). Some use some informal
language.
Poor spelling and/or grammar.
Persistent use of informal
language.
Writing & Presentation 5 pts 3.5 pts 1.5 pts 0 pts
Sentence and paragraph
structure, cohesion of
report structure (hourglass
structure).
Sentence and paragraph
structure allows exceptional flow
of ideas. Report demonstrates
outstanding overall cohesiveness.
Sentence and paragraph
structure allows good flow of
ideas. Report demonstrates some
overall cohesiveness.
Sentence and paragraph
structure allows impede flow of
ideas. Report lacks overall
cohesiveness.
Poor and/or non-existent
sentence and paragraph
structure, poor overall
cohesiveness.
Writing & Presentation 5 pts 3.5 pts 1.5 pts 0 pts
Adherence to report
formatting instructions
(correct font face, font size,
margins, line spacing,
figures presented on
separate page(s) after the
discussion)
Compliance with all 5 criteria. Compliance with 3-4 criteria. Compliance with 1-2 criteria. Compliance with no criteria.