At Providence College we no longer use that format. Instead, we provide lab instructions that guide the students through the experiment. Before each operation that comprises the lab we ask a question about what the student might suggest doing to accomplish a particular goal. After the operation, we ask about how successful the outcome was and whether the students earlier suggestion might have led to more or less success meeting the goal. We also ask questions such as "Why was it permissible to ignore such and such a parameter?". At the end we ask specific questions about meeting the overall objectives of the lab. Many of the questions are phrased such that there are really no right or wrong answers - just an honest analysis of what happened. The student hands back the instructions with the data entered and the questions answered. These are graded and returned the next lab for study use on upcoming exams in class.
We try to keep the exams focused on a single concept. If it's, say, centripetal force, we don't deal with the statistical errors, significant figures, or other distracters. We focus on the major concept of that particular lab. Our chemistry department hammers the students with all the nit picking items that make up a three hour lab with the standard report format. Because of that, we feel we are relieved of that burden and can concentrate on concepts. General Physics is a place to learn physics - not become professional scientists.
Bob at PC
________________________________________
From: phys-l-bounces@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu [phys-l-bounces@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu] On Behalf Of trappe@physics.utexas.edu [trappe@physics.utexas.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, November 04, 2009 2:14 PM
To: 'Forum for Physics Educators'
Subject: [Phys-l] format for lab reports
I know it has been discussed before, but I would appreciate a few
opinions/insights on lab report formats.
I recall, from my own indoctrination, the standard format found in the
lab textbook of the 60's. Generally, it included: objective, method,
data sheet, results, analysis and interpretation, etc. Sometimes it
included apparatus and a discussion as to how it worked.
Beyond its historical significance, it rarely fits the research or
research paper reality, so I am curious how we continue to justify it.
As an experimental physicist, I did NOT use such a report format for
anything. Is it still in use by engineering companies, as our
continued use in intro labs would suggest?
If its an extinct dinosaur, what has replaced it for lab evaluation?
Or, is that why we still see it? Thanks, Karl
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l