Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: [Phys-l] format for lab reports

Yes - the audience for the course is important. The 'workbook" style we use in general physics is abandoned and the labs become more formal as the students progress through the major. Formal lab reports certainly have their place.

Bob at PC

-----Original Message-----
From: phys-l-bounces@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu [mailto:phys-l-bounces@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu] On Behalf Of trappe@physics.utexas.edu
Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2009 10:03 AM
To: Forum for Physics Educators
Subject: Re: [Phys-l] format for lab reports

Bobs approach is closer to what I had in mind. I am especially
concerned about the busy work that the format creates. As Bob pointed
out, the student spends disproportionate time figuring out how to
satisfy the format at the expense of seeing what is going on. The
reverse is true when no report is required, so I am interested in your
balancing act to address this.

I still want to know about the formal report that several of you
espouse. I suspect that the kind of report varies with the target
market for the course. At smaller institutions, there is barely
enough enrollment to fill one or two courses without separating out by
career future of students. Is that your case, Bob?

Do you use the same format for all labs, regardless of market, ie,
"scientist and engineer, general physics, conceptual physics? Most
larger universities serve all three course types. UTexas (total
enrollment 50,000) even has three different calculus based courses
(majors, engineers, pre-meds) plus a prep-engineer course for students
with weak backgrounds, and then the general physics for softer science
majors and medical technicians, and the conceptual physics for "the
other side of campus students (CP has no lab at UT). Austin Community
College(total enrollment 40,000+) has EP, GP, and CP (all with labs).
Trade schools offer a watered down algebra-based one year course in 11
weeks, without lab.

In the responses, I sense a target audience of "Scientist and
Engineer". That market makes a little more sense to me to do a more
rigid report format. I was interested to learn that engineering firms
still do a somewhat standard format for reporting to bosses. I recall
a machine shop foreman expecting a specific format for drawings, but
that evaporated pretty quickly when researchers told him to put up
with faculty or find a different career choice. So, I know that rigid
formats are both expected, and disdained.

Quoting "LaMontagne, Bob" <RLAMONT@providence.edu>:

I was too brief. They certainly do calculations - like finding the
value of g in a free-fall experiment, initial speed of a ball in the
ballistic pendulum, etc. They basically find all the quantities from
the usual spectrum of general physics labs. And they also prepare
lots of graphs and use the slopes and intercepts to find various
parameters. But yes, it is in a fill in the blank format. Each
question asked to guide them through the lab has a space for a
response, every data analysis has a table to be filled in. The
students do most of the things that would be done in a traditional
"lab report", except that it is done in a "workbook" style instead
of the standard structure. The grade is based on the quality of the
analysis. A good analysis as to why a lab failed is considered to be
better than a rote but clueless comment about a correct numerical
outcome.

Our labs have been derided by faculty in other departments as
"cookbook". However, we find that the labs force the students to
think about the physics instead of struggling to fit what they have
done into the inflexible format of a "report". Perhaps I could send
you one so you can see the format. We are a small department and the
format we use works well with the mix of faculty we have at the
moment. It may not work that well for others.

Bob at PC
________________________________________
From: phys-l-bounces@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
[phys-l-bounces@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu] On Behalf Of Wes Davis
[wlrdavis@earthlink.net]
Sent: Wednesday, November 04, 2009 7:56 PM
To: Forum for Physics Educators
Subject: Re: [Phys-l] format for lab reports

I'm not sure I understand the process here. Please excuse my ignorance.

As I understand it, your lab hand-outs have spaces to fill in the data. The
lab
hand-outs are then returned with data filled in the spaces. Then the
students answer questions that have no right or wrong answers. Then the lab
write-ups are graded. Right?

Does that mean the students don't do calculations with the data?
On what basis is the lab report graded?

Just wondering,
Wes



----- Original Message -----
From: "LaMontagne, Bob" <RLAMONT@providence.edu>
To: "Forum for Physics Educators" <phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, November 04, 2009 4:26 PM
Subject: Re: [Phys-l] format for lab reports


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

_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l



_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l