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



I think we must continue the requirement that students write formal lab reports. One of my wise college professors was fond of saying, "If you don't communicate what you have done, then you haven't done anything." And he also said, "Poor communication is not much better than no communication."

Many of my students, if not most, do not communicate well in writing. When they do write, it is quite colloquial; almost as bad as the text messages they send each other. I think their speech is also affected by this, or vice-versa. They simply are not used to explaining technical or complicated things verbally nor in writing. I liked the comment John Denker made about trying to explain something to colleagues verbally before starting to write it. That makes a lot of sense. In a classroom/lab setting students could start by explaining things verbally to each other, or to me. When students ask me to help them analyze their data, my first question is, "What are you trying to do?" That surprises them because I wrote the lab "handout," so I ought to know what they are trying to do. However, when I persist, and they realize they can't tell me what they are trying to do, I can then say, "Well if you don't know what you are trying to do, then how can you possibly do it? Are you waiting for the miracle of divine inspiration?" (The clever student might respond, "Yes, that's why I asked you to help me.")

What I'm getting at in this first portion is the idea that students need to be able to write a good introduction in which they describe the purpose of the experiment and what they hoped to accomplish by it. If they can't do that, then how can they analyze the data, and how can they reach any meaningful conclusions? Indeed, it sure would be nice if they could write a good introduction before they take any data. That's why I ask them to begin their lab notebook page with a short description of the experiment (no more than a paragraph). Alas, I think most of them leave space in the notebook and write the goals for the experiment in their lab notebooks after they have written the report.

Many journals continue to begin a paper with an abstract. It might not be labeled as such, but a brief introductory paragraph preceding the main body of the paper is still quite common. I think it is important for students to begin the report with an abstract because this is a very strong test of whether they can distill the experiment into jut a few sentences to tell the reader the main thrust of the experiment (so the reader can decide whether to continue reading). Students often complain it is very difficult to write an abstract that receives a "good" comment when I grade it. I agree, and this is why I write my abstracts last, and I recommend they do the same.

Following the abstract is a more detailed introduction to explain the purpose of the experiment and any background information the reader needs. Students also have difficulty with this. They want to launch right into a detailed experimental-procedure section. Indeed, the experimental-procedure section is easiest for them to write, because they can generally describe what they did, even if they don't fully understand why. Thus, even when my students have separate introduction and experimental-procedure sections (which I require) they frequently hopelessly intermingle the two sections. I keep having them do it because I think it is important to separate the idea of what the person tried to accomplish from the procedure the person used to accomplish it.

Notice my use of past tense in the previous sentence. I have great difficulty getting students to write in past tense. They most frequently try to write in future tense... "In this experiment we will measure the coefficient of friction for a piece of particle-board sliding on another piece of particle-board." This is usually results in a cynical remark from me such as "Wouldn't it be a good idea to do the experiment before you hand in the report?" If I am in a less cynical mood I write, "You already did the experiment, why are you writing in future tense?" It is sad that some students ask me what I mean by past tense and future tense. That tells you how poor their writing experience was in high school.

Also, when they write the experimental-procedure section, many want to begin with a list of everything they used during data acquisition. Some even include that they used a pen to record the data in their notebooks. I view lists as immature, but I also view lists as a way to avoid writing complete sentences, and also as a way to avoid thinking about what is really important to describe versus what is obvious and unnecessary to describe. I want students to think about the concise wording that is required to communicate the message. Shorter is better (assuming shorter is still complete).

Another problem is the tendency for students to tell the reader what to do rather than telling the reader what the students did. I wish I had the proverbial nickel for every time I have written, "Don't tell me what to do... tell me what you did."

After the experimental-procedure section I expect results and conclusions either as separate sections or as a combined section. I do not want to see raw data anywhere in the report. Practicing scientists generally do not publish tables of raw data. I do require that students submit photocopies of the appropriate lab-notebook pages with their reports. That way I have their raw data (so I can check their calculations), and I also can see their lab-notebook skills (which are graded and constitute about 5% of the overall report grade).

It should not surprise you that students who write poor introductions also have poor conclusions. It's pretty difficult to express clear results if you have a murky understanding of why you did the experiment. Students also struggle with proper presentation of the results. Should it be a table? Should it be a graph? If table; what columns should be in the table? If graph; what kind of graph? Some students include some tables and graphs, but don't mention them in the results/conclusion text. When that happens, I circle the table and write, "Why did you include this table? You never mentioned it in your report." They usually respond that they thought I wanted a table. I respond that the only thing I want is a clear communication of what the experiment was supposed to accomplish, then clearly stated evidence of how well the goal was accomplished and/or what knowledge was gained from the experiment.

As you might imagine, many of my students dislike writing lab reports, and they dislike me for being such a picky editor (which is what I call myself). I think it is one of the most important things I do. Indeed, quite a few student have written to me, or come back to visit, and have thanked me for teaching them to write good reports.

Please note that I readily agree my proscribed format (abstract, introduction, experimental procedure, results/conclusions) is not the only way to do it. Use any format you want. Just make sure students get plenty of practice communicating what they did, why they did it, and how well it succeeded. Also make them do this in a fairly formal manner... complete sentences, proper verb tense, adjectives modifying the correct noun, etc. Require nicely formatted tables with pertinent columns and properly labeled columns including units. Graphs should be well drawn (preferably with appropriate software) and axes must be labeled complete with units. Any included tables, graphs, or figures need to be explained in the report text. We don't just throw in a table or two, or a graph or two, because every scientific report ought to have graphs and tables. If you aren't going to say something about a table, graph, or figure in the text, then don't include it.

Summary... keep them writing... keep it formal... take the time to grade it as if you are a picky editor.


Michael D. Edmiston, Ph.D.
Professor of Chemistry and Physics
Bluffton University
Bluffton, OH 45817
(419)-358-3270
edmiston@bluffton.edu



-----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: 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