Physics 163 - Quarter 2 Projects

Interactive Physics

Scoring Rubric

 

Interactive Physics Project Description

About the Lab Report

Due Dates

The Project Corner

Your project will be graded based on the following scoring rubric.

Outcomes w/criteria

Scale

Score

1. Purpose

Used brainstorming skills to generate a real-world scenario to model; succinctly described the scenario; proposed a what-if question and identified a relevant variable to modify; purpose was focused and ambitious.

0 - 1

Failed to identify and describe either a scenario or a what-if Q.

2

Identified and described a scenario and a what-if Q; variables may not be clearly stated; purpose statement may lack focus or ambition.

3

Effectively identified and described a scenario; realistic what-if? Q was clearly stated and variables to be modified were clearly identified; purpose was focused and ambitious.

 

 

 

______

2. Physics Understanding

Physics of the scenario is exhaustively described in the Theory; included verbal descriptions, diagrams, graphs, and other visuals which have been discussed in class or found in the book or other literature; application of physics to the scenario revealed a high level of understanding.

0 - 2

Physics understanding is very limited as demonstrated by the lack of depth, several errors, failure to depict information in visual manner or merely the absence of a Theory section.

3 - 4

Made a clear effort to use both words and visuals to describe the physics of the scenario; understanding level is still developing as evidenced by errors and a lack of depth and analysis in the Theory section.

5 - 6

Used a wealth of physics to fully describe the scenario; introduced free-body diagrams, p-t and v-t graphs, energy bar charts, equations, and calc'ns; understanding of physics is well developed and evident in the Theory section.

 

 

 

______

3. Description of Model

Used software to accomplish stated purpose; described and developed a working model of the scenario; utilized and reported reasonable input values to obtain realistic results and to explore the what-if? question.

0 - 2

Failed to construct a working Interactive Physics model which was relevant to the purpose.

3 - 4

Interactive Physics model works and is relevant to purpose; certain input values and/or results are not realistic; model may not be capable of exploring the stated what-if? Q.

5 - 6

Interactive Physics model works and is relevant to the stated purpose; model uses reasonable input values and yields realistic results; was able to use model to explore the what-if? Q.

 

 

 

______

4. Data and Graph

Collected accurate data and reported it using a well-organized table with a row-column format. Used computer software to plot data, to determine the m, b, and R values, and to determine the equation relating the dependent and independent variables. All data and graphs are labeled with the symbol and appropriate unit.

0 - 2

Data and graph section reflects lack of concern and attention. There are a number of errors and omissions with regard to either the graph and/or the data table.

3 - 4

Data is clearly presented and labeled using a row-column format; graph is included, though it may not be properly done; may have failed to organize data or include all data. Data may reflect errors or improper procedure.

5 - 6

Data is clearly presented in a row-column format; dependent and independent variables are plotted on proper axis using appropriate computer software; slope, y-intercept and regression constant are clearly shown; data is labeled with unit and symbol. Data are accurate and sensible.

 

 

 

______

5. Discussion of Results

Results are thoroughly discussed and include a statement about the qualitative and quantitative (eq'n) relationship; sources of error and technical problems were identified and discussed. Results of the study were interpreted and related to physical theories and models.

0 - 2

Failed to intelligently discuss the meaning of the data and results; discussion suffers from many serious errors and/or omissions.

3 - 4

Conclusions were drawn and relationships were discussed; may have one or more serious errors and/or omissions.

5 - 6

Relationship (direct, inverse, linear, parabolic, etc.) between variables is clearly stated; eq'n relating the data is properly written using the symbols for the variables (and not y and x); interpreted results and drew meaningful conclusions; provided an intelligent discussion of errors.

 

 

 

______

6. Report Organization

Report includes all the appropriate sections; info is placed in its proper section; each section is labeled and placed in its appropriate order; spelling is checked and corrected.

0 - 1

Report fails to include all the appropriate sections; includes several errors or omissions.

2

Lab report is mostly complete yet lacking in the quality of discussion and the support of the findings; may lack organization; may failed to have documented input values and/or results in a row/column format.

3

Lab report is well-organized, complete, and labeled. With few exceptions, spelling has been checked and corrected.

 

 

 

______

Comments:

TOTAL

______

(out of 30)

Your score is _____/30; which is scaled to a ______________%.

 

Exemplary (for the most part) projects are included online at The Refrigerator; a quick glance at these pages is highly recommended prior to the completion of your project. Such examples are not included for you to mimic, but rather as helpful illustrations of what your own end product might look like. Students should be cautioned that project guidelines change through the years and thus the online exemplars should not be considered as the definitive word concerning what should be included in the final lab report. The definitive word are the guidelines which are included on these Internet pages.


Return to:

Interactive Physics Description
The Project Corner
The Refrigerator
Physics 163 Home Page
GBS Physics Home Page
The Physics Classroom

 

The GBS Physics staff invite you to send electronic mail:

| Tom Henderson | Howard Jenewein | John Lewis | Neil Schmidgall | Dave Smith | Suzanne Webb | Brian Wegley |




Questions and comments can be sent e-mail to Tom Henderson.


This page last updated on 1/21/99.