Science Experiment Grades

	A	B	C	D	E	F	G	H	I	J	K	L	M	N	O	P	Q	R	S	T	U	V
1	Names	Topic	Date Graded	Purpose/Question	P/Q 3	Hypothesis	Hyp 4	Materials & Procedure	M/P 5	Data & Observations (8)	D/O 8	Analysis & Conclusions	A/C 5	Confounds (3)	SoE 3	Future Work (2)	FW 2	Extra Elements	EE 0	AdditonalTeacher Comments	Tot Pts	Pct

2	Claire Faulkner	Fading effects of sunlight	5/12/2013	bms re "affected". Your experiment is really about the filtering/protective properties of various materials	3	good	4	waalos	4	numeric values or scales would have helped	5	Can't really related your resutls to skin protection.	4	none included	0	none	0	good use of photo	2	glass bowls didn't cover entire paper. Variable layers of cloth.	22	73.3
3	Claire Keyes	Effect of soda on enamel (copper, actually)	5/12/2013	bms about "effects"	3	good rationalle	4	WAALOS and not FP. Your procedure is good but it is about the effect on copper, not enamel (or the components of tooth enamel)	2	Where? Needed more than pictures	4	Good.	5	pennies didn't start out at same level of tarnish (or whatever)	0		0	good use of photos	2	My main concern is that you tested the effect on pennies, but your question is about enamel.	20	66.7
4	Laken Barber	Effect of oil spills on water	5/30/2013	good initial question	3	ok	4	not specific enough	2	none (should have started earlier)	0	none	0	Good statements about why it didn't work and what you would have done earlier.	3		1	notes about spills	5		18	60.0
5	Noami Erez Keelin Spencer	Egg in vinegar	5/30/2013	not stated but fairly obvious	1	ok	4	none	0	yes, but should have been in chart or table	5	none	0	none	0	none	0	cute pix	1	This was a bit below your level of potential	11	36.7
6	Karen Choe Monika Zscherpel Zaynab Ismail	Pea plants and microwaved water	5/30/2013	good, but define "energized"	2	interesting idea and reasoning	4	not FP; BMS; last part (bullets) didn't belong in this section	3	very interesting results; well represented	8	good	5	good	3	good	2	Impressive data colletion and representation	2	This was a good project. Higher number of plants would have helped.	29	96.7
7	Francesca DePierola Cayley Nickerson	Gummi bear flavor detection	5/30/2013	good. Clear and specific	3	connect your hyp to your question 1 as well	3	excellent	5	good, but a key would have helped	7	again, what about question 1?	4	smell, experience w/ gummies	0	none	0	nice border... yum	1	This was a bit too simple, but certainly enjoyable	23	76.7
8	Claire Leary Tatyanna Horoszko	Nail polish endurance	5/30/2013	good	3	why?	3	a bit unclear	3	chart?	6	ok	5	none	0	BMS	1	neat; pix	1	a larger number of people would have strenghtened your results	22	73.3
9	Julian Jaimes Patrick Ocock	hydrodynamics	5/30/2013	ok	3	nyeh, ok; too obvious	4	FP; BMS; I think that you should have used more objects or ones with more subtle differences	3	unclear what the axes were.	5	again, too vague. Which objects were in the categories.	3	none	0	none	0	none	0	The idea was great, but the execution and write-up wasn't up to your potential	18	60.0
10	Gale Heumann Hali Zweigoron	chemistry of cakes	6/5/2013	good	3	reasons for assumptions?	3	excellent!	5	good, but what are the units for density?	7	Yes. Well stated.	5	good	3	Yup.	2	nice icons and formula/equation	1	Great experiment and board. I think that your data would have been strengthened by more samples	29	96.7
11	Alisa Schouten Maggie Armenta	B-ball position & scoring	6/5/2013	seems like a no-brainer. Too simple?	3	Careful... "easier" is a subjective term	3	materials? good procedure	4	good charts and data representation	8	excellent	5	in conclusion	2	in conclusion	1	great use of photographs	2		28	93.3
12	Sara Bell	hair & humidity	6/5/2013	Your "intro is good, but doesn't serve this purpose well	2	should be shorter (and not include hygrometer def)	3	WAALOS and not FP	3	good that you used 3 meters. Section labeled D&A is actually more A&C.	8	use "support" instead of "prove". Again, much of what is in your D&O section should be here instead	4	good!	3	yup	2		0	Good idea. Hard to measure w/o many confounds.	25	83.3
13	Emily Gilles Keana	dress & response	6/5/2013	Good idea & clear question	3	Good statement; need to explain position a bit	3	Nice and clear. Have repeated trials in various areas and different models	5	You called it "Revealing". It really doesn't show any data.	3	Doesn't really relate to the data (or lack of)	2	BMS	2	vague, but ok	2	pictures	1	This was a great idea, but needed more specifics and larger set of data.	21	70.0
14	Brian Woo-Shem	seed germination	6/5/2013	Good clear statement	3	Again, good statements. What info/experience leads you to those statements?	3	BMS, WAALOS and not PT	3	What does 5/6, 6/6, etc mean (state it explicitly). Also, explain "# of days"	5	Label this section as such. You need a "Therefore...." to conclude this section.	4	good	3	none	0	Excellent extra information about weather, plants, location details, etc	4	Good extensive work and well presented.	25	83.3
15																					0	0.0
16																					0	0.0
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24	Abbreviations explained							WAALOS = write as a list of steps.
25								Not FP = don't write it in first person
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99