One rubric per section.

Introduction graded on completion (already been evaluated by

rubric).
INTRODUCTION &RESPONSE TO PEER REVIEW (7 POINTS TOTAL)
5 points: Draft present that is notably improved from original draft
2 points: Paragraph describing changes made in response to reviewer feedback

METHODS AND PROCEDURE (10 POINTS TOTAL)

BIG PICTURE: Did their procedure clearly convey what they did in a repeatable manner?

OBJECTIVE 2 POINTS 1 POINT 0 POINTS

PROCEDURE FOR Silver Nanoprism
SILVER NANOPRISMS procedure thoroughly
described. Details (such as
solution molarity, source
of water for solutions) are
provided wherever
needed, and unnecessary
detail is absent.
PROCEDURE FOR Silver Mirror procedure
SILVER MIRROR thoroughly described.
Details (such as solution
molarity, source of water
for solutions) are provided
wherever needed, and
unnecessary detail is
absent.
LOGICAL FLOW The steps make sense in
the order they are
presented, and it is clear
why (scientifically) each
step is performed in the
given order.
DIFFERENCES Differences
BETWEEN THE TWO (concentration of AgNO3,
EXPERIMENTS process of Ag reduction,
HIGHLIGHTED other reagents that the
two experiments do not
have in common) are
briefly mentioned and
rationalized (also briefly)
based on desired outcome
DISCUSSION OF Error and limitations of
LIMITATIONS AND the test are thoughtfully
ERROR IN considered. Potential
PROCEDURE sources of error are
recognized and briefly
mentioned.
Many necessary details are Crucial details are absent.
missing. Procedure would be
/ unrepeatable.
Excessive detail is present
to a point of distracting
from the document.
Many necessary details are Crucial details are absent.
missing. Procedure would be
/ unrepeatable.
Excessive detail is present
to a point of distracting
from the document.
Steps are somewhat clear. Steps are presented
No clear reason why each incoherently.
step is happening (in a
particular order).
Differences between the No explicit discussion of
two processes are differences between
mentioned but the reason procedures.
for the differences are not.
OR
Too much detail about the
results are given in this
section.
Both (error and No discussions of
limitations) are glossed limitations on procedure.
over.
/
One is thoughtfully
considered, the other is
absent.
 RESULTS & DISCUSSION (10 points total)
BIG PICTURE: Did the results and discussion section accurately depict the data acquired
and explain what the data mean?
OBJECTIVE 2 POINTS 1 POINT 0 POINTS
PHYSICAL Physical attributes of silver mirror Some physical attributes of No physical
ATTRIBUTES OF and silver nanoprisms are silver mirror/nanoprisms description of
SILVER thoroughly described (color, described, but some silver mirror or
MIRROR/SILVER general appearance, way in which obvious attributes are nanoprisms
NANOPRISM particles are suspended). absent.
If observed color was not OR
correct a possible explanation is Incorrect colors not
given AND expected attributes are rationalized/correct
described. expected colors are not
described.
ABSORPTION (1) Figure depicting the absorption Only (1) or (2) No Beers Law
SPECTRA OF spectra of different size plot or
DIFFERENT SIZE nanoprisms is provided. Absorption
NANOPRISMS & (2) Figure accurately depicts a Spectra of
BEERS LAW PLOT-- Beers Law plot (with correct units Different-Size
PRESENTATION and axes). Figure caption describes Nanoprisms
the curve appropriately provided
ABSORPTION OF Figure caption/body of the text The relationship between No explanation
DIFFERENT SIZE explains what the spectra of the size of nanoprisms and of nanoprism
NANOPRISMS-- different size nanoprisms suggest their absorption spectra is size as it relates
EXPLANATION about the electronic structure of addressed but electronic to absorption
the nanoprisms. structure not adequately spectra.
described.
BEERS LAW PLOT Explanation answers the question: Explanation addresses the No explanation
(NANOPRISMS)-- Does Beers Law apply to colloid question but does not use of Beers Law
EXPLANATION solutions? any specific data to back up plot is given.
--using specific data from the the claim.
Beers Law plot. Physical OR
phenomena underlying Beers Law Beers Law phenomena
is clearly explained. inadequately explained.
DIRECT The differing physical attributes of The differing physical No explicit
COMPARISON OF silver mirror and silver nanoprisms attributes of silver mirror comparison of
SILVER are rationalized in terms of their and silver nanoprisms are the features of
MIRROR/NANOPRISM chemical structure using rationalized using some silver mirror and
ATTRIBUTES & specific features and data (what aspects of chemical silver
RATIONALIZATION features allow nanoprisms to be structure, but nanoprisms is
OF DIFFERENCES characterized by spectroscopy but rationalization lacks depth made.
not bulk silver?, etc) and reference to specific
data.
 CONCLUSION (10 POINTS TOTAL)

BIG PICTURE: Did the conclusion convey the overall experimental results and interpret
them in the context of the broader impact?
Many of these points will be reiterations from the body of the text. Repeating yourself
is okay, but you want to make sure you are going into the appropriate level of detail!
Look at examples if you are unsure

OBJECTIVE 2 POINTS 1 POINT 0 POINTS

SUMMARY OF The text adequately
RESULTS summarizes the products
of each experiment, the
role of the silver, and the
roles of other chemicals
SIGNIFICANCE OF Explains significance of
RESULTS - various techniques
TECHNIQUES (concentrations of
solutions, water sources,
etc) specific to each
experiment and why they
differ
SIGNIFICANCE OF The properties of
RESULTS nanostructures are nano/bulk properties is
NANOSTRUCTURES summarized and
connected to their general
governing principles
RESULTS IN Results of these
CONTEXT experiments are placed
into a larger context, and
suggestions for future
work to further
understanding of these
principles are mentioned
and supported
FINAL CONCLUDING A final, summative
STATEMENT statement concludes the
report, and appropriately
highlights the most
relevant aspects of the
experiment as a whole
Summary is lacking in Summary is absent.
detail
OR
Summary is needlessly
detailed
Explanation for No explanation is present
differences is unclear OR
missing from one of the
techniques
Some summary of General properties of
nanostructures are not
offered. Explanation discussed
doesnt follow
Either the context or No context or future work
future work is suggested, is mentioned
but not both.
A summative statement is No summative statement
attempted, but it focuses is provided. The
on inappropriate details of document ends in the
the experiments. middle of some kind of
analysis

OVERALL WRITING CLARITY AND TONE: 3 POINTS TOTAL

Was the document (as a whole) written clearly? Did the writing help or hinder the understanding of
the material?
OVERALL TOTAL: 35 POINTS