Component

Superior Work

 Good Work

Passable Work

Unacceptable Work

Cover Sheet

3

Project Title is clearly & artistically displayed

Names of investigators are clearly displayed in alphabetical order.

3

Project Title is clearly displayed

Names of investigators are clearly displayed.

2

Project Title is present

Names of investigators are present.

Project Title is missing

                and /or

Names of investigators are missing

0

General Style

10

No typographic or spelling errors.

tyle is consistent in voice & well-written throughout text.

10 - 8

Few typographic or errors in spelling.

Style is consistent throughout most of text.

8 - 6

Significant number typographic or spelling errors are present.

Style is inconsistent.

5 - 4

Many typographic or spelling errors.

Did not follow directions.

3 - 0

Abstract

Points available

7

A well-written (200 words or less) summary of the hypothesis, general experimental approach, preliminary data, and importance of your findings is present.

7 - 6

A (~200 words) summary of the hypothesis, general experimental approach, preliminary data, and importance of your findings is present.

6 - 5

A summary is present but is not complete in coverage.

4 - 3

Abstract is missing or is very incomplete.

2 - 0

Hypothesis

5

 Main hypothesis is stated in a clear & concise manner.

5

Main hypothesis is stated in an understandable manner.

4

Main hypothesis is stated but is not well written.

3

No testable hypothesis is stated.

2 - 0

Significance

6

A clear and well-written exposition of the significance & the importance of your hypothesis to Biology and other disciplines is present.

6

A reasonable exposition of the significance & the importance of your hypothesis to Biology and other disciplines is present.

5

Some description of the significance & importance of your hypothesis to Biology is present but it is not well-written.

4

The significance and importance of your hypothesis is either not present or very poorly described.

3 - 0

Background

10

A concise well-written description of work done by others relating to your hypothesis is present.

A well thought out critical analysis of prior work is present.

All work is properly cited.

10 - 9

A reasonable description of work done by others relating to your hypothesis is present.

A reasonable critical analysis of prior work is present

All work is properly cited.

8 - 6

Some description of work done by others relating to your hypothesis is present.

Some critical analysis of prior work is present

Most works are properly cited.

5 - 4

Little or no description of work done by others relating to your hypothesis is present.

Little or no critical analysis of prior work is present.

Work not properly cited.

3 - 0

Experimental Design

& Methods

8

A well-written description of the general strategy used is present.

Specific methods are well described with advantages & disadvantages considered.

Statistical analysis is well thought out, well described and appropriate.

Methods are properly referenced where possible.

8 - 7

A reasonable description of the general strategy used is present.

Specific methods are described with advantages & disadvantages considered.

Statistical analysis is reasonably described and appropriate.

Majority of methods are referenced where possible.

6

General strategy is not reasonably described.

Specific methods are present but not well described.

Statistical analysis is described and generally appropriate.

Many methods are referenced where possible.

General strategy is not present or very poorly described.

Specific methods are poorly described or not present.

Statistical analysis is poorly described and/or not appropriate.

Few or no methods are referenced where possible.

4 - 0

Preliminary Data

Points available

7

The results of preliminary experiments are clearly & concisely described.

Data are throughly analyzed and graphed.

Interpretations that are well-written are presented in a clear & logical manner.

7

The results of preliminary experiments are reasonably described.

The data are reasonably analyzed and graphed.

An interpretation that is reasonable presented in a logical manner.

6

The results of preliminary experiments are present but not well described.

The data are somewhat analyzed.

Some interpretation is of preliminary data is presented

5

The results of preliminary experiments are not present or very poorly described .

The data are poorly analyzed and not graphed.

No interpretation is presented or it is poorly described.

4 - 0

Discussion & Interpretation

Points available

6

A well-written discussion

of whether the results support the hypothesis is present.

Discussion of potential directions for future experiments is present.

6 - 5

A reasonable discussion of whether the results support the hypothesis is present.

Some discussion potential modifications for future experiments is present.

   5 - 4

Some discussion of whether the results support the hypothesis is present.

Very little or no discussion of future experiments is present.

4 - 3

No discussion as to whether the results support the hypothesis is present.

No discussion of potential modifications for future experiments is present.

2 - 0

References

8

Total Points

70

Each of the papers & texts cited are properly referenced.

Reference format is consistent.

At least three (3) peer-reviewed journal articles.

Majority of the papers & texts cited are properly referenced.

Reference format is consistent.

At least two (2) peer-reviewed journal articles.

Many of the papers & texts cited are properly referenced.

Reference format is generally consistent.

At least one (1) peer-reviewed journal article.

 4 - 3

Papers & texts cited are not properly referenced.

Reference format not consistent.

No peer-reviewed journal articles.

2 - 0