Bio 103, Fall 2007, Lab Reports

There is no set format/paragraph number for the lab report (though see below), no "extra credit" for "chemistry inspired illustrations". The length should be appropriate to the objective (see next), generally three or four pages. There is no requirement to quote the book, or provide other references (though these would be needed in a professional research publication).

• An Introduction should explain why the observations being reported are significant. It should be thoughtful, interest the reader and include an hypothesis if one has one. The latter may be something developed after seeing what one's observations are (think about what the question is to which one's observations provide an answer).
• A brief Methods section should give a reader an understanding of how the observations were made so their adequacy to the purpose can be evaluated.
• Observations should then be clearly and succinctly described insofar as they bear on the issues of the Introduction, or raise new, unexpected questions.
• The report should end with a Discussion indicating how the observations speak to to the questions/hypotheses in the Introduction. This should include an evaluation of any uncertainties in the findings and their interpretation and, perhaps, a description of new questions which have arisen in the course of the research.

Write about what was observed rather than assignment and thought processes related to it

Introduction to paper should be written AFTER and in light of your observations and what you make of them

Further clarification (December 2006)

Break lab report up into sections

• Introduction

  Should motivate observations, in terms of question/hypothesis of yours, not in terms of what was "assigned"

• Methods

  Adequate so reader can imagine how you were observing, evaluate appropriateness (and, in principle, replicate)

• Observations

  What you actually saw. Period. Insofar as it relates to Introduction. Plus any surprises.

• Discussion

  Your intepretation/story to make sense of what you saw. Following from your observations. With critique/defense of how observations made, alternate interpretations/stories. And new questions that are raised by observations/interpretations/stories.