Full lab report

The second full lab report is to be written on the lab “Determining the Identity of an Unknown Weak Acid”. The lab report DOES NOT replace the regular weekly assignments of labs (pre-lab, lab notebooks, post-lab discussion). The assignments are used to scaffold the process of writing the full lab report.

The first full lab report will be written in AIMRAD format: Abstract, Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results, and Discussion. It must also include a section titled References in which a minimum of 2 primary scientific journal sources are included.

The Abstract should take the least amount of time to write, and it should help to frame your entire report. What was the objective of the experiment? What experiment (generic procedure name and specific chemicals) was performed? What was found (general but not vague result)?

The Introduction should introduce readers to a broad topic or topics that the general public understands, gradually narrow the focus to chemistry concepts/formulas, and finish with the same items written in the abstract.

The Materials and Methods section should be written in only past tense, reporting specific measured amounts used in your experiment with associated units. It should be written in paragraph form WITHOUT lists or sentences indicating obtained items. Details necessary to repeat the experiment should be included. Unnecessary values should be excluded. For example, if a beaker of ice water was needed to cool the chemical reaction, exclude the beaker volume and water volume, as they are unnecessary measures in the reaction. Information for calculations may be included in this section.

The Results section should include data presented for the reader to best comprehend it. Write the section using only past tense verbs. Tables should be titled at the top. Graphs should be described in figure legends underneath the graph that includes axis labels in a font that is consistent with the written text and numbers. No title should appear on the graph itself. In addition to tables or graphs, a paragraph with sentences that describe the most relevant data must be included. In this section, a common error is students simply listing raw data, which fails to properly report what the scientist has found.

The Discussion section is modeled after the post-lab discussion assignments, and you may use your exact submitted PLD to complete this section if you choose without fear of self-plagiarism for my class. However, I encourage editing and improved vocabulary wherever possible since the lab report carries a higher point value that the PLD. The necessary points to cover in this section are: (see abstract items again) objective, experiment, results; then compare your work to peers and do the error analysis, finishing with future directions. Error analysis includes a recognition of distinct values between you and your peers, possibly a calculated percent error between values compared to peers of theoretical values, and what possible sources existed in the lab that may have contributed to the differences. Unacceptable sources of error are miscalculations (if math is a problem, recalculate it correctly!), human error (too vague!), not understanding protocol (clarify before you complete a lab report!), and any other excuse for incompetency. You should be recognizing limitations in measurement tools, adherence of reacting chemicals to labware, etc. As you recognize these, you then communicate responsibly about the strengths of your data within the limitations of scientific processes. This is a most professional characteristic! Future directions must address an expansion of the experiment conducted by suggesting alternate chemicals, instruments, or applications. Unacceptable future directions are “repeating the experiment again and understanding it better”. Future directions are the last opportunity to flex your scientific brain muscle, so even if your results were unusual, you may include a repeat of the current procedure, but expand it to the next level. This demonstrates that you are forward thinking, which is another strong professional skill to have.

Finally the Reference section must be correctly formatted and include no less than two primary peer-reviewed scientific journal sources. References should be numbered, listed alphabetically, and cited within the text by using the number in parentheses right before the terminal punctuation of sentences. The best place to use referenced information is in the Introduction section. In order to receive full credit for first author peer reviewed primary scientific journal articles, the reference must include last names and initials of all authors (up to 5 authors, then use et al), the year of publication, the article title, the journal name, volume, and pages. A weblink or doi may NOT substitute for the presence of these key items.

Finally, edit your work at least twice once completely written. Good practices when editing are sentence rearrangement for clarity, improving chemistry-specific vocabulary, modifying sentence fragments or run-on sentences, and finding written portions that make no sense. If you have no one to help you edit, read your written work out loud, and very quickly you will realize what is and is not well-written. No, students do NOT write their best at the deadline, so have the first draft completed November 3, so you can edit twice before submitting it by the November 10 8:00 am deadline.

If the report is easy to read and includes good chemistry communication, that makes your instructor very happy. When the instructor is happy, really high grades are given to students.

HERE IS THE LINK TO THE DATA – https://www.dropbox.com/s/dgg1vs3yxwd6vut/2020oct27determiningidentityofunknownprivitt.xlsx?dl=0