Crowdly
Додати до Chrome
CHM1022 - Chemistry II - S2 2025
Шукаєте відповіді та рішення тестів для CHM1022 - Chemistry II - S2 2025? Перегляньте нашу велику колекцію перевірених відповідей для CHM1022 - Chemistry II - S2 2025 в learning.monash.edu.
Отримайте миттєвий доступ до точних відповідей та детальних пояснень для питань вашого курсу. Наша платформа, створена спільнотою, допомагає студентам досягати успіху!
What is the oxidation state of iron in oxymyoglobin?
Could polypeptides serve as ligands to transition elements?
Which of the following elements is non-essential for normal human bodily functions?
Laboratory Notes
Upload a single PDF file of your scanned laboratory notes.
Generally, your lab notes should contain the following:
- Name and student ID recorded.
- Experiment title and date recorded.
- Notes are written in pen.
- Method recorded in brief, including changes to experimental variables/conditions (if applicable).
- All results, data, and observations are recorded, and are neat and legible.
Lab notes marking rubrics:
Did you attend your regular lab group for Exp 5?
Lab notes rubric:Conclusion
Your conclusion should answer all parts of your aim, and should state your (numerical) results. Think of it as a spoiler for your whole lab report!
For example:
Aim: Determine the concentration of Vitamin C in a fruit juice via a redox titration against N-bromosuccinimide.
Conclusion: Berri orange juice (2000 μL aliquots, in triplicate) was titrated against a 0.104 M solution of N-bromosuccinimide. The concentration of Vitamin C in the fruit juice was determined to be 55.0 mg/L.
Discussion
This is where you discuss and give meaning to your results. You should also detail any experimental errors and make any other relevant comments about the experiment. Include possible improvements. Ensure you are not re-stating the method.
Discussion points to consider: (Note: The points below are not intended as questions! They are here to give guidance on what to include in your discussion. Do not simply list answers – incorporate them into a full discussion.)
- Relate results back to the aim and the introduction of the experiment – what were you trying to do, did the results support the aim of the experiment? Were you able to successfully identify the metals in the unknowns?
- Discuss what results helped determine the identity of the metals in the unknowns and how you arrived at this conclusion.
- What are some sources of error you may have encountered, and how would they have impacted on your results?
Discussion marking rubric:
| 0 | 1 | 2 |
Relates results to aims. | Interpretation of results not related back to original experimental aims. | Results partially related back to original experimental aims. | Key results interpreted in relation to experimental aims. |
Discussion and interpretation of results. | No interpretation or comparison of results is made. No discussion points are addressed. | Some interpretation or comparison of results is made. Some discussion points are addressed. | Key findings are summarised. Results are interpreted. Results are compared to expected/predicted values. All discussion points are addressed. |
Actual data used to validate statements. | No experimental data used to justify scientific statements/claims. Multiple scientific errors are present. | Some experimental data used to justify scientific statements/claims. Some scientific errors are present. | Experimental data used to justify all scientific statements/claims. The science is correct. |
Factors affecting results discussed. | No errors were raised or were only non-scientific/experimental errors raised. | Only some errors raised or several non-scientific/experimental errors were raised. The impact of the errors was not discussed. | Multiple errors/factors are raised and are scientific/experimental in nature (i.e. NOT human error). The impact of the errors was discussed. |
Writing Style | Many grammatical/spelling/scientific writing errors were noted, and/or discussion was over 300 words in length. | Some grammatical/spelling/scientific writing errors were noted. | The discussion was free of grammatical and spelling errors, was written in the past tense, used full sentences and a passive voice, and was within 300 words. |
Word limit: 300 words+/- 10%.
An incomplete discussion may be given a zero mark.
For guidance on writing a meaningful discussion, please refer to the following resources:
- SoC: Undergraduate Student Handbook
- RLO: Writing a Science Lab Report
- RLO: Writing for Assignments