You are on page 1of 2

Aim:

To observe the difference between onion cells and cheek cells.

Hypothesis: Variables: Equipment:


Microscope amp ! "lass slides ! cover slips ! toothpicks Methylene blue solution Twee#ers $repared slides %nife &mall piece of onion $etri dish

Method: '()'( *E

&

+. . Take a "lass slide and place a small drop of water in the centre. !. $eel the onion and carefully pull a piece of the very thin membrane from between the layers. The teacher will demonstrate if necessary. ,. $lace this in the drop of water on the slide and put on a coverslip. -. E.amine the onion under the microscope. /raw what you can see. 0. 1epeat steps + to - but this time put a small drop of methylene blue in the water.

*HEE% *E
+. !. ,. -. 0. 7.

&
AT ALL TIMES YOU ARE ONLY TO TOUCH YOUR OWN SLIDE AND TOOTHPICK NO ONE ELSES!!

9. The slide is to be pl !ed i"to the disi"#e!t "t $Y YOU NOT YOUR PARTNER .

$lace a very small drop of methylene blue onto a "lass slide. 2ently scrape the inside of your cheek with the blunt end of a toothpick. /ab the scrapin"s into the methyl blue on the slide. $lace the toothpick in the rubbish bin 34'5 ('T 4'51 $A1T(E16 *over with a cover slip. 8ocus under low then hi"h power. /raw what you see

$1E$A1E/ &) /E&


+. . 8rom the prepared slides available choose one from a plant and one from an animal. /raw a cell from each slide.

1esults:
The drawin"s of the cells you have viewed under the microscope form your results

/iscussion:
+. !. ,. -. 0. 7. :hat are the similarities between the onion and cheek cells; 5se a Venn /ia"ram. &u""est why onion cells are different from cheek cells. :hat is the purpose of the methylene blue; /o all stains hi"hli"ht the same parts of a cell; How do the prepared slides compare to the fresh slide; :hat are the differences between a li"ht microscope and an electron microscope;

*onclusion:

Total Score

Above Level
Presents a clear opening to the report. The purpose of the experiment is clearly identified and stated. Some background to the experiment is presented, why it is being done.. The aim is clear and is linked to the hypothesis. !ypothesis is based on ain and is reasonable and fully explained. "ll variables, constants and controls listed and explained Good understanding of these and how they are related demonstrated "ll materials and the setup used in the experiment are clearly and accurately described 'explained'drawn. Presents clear and easy(to(follow steps which are logical and detailed. Tables and'or graphs are completed and are totally accurate ) clearly labelled. *alculations have been accurately demonstrated and significant figures have been addressed. "ll +uestions are answered correctly and many other relevant facts are included. iscussion includes and expands on what was learned from the experiment. ,imitations to the experiment are clearly identified and explained. Suggestions are made of how to make the results more accurate and'or fair.

At level
Introduction more like a summary. The purpose of the experiment is identified.

Below Level
Gives very little information The purpose of the experiment is not clear.

Well Below Level


oes not give any information about what to expect in the report. The purpose of the experiment is incorrect or not relevant.

Introduction

Aim , Hypothesis

The aim is clear. !ypothesis and aim are linked, hypothesis is clear.

"im is not clear. !ypothesis is not directly linked to aim.

"im not stated or relevant to experiment. !ypothesis not stated or not linked to aim.

Variables, Constants and Controls aterials!Setup ethod

"ll variables, constants and controls listed. #nderstanding of these demonstrated. "ll materials and the setup used in the experiment are clearly listed. Presents clear steps which are logical with some details included. Tables and'or graphs are completed and accurate. $ost calculations have been accurately demonstrated and significant figures have been addressed. $ost +uestions are answered correctly and a few other relevant facts are included. iscussion includes what was learned from experiment ,imitations to the experiment are identified. Some suggestions are made of how to make the results more accurate and'or fair.

$ost variables, constants and controls listed. Some understanding of these demonstrated.

%ew or none listed. &o understanding of these demonstrated.

$ost of the materials are listed.

$any materials are not listed

Some of the steps are missing, confusing and'or lack detail. $ost tables and'or graphs are complete. Some calculations have been accurately demonstrated and significant figures have been partially addressed. "ll +uestions answered, some very briefly or incorrectly

$ost steps are missing and'or are confusing.

"ata # $esults

Tables and'or graphs are missing. &o or not all data are presented &o calculations shown.

%uestions! "iscussion

Some or no +uestions answered.

Alterations and Improvements

Some limitations to the experiment are identified. Some suggestions of changes of how to make the test more accurate or fair are made.

oes not identify limitations to the experiment and does not make suggestions of how to make the experiment more accurate or fair.

Conclusion

Includes whether the results supported the hypothesis and links with aim. "ll grammar and spelling are correct. ,ab report is neatly presented and uses accurate headings and subheadings to visually organise the material.

Includes whether the results supported the hypothesis, and makes reference to aim.

$akes little reference to aim and hypothesis.

&o conclusion was included in the report -. shows little effort and reflection.

&rammar, Spellin'( Appearance # )r'anisation

$ost grammar and spelling are correct. ,ab report is well(presented and uses headings and subheadings to visually organise the material.

Several grammar and'or spelling errors are evident. ,ab report is neat, but the material is not well organised.

There are very fre+uent grammar and'or spelling errors. ,ab report is messy and disorganised.

You might also like