Abstract (bold, 3 points)
The abstract is a short (1-2 paragraph, 250 words) summary of EVERYTHING in very general terms. Here’s the plan for the lab, why we did it, what we did, what we concluded, etc.
How did the experiments help you investigate photosynthesis? How did you build on the basic lab with open inquiry?
Introduction (bold, 5 points)
Do an internet search related to what the lab was about. Give some background on why the particular lab is important. This should be 3-5 paragraphs and make sure you cite your sources (see below). The final paragraph should bring the issue back to you. What did you hope to accomplish with this particular lab? State your hypotheses and whether they were supported by your data.
How does photosynthesis work? What are the reactants and what are the products? What are some leaves that are native to this area? What leaves did you work with? Do some research and try and find information on stomata density or specific traits that help them adapt to this area. What factors affect photosynthesis? Are there examples of plants that have to be very specialized in order to overcome certain challenges regarding to photosynthesis? What background information is necessary to understand your open inquiry?
Methods (bold, 5 points)
Describe in detail what you did. Make sure one of your friends would be able to do exactly what you did.
Break up each experiment and in detail explain what you did. This is especially important for this set of labs since there was a big open inquiry component. I want to know exactly how you made the vacuum and how you set up your open inquiry experiments. Write this in narrative form. Include your controls!
Results (bold, 10 points)
Charts, graphs and pictures go here. If you put in a chart or graph or picture, make sure you add an informative figure legend.
I want to see graphs here in addition to the raw data (number of disks per minute per condition). If your results were not according to your hypotheses, then make a graph showing what the data should have looked like given your hypothesis was correct! Pictures/sketches will be very helpful here to show your experimental setup.
Discussion (bold, 25 points: Model = 10 points; Text = 15 points)
Here is where you interpret your results. For every result you should have a few sentences of interpretation. What does it mean? Where could I have gone wrong? What is an alternate explanation?
Were your open inquiry designs appropriately designed? Did they tell you what you wanted to know? What were ALL of the variables in each set of experiments? Even though they seemed like controls, what variables might not have been the same across all experiments? Did your control work every time? Why or why not? Your discussion (in addition to the models) should touch on the following subjects:
-importance of CO2
-variables (light source, height, length, vacuum procedure, concentration of CO2, CO2 maker, timer, which syringe you used, plant, etc.)
-effect of the vacuum process
-What SHOULD be happening within the leaf both with and without CO2
-alternative ways to do the experiment
-role of the type of plant in this experiment
-extensions of this project
-Really investigate your open inquiry setup and relate it to nature. If you chose different types of light, where might there be different types of light on earth? Or, different amounts of light? How would that affect plant life?
Be sure to reference your model in your discussion. Ideally, someone should be able to read your lab report and understand from the model what you were trying to accomplish.
References (bold, included in the formatting
