A description of the main idea or question of the lab. This can also highlight a key finding or question.
A brief summary of the main question, methods and findings. This is usually the last thing written but
the first thing presented in order to grab the attention of the reader.
A rough breakdown of an abstract would contain about:
3 sentences worth of introduction with the key question
2 sentences of major methodology
3-6 sentences of the major results and conclusions drawn from them
Lengths will vary, but using this framework, you will not deviate too far from having a reader lose
Introduce the background that is relevant for forming the hypotheses being tested. What were the
previous observations or prior knowledge used to come to these ideas? State the actual hypotheses
to be tested and how it will further the understanding of the issue
Materials and Methods
This section is a little like a cooking recipe. The main steps taken should be summarized as a standard
prose in a manner that anyone could follow and repeat. This is written in the past tense and 3rd
person. Do not write in the first person as *you* have nothing to do with the experiments. Explain
“What was done with which reagents?”
This section is descriptive of what was observed. Figures and tables serve as a summary of the results
to illustrate the data. They also serve as guides to outline the text of the section. Slowly describe each
figure or table. Expand these points into sentences and paragraphs. Present the data as fully as
possible, including stuff that at the moment does not quite make sense. This is written in the past
tense and 3rd person. Conclusions are not provided in this section as they are made from analyzing
the information and synthesizing the results.
Discussions are the conclusions made through analyzing the results. At this time, you will be able to
re-emphasize the original hypotheses made in the introduction. Indicate whether or not the
hypotheses were demonstrated sufficiently. If this is not the case, offer alternatives and
interpretations. Can you improve or modify your hypotheses? Explain how multiple lines of evidence
corroborate each other and help to further the understanding of the problem.
Jeremy Seto email@example.com://openlab.citytech.cuny.edu/bio-oer/biology-basics/reporting-on-science/
Prior knowledge requires demonstration of strength or validity.
The references should be from
primary sources and should illustrate the point of the statement. The section is presented in
numerous formats as a bibliography, but citations are inserted near the text where knowledge or
statements are displayed. Use a reference Manager to insert citations and format the bibliography.
An excellent free reference manager with a plug-in to common word processors is Zotero.
- Describe 4 ways you can make deposits in other people’s emotional bank accounts.
- Explain Plato Knowledge and Reality and relate to the Socratic method.
- What matters is if the story has TIP CUP values.
- Write a paper explaining patients’ rights as it relates to choice of treatment, consent for treatment, and refusal of treatment.
- What is the legacy of colonialism according to the various authors that we have read (be sure to reference at least three)?
- Write an essay on why qualifying with your weapon is important in the army/military.
- Describe the internal and external criticism that is used to evaluate middle range theories”.
- Discuss the types of behaviors that are typically exhibited by a facilitator in team meetings.
- Describe a scene (specific place) you remember from your childhood.
- Explain how Peter Funt builds an argument to persuade his audience that the digital age is making it more difficult to preserve one’s memories.