Hit The Order Button To Order A **Custom Paper**

>> CLICK HERE TO ORDER 100% ORIGINAL PAPERS FROM AustralianExpertWriters.com <<

3 Apr
2021

4009BMS Cell and Molecular Biology

Category:ACADEMICIAN

SOLUTION AT Australian Expert Writers

                Assignment Brief Semester 3 2019-20
Module title
4009BMS Cell and Molecular Biology (May 2020)
Assignment title (and number, if more than one)
CWLab report
Module Leader(s)  
Dr Siobhan Darrington Module team: Dr Ann Wilson, Dr Jan Coveney and Dr Mike Dodd.
Submission Instructions
Lab report based on the online virtual lab 2 Lab report should be submitted via the Turnitin link on the course Moodle page Submission deadline: 18.00h on 30th November 2020. The receipt will be recorded through Turnitin
Learning outcomes assessed in this assignment  
L.O.1. Demonstrate a broad knowledge of mammalian cell biology, including cell division, cell culture, cell signalling and energy metabolism. L.O.5. Analyse, interpret and report results of practical laboratory work.
Learning outcomes assessed mapped to Course Learning Outcomes
See appropriate course guide in the BMS course web (LINK)
Task details and instructions
CW1 is a Laboratory report based on the online virtual Laboratory Two (cell signalling). Students will be provided with LTK- cell count data to calculate the plating density to seed a six well cell culture plate. Confluency data will be provided for the effect of two different GPCR drugs on the growth of LTK- cells. This data provided should be used to write a full scientific lab report including an introduction, results, discussion and references (please note that methods should not be included). As this is a virtual lab, you will not be expected to consider any experimental limitations.  The report should be written using scientific language. References should be formatted in CU Harvard style.   The word limit for this assignment is 1500 words. If you exceed this word limit by more than 10% ie if you exceed 1625 words then you will be penalised by deduction of 10% of your final mark. You should state your word count at the end of your work.  The following are included in your word allowance: The text of your written workReference citations and reference to Figures and Tables within the textDescriptive paragraphs as Figure or Table legends  The following are excluded from your word allowance: The titleYour name, course etcFigure and Table headings Words associated with Figures and TablesReference listThe word count detailsContents pageAcknowledgements
Feedback policy
All marks released are subject to final Assessment Board decisions and are therefore provisional until after the Board sits.   Feedback will be given to each student via the Moodle coursework submission link   Marks will be released on tbc three weeks after the due date.  
Support and guidance
The lab will be delivered virtually. Support will be provided in the form of a FAQ forum available on the Moodle page. An online workshop will also be provided to support the write up of the report. . Online academic surgeries will be available.   If you have a special requirement such as a variation of assessment need please contact the disabilities team.
Extensions / Deferrals
Please note that if you are unable to submit coursework or attend an assessment e.g. test, examination, presentation or assessed laboratory session you may be eligible to apply for an extension or a deferral.  Please refer to the Extenuating Circumstances guidance on the Student Portal.   Deferral or Extension requests must be made before the due date of the assignment and must be accompanied by appropriate evidence. Please be aware that deferral of an assessment may affect your ability to progress into the next academic year of study, please seek advice if you are considering deferring an assessment.
Late or non-submissions
Normal penalties for late/ non-submission apply: Work that is submitted late, without an extension or deferral having been granted, will receive a mark of ZERO (students will normally be eligible for a resit attempt).Work that is not submitted or exams not attended will be recorded as Absent (ABS) (students may not be permitted a resit attempt).
Plagiarism and Cheating
Academic dishonesty hurts everyone in the community. It not only damages your personal reputation, but also the reputation of the entire university, and it will not be tolerated at Coventry University. It is in the best interest of all students for the University to maintain the good reputation of its awards. Your co-operation is expected in actively protecting the integrity of the assessment process. It is your duty to observe high personal standards of academic honesty in your studies and to report any instances of malpractice you become aware of, without fail.   We expect students to act with academic integrity, which means that they will study and produce work in an open, honest and responsible manner. It is important, therefore, that you understand fully how to avoid academic misconduct and where to obtain support. Academic dishonesty covers any attempt by a student to gain unfair advantage (e.g. extra marks) for her/himself, or for another student, in ways that are not allowed.   Examples of such dishonesty include: Collusion includes the knowing collaboration, without approval, between two or more students, or between a student(s) and another person, in the preparation and production of work which is then submitted as individual work. In cases where one (or more) student has copied from another, both (all) students involved may be penalised. Falsification includes the presentation of false or deliberately misleading data in, for example, laboratory work, surveys or projects. It also includes citing references that do not exist.Deceit includes the misrepresentation or non-disclosure of relevant information, including the failure to reveal when work being submitted for assessment has been or will be used for other academic purposes.Plagiarism is the act of using other people’s words, images etc. (whether published or unpublished) as if they were your own. In order to make clear to readers the difference between your words, images etc. and the work of others, you must reference your work correctlySelf-Plagiarism is the reuse of significant, identical, or nearly identical portions of your own work without acknowledging that you are doing so or without citing the original work, and without the written authorisation of the module leader.Re-presentation is the submission of work presented previously or simultaneously for assessment at this or any other institution, unless authorised in writing by the module leader and referenced appropriately.Exam Misconduct is any attempt to gain an unfair advantage in an assessment (including exams) or assisting another student to do so. It includes: taking unauthorised materials into exams, copying from other candidates, collusion, impersonation, plagiarism, and unauthorised access to unseen exam papers. In the event of an allegation of exam misconduct you are advised to contact the Student Union Advice Centre immediately after the incident.   For more details (including misconduct investigations and penalties) please consult the Faculty of Health and Life Sciences Student Handbook.  
Marking and Moderation policy
Scripts will be marked anonymously by members of the teaching team. Moderation will be conducted by a member of staff outwith this team.
Indicative Marking Criteria
Band (Mark)
Criteria:
100, 95, 90, 88, 85, 82, 78, 75, 72              
– Demonstrates an excellent understanding of the requirements of a lab report. – Title of report and sub-headings have been included. – Introduction is appropriately detailed in aspects of cell culture, the cell line, cell signalling mechanism, the uses and effects of the drugs used and the aims of the experiment. -Method is referred to and referenced. A full description of the method is not required. – Results state why the experiment was performed. Details of the experimental results are described; appropriately labelled  tables and figures of data are included. Figure legends are accurate. – Discussion includes a short statement of the aims of the experiment and the main findings. Results have been discussed in detail in relation to mechanism of action of the drugs on the cells in terms of G protein coupled receptor signalling. Accuracy and precision have been discussed. Improvements to the experiment have been suggested. A conclusion of the discussion has been included. – Grammar and punctuation are accurate. References are listed accurately using CU Harvard style in both in-text citations and reference list. Good reference sources have been used such as peer-reviewed journal articles, books, some reputable websites. A minimum of five references have been used, including at least two peer-reviewed journal articles. References included in all sections as appropriate.
68, 65, 62
– Demonstrates a good understanding of the requirements of a lab report. – Title of report and sub-headings have been included. – Introduction is appropriately detailed in aspects of cell culture, the cell line, cell signalling mechanism, the drugs used and aims of the experiment. -Method is referred to and referenced. A full description of the method is not required. – Results state the aims of the experiment and describe details of the experiment; appropriately labelled tables and figures of data have been included. Minor improvements to figure legends are needed. – Discussion includes a short statement of the aims of their experiment and their findings. The results are discussed in relation to mechanism of action of the drugs on the cells in reasonable detail. Accuracy and precision has been discussed in reasonable detail. Errors in relation results have been discussed in reasonable detail. Improvements to the experiment in reasonable detail. Conclusion of the discussion has been included. – Small errors in grammar and punctuation. – References have been included and references are listed reasonably accurately using CU Harvard style in both in-text citations and reference list. Good reference sources have been used such as peer-reviewed journal articles, books, some reputable websites. A minimum of five references have been used, including at least two peer-reviewed journal articles. References included in all sections as appropriate.
58, 55, 52
– Demonstrates reasonable understanding of the requirements of a lab report, but some elements of the report may be lacking. – Introduction is reasonably detailed in aspects of cell culture, the cell line, cell signalling mechanism the drugs used and aims of the experiment. -Method is referred to and referenced. A full description of the method is not required. – Results lack details of the experiment conducted; elements of appropriately labelled pictures, tables and figures of data have not been included. – Discussion lacks detail in at least one element, such as: mechanism of action of the drugs on the cells; accuracy and precision; errors in relation results;  or improvements. Conclusion may be omitted or is inappropriate. – Grammar and punctuation is reasonably accurate. – References have been included and references are listed inaccurately not using CU Harvard style. Poor reference sources have been used some irreputable websites. An insufficient number of references have been used (a minimum of five references has not been used, and/or does not include least two peer-reviewed journal articles).
48, 45, 42
– Demonstrates some understanding of the requirements of a lab report, but several elements of the report are lacking. In detail. – Introduction is insufficiently detailed in aspects of cell culture, the cell line, cell signalling mechanism the drugs used and aims of the experiment. -Method is referred to and referenced. A full description of the method is not required. – Results do not state why the experiment was performed and/or details of the experiment; elements of appropriately labelled pictures, tables and figures of data have not been included. – Discussion lacks detail in two or more elements: mechanism of action of the drugs on the cells; accuracy and precision; errors in relation results;  or improvements. Conclusion may be omitted or is inappropriate. – Grammar and punctuation shows several inaccuracies. – References have been not been included and/or are listed inaccurately not using CU Harvard style. Poor reference sources have been used, such as irreputable websites
FAIL (35, 30, 20, 10, 0)
– Demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of the requirements of a lab report. -Incorrect drugs (I.e. drugs that were not used in the experiment) have been described. -Required sections of the report have been omitted or are incomplete. – Introduction: Multiple elements of the report have been omitted, such as titles, details on aspects of cell culture, the drugs used and/or aims of the experiment. – Results are brief and lack sufficient or relevant detail. Labelled pictures, tables and figures of data have been omitted. – Discussion is brief and lacking in relevant detail. The conclusion has been omitted. – Grammar and punctuation is poor. – References have been not been included and/or references are not listed accurately using CU Harvard style in both in-text citations and reference list. Poor reference sources have been used such as irreputable websites.

Order from Australian Expert Writers
Best Australian Academic Writers

QUALITY: 100% ORIGINAL PAPERNO PLAGIARISM – CUSTOM PAPER

READ ALSO  “Avoiding bias seems a commendable goal, but this fails to recognise the positive role that…