Back

Research Skills

Instructions

  • These rubrics can be used at the start of the project (to discuss and align expectations), during the interim assessment, and during the final assessment period at the end of the project. 
  • To provide feedback on the different criteria use the sliding bar to indicate where the student fits best. Note that the position of the scalebar does not reflect a linear scale from 0-10 points. 
  • The descriptions of performance levels are only indicative of what is expected and additional comments in the open remarks space 'Feedback/feedforward' may be necessary to fine-tune, add criteria, or specify feedback. The space 'Additional Criteria, Feedback, and Comments' at the bottom of the Rubric can also be used for this purpose. 
  • A written narrative accompanying the rubric should be filled in under 'Additional Criteria, Feedback, and Comments'. This field is obligatory. 
  • If a criterium is not applicable, you can use the eye icon on the right to grey-out the criterium. 
  • To save this rubric use the 'Download rubric' button to turn it into a pdf document. Student/examiner must upload it at the right step in OSIRIS Case.
  • An instruction video on how you can make the best use of the rubrics can be found here. 
  • We recommend using the SEED Tool. If you are using it during this project, take it side-by-side with this rubric to set/revise expectations and provide feedback. 
  • Name student
  • Research group
  • Select Master's programme
    • Biofabrication
    • Bioinformatics and Biocomplexity
    • Bio Inspired Innovation
    • Biology of Disease
    • Cancer, Stem Cells and Developmental Biology
    • Cardiovascular Health and Disease
    • Drug Innovation 
    • Environmental Biology
    • Epidemiology
    • Epidemiology Postgraduate
    • Health and Environment
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Medical Imaging
    • Molecular and Cellular Life Sciences
    • Neuroscience and Cognition
    • One Health
    • Regenerative Medicine and Technology
    • Science and Business Management
    • Toxicology and Environmental Health
  • Student number
  • Rubric filled in by
    • Examiner
    • Supervisor host institute 
    • Daily supervisor
    • Student
  • Select project type
    • Major
    • Profile
    • Mini-project
  • Select assessment moment
    • Interim Assessment 
    • Final Assessment 

Preconditions for project to be eligible for assessment

  • The rubrics are discussed between the examiner and daily supervisor (if not the same person)
  • The rubrics are (orally) discussed with the student to provide extra feedback
Criteria
Insufficient
Sufficient - Good
Good - Excellent
Feedback/feedforward
Performing Research
Insufficient
Sufficient - Good
Good - Excellent
Feedback / feedforward
Designing research plan/experiments

• Executes plans suggested by supervisor only

• Asks questions regarding the proposed experiments/plans and has ideas for follow up 

• Proposes new valid experiments/plans based on previous results including proper controls

Data analysis and interpretation

• Depends largely on supervisor for correct interpretation of results

• Can interpret the results correctly after some guiding questions and tips from the supervisor

• Can correctly interpret the results without help from the supervisor

• The chosen statistical analysis is not valid to answer the research question or choice is not justified

• The chosen statistical method is valid to answer the research question and justified

• The chosen statistical method is sound and supported by literature; student understands implications and can discuss the (dis)advantages

Discussing research outcomes (own results and those of others)

• Hardly participates in discussions nor asks questions

• Participates in discussions and asks questions

• Is critical during discussions and occasionally leading them

• Does not place research into perspective

• Discussion in the light of (recent) literature

• Stays on top of recent literature

Practical Skills
Insufficient
Sufficient - Good
Good - Excellent
Feedback/feedforward
Technical Skills

• Does not master technical/laboratory/design skills

• Has required technical/laboratory/design skills

• Has excellent technical/laboratory/design skills

• Does not apply techniques independently

• Applies techniques independently

• Finds and masters new technical approaches or improves existing procedures

Efficiency

• Plans activities inefficiently (e.g., waiting times in protocols not used)

• Plans activities efficiently (e.g., data analysis, reading, etc.)

• Plans activities efficiently and productively

Organization data/work records/lab journal

• Data badly organized

• Data well organized

• Data well organized and clear for general use

• Required information (protocols/calculations/designs)  is missing or not up to date

• All required information (protocols/calculations/designs) is available and up to date

• Repetition of experiments/designs based on information provided easily possible

• Does not follow guidelines and protocols

• Follows guidelines and protocols

• Suggest improvement for existing protocols 

Professional Attitude
Insufficient
Sufficient-good
Good-excellent
Feedback/feedforward
Responsibility and safety (safety in the laboratory, data safety, equipment, etc.)

• Workspace and equipment not taken care of after use

• Takes care of workspace and equipment after use

• Takes responsibility for workspace and equipment

• Does not respect the safety measures 

• Is aware of and follows the safety measures 

• Takes responsibility for safety measures for themselves and others

Initiative, independence, creativity, handling feedback

• Relies on supervisor's instructions only

• Takes initiative (initially) after stimulation by supervisor

• Takes ownership of the project

• Relies on supervisor's ideas only

• Comes up with own ideas

• Has original ideas that further the project 

• Does not ask for help, guidance, or feedback 

• Requests general help, guidance, or feedback 

• Provides relevant and concrete questions when asking for help, guidance, or feedback

• Responds defensively or ignores feedback; minimal improvements after feedback

• Responds well to feedback leading to reasonable improvements

• Takes feedback seriously yielding excellent improvements

Critical attitude (towards self and other people's research)

• Self-reflection is absent

• Shows self-reflection 

• Self-reflection leads to behavioural changes

• Critical attitude is absent, asks no questions

• Has critical attitude towards (published) research

• Critical attitude is based on intellectual depth and profundity

Integrity, conscientiousness

• Data manipulated or left out*

 • Data reliable and trustworthy

• Data accurate, reliable and trustworthy; shows awareness of confidentiality of information

Perseverance, dedication

• Loses motivation when experiments / research fail(s)

• Repeats experiment/design until trustworthy result is obtained

• Perseveres but knows when to stop

Communication with colleagues

• Does not take colleagues into account and/or does not communicate with colleagues

• Is aware of needs of colleagues and communicates when necessary

• Takes (needs of) colleagues into account and communicates with colleagues proactively, e.g. to share equipment

Punctuality

• Does not meet deadlines

• Meets most deadlines

• Sets own deadlines and adheres to them

• Does not keep appointments

• Keeps appointments

• Schedules appointments when necessary

Additional Criteria, Feedback, and Comments**

* In case of fraud or plagiarism, the examiner will inform the Board of Examiners about this in writing
** Obligatory: please provide a written narrative to accompany the rubrics

  1. Name supervisor/examiner 
  2. Current date

Rubrics