Grignard Lab Report

Overview

fDrawing Software

Here are three chemical drawing software

1. ChemDraw

Go to My Apps type ChemDraw and download the software.

To access the video recording on how to use the program Click HereLinks to an external site.

2. Marvin Sketch:

Here is another link for free chemical drawing software.

https://chemaxon.com/products/marvinLinks to an external site.

On this page, select "Marvin for end users and Java developers". You do need to make an account but it is free.

3. ChemSketch

http://www.acdlabs.com/resources/freeware/chemsketchGrignard Lab Report Rubric Summer 2024h

Grignard Lab Report Rubric
CriteriaRatingsPtsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeTITLE/ FRONT PAGE• relevant title• TA name• Lab Day/time
3 ptsExpert-ExcellentTitle is appropriate, TA, lab time, day is there, no typos
2 ptsProficient-Above Averagemultiple typos/missing lab time etc
1 ptsCompetent-Averagemultiple typos/missing lab time etc
0 ptsBelow Averageno title etc
0 ptsNovice- Failingno title
3 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeABSTRACT• summary of experiment and techniques •%yield •Mention IR is used for characterization (no need to include the IR peaks No need for any numbers (MP/IR)
10 ptsExpert-ExcellentComplete, concise, and correct including mention of the kind or reaction performed, something about isolation/purification, %yield, IR for characterization, and name of the final product
8 ptsProficient-Above AverageConcise but Missing one thing important or contains one irrelevant thing
6 ptsCompetent-AverageMissing couple of important things and/or contains a couple of irrelevant things
3 ptsBelow AverageVery incomplete or contains much that is irrelevant
0 ptsNovice- Failingno abstract
10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeINTRODUCTION • very brief overview/introduction to synthesis and the reactions
6 ptsExpert-Excellentis present and generally correct and relevant
5 ptsProficient-Above Averageis present but includes some unimportant or irrelevant content
4 ptsCompetent-Averageis present but contains inaccuracies and/or many irrelevancies
2 ptsBelow Averageis present but barely relevant
0 ptsNovice- Failingis missing
6 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeINTRODUCTION • Describe the reactions •Draw the equations for the formation of the Grignard reagent, the addduct, and triphenylmethanol
6 ptsExpert-Excellentare present and accurate, the equations shows the specific reactants/compounds actually used or obtained in the lab, not generic equations for the reactions
5 ptsProficient-Above Averageare present but 1 or 2 small errors or irrelevancies
4 ptsCompetent-Averageare present with more than 2 errors or irrelevancies
2 ptsBelow Averageare present but many issues
0 ptsNovice- Failingmissing or severe problems with the content
6 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeINTRODUCTION • Brief overview of isolation/purification techniques and their uses, if the the details are not included here, that is fine, just so long as they are mentioned later in the Discussion Section
6 ptsExpert-Excellenteither all techniques mentioned here or most of it is here and the rest in the discussion. Indication about MP and IR
5 ptsProficient-Above Average1 or 2 small errors or irrelevancies
4 ptsCompetent-Averagemultiple errors or irrelevancies
2 ptsBelow Averagetechniques mentioned but very badly described
0 ptsNovice- Failingno discussion of techniques at all or complete misunderstanding
6 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeEXPERIMENTAL • This should not be straight out of the lab (not longer than 1.25 page)
8 ptsExpert-Excellenteverything described concisely and accurately, nothing missing
6 ptsProficient-Above Averageone item missing or in error OR includes small amount of unnecessary detail
4 ptsCompetent-Averageseveral items missing and/or several errors OR includes many unnecessary details (longer than 1.5 pages)
2 ptsBelow Averagemultiple errors and/or items missing OR includes too much unnecessary detail (longer than 2 pages)
0 ptsNovice- Failingno experimental or very badly done, most is missing or irrelevant
8 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRESULTS • Calculations for 1) moles of all reactants 2) indication of the limiting reactant 3) theoretical yield 4) moles of the crude product 5) percent yield of the crude product 6) moles of the pure product 7) percent yield of the pure product 8) percent recovery from recrystallization • including mass values of reactants/products, with appropriate equations and units
8 ptsExpert-Excellentall information present and tabulated properly, equations all present and numbered including units as appropriate
6 ptsProficient-Above Averagesome minimal errors or omissions
4 ptsCompetent-Averagesomething major missing, yield calculations for example
2 ptsBelow Averagemultiple items missing or not presented properly
0 ptsNovice- Failingno results, or most of the results data is missing
8 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRESULTS • Melting point range and LABELED IR spectrum and table of frequencies
6 ptsExpert-ExcellentMelting point range for purified product. Spectrum with all peaks labeled and accurate and complete table
5 ptsProficient-Above Averagesomething small missing such as missing units (cm-1)
3 ptsCompetent-Averagespectrum OR table OR melting point range missing
1 ptsBelow Averageminimal IR information provided and melting point range missing
0 ptsNovice- Failingno spectrum/table and melting point
6 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDISCUSSION •Arrow-pushing mechanisms of the following steps including: (1) reaction between the Grignard reagent and benzophenone to form the adduct; (2) hydrolysis/acid workup to form the final product, triphenylmethanol
10 ptsExpert-ExcellentA complete and correct mechanism AND the reaction discussed in the context of the synthesis, AND it looks like they learned or attempted to summarize some learning from the experiment
8 ptsProficient-Above AverageA complete and correct mechanism AND the reaction discussed in the context of the synthesis, BUT it was similar to the intro and only minimal extensions to learning attempted
6 ptsCompetent-Averageincomplete mechanism or small inaccuracies OR only drew generic reaction mechanisms not specific to their reaction.
4 ptsBelow AverageOnly drawing and no explanation bare minimum discussion of mechanism beyond a summary of the yield, and results
0 ptsNovice- Failingno discussion of the reaction or any indication of learning at all
10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDISCUSSION • Discussion of techniques used
6 ptsExpert-ExcellentDiscuss extraction/ crystallization/recrystallization
5 ptsProficient-Above AverageMostly accurate and complete
3 ptsCompetent-Averagebasically the same as the introduction or other indications of significant absence of understanding of what is required
1 ptsBelow Averagealmost no discussion
0 ptsNovice- Failingno discussion of extraction/ crystallization/ recrystallization
6 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDISCUSSION • Discussion of techniques used for characterization PURITY (by IR and MP)
6 ptsExpert-Excellentcontent complete and correct all IR bands characterized all complete and reasonable
5 ptsProficient-Above Averagediscussion present but limited discussion missing some IR assignments
3 ptsCompetent-Averagediscussed but minimally incomplete discussion of IR and MP
1 ptsBelow Averagevery incomplete IR and MP discussion
0 ptsNovice- Failingnot discussed IR and MP discussion absent or severely in error
6 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDISCUSSION • Discussion of what was learnt/observed/possible reasons for lower yield
6 ptsExpert-ExcellentDiscuss possible reasons for lower yield (formation of side products) complete and reasonable
5 ptsProficient-Above Averagediscussion of factors that contribute to lowered yield or purity content complete, discussion missing something or one assignment Missing few details
4 ptsCompetent-Averageyield mentioned but incomplete discussion about reasons for lowered yield (formation of side products)
2 ptsBelow Averageyield mentioned but no mention of reasons for lowered yield ( formation of side products) very incomplete
0 ptsNovice- FailingNo discussion
6 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCONCLUSION
5 ptsExpert-Excellentnot just repeat of the introduction, but a concise summary of experiment, including %yield
4 ptsProficient-Above Averagenot just repeat of the introduction, but something missing, maybe %yield
3 ptsCompetent-Averagemainly just a repeat of the introduction and/or lots missing
1 ptsBelow Averagebare minimum conclusion, mostly unimportant stuff, most of the important stuff missing
0 ptsNovice- Failingmissing
5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCITATIONS
2 ptsExpert-Excellentneeded citations formatted correctly
1 ptsCompetent-Averageneeded citation missing but the rest formatted correctly
1 ptsProficient-Above Averageneeded citations included but not formatted correctly, or very sloppily
0 ptsBelow Averageall needed citations missing
0 ptsNovice- Failingall needed citations missing
2 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFIGURES/DIAGRAMS/SPECTRA should be clear, legible, STRAIGHT, no excessive white space or shadows or other non-related items present
4 ptsExpert-Excellentclear, legible, straight, no excessive white space or shadows etc. properly labeled
3 ptsProficient-Above Averagecould be clearer, more legible, less white space etc. properly labeled
2 ptsCompetent-Averagediagrams/spectra are not easy to read or have been prepared sloppily
1 ptsBelow Averagemost diagrams/spectra illegible and/or blurry etc.
0 ptsNovice- Failingall diagrams/spectra illegible and/or blurry etc.
4 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOVERALL Grammar/Spelling/Style
4 ptsExpert-Excellentminimal grammar/spelling errors and appropriate scientific style
3 ptsProficient-Above Averagesome grammar/spelling errors and/or less than appropriate scientific style
2 ptsCompetent-Averagemultiple grammar/spelling errors and/or inappropriate scientific style
1 ptsBelow Averagemany grammar/spelling errors and/or inappropriate scientific style
0 ptsNovice- Failingvery bad grammar/spelling errors and also very inappropriate style
4 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOVERALL Clarity
4 ptsExpert-ExcellentEverything in the rubric is present and flows clearly
2 ptsProficient-Above AverageSomething in the rubric is missing but what’s left flows clearly
1 ptsCompetent-AverageGood attempt at writing clearly but some part do not go well
0 ptsBelow Average
0 ptsNovice- Failing
4 pts