Paleoclimatology (Geology 415X/515X)
Spring 2007
~ Term Paper ~
Important Dates:
| Paper topic: | |
Feb. 9 |
| Paper outline: | | March 9 |
| Paper due for peer review: | | April
6 |
| Peer reviews due: | | April
13 |
| Paper submission (final version): | | April 20 |
Note:
- Papers should be submitted electronically, preferably by email, as pdf files.
- Five points will be deducted from the final grade of the paper for each day that the paper is delayed beyond the due dates.
Description:
There is no pre-determined layout for the paper. However, the paper must include a title, a brief abstract, conclusions, and cited references.
Topic:
Your paper should contain a discussion of a paleoclimate question
(see examples below). On February 9 you must provide the question
that you plan to address in your paper. On March 9 you must provide
an outline of the paper. The outline should include the title of the
paper, the main topics to be addressed, and a list of at least five
references. We will evaluate your outline on the basis of
significance and suitability (see below).
Format:
Your paper should contain 10-12 double-spaced, typewritten pages of text (12-point font, 1 inch margins all around). Figures and tables should be added as required to clarify meaning and to add detail (not included in the required page count). Each figure and table should have a caption.
Plagiarism is unacceptable! Consequently, you must document the source of any piece of information that is not yours. If you choose to copy a phrase from a source, you must place it in quotes and cite its source. However, it is recommended that you employ your own words to describe a set of data or to explain a given concept. The source of each assertion that is not yours (including interpretations and point of views) or data must be acknowledged by citing the source within the body of the text. Citations should follow the style of any of the manuscripts that we are going to discuss in class, but you must be consistent.
When writing the paper, keep the following general points in mind:
- The title should adequately describe the topic you are discussing.
- The abstract should provide a succinct statement of the topic, including its background, findings, interpretations, and conclusions.
- The body of the paper should include significant contributions to the topic, the relevance of that particular topic, and the focus of the paper. It should provide adequate examples with suitable details of experimental designs, environmental settings, data analysis, and data interpretation.
Grading Criteria
Grading will be based on the following general criteria:
- Clarity (Is the paper well written and readable? Is the organization of the paper appropriate?) [20 pts.]
- Suitability (Does the paper conform to the requirements mentioned above? Is the paper addressing issues pertinent to the class?) [15 pts.]
- Significance (Does the paper adequately summarize the topic
that you proposed? Does it describe information in a concise manner?)
[30 pts.]
- Accuracy (Are there any scientific errors in the paper? Does the paper contain a comprehensive review of relevant literature?) [20 pts.]
- Contribution (Does the paper contain original analyses from the writer?) [15 pts.]
Peer-Reviewing Criteria
- Peer reviews should be roughly 1-2 pages.
- Peer reviews should be based in part on the Grading Criteria
above. Reviews should note, for example, where clarity is lacking or
if there appear to be scientific errors. Reviews should also note
where the Criteria have been handled well.
- Peer reviews should also point out minor issues like incorrect
spelling, missing references, figures that are not clear, etc.
- Comments should be supported by specific writing from the paper
reviewed. That is, saying simply, "The writing was not clear." is not
acceptable. A much more substantive statement is, instead, "The
writing was not clear because the
discussion on page N of the paper could me X or it could mean Y or Z."
In other words, give evidence supporting your review comments.
- Grading of peer reviews will be based on how well they address
each of the peer-reviewing criteria.
Grading Scheme (100 points)
| Topic | | 10 points |
| Outline | | 25 points |
| Peer review | | 10 points |
| Final draft | | 55 points |
Examples of Questions
- How have human societies responded to past changes in climate?
- What are the major uncertainties in climate models that predict past climates?
- How accurate are paleo-temperature reconstructions?
- Can climate change promote the extinction of species?
- What is the response of alpine glaciers to past global warming events?