Important Dates:

Note:

1. Papers and outlines should be submitted electronically, preferably by email, as pdf files.
2. 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 climate change question (see examples below). A good way to think about your paper is that it it should be like a review of a topic, as appears for example in Reviews of Geophysics. Your paper should distill current knowledge on your topic and indicate future directions for answering remainting questions.

On February 1 you must provide the question that you plan to address in your paper. On March 7 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 that will be used for your paper. I 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. Your paper should also have a cover page (not included in the required page count) with title and an abstract.

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 directly 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 concept. The sources of data and each assertion that is not yours (including interpretations and point of views) must be acknowledged by citing the source within the body of the text. Citations should follow the style of any of the papers you use, 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 the focus of the paper, why it is relevant, and significant contributions to the topic. It should provide adequate examples with suitable details of experimental designs, data collection, construction of models, data analysis and data interpretation, as appropriate for the topic and its discipline.

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

1. Peer reviews will be anonymous.
2. Peer reviews should be roughly 1-2 pages.
3. 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.
4. Peer reviews should also point out minor issues like incorrect spelling, missing references, figures that are not clear, etc.
5. 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 mean X or it could mean Y or Z." In other words, give evidence supporting your review comments.
6. Grading of peer reviews will be based on how well they address each of the peer-reviewing criteria.

Grading Scheme (100 points)

Grading on the final draft includes a short presentation during the last week of classes.

Examples of Questions

Excellent starting point for topics are the AR4 reports from Working Groups I, II and III of the IPCC. Clicking on the "FULL REPORT" link under each Working Group's report accesses web pages listing individual chapters and downloadable copies of chapters. Another source of guidance is the U.S. Climate Change Science Plan. Note that sources like these are starting points for your work. Your paper should not be simply a re-write of the relevant AR4 report's section. In particular, you should strive to include work that has been published since the cut-off date (approx. mid-2007) for inclusion in the AR4.

• What are economic oonsiderations for reducing greenhouse gas emissions by the transportation sector in Europe and the U.S.?
• How does projected climate change impact food supply in southern Asia?
• What barriers impede passage of legislation aimed at curbing greenhouse gas emissions?
• How does projected climate change affect distributions of pollinating species?
• How important are global warming issues versus other socio-economic concerns for West Africa?
• What is the future for water resources in the Southwest U.S.?