Topics, Tools and Techniques in Paleoclimate Research
Proposal  Assignment

[written 4/14/04; revised 4/28/04]

Goals of this assignment:
  1. Employing at least two of the tools and techniques we have discussed over the semester, develop a multidisciplinary research effort designed to resolve an outstanding paleoclimate question of interest to you.
  2. Learn to effectively incorporate constructive criticism on your work via peer evaluation.
  3. Improve oral and written communication skills by presenting your proposal in short oral and written formats.
Products:
  1. A draft proposal, to contain at least an outline of the components described below.  You may also include notes from the literature, key figures and references. 
  2. A written proposal, not to exceed 10 pages plus references and figures, with the following components:
    1. Title: a concise, specific representation of what you intend to propose.  Suggested length: no more than 25 words.
    1. Abstract: a concise summary of the complete proposal, including a statement of the scientific question of interest; why the work is important; basic principles of the chosen approach, and expected experimental outcomes and results.  Suggested length: 250 words (1 page).
    2. Introduction: A statement of the scientific question; why the work is important; basic principles of the chosen approach; what, if anything, has been done along these lines previously.  Suggested length: 750 words (3pp). 
    3. Proposed research: A complete description of the approach, including expected experimental outcomes and results.  This should also include the major uncertainties of the approach you describe, and how you have designed your experiment to minimize the effects of these uncertainties.  Suggested length: 1500 words (6pp).
    4. Figures and Tables:  You will probably want to make key points using figures and tables.  These may be obtained from the literature (e.g. someone shows a result which supports your idea) or designed originally.  In any case, be sure that all figures and tables have captions which explain exactly what is plotted or listed, and data units.  If the figure or table is obtained from another scientist's work, or contains data provided by another scientist, be sure to cite and reference the source material (see below).  Include only as many figures ajnd tables as are necessary to make your points.
    5. References: A complete list keyed to citations in your proposal.  Please use parenthetical referencing in your proposal, and please use a consistent bibliographical format which permits anyone to find the source of the information.  For example, in the proposal text you might write:
The zonally averaged solsticial surface divergences from the International Comprehensive Ocean-Atmosphere Data Set (I-COADS; Woodruff et al., 1998) climatology for the Pacific marine sector are illustrated in Fig. 1.

In the References section, the cited reference may appear as

Woodruff, S.D., Diaz, H.F., Elms, J.D., Worley, S.J., 1998. COADS Release 2 data and Metadata Enhancements for Improvements of Marine Surface Flux Fields. Phys. Chem. Earth 23, 517-526, accessed via Internet, 1 May 2003: http://www.cdc.noaa.gov/coads/egs_paper.html.
  1. An oral presentation, 15 minutes in length, of the primary features of your proposal.  Additional suggestions for developing an effective oral presentation are here.
Schedule:
  1. Draft proposals to be brought to class Wednesday, April 28th.  Keep an original copy of your draft.  We will pair up and take 45 minute turns providing constructive written criticism on each others' proposals, and 15 minute turns communicating that feedback orally.  We will use the peer evaluation form (I'll bring copies to class).  Mike will also evaluate all drafts and return comments by Friday, April 30th.
  2. Oral proposals to be presented in class Wednesday, May 5th.  Each talk slot will be 15 minutes: 10 minutes to describe your proposal, 4 minutes for questions, and 1 minute for evaluation and changeover to the next speaker.  Since these are short presentations, you will want to hit the high points of the argument in your written proposal with simply and clearly designed visual aids.  We will evaluate each others' presentations according to the presentation grading rubric using the presentation evaluation form. 
  1. Finalized written proposals, to be submitted as paper copy, no later than 4pm, Friday, May 7th to Mike at his office in the West Stadium.  Submitted package to include:
    1. Proposal draft
    2. Peer critique
    3. Instructor critique
    4. Final written proposal
  1. I will evaluate the results and compile and submit grades by May 14th to Anne Chase.  Grades to also be distributed electronically and individually to students by instructor.
Expectations:
  1. A grading plan for the following assignments is here.
  2. A grading rubric, explaining expected outcomes for the draft written proposal, is here.
  3. The peer evaluation form for draft proposals is here; a grading rubric, explaining expected outcomes for peer evaluation of the draft written proposals, is here.
  4. A grading rubric, explaining expected outcomes for the oral presentation, is here.
  5. A grading rubric, explaining expected outcomes for the final written proposal, is here.
General remarks:
  1. In my opinion, the best paleoclimate research proposals ask simple questions which are clearly linked to "big picture" questions.  The proposed work is designed to as unambiguously as possible answer the question.
  2. Try to explain things in a clear manner such that a general interest paleoclimatologist (e.g. not a specialist in the topics or tools you discuss)  can understand your rationale and argument.
  3. While developing your ideas, you are encouraged to seek advice from semester speakers with expertise in the tools and/or topics you wish to study.
Results:

  1. A table listing the titles of the proposal projects is here.
Back to TTT04 syllabus.