Bring scientific calculator to exams.

First exam … Start of period

Second Exam … Start of period

Final Review …

Bring Scantron form 882 to exams.

The Capstone Skill required for this course is critical thinking. As specified in the University General Education criteria, "critical thinking skills include being able to identify, analyze, evaluate, and present oral and written arguments; distinguish fact from judgment and belief from knowledge; and embody intellectual standards such as accuracy, evidentiary support, clarity, logicalness and fairness."

Sample Report Topics

Note: these are only samples. Original topics are preferred.

1. Describe the historical development and current features of the modern theory of plate tectonics. Include explanation of the major objection(s) to continental drift in its original form. List and explain at least eight lines of evidence for the process. Compare terrestrial tectonic activity with that of Venus. Discuss specific features as examples of Venusian tectonic activity. What could account Venus's lack of large-scale continental drift?

2. Discuss the history of water on Mars. How much does current evidence suggest was formerly present, what were its possible sources, and where has it gone? How much appears to be currently present in the atmosphere, the polar caps and in subsurface permafrost. Include the various landforms or fluvial features caused by flowing water and compare them to any similar features found on Earth. Specifically, how might our understanding of corresponding terrestrial features help us better understand those of Mars? Explain how pertinent data were acquired through the use of robotic orbiters and landers past and present. What additional experiments might be useful? How might some of the presently frozen water be released to perhaps create a more clement Martian environment?

3. Discuss the development of the atmospheres of Earth, Venus, and Mars, emphasizing initial similarities followed by increasing differences. On Earth, include the role of liquid water, carbonate rocks, marine and plants and animals. On Venus, include the roles of photodissociation and the runaway greenhouse effect. On Mars, explain how impact erosion could account for the missing dense atmosphere necessary for the amount of liquid water formerly present. Explain specific data, methodologies, and assumptions used to develop the current theories

4. Discuss work of Johannes Kepler, especially the scientific reasoning leading to his three laws of motion and, ultimately, his Rudolphine Tables. Explain how his work overthrew the old concepts of the geocentric solar system and uniform planetary motion. Include some personal and historical information, especially his scientific relationship to Tycho Brahe, but the emphasis must be on the method and reasoning behind his laws.

5. Jovian satellites: Describe the geological features. Describe and compare findings based on data obtained from Voyager and Galileo missions.

6. Saturnian satellites: Include the Cassini mission.

7. Submit proposal for other topics. Include sufficient detail to allow a useful evaluation. This option is encouraged.

(From Spring 2003): The following are general comments from the previous reader concerning the rough drafts. This was read in class when the drafts were returned.

Here are some of the 'features' which apply to the students' outlines and reports. Of course, not all apply to every student. Some papers were excellent, but a few were substandard.

1. Few students submitted an outline, and among those who did so, most were not usable as outlines. An outline is more than an organizational aid. An outline is a tool ‑ it should be constructed so that the author is able to write the report directly from the outline. There is really no other reason for creating one. I am not referring here to those students who turned in reports that were already complete, or nearly so.

2. Where are those bibliographies? Oh, a few had them at the end of their more completed Reports, but of the outlines, I didn't find many. A few listed some websites. Also, instead of using footnotes, students were listing their source website in right along with their text.

3. A lot of the submissions are merely book reports ‑‑ relaying information found from a source or two, trying to rephrase it. Of course it is necessary to use source material, but for many the source material was the report. No critical thinking was involved at all. I recall only 2 or 3 papers where students mentioned sources which disagreed with one another, although without elaboration. The necessity to do some deeper research into your topic should be assumed. Even those whose reports involving data from recent Planetary Explorations will find a wealth of information that can be compared to what was known before the new discoveries.

4. And then, some of the reports are even Less than mere book reports ‑‑ these consist of material copied, in many cases verbatim, from one or more websites, or perhaps a written page now and then. Now, This is Serious! Unmistakable evidence of submitting non‑original material: Several students have sections of their reports which are identical to those of one or more other students, even down to punctuation! Don't do this! In my comments to the students, I sometimes forgot to include this in my remarks, but I noticed them just the same.

5. The poor grammar, sentence structure and spelling on several papers made them sometimes almost impossible to follow. Except for the type of situation unique to a new immigrant, there is no excuse for improper use of English in an upper‑division university science course. If material is poorly understood, it will likely be poorly graded.

6. Reports from some students who were totally unfocused, whose ideas had no structure, and whose few facts were wrong. There were 2 ‑ 4 of these.

On the positive side....

l. Now, the vast majority of the students are so interested in their topic(s) that they need to be restrained from trying to do justice to their outlines, trying to cover too broad a topic. Trying that, they would become overwhelmed very quickly, and following that, discouraged. They would hate it.

2. There are several students who are actively interested in their topic and have done enough research to produce an outline or draft they will be able to work from. A couple of them are almost complete.

In each case, these students found new material and/or interesting angles from which they make their presentations (and present their ideas!). They cite their sources' opinions (or plan to) as well as their own, and work steadily toward the conclusions they've defined for themselves.

Also, every one of their reports contained nothing but correct sentence structure, grammar, and spelling.In addition to the above, it was their obvious enthusiasm for their subject that made their work a pleasure to review.

I am looking forward to reading all of the students' final reports, and especially these.

I didn't suggest any of these to the students, but it I'd thought of them, I would have...

1. Page after tedious page of planetary and satellite statistics; mass, 'weight', length of an objects 'year', etc. might confuse the author, but will almost certainly bore the reader. However, for some students, this information is integral to their reports. I suggest placing this material in a table to accompany the text: Not only woudi this look alot nearter, but will be much easier for the reader to follow.

3. There were several places where an illustration, even a simple drawing, would have revealed aspects of the discussion that a reader might otherwise miss. Among the benefits of having these is that they enhance the material and therefore the report itself. ft is also possible that in creating such a thing, the student must become more involved in the project, and the topics, too as the report develops.

4. There are controversies galore in every one of the topics the students chose. And data from recent Planetary Explorations will provide a wealth of information that can be compared to what was known before the new discoveries. This is redundant on purpose.

A few other notes:

Students need to determine what their goals are ‑ what conclusions they hope to achieve with their work. Many are so unfocused.

Some students just don't appear to know anything at all about the subject they chose ‑‑ In particular, I mention "Evolution of the Stars" and "Entropy and Black Holes". I wasn't able to do much for either of these students.