Information about the U.S. Civilian Research and Development Foundation

Lorelei Alvarez, UVA

“Vegetation patterns, changes, and interactions with wind erosion in an arid grassland ecosystem”
Host: Howie Epstein

Thursday, November 5, 2009
3:30 PM
Room 108, Clark Hall

Refreshments will be served a 3:00
We hope you can attend

]]> http://www.evsc.virginia.edu/news/thurs-sept-3-seminar-speaker-greg-jones-southern-oregon-university/feed/ http://blog.epa.gov/blog/2009/09/30/science-wednesday-protecting-ocean-meadows/ http://blog.epa.gov/blog/2009/09/30/science-wednesday-protecting-ocean-meadows/#comments Wed, 30 Sep 2009 16:00:58 +0000 mreidenbach http://www.evsc.virginia.edu/?p=2303 http://blog.epa.gov/blog/2009/09/30/science-wednesday-protecting-ocean-meadows/feed/ http://www.virginia.edu/uvatoday/newsRelease.php?id=9804# http://www.virginia.edu/uvatoday/newsRelease.php?id=9804##comments Thu, 24 Sep 2009 15:35:18 +0000 mreidenbach http://www.evsc.virginia.edu/?p=2070 http://www.virginia.edu/uvatoday/newsRelease.php?id=9804#/feed/ http://www.evsc.virginia.edu/news/prof-vivian-thomson-publishes-new-book-garbage-in-garbage-out-solving-the-problems-with-long-distance-trash-transport/ http://www.evsc.virginia.edu/news/prof-vivian-thomson-publishes-new-book-garbage-in-garbage-out-solving-the-problems-with-long-distance-trash-transport/#comments Wed, 23 Sep 2009 20:59:13 +0000 mreidenbach http://www.evsc.virginia.edu/?p=2251 Associate Professor Vivian Thomson’s book, “Garbage In, Garbage Out: Solving the Problems with Long-Distance Trash Transport”, is now in print (University of Virginia Press, 2009).  This work examines interstate trash transport in the United States within a broad social, economic, and cultural context that includes comparisons with practices in the EU and Japan.

Guidelines from UGARC presented to and accepted by the faculty on November 14, 2007

Rating scheme for DMP’s level of distinction (guidelines, not rules)

The benefit of having a guideline for making recommendations for level of distinction include

1) uniformity of outcome from year to year as UGARC membership changes

2) students can know approximately what they might expect as an outcome as they consider undertaking the DMP

3) all DMP students and their advisors are working under the same set of expectations

The total points determine the level of distinction. A 9-point scoring system is used:

7-9 – Highest Distinction

4-6 – High Distinction

1-3 – Distinction

0 – No distinction awarded

Three components of consideration contribute to the final score.

1) Based on overall grades (cumulative GPA), students are assigned the following points:

3.800-4.000 – 6 points

3.600-3.799 – 4 points

3.400-3.599 – 2 points

2) These scores are adjusted by the UGARC based on the “quality” of the student’s record according to

Typical EVSC major: 0 points (no adjustment)

Ambitious selection of EVSC and related science/math courses: plus 1 point

For example, the B.S. student with 50 credits in the major who took 3 graduate classes could get plus 1 point; the B.A. student with exactly 30 credits selected from tools courses (GIS, for example), policy courses, and seminars who took the minimum required allied science and math courses would get minus 1 point. Most students would not be adjusted (zero).

3) The research project and communication of findings in the thesis and the presentation are evaluated as follows:

Poor thesis, flawed throughout: minus 2 points

Fair overall, but significant flaw or flaws: minus 1 point

Acceptable thesis (“good”): 0 points (no adjustment)

Excellent thesis: plus 1 point

Publishable research with only minor revisions: plus 2 points

Elements of a high-end research project and thesis (excellent or publishable) and presentation include

1) a research question of significant scientific merit or plans for innovative application of somewhat mundane findings.

2) thorough coverage of the literature and the current state of knowledge; identified the major papers

3) appropriate use of the scientific method in the conduct of the research project

4) significant scope of results; meaty data set

5) rigorous data analysis

6) significance of the work expressed in the context of the literature

7) careful preparation of the document for effective and stylish communication

8) informative oral presentation

9) effective and knowledgeable response to questions at the defense

Indications of a low-end research project and thesis (poor or minimally acceptable) and presentationinclude but are not limited to

1) poorly formed question or lack of question

2) lack of knowledge of the literature

3) trivial scope of work; amount of work involved not commensurate with a year-long project

4) blatant mistakes in methods, calling validity of data into serious question

5) illogical approach to data analysis

6) inadequate interpretation of the findings; results not discussed in context of current literature

7) written style so bad as to obscure communication of the nature of the study and the results

8) clear and complete lack of independent thought in carrying out the research project, preparing the thesis, making the presentation, and answering questions

In application to making a recommendation about level of distinction, the rating scheme seems to work as desired. We tested a few hypothetical extreme cases:

Scenario 1: A student with 4.0 cumulative GPA (6 pts.) from a double major in sociology with 30 credits in EVSC and the minimum allied sciences and math (no adjustment, 0 pt.) who does a poor thesis (minus 2 pts.) can end of with 3 points and Distinction only. That student would have been awarded Distinction by the university anyway. The lack of challenging coursework and the disappointing research results lead to no change on what such a high GPA alone would have earned.

Scenario 2: A student with 3.400 cumulative GPA (2 pts.) with extensive and challenging EVSC, science, and math classes (plus 1 pt.) and a publishable thesis that was well presented and defended (plus 2 pts.) can reach High Distinction (6 pts.). Without a higher GPA, however, this student cannot achieve Highest Distinction.

Executive Summary: Most students would stay in the same category for distinction that their GPAs cause them to start in. It takes an exceptional thesis to earn Highest Distinction, even with excellent grades.

The National Sea Grant College Program Dean John A. Knauss Marine Policy Fellowship, established in 1979, provides a unique educational experience to students who have an interest in ocean, coastal and Great Lakes resources and in the national policy decisions affecting those resources. The program matches highly qualified graduate students with “hosts” in the legislative and executive branch of government located in the Washington, D.C. area, for a one year paid fellowship.

Knauss Marine Policy Fellowship website:  http://www.seagrant.noaa.gov/knauss/

Congratulations Meredith!

Graduate student Jennifer Romanowich was recently awarded a National Science Foundation (NSF) Graduate Research Fellowship. This is an extremely competitive and prestigious award, and funds her Ph.D. research at the University of Virginia. Her fellowship is through the Biological Oceanography program at NSF to study the hydrodynamics and sediment transport processes occurring in seagrass and coral reef ecosystems.

Congratulations Jen!

UVA Today Announcement

Lawrence this year also was named a Guggenheim Fellow and a Fulbright Scholar. She earned these two awards to continue work on the effects of “slash and burn” agriculture and land-use transitions in the tropics.

Guggenheim Fellowship Awards Announcement

The Fulbright U.S. Scholar program, sponsored by the Department of State, each year sends 800 academics and professionals overseas for educational and cultural exchange. Lawrence will serve her fellowship in Thailand in the summer of 2009 and the fall of 2010.

Lawrence’s research is focused in Mexico, Costa Rica and Indonesia, specializing in understanding the consequences of land-use change on tropical ecosystems. Researchers in her group study how vegetation and soils respond to changing uses by humans, focusing on the interplay between vegetation dynamics and nutrient dynamics in secondary (re-growth) tropical forests.

In many environments exhibiting rapid geomorphic change, landscapes evolve by a combination of physical, biological, and anthropogenic forces. In my research, I aim to better understand how these coupled processes influence the formation and survival of large scale landscapes, and how they respond to climate change.  The couplings are particularly strong in tidal marshes, where I concentrate most of my research. Of course, these ecomorphodynamic couplings apply to landscapes beyond marshes. Hillslopes in the southeastern United States, for example, may be dominated by their dense vegetation cover. In this direction, I’m currently attempting to apply lessons learned from marsh ecogeomorphology towards modeling sediment transport on hillsopes due to tree throw and other biologically mediated process.

For recent publications, please see:
http://people.virginia.edu/~mlk4n/website.htm

• Configuring your personal computer:
  • How to set your computer up for wireless access
  • Using Microsoft Exchange Calendar
  • Anti virus support
  • Backing up data
• Printing help:
  • How to set your computer up for printing
  • Connecting to the Black and White printer (3rd Floor Clark)
  • How to print a large format poster
• Network resources:
  • The Odum server
  • Romulus computing cluster
• FAQ section
• Miscellaneous links:
  • OTS (Order Tracking System)
  • Identity finder software to comply with new U.Va. policy
  • Surplus equipment form
  • Mobil devices
  • Creating PDF documents

The G. Evelyn Hutchinson Award has been presented annually since 1982 to recognize excellence in any aspect of limnology or oceanography. The award is intended to symbolize the quality and innovations toward which the society strives and to remind its members of these goals. In lending his name to the award, Hutchinson asked that recipients be scientists who had made considerable contributions to knowledge, and whose future work promised a continuing legacy of scientific excellence.

From the American Society of Limnology and Oceanography:

This award is intended to symbolize the quality and innovations toward which the society strives and to remind its members of these goals. In lending his name to the award, Hutchinson asked that recipients be scientists who had made considerable contributions to knowledge, and whose future work promised a continuing legacy of scientific excellence. The G.E. Hutchinson Award is made each year to a scientist whose work has inspired us and promises future outstanding accomplishments. In view of his excellent contributions to scientific understanding of freshwaters and oceans, and the ongoing impact of his insights, Michael Pace is the premier choice for this award.

After undergraduate training in Biology and English at the University of Virginia, Mike obtained graduate degrees at the University of Georgia with Karen Porter, herself a student of G.E. Hutchinson. Pace’s early work compared the trophic ecology and feeding relationships of protozoa, rotifers and crustacean zooplankton. He also worked with Larry Pomeroy on a modeling analysis of coastal marine food webs. The papers from Georgia foreshadow Mike’s future work. He writes with clarity and precision (perhaps a legacy of his early training in English). He addresses the role of animal body size in ecosystem phenomena. The papers integrate field observations with complex concepts, and reveal interests that span freshwaters and oceans.

By the early 1980s, limnologists were comparing the roles of external drivers and internal processes in lake characteristics. Mike addressed this issue by analyzing a diverse set of lakes during a postdoc at McGill University with Jacob Kalff. In a prescient paper in CJFAS in 1984, Pace showed that zooplankton body size, but not biomass, could explain deviations of lakes from phosphorus-chlorophyll regressions. His findings helped explain how primary producers could be regulated jointly by nutrients and grazing.

At the University of Hawaii (1983-1985), Mike continued his pioneering work on the role of protozoa in aquatic food webs - a topic that became one of the key insights for understanding how the microbial loop influences biogeochemical cycles. Pace also developed an empirical model to describe one of the first relationships between primary production and particle export. This relationship, published in Nature (1987), is widely cited and still used today for lake and ocean models of vertical flux of particles.

In 1986, Mike moved to the Institute of Ecosystem Studies in Millbrook, New York. There he continued his work on biogeochemical consequences of microbial processes, and the effects of metazoan food webs on microbes. He collaborated on comparative studies of microbial production in freshwater and marine environments, relationships of primary producers and consumers in aquatic and terrestrial environments, and trophic cascades across a wide variety of ecosystems. Mike added more ecosystems to his life list, with projects on the Hudson River and experimental lakes near the Wisconsin-Michigan border. Whole-lake experiments became an important tool for his research on microbial dynamics and trophic cascades.

By the late 1990s Pace was looking well beyond the shoreline to understand ecosystem processes in lakes. He expanded the scope of his work to include terrestrial controls of organic carbon dynamics in Adirondack lakes. Mike was a leader of whole-lake stable-isotope enrichment experiments to evaluate the uses of terrestrial and lake-derived organic carbon by lake food webs. Pace circled back to the University of Virginia as a Professor in 2007. He continues to work on land-water interactions and the role of food webs in ecosystems, while expanding his horizons as an educator.

By all conventional measures of citation, publication and leadership, Mike Pace has made outstanding and sustained contributions to science. Yet his colleagues praise him most for attributes that are not measurable by statistics. In a field that is frequently contentious, Mike is open-minded and never dogmatic. Although he is a brilliant conceptual thinker, Mike grounds his papers carefully in observed patterns of nature. He is a generous collaborator. One correspondent noted that “Adding Mike to a team always makes it better”. And he is a fine teacher. Each spring as we prepare for another field season in northern Wisconsin, we look forward to the next big question that Mike will pose on the porch of the cabin as dusk falls over the lake. Whatever it is, it will evoke intriguing discussion and debate. Such conversations do more than just facilitate science; they are the heart of science itself. For his ability to raise the level of scientific conversation, and his many more tangible accomplishments, Mike Pace is an exemplary winner of the Hutchinson award.

Cited by Stephen Carpenter, Center for Limnology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin 53706 USA; srcarpen@wisc.edu

All proposals must contain the following items in the order specified. The proposal must be printed on standard 8.5″ ´ 11″ paper. Pages should be numbered sequentially at the bottom center, beginning with the first page of the Project Description. Pages before the Project Description and past the References need not be numbered. Type should not be less than 12 point for any body text, and margins in the Project Description must be no less than 2.5 cm on all sides. Please submit 4 copies of the proposal, along with the letter of support from the advisor.

1. Title Page

The title page should be prepared according to the following format:

Title:

Student Name ___________________________________

Advisor Name ___________________________________

Submitted for ____________________________________[enter name of Award, e.g. Exploratory Research Award, Moore Award, etc.]

Date __________________________________________

Amount of Request _______________________________

2. Project Summary

This should be an abstract of no more than 300 words that includes the question being addressed, the objectives of the research, the general approach to fulfilling the objectives, and the anticipated benefit of the research.

3. Project Description

The project description must contain adequate introductory material to allow the committee to determine the context of the proposed research. It should contain the question to be addressed and the specific objectives to be fulfilled in answering that question. The experimental approach, including experimental design, should be laid out to allow the committee to determine if the research will actually address the question. Finally some statement of anticipated results and their general benefits should be included. Literature citations are necessary to demonstrate the appropriate background to conduct the work. This section must not exceed 3 single-spaced pages, including figures and tables.

4. References

References for the literature cited in the Project Description should be included. The Reference section is not included in the page limit for the Project Description.

5. Budget

An itemized budget must be submitted to indicate what funds are requested and how they will be used. Travel requests other than to and from a research site in a personal vehicle are discouraged. The basis for the request for funds for use of a personal vehicle to get to and from a site must be explained (miles, rate etc.) and the need justified. Some level of personal investment in a project by a student is encouraged; travel often falls in this category. If funds for use of a Department or rental vehicle are included, a full justification for the request must be included as an appendix to the Budget. Supplies need not be completely itemized, but adequate description must be included to allow the committee to determine the appropriateness of the requested funds. Equipment and computer software, data products, and digital or photographic images must be specifically enumerated in as much detail as possible.

The Graduate Academic Review Committee (Chair: Robert Davis) oversees graduate research efforts in the department. This committee manages requests for travel awards and the annual competition for research awards supported from the Department’s research overhead account, the Moore Research Endowment, and other sources.

Note that in all cases, application for the research awards or grants must be submitted with a signed letter of support from the student’s advisor. The letter should indicate the current status of the student’s progress, the advisor’s evaluation of the proposed work, and any additional information or materials described in the guidelines for preparing the proposal as indicated below. Each award is limited to one per granted degree, and the award must be spent within one calendar year from the date awarded. A student who transitions to the PhD program without receiving an earned masters degree is eligible for only one award.

Format and guidelines for preparing your proposal
Travel Support Awards for Students

Each graduate student in good standing with the department is eligible to apply for up to $600 in support of travel to a major meeting where he/she is presenting a paper/poster as senior author. The basis of the paper must be research accomplished during the student’s tenure as a graduate student in the department. This allotment is a one-time, nonrenewable award for each degree ( one $600 award per degree ). Request guidelines are as follows:

1. A letter requesting authorization to expend funds must be submitted to the Chair of the GARC; at least 30 days prior to the time of travel.

2.The letter should specify the title and authorship of the paper and itemization of the anticipated expenses and must contain the student’s major advisor’s signature.

Exploratory Research Awards

Exploratory Research Awards are merit-based prizes for proposals from graduate students submitted in the spring. Graduate students, prior to the defense of their research proposals, may apply for financial support for exploratory research leading to a thesis or dissertation proposal. Awards are limited to a one-time per degree amount usually not exceeding $1,500.

The Exploratory Research Award proposal should be not more than three pages of text. The three page limit includes figures and tables but does not include references and the budget. Four (4) copies of the proposal for exploratory research support must be submitted to the Chair of the GARC no later than 5:00 p.m. on the first day of classes in April. An applicant must have established a committee prior to the April deadline. A signed cover letter from the student’s advisor indicating strength of his/her support for the project and the necessity of the preliminary research that will lead to a thesis or dissertation proposal should be provided. This proposal should describe the concept of the proposed research, define the special need for the preliminary research to be funded and include a detailed budget. Items requested in the budget may include research equipment, materials and supplies. Travel to collect preliminary data may be supported. No salaries of any type will be paid. Only costs incurred after the award date will be permitted.  Ownership of non-expendable equipment purchased from these funds will reside with the Department and under the oversight of the student’s major professor and will be available to future students.

Exploratory Award Application Checklist:

1. Proposal (up to 3 pages, at least single-spaced, 12-point font, including all tables and figures) - four copies

2. Detailed budget - four copies

3. Signed cover letter from advisor* - four copies

Proposals that do not adhere to these guidelines will not be considered for funding.

(*Advisors who choose to submit a cover letter directly to the GARC should place four copies in the GARC Chair’s mailbox by the proposal deadline.)

Department Overhead and Moore Awards and Thomas Jefferson Conservation Awards

The Department Overhead and Moore Research Awards are merit-based prizes for proposals from graduate students that must be submitted in the spring. Graduate students, who have successfully defended their research proposal, may apply for these research awards. Awards are limited to a one-time per degree amount usually not exceeding $5,000.

A student must have defended a thesis proposal before applying for research overhead support. Students who have not successfully defended their research proposals on or before the application deadline will not be considered for these awards.

A research award proposal, not exceeding three pages of text (including all tables and figures but excluding references), must be accompanied by a committee research proposal that has been defended and is approved by the student’s committee. The research proposal will serve as a reference resource for the 3-page proposal. Four (4) copies of the proposal for exploratory research support must be submitted to the Chair of the GARC no later than 5:00 p.m. on the first day of classes in April. A signed cover letter from the student’s advisor indicating the basic intrinsic merit of the research idea and strength of his/her support should be provided. The three-page proposal should describe the concept of the proposed research, define the component of the research to be funded and include a detailed budget. Items requested in the budget may include research equipment, travel, materials and supplies. If the funds are awarded from the Moore Research Award account, some stipend support might be allowed.  The GARC will rank the proposals in a competitive fashion and determine the most meritorious proposals each year.

Moore/Overhead Award Application checklist:

1. Proposal (up to 3 pages, at least single-spaced, 12-point font, including all tables and figures) - four copies

2. Detailed budget - four copies

3. Signed cover letter from advisor* - four copies

4. Thesis or dissertation proposal - one copy

Proposals that do not adhere to these guidelines will not be considered for funding.(*Advisors who choose to submit a cover letter directly to the GARC should place four copies in the GARC Chair’s mailbox by the proposal deadline.)

Both MS and PhD students may submit proposals for these awards. Students are limited to no more than one Exploratory/Garstang award and one Moore/Overhead/Jefferson Conservation Award . Awards will usually not exceed $5000. Requests for funding for travel to scientific meetings is strongly discouraged. The Department Overhead and Moore Research Awards are not related to the travel awards, and it is possible for a student to receive funding from both sources.

August 2009

To complete the DMP after approval of your proposal by the UGARC, you will need to

1. Have a cumulative GPA of at least 3.40 across all courses taken since matriculating in the University.
2. Complete the research work.
3. Complete a report of the work (the thesis) by drafting and revising several versions of the document with your supervising faculty member.
4. Only after the faculty supervisor approves the thesis can you provide 5 copies to the Director of the DMP. For May 2010 graduation, theses must be turned in by April 23, 2010.
5. Defend your research to the UGARC, your faculty supervisor, and any other member of the public who wishes to attend. The defenses will be scheduled in consultation with the Director of the DMP. For May graduation, all defenses will take place on Wednesday May 5, 2010 (Reading Day).

Your supervising faculty member (your DMP advisor) will review your total performance in the DMP and provide the UGARC with a letter recommending a level of distinction. The UGARC then will meet, using the information from your advisor and from the thesis and its defense, consider your entire performance in the DMP, major, and College, and provide its final decision to the College Registrar.

The College Registrar’s deadline for graduation is usually two weeks prior to the scheduled graduation date for the given semester (third week of May, second week of August, or first week of January). Thus, the UGARC needs plenty of time to:

1. receive and review the thesis;
2. schedule their attendance at the defense;
3. receive your DMP advisor’s letter recommending level of distinction;
4. meet; and
5. forward a decision to the College Registrar.

To complete your DMP, you will need to provide a final thesis in the format required Graduate School of Arts and Sciences (http://artsandsciences.virginia.edu/gradschool/requirements/thesis_dissertation.html). This document (digital is preferred, but velo-bound is acceptable) must be submitted to the Librarian for Life Sciences, Rebecca Pappert, in the Brown Science and Engineering Library. The Librarian will confirm to the Director of the DMP, Patricia Wiberg, that a document of appropriate format has been received.

August 2009

Distinguished Majors Program, 2009-2010

Your research proposals are due by Friday October 23, 2009. Five (5) copies of the complete proposal package should be delivered to the Director of the Distinguished Majors Program, Patricia Wiberg. You may place the proposal package in Prof. Wiberg’s departmental mailbox.

Use double-spacing throughout, one-inch margins, and 12- or 14-point font. Number all pages of your proposal except the title page. Two-sided printing is strongly preferred.

Your proposal package must contain all of the following items, in order.

1. One letter of application, addressed to the Director of the Distinguished Majors Program that includes
   1. Your contact information (local address, phone, and email).
   2. A short (one or two sentence) description of the goal of your research.
   3. Name(s) of the faculty member(s) who have agreed to supervise your work.
   4. Identification of at least six hours of advanced course work that is related to your research project and a very short description of how is each course is relevant to your work.
   5. How you will allocate at least six hours of Supervised Research credits related to your thesis (e.g., 3 credits in the fall semester, 3 in spring, etc.).
2. A memo or letter from your supervising faculty member stating that she or he agrees to supervise your research and that he or she has approved your proposal and course of study.
3. A copy of your current unofficial transcript.
4. Research Proposal
   1. Title page that includes
      1. Title
      2. Author (that would be you!)
      3. Supervising Faculty
      4. Abstract

      The abstract is a short summary of your proposed work (fewer than 300 words). It should contain your thesis or goals statement, a justification statement, a summary of the data you will be using or collecting, and your methods of analysis.

   2. Body of Proposal
      Although there is considerable variability in the organization of the text of research proposals, the following outline should be compatible with most of your topics. You do not necessarily need to exactly follow this outline, however, as long as all of the main ingredients are included in the body of your text. The body of your proposal, excluding the title page, tables, figures, and the bibliography, may not exceed 8 double-spaced pages (minimum 12-point font).

      1. Introduction

      The purpose of the introduction is to place your proposed research within the framework of existing knowledge. Why is it important? How might your research advance some area of scientific knowledge? Who cares? One good strategy is to begin by discussing the broader picture and then narrowing the focus toward your topic.

      The motivating introduction should be followed by your thesis statement sentence summarizing the purpose of your research or your hypothesis. It should be an absolutely straightforward statement… “The goal of my research is to…” or “My hypothesis is…”. This statement can be followed by a series of statements outlining what you hope to learn upon completion of the research (what “products” or “outcomes” might be produced).

      The next section is a literature review. (You may wish to make this a separate section after the introduction.) Here you will summarize past work related to your topic or procedures developed by others that you plan on using. You do not need to go into great detail about each paper that you have read, although some of the more pertinent papers may require more development than others (typically spend no more than a paragraph discussing a single research paper). For example, you could say something like, “Using a variety of methods, numerous researchers have documented a shift from predominantly zonal to meridianal circulation over the Northern Hemisphere in the1950s and 1960s (Dzerdzveeskii, 1969; Lamb, 1970; Davis, 1992; Yarnal, 1993).” All of your citations in the body of the text must be included in your bibliography.

      (In some cases, it may be preferable to place your thesis statement after the literature review. Consult your faculty advisor for advice.)

      2. Data

      If your research entails your analysis and interpretation of an existing data set, describe your data set(s). Where did you get them (all data sources should be cited)? What variables will you be using? How often are they collected (daily, monthly)? Are you using raw data or calculated values (in other words, are you using monthly means that have been calculated for you from daily values, etc.)? What is the time period of your data set? What locations are you using? Give as many specifics about your data set as you can. Note: If you are making your own measurements, you can skip this section and begin with a description of your methods.

      3. Methods

      Describe your proposed research approach. How will you obtain results? What methods of observation or analysis do you intend to use? If you are developing your own data set, describe the exact procedures you plan to use. If you are analyzing existing data, what procedures will you use? Discuss your statistical analysis, even if it is relatively straightforward, remembering that your goal is to test your proposed hypothesis. (In the course of performing your research, many of you will deviate from the exact methods you propose here. Nevertheless, it is important to think about your methods now, even though your data collection is not complete, or in some cases even underway.)

      4. Work Schedule

      Outline your work plans, with specific deadlines for completion of various stages of your work (data collection, quality checking and summary of data, analysis, etc.). Note that your final thesis will be due to the DMP Director on April 23, 2010, and that your faculty advisor must review it multiple times before you submit it.

      5. Bibliography

      All of the research cited in your proposal must be listed with a complete list of authors and the full title of the journal, book, etc. Although there is no required format, the following works well:

      Davis, R.E., M. Lowit, P.C. Knappenberger, and D.L. Legates (1999). A Climatology of Snowfall/Temperature Relationships in Canada, Journal of Geophysical Research, 104,11,985-994.

      Order papers alphabetically and chronologically by author.

      6. Tables and Figures

      Tables or figures must be numbered consecutively and explicitly cited in the text. Insert tables and figures as soon after their first mention in the text as possible.

      decoration: underline;”>
      

      Notes on citations within the text

      Within the body of the proposal, simply cite the author and year. For example,

      “According to Smith (1989), global nighttime temperatures have increased significantly over the past century.”

      “Nighttime temperatures have increased significantly over the past hundred years (Smith, 1989).”

      Do not use page numbers in a citation unless you are using a direct quote.

      The abbreviation et al. is used in the body of the text for papers with more than two authors. Note that et al. is an abbreviation of a foreign phrase and is sometimes italicized (depending on the style guide one chooses to use), and that there is no period after the “t” in “et”. (”e.g.” is also a foreign phase abbreviation, as is etc.).

      The Undergraduate Academic Review Committee will review the application and decide upon your admission to the Distinguished Majors Program. You should receive word approximately November 1, 2009.