UBC ATSC 507 - Numerical Weather Prediction (NWP)

Evaluation

Weight
(original)
Assignment
80%
Written homeworks, including derivations, code segment writing, and numerical problems, and running the WRF model.
    Each HW covers a different day of lecture, which are aligned with the course learning goals. (not counting HW2)
10%
Implement and run the WRF model for both the demo cases (= HW2)
10%
Written final report and presentation on physics schemes for NWP, focused on the learning goals.
100%
TOTAL

 

Rubric for Assessing Presentations

 

Exemplary (>80%)

Proficient
(60%-80%)

Developing
(50%-60%)

Beginning
(<50%)

Delivery

Holds attention of audience with use of direct eye contact, seldom looking at notes. Speaks with fluctuation in volume and inflection to maintain audience interest. Emphasizes key points.

Consistent use of direct eye contact with audience, but still returns to notes. Speaks with satisfactory variation and volume and inflection.

Displays minimal eye contact with audience, while reading mostly from notes. Speaks in uneven volume with little or no inflection.

Holds no eye contact with audience, as entire report is read from notes. Speaks in low volume and/or monotonous tone, which causes audience to disengage.

Content/
Organization/ Answering Questions

Provides clear purpose and subject; pertinent examples, facts and/or statistics; supports conclusions/ideas with evidence Demonstrates full knowledge by answering all class questions with explanations and elaboration.

Has somewhat clear purpose and subject; some examples, facts, and/or statistics that support the subject; includes some data or evidence that supports conclusions. Provides expected answers to all questions, without elaboration.

Attempts to define purpose and subject; provides weak examples, facts, and/or statistics, which do not adequately support the subject; includes very thin data or evidence. Is uncomfortable with information and is able to answer only rudimentary questions.

Does not clearly define subject; gives insufficient support for ideas or conclusions. Does not have a grasp of information and cannot answer questions about subject.

Enthusiasm/
Audience Awareness

Demonstrates strong enthusiasm about topic during presentation. Significantly increases audience understanding and knowledge of topic; convinces an audience to recognize the validity and importance of the subject.

Shows some enthusiasm about the topic. Raises audience understanding and awareness of most points.

Shows little or mixed interest in the topic being presented. Raises audience understanding and knowledge of some points.

Shows no interest in topic presented. Fails to increase audience understanding and knowledge of topic.

Adapted from: http://www.readwritethink.org/files/resources/printouts/30700_rubric.pdf
  

Rubric for assessing submitted final report (hint: be concise):

 

Exemplary (>80%)

Proficient
(60%-80%)

Developing
(50%-60%)

Beginning
(<50%)

Integration of knowledge

Paper/assignment
demonstrates the student fully understands and has applied concepts learned in the course. Provides concluding remarks that show analysis and synthesis of ideas.

Paper/assignment demonstrates the student, for the most part, understands and has applied concepts learned in the course. Some of the conclusions, however, are not supported in the body of the paper.

Paper/assignment demonstrates that the student partially understands and has applied concepts learned in the course. Conclusions are marginally supported.

Paper/assignment does not demonstrate that the student has understood and applied concepts learned in the course. Conclusions are mostly not supported.

Depth of discussion

In-depth discussion and elaboration in all sections of the paper.

In-depth discussion and elaboration in most sections of the paper.

In-depth discussion in few sections; mostly brief discussion. Pertinent content is missing.

Cursory discussion in all the sections of the paper or brief discussion in only a few sections. Pertinent content is missing.

Cohesiveness

Ties together information from all sources. Paper flows from one issue to the next. Writing demonstrates an understanding of the relationship among material.

For the most part, ties together information from all sources. Paper flows with only some disjointedness. Author’s writing demonstrates an understanding of the relationship among material.

Sometimes tied together information from all sources. Paper does not flow – disjointedness is apparent. Authors’ writing does not demonstrate an understanding of the relationship among material.

Does not tie together information. Paper does not flow and appears to be created from disparate issues. Writing does not demonstrate understanding any relationships.

Spelling and grammar

No spelling and/or grammar mistakes.

Minimal spelling and/or grammar mistakes.

Noticeable spelling and grammar mistakes.

Unacceptable number of spelling and/or grammar mistakes.

Sources

More than minimum required current sources, of which at least two-thirds are peer-reviewed journal articles or scholarly books. Sources include both general background sources and specialized sources.

Minimum required current sources, of which half are peer-reviewed journals articles or scholarly books.

Fewer than minimum required current sources, and fewer than half are peer-reviewed journal articles or scholarly books.

Fewer than required current sources, and almost none are peer-reviewed journal articles or scholarly books.

Citations

Cites all information obtained from other sources. Consistent citation style is used in both text and bibliography.

Cites most information obtained from other sources. Consistent citation style is used in both text and bibliography.

Cites some information obtained from other sources. Citation style is inconsistent.

Does not cite or rarely cites sources. Citations are largely incomplete and inconsistent.

Adapted from: Whalen, S. “Rubric from Contemporary Health Issues Research Paper” http://academics.adelphi.edu/edu/hpe/healthstudies/whalen/HED601_r2.shtml