I will therefore assign a paper, over 1200 words long, due on the last day of instruction. These papers may be on any topic in contemporary or historical astronomy, space exploration, or related sciences. Since I take this so seriously, I personally read and grade every one, so make them good!

• Lesson Plans: Teachers may fulfill this requirement by writing lesson plans in astronomy (or related sciences),
  which are useful for your classes, whether elementary, middle, or high-school level.

Teachers and students may also elect to write research papers. A list of example paper topics is available online, at: http://zimmer.csufresno.edu/~fringwal/nsci140t.paper.topics

For ideas, see the texts, including chapters we haven't read, as well as current and back issues of reputable popular magazines such as Sky & Telescope, Astronomy, Mercury, Scientific American, and New Scientist. Articles in these magazines are what research papers should be like.

Feel free to use the World Wide Web for research, too, but be careful of what you use, since there's a great deal of rubbish on the web. When using the web for research, be sure as always to reference your sources, by listing their web addresses, also called URLs. Because everything on the web is subject to change without notice, it is also essential to list the date that appears on the page to indicate when it was last updated. If no such date appears on the page, list the version number appearing on the page. If there is no version number, then list the date you consulted the page.

Having something to say in your paper is essential. How you write it is also important: good content is so much better if it's written in a way that's clear and easy to understand. For hints on writing, see The Elements of Style, by W. B. Strunk and E. B. White. There is now an online version, too. Read it from cover to cover twice a year, for life!

Papers (or lesson plans) must be typed (or computer printed), on standard 8.5-inch x 11-inch paper with standard, one-inch margins. Use a readable 12-point serif font such as Times or Computer Modern Roman—not Chicago, Helvetica, Monaco, or Geneva, which are sans serif and hard to read in large doses.

These papers must provide a list of references, or works cited. Not doing so can turn an "A" paper into a "B" paper. There must be at least five references. No more than two of these five can web addresses. You may use more references than this required minimum: indeed, if you want an A, you should have substantially more, which are read carefully and cited in the text.

Here are some useful ways to list references:

For a journal article:


Ringwald, F. A., & Naylor, T. 1998, The Astronomical Journal, volume 115, pp. 286-295,
"High-Speed Spectroscopy of a Cataclysmic Variable Wind: BZ Camelopardalis"


For a magazine article:


Ringwald, F. 2000, Astronomy, vol. 28, No. 6, p. 48 (June issue),
"The Sky Down Under"


For a book chapter:


Ringwald, F. A. 1998, in the Third Conference on Faint Blue Stars, edited by A. G. Davis Philip, J. W. Liebert, R. A. Saffer, and D. S. Hayes (Schenectady, New York: L. Davis Press), p. 425,
"PG 1002+506: a Be Star at Z = +16 kpc"


For a book:


Warner, B. 1995, Cataclysmic Variable Stars (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press), p. 221


(Don't forget to include the specific page that contains the information you used. It's too much to expect your reader to wade through the entire book to find what you mean.)

For a web page:


Ringwald, F. A., 1998, http://zimmer.csufresno.edu/~fringwal/comp2.3lis
"Composite-Spectrum and Related Stars That Are Candidate Detached Post-Common-Envelope Binaries, v. 2.3" (March 29)

Knowing how the references were used is also important. You should therefore cite references in the text, especially when making statements of fact that aren't well-known or immediately obvious. Give the author's name and the year of publication, so your reader can easily match up the statements with the references. Here are three different examples of how to cite references in the text:

"Although doubt had been expressed in the past about whether this approach was feasible (e.g., Smith 1993), the problem was solved by Horne (1994), and described in detail by Warner (1995, p. 221)."

Here, Smith (1993) and Horne (1994) were journal articles, but Warner (1995) was a book. Note that with the case of Horne (1994), one can put the author's name into the sentence, useful for emphasizing that Horne did this work.

You need not use this exact format for citing references, but do use a format precise enough so that I can look the references up myself. I get frustrated whenever a student writes something interesting, but gives a reference that's so imprecise, I can't find out more about it!

Other tips on writing:

• Don't write about feelings. Some high school teachers encourage students to do this, but college students need to go beyond this. Write with facts, they speak more convincingly than feelings.

• Avoid gratuitous opinion. If you can substantiate an opinion logically, fine, that's what it's all about. If you can't, you really should, since even the most ignorant people have opinions. Back up your claims with evidence!

  (Opinions are like children: anyone can have them, but you may keep them only if you support them.)

  I will admit that, to enliven my lectures, I sometimes do inject opinions and value judgments—such as my opinion that total solar eclipses are amazing phenomena that everyone should see, at least once. There is a big difference between spoken and written communication, however. Avoid imitating this when you write: stick to the facts.

• Thoughtful students may wonder whether my insistence on logic, facts, evidence, and quality composition and style "inhibits creativity." The answer is no: no more so than the format of the minuet inhibited Mozart, or the form of the sonnet stifled Shakespeare. The truth is, when given well-defined sets of rules, creativity does well. Your imagination and originality are greatly encouraged, and will be rewarded. They must be disciplined, though—get your facts right, and explain carefully and clearly: Why do you think what you think?

• Do not confuse the following:
  

  "It's" is the contraction of "it is."
  "Its" is the possessive of "it," as with "hers" or "his."
  

  This error may be common, but it drives me wild, and can be bad for your grade.

• Avoid clichés like the plague, they're old hat and hard to swallow, and don't hold water. (See how trite they sound?)

• Avoid hype, it makes me vomit. Seriously: science is about truth, remember?

• Use the word "unique" sparingly. Unique specifically means one-of-a-kind. It's never necessary to write "very unique."

• Use the word "interesting" sparingly. It smacks of opinion. Anything can be interesting to a nerd.

• Words loaded with value judgements, such as "amazing" or "wonderful," should be used sparingly. If you must use them, remember that "amazing" specifically means able to amaze. "Wonderful" specifically means able to inspire wonder. As Michael Faraday said: "Nothing is too wonderful to be true, if it be consistent with the laws of nature."

• Don't write "very important," unless what you're describing is worthy of a Nobel Prize. Use "important" sparingly. Don't use "very." (Mark Twain wrote that instead of "very," you should write "damn." Your editor should remove every instance of this, and your writing will become as it should be.)

• Avoid writing in the first person ("I," "me," "mine") or the second person ("you," "yours"). If you must refer to yourself, do so in the third person (i.e., "the author," not "I," which sounds so egotistical). Academic writing is more formal than the average e-mail message. This doesn't mean that your writing must be stuffy or boring. Write in a way that seems natural to you, but avoid slang, colloquialisms, and clichés.

• Avoid using the following words or phrases: "very," "nice," "good", "bad," "I/me/my," "big," "a lot," "fact that," "hopefully."

• Omit needless words. Omit needless words. Omit needless words.
  (Somewhere, Will Strunk is beaming.)

• Avoid putting a numeral at the beginning of a sentence, since it makes the sentence confusing. For example, don't write this: "94% of the students who took this course in Fall 2000 passed." Instead, write this: "Ninety-four percent of the students who took this course in Fall 2000 passed." Another way is: "Of the students who took this course in 2000 Fall, 94% passed" (This is a true statement, by the way.)

• The names of Earth and other planets, such as Mars or Venus, should be capitalized, since they're places. Some older references do not capitalize "Earth": they should be informed that we're living in the Space Age. Our "Solar System" should be capitalized, since it is a proper name, but "solar systems" in general (more properly, stellar systems, or extrasolar planetary systems) are not. "The Sun" should be capitalized, but "sunlight," "sunrise," and "solar energy" are not. "The Moon" should be capitalized only when referring to the Earth's Moon, but not for any of the many other moons of the planets (which more properly should be called satellites). Again, "moonlight" and "moonrise" are not capitalized. "Galaxy" should be capitalized only when referring to our own Milky Way Galaxy (often called just "The Galaxy"), or as part of the proper name of another galaxy (e.g., The Great Galaxy in Andromeda, also called M31). "Universe" should be capitalized, because it is a place; "universal," when used to mean general or ubiquitous, should not.

• Italicize the names of spacecraft, such as Hubble Space Telescope or Chandra X-ray Observatory.

• The plural of "phenomenon" is "phenomena." This also holds with other Latin words, such as nova (novae) and spectrum (spectra).

• Avoid sexism. In the 1960s, it was "manned" spaceflight; it's now called human spaceflight. "Unmanned" spacecraft are no longer called that: they're now called robotic spacecraft, or space probes, or robots. Sputnik was the first artificial satellite, not the first "man-made" satellite. It's not "mankind," it's "humankind," or better, "humanity." Avoid exclusive use of male pronouns: if Shakespeare could use "they" in the singular, so can you. Don't overzealously mangle the language, either: don't use contrivances such as "his or her" or "he/she" or "he/she/it" or "she/he/it" (which sounds like something I've heard said in Texas). Be natural: for example, "To boldy split infinitives where no one has gone before..." (Neil Armstrong's famous quote has problems, but then, he did misquote himself.)

• Stonehenge is a topic on which a great deal of unreliable information has been published. Beware in particular of the book Stonehenge Decoded, by Gerald Hawkins. It over-interprets the data with its claim that Stonehenge was used to predict eclipses. Stonehenge was certainly used for astronomy, but it was never that accurate.

• Avoid using Encarta, or indeed, any kind of encyclopedia. They were OK for high school, but we aspire to better now. College work requires more detailed, and expert, sources.

• Proofread carefully, to spot missing words, jumbled sentences, or other ill effects of writing with a computer.

• Always run a spelling check! Not doing so makes you look sloppy.
  (It is not called a "spell check," it's a spelling check. I don't know what a "spell check" is: it sounds to me like software used by witches, to make sure they've cast the correct spells.)

This is how I grade papers:

• F = This paper was handed in late, and will not be counted. Plagiarized papers will earn an F for the entire course.

• D = This paper was full of composition and factual errors, and was skimpily and begrudgingly researched, or showed a basic lack of understanding of what science is about.

• C = This paper was either well written, showing few errors in spelling, grammar, or style (as described by The Elements of Style, by W. Strunk and E. B. White). Or it was well researched, showing a thorough gathering and reading of sources. It wasn't both well written and well researched at the same time, though.

• B = This paper was both well researched and well written, but it was not particularly thoughtful, innovative, or original. It would have helped to have focused this paper more.

• A = In addition to being well written and well researched, this paper was innovative and original, and was a real pleasure to read. Papers like this are almost never written the night before they are due. They are the result of a great deal of careful thought and preparation.

For more on how papers are graded, see the California State University, Fresno General Education Writing Rubric.