atoc10001 Weather diary report assessmentStatistics

Java Python atoc10001

Unlimited Attempts Allowed

Details

Aim

The purpose of this assignment is for you to apply what you have learned about synoptic weather systems, weather fronts and weather maps, as well as weather observations, to a real-life situation to consolidate your knowledge.

Working in groups of 4, you will aim to collect and compile a set of weather information for a chosen Australian city over a one-week period, including weather forecast and weather observation information, and then use it to produce a 'weather diary' written report.

A particular focus will be on comparing the official Bureau of Meteorology weather forecasts to real-time weather observation data, to make assessments of how accurate the forecast information was.

Introduction

The Bureau of Meteorology is an Australian Government agency that has the responsibility for providing official weather forecasts and warnings to the Australian community.

These forecasts and warnings are used in various ways by each of us in every day life, and are critically important to many industrial sectors across Australia including agriculture, aviation, marine, etc.

The weather forecasts that most of us would interact with most frequently are the 'public weather' forecasts that we would find on the Bureau of Meteorology app, on the Bureau of Meteorology website, or see on the TV news bulletin each night.

These forecasts predict the weather conditions for any Australian location out to a period of 7 days in advance, and contain both quantitative (measurable, numbers-based) information and qualitative (descriptive, language-based) information:

· Quantitative information:  e.g. maximum and minimum temperature, rainfall amount and probability, wind speed and direction.

· Qualitative information:  e.g. descriptions of expected weather, cloud cover, and timing.

Modern weather forecasts are generated using sophisticated computer weather models that combine fundamental mathematical equations that describe the physics of the atmosphere, together with real-time observation data, to predict the future state of the atmosphere out to a period of around 7–10 days. These computer weather model predictions are combined with the skill and input of human meteorologists, to produce the end-product forecasts.

Computer model weather predictions incorporate numerous sources of uncertainty, including:

· Incomplete sets of real-time observations to define the initial atmospheric state for the model, due to gaps in data coverage across the planet

· Necessary simplifications in computer weather model equations and physics, due to limitations in computing power

· Inherently low predictability of many aspects of our atmosphere (i.e. small errors and uncertainties in defining the initial atmospheric state often lead to much bigger errors later in the forecast period).

What this means is that no weather forecast is perfect! We all know that weather forecasts are sometimes wrong, and this is something that is scientifically unavoidable.

This 'weather diary' group assignment will develop your ability to assess the accuracy of public weather forecasts, and to think about what level of accuracy we might reasonably expect at different lead-times in the 7-day forecast period.

We will use the first part of the Week 5 practical class to:

· Form. the assignment groups and exchange group contact details

· Delegate group member responsibilities and organise group meeting times

· Become familiar with relevant weather forecast and observation resources on the internet

· Begin thinking about your group report structure, and investigation methodology.

Task

1. Organise yourselves into small groups of four (4) members.

2. As a group, select one of the following Australian capital cities to investigate:

· Perth, Adelaide, Melbourne, Hobart, Canberra, Sydney, or Brisbane.

· You may choose a different Australian location if you like, but ask Adam or your demonstrator for guidance first.

3. Select any one-week period between now and the assignment due date as the focus period for your 'weather diary' investigation.

4. For your selected city, and your selected one-week period of interest, collect and compile a set of relevant weather information from various sources, including Bureau of Meteorology weather forecasts, weather charts and weather observation data.

5. As a group, produce a 1000 word (+/- 100 words) 'weather diary' written report, complete with relevant data tables, figures, maps and/or diagrams to complement your analysis.

6. Submit your 'weather diary' report via Canvas (one submission per group), by no later than Friday 4 October 2024.

Writing your report

Beyond some general guidelines given to you here, you will not be provided with specific instructions to follow, like a recipe! As a group, you will need to decide on how to structure your report, and how to design your own investigation methodology.

You may need to brainstorm, or try a few different options, to work out the best way to approach and complete this assignment. This is an important part of learning scientific methodology.

Report structure

Ultimately, your report structure should be guided by the story you want to tell, and the things you want to focus on. Whilst there is no prescribed format for the report, it should contain the following general elements:

· A brief introduction to the set the scene for the report. You should introduce the city you are investigating, the period of investigation, and what type of forecasts and observation information you will be evaluating. You could also describe or define some of the different features you will be looking at, e.g. maximum/minimum temperature, rainfall, cloud cover, etc.

· A brief discussion of your investigation methodology. To design your methodology, you will need to think about the best way to analyse the information and data that you have collected, and about how you plan to present your findings in a succinct and scientific manner.

· Analysis and discussion of your findings should be both quantitative and qualitative. You should use appropriate data tables, figures, maps and/or diagrams to support your written analysis.

· Brief conclusions to summarise the findings in your report and link everything together.

Analysis and discussion

When analysing the forecast and observation information that you have collected, there are some key elements that you should include:

· Quantitative estimation of errors in numerical forecast components (e.g. temperatures, rainfall, etc.) for different forecast lead times.

· Qualitative description of errors in language-based forecast components (e.g. weather type, cloud cover, etc.) for different forecast lead times.

· Discussion of overall forecast accuracy at all forecast lead times (e.g. how accurate is the Day 1 forecast on average, compared to the Day 4 or Day 7 forecast, etc.)

· Identification and discussion of any days that were particularly interesting, where there was an extreme event or records that were broken, or perhaps where there was a major failure of the forecast.

A strong report will attempt to explain the causes of forecast errors (or explain the absence of forecast errors) during your one-week period of interest.

Figures, referencing and word count

Your report should contain an appropriate number of relevant data tables, figures, maps and/or diagrams to support and explain your written analysis.

· Make sure you refer to any tables, figures, maps and/or diagrams in the text of your report.

· All data tables, figures, maps and/or diagrams require a brief descriptive caption.

· Data tables, figures, maps and/or diagrams can be placed throughout the text, or in an Appendix.

· Do not include copious quantities of data or figures that are not relevant.

Referencing should follow APA style, as you learned about in the Library Research and Writing Skills practical class in Week 6.

The word count is 1000 words (+/- 100 words), so around 250 words per person. Text contained within data tables, figures, captions, references and appendices does not count towards the word count.

1000 words is not a lot of words, so you will need plan your report carefully and be concise with your writing. Deciding what to leave out when you only have a limited word count is an important skill to develop, and is just as important as decide on what to include!

Individual contributions

On a separate page at the beginning of your report, you should clearly list the members of your group with their Student ID numbers, and provide a short statement (a few sentences) detailing the individual contributions of each team member to the group report.

Each member of the group should sign this page, to indicate that they have read and agree with the individual contribution statements.

When marking the reports, the demonstrators will be looking for an equal and even contribution by all group members.

Assessment

Your group report will be assessed against the criteria outlined in the rubric at the bottom of this page.

This written report is worth 10% of your final subject grade.

Resources

The main resources for this group assignment are internet-based.

Below is a series of links to some official Bureau of Meteorology web pages to get you started on comparing weather forecasts to real-time weather observation data, and to begin thinking about the accuracy of weather forecast information.

Of course, however, this is not an exhaustive list of links, and you will no doubt find lots of interesting information from trustworthy scientific sources elsewhere on the internet!

Official public weather forecasts:

· Go to www.bom.gov.auLinks to an external site. and then click on your city of interest.

· These forecasts are published twice per day, around 5am and 4.15pm.

· Each new forecast overwrites the old forecast, so you will need to save copies of the forecast regularly.

Official weather observations:

· Here are the current observations for all weather stations in each capital city:

o Melbourne: http://www.bom.gov.au/vic/observations/melbourne.shtmlLinks to an external site.

o Sydney: http://www.bom.gov.au/nsw/observations/sydney.shtmlLinks to an external site.

o Brisbane: http://www.bom.gov.au/qld/observations/brisbane.shtmlLinks to an external site.

o Perth: http://www.bom.gov.au/wa/observations/perth.shtmlLinks to an external site.

o Adelaide: http://www.bom.gov.au/sa/observations/adelaide.shtmlLinks to an external site.

o Hobart: http://www.bom.gov.au/tas/observations/hobart.shtmlLinks to an external site.

o Canberra: http://www.bom.gov.au/act/observations/canberra.shtmlLinks to an external site.

· For any individual weather station, you can click on the link to see 10-minute observation data for the previous 72 hours.

· You can also find daily weather obs atoc10001 Weather diary report assessmentStatistics ervations over the previous 12 months for each capital city via: http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/dwo/Links to an external site.

MSLP charts:

· 6-hourly colour MSLP charts for the previous 7 days: http://www.bom.gov.au/australia/charts/synoptic_col.shtmlLinks to an external site.

· Latest colour MSLP chart with infrared satellite image: http://www.bom.gov.au/australia/charts/synoptic_col_satellite.shtmlLinks to an external site.

Satellite and radar imagery

· You can track weather systems in real-time by keeping an eye on the satellite and radar imagery.

o Radar imagery is typically available at 6-minute frequency for the previous 30 minutes: http://www.bom.gov.au/australia/radar/Links to an external site.

o Visible and infrared satellite imagery is available at 10-minute frequency for the previous 4 hours: http://satview.bom.gov.au/Links to an external site.

Glossary

· The Bureau of Meteorology Glossary might be helpful if you come across any 'weather words' or terms that you are unfamiliar with: http://www.bom.gov.au/lam/glossary/Links to an external site.

View Rubric

Weather diary report assessment criteria
Weather diary report assessment criteria
Criteria	Ratings	Pts
Report design and structure	20 pts Excellent The report is designed around a coherent and insightful story. • The report flows with a clear and logical structure, that beautifully supports the story being told. • The methodology is described in such a way that anyone could easily reproduce the analysis. 15 pts Very Good The report is designed around a coherent and interesting story. • The report has a clear and logical structure, that is generally easy to follow. • The methodology is described in such a way that someone with prior knowledge of weather and climate could reproduce the analysis. 10 pts Satisfactory The report is loosely designed around a central story. • The report structure is clear, but not necessarily the most logical, and some parts are difficult to follow. • The methodology is described satisfactorily but is missing some details that would make it easy for someone to reproduce the analysis. 5 pts Below Average The report is not clearly designed with a story in mind. • The report structure is poor, and the report is generally difficult to follow with some parts that don't make sense. • The methodology is described in such a way that it would be difficult for someone to reproduce the analysis. 0 pts Unsatisfactory The report does not tell a story. • The report has no structure, and the report is impossible to follow with many parts that don't make sense. • The methodology is described in such a way that the analysis would not be reproducible.	/ 20 pts
Presentation and writing style	20 pts Excellent The report is beautifully written and presented, with minimal typographic errors. • The tone of language is appropriate for a report of this kind. • Formatting of any references, appendices, figure captions, etc. is all correct and complete. • The overall quality is excellent, such that it could be shown as an example of how to write a great report! 15 pts Very Good The report is well written and presented, with minimal typographic errors. • The tone of language is mostly appropriate for a report of this kind. • Formatting of any references, appendices, figure captions, etc. is mostly correct and complete. • The overall quality is very good, with some small improvements that could be made. 10 pts Satisfactory The report is satisfactorily written and presented, but may contain spelling and grammar errors. • The tone is generally appropriate for a report of this kind, but requires improvement. • Formatting of any references, appendices, figure captions, etc. may be incomplete and/or clumsy. • The overall quality is satisfactory, with some obvious improvements that could be made. 5 pts Below Average The report is poorly written and presented, with many spelling and grammar errors. • The tone is inappropriate for a report of this kind. • Formatting of any references, appendices, figure captions, etc. is incomplete and/or incorrect. • The overall quality is poor, with many obvious improvements required. 0 pts Unsatisfactory The report is unsatisfactorily written and presented. • The tone is inappropriate for a report of this kind. • Formatting of any references, appendices, figure captions, etc. is incorrect or absent. • The overall quality is unsatisfactory.	/ 20 pts
Analysis and interpretation	40 pts Excellent Quantitative and qualitative analysis of the data collected is excellent. • Tables, graphs, and figures are all clear and appropriate. • Interpretation of the data is impressive, with thoughtful discussion of forecast accuracy and causes of forecast error. • Interpretation of the data within broader unusual weather, seasonal, and/or climate contexts (if relevant) is excellent. • Conclusions drawn are supported by the data, and superbly tie the overall story together. 30 pts Very Good Quantitative and qualitative analysis of the data collected is very good. • Tables, graphs, and figures are mostly clear and appropriate. • Interpretation of the data is very good, with some discussion of forecast accuracy and causes of forecast error. • Interpretation of the data within broader unusual weather, seasonal, and/or climate contexts (if relevant) is very good. • Conclusions drawn are mostly supported by the data, and meaningfully tie the overall story together. 20 pts Satisfactory Quantitative and qualitative analysis of the data collected is satisfactory. • Tables, graphs, and figures are generally appropriate, but clarity could be improved. • Interpretation of the data is satisfactory, with limited discussion of forecast accuracy and causes of forecast error. • Interpretation of the data within broader unusual weather, seasonal, and/or climate contexts (if relevant) is limited. • Conclusions drawn are generally supported by the presented data, and generally tie the overall story together. 10 pts Below Average Quantitative and qualitative analysis of the data collected is poor, and mostly superficial. • Tables, graphs, and figures are hard to understand and/or contain errors, with obvious improvements required to clarity. • Interpretation of the data is poor, with mostly superficial discussion of forecast accuracy and causes of forecast error. • Interpretation of the data within broader unusual weather, seasonal, and/or climate contexts (if relevant) is poor or absent. • Conclusions drawn are generally unsupported by the presented data, and do not tie the overall story together. 0 pts Unsatisfactory Quantitative and qualitative analysis of the data collected is unsatisfactory. • Tables, graphs, and figures are either incorrect, or not presented at all. • Interpretation of the data is unsatisfactory, with no discussion of forecast accuracy and causes of forecast error. • Interpretation of the data within broader unusual weather, seasonal, and/or climate contexts (if relevant) is absent. • Conclusions drawn are unsupported by the presented data, and are not logical.	/ 40 pts
Individual contributions	10 pts Excellent Individual contributions of all group members are clearly stated and signed. • Individual contributions are equal and even. 5 pts Satisfactory Individual contributions of all group members are clearly stated and signed. • Individual contributions are NOT equal and/or even. 0 pts Unsatisfactory Individual contributions of all group members are not provided.	/ 10 pts
Word count	10 pts Satisfactory Within range of 1000 words +/- 10%, excluding text within data tables, figures, captions, references and appendices. 0 pts Unsatisfactory Outside range of 1000 words +/- 10%, excluding text within data tables, figures, captions, references and appendices