Transforming an Atmospheric Science Undergraduate Lab Integrating Skywatch Observatory into ATOC 1070 Kim Trenbath, Scott Kittelman, Peter Pilewskie and Katja Friedrich Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, University of Colorado Boulder

Motivation Curriculum Examples Discussion

Fundamental Idea: Radiation Lab Precipitation Lab Team successfully developed undergraduate laboratory sessions  Introduce atmospheric science instrumentation to students through that incorporated guided inquiry, real data, and actual radiation and Incorporates guided inquiry and local radiation measurement Incorporates disdrometer, curriculum that is inspiring and effective in teaching students basic Ceilometer precipitation instruments. instruments, and Skywatch Observatory data. radar reflectivity and rainfall fundamentals of radiation and precipitation. data into streamlined laboratory Team used curriculum to partially transform ATOC1070 – Part 1: Instructor demonstrates impacts of radiation sources on orientation lab. Weather and Atmosphere Laboratory. pyranometer and pyrgeometer. Students experiment with Project Goals: instruments in classroom and infer the wavelengths that each Students spray water through Students’ average assessment scores increased after completing New Radiation Lab, but far from highest possible score. Establish a rooftop observatory to measure and archive radiometric instrument measures. disdrometer to analyze drop size and velocity data. and precipitation quantities: atoc.skywatch.edu Part 2: Students examine pyranometer, pyrgeometer, ceilometer, New Radiation Lab students’ score increase higher than Old Lab Disdrometer students’, but their pre- and post-assessment averages were lower. Provide web-based public access to real-time and archived data. and video archive data corresponding with various weather. Student plot radar reflectivity Students determine the impact of time of day and clouds on and rainfall rate data in New Radiation Lab students’ average increase was due to Develop local instrument-based curriculum for undergraduate radiation. Microsoft Excel, a program they moderate improvements from Low and Medium students. (See atmospheric science classes. use throughout the lab. Part 3: Students calculate the emissive temperature of the orange highlight in below tables.) Evaluate curriculum using pre- and post-questionnaires. atmosphere and effective emission altitude. High classification New Radiation Lab students’ scores Integrate curriculum into undergraduate weather and atmosphere Lab Conclusion: Students decreased. (See yellow highlight in below tables.) course sequence. extrapolate the big picture from what they learned in the lab. Methodology New Lab Classification Chart Pyranometer Moderate Score Small Improvement Same Decrease Improvement Total Four Phases of Curriculum Development: High 3 3 1. Development Phase (Nov. 09 – Mar. 10) Medium 2 1 2 7 12 Low 5 5 10 Precipitation Lab Objectives Comparison Total 7 1 5 12 25 Pyrgeometer New Traditional Team kick-off meeting Precipitation Lab Cloud Observations and Synoptic Weather Patterns Old Lab Classification Chart Radiation Lab Objectives Comparison Essential Questions: Objectives: Moderate Score Small Professors develop the Essential Questions, Learning Goals, New Traditional 1. What is the drops size 1. Observe, identify, and keep Improvement Same Decrease Improvement Total and General Lab Exercise Outline Radiation in the Atmosphere Infrared Radiation and the Greenhouse Effect distribution in rain storms and a log of cloud observations. High 2 1 5 8 Essential Questions: Demonstrate the following: how does it affect rainfall Medium 1 1 4 4 10 Team revises professors’ 1. How do the magnitudes of solar and infrared 1. Properties of emission and absorption of radiation amount and rainfall intensity? Low 1 2 3 6 Graduate students outline and focus exercises. radiation compare during the day and night? in the atmosphere. How are these measured? Total 2 3 7 12 24 develop the pre 2. What factors control the amount of solar and 2. How the Earth’s atmospheric and surface 2. Why do storms with the 2. Relate cloud observations and post infrared radiation reaching the ground? temperatures may be determined by measurements Future Work instruction Graduate Professors revise and/or from a weather satellite. same rainfall amount have to regional weather patterns 3. How does the greenhouse effect work? 3. How temperature of the troposphere depends on different intensity? revealed by surface weather assessment. students lab approve the team’s Analyze precipitation assessment data. exercises. additions/revisions the amount of carbon dioxide, water vapor, and other 3. What is the shape of a maps, upper air maps, satellite absorbing gases. raindrop? images, and radiosonde Investigate why radiation assessment scores changed. Final pre/post assessment Final laboratory exercise Analyze students’ rating of the Labs. Results: Radiation Lab Evaluation Continue to use similar curriculum development techniques and 2. Pilot Phase (Mar. 10 – Apr. 10) Evaluation Methods the Skywatch Laboratory to revamp undergraduate curriculum. Radiation Lab Precipitation Lab Assessments developed based on common learning goals between the old and new labs and contain identical content questions. Administered pre-assessment 1 week prior to lab. Acknowledgements Pilot instructors (2) taught “New” (Transformed) Lab to one section Special thank-you to participants from the ATOC community, and “Old” (Traditional) Lab to second session. especially Dr. Richard Keen, Rachel Humphrey, Samuel LeBlanc, Administered post-assessment the class period after the lab. Katherine McCaffrey, Alice DuVivier, Ethan Peck, Jesse Nusbaumer, Brian Vanderwende, and Benet Duncan. They contributed their Compared students who completed both assessments. wonderful time and energy. Without them, our curriculum would not Results include both pilot instructors: new lab - 25 students, old lab - exist. 24 students. Thank you to the National Science Foundation (DUE 0837388) and ATOC Department for funding this research. Average Scores Pre-assessment Post-assessment Change  Piloted “new” laboratory exercises in 4 lab sections and compared Score Change with 4 “old” traditional labs. New Lab 5.0 7.3 2.2 Legend: Old Lab 7.1 7.9 0.8 -Moderate Improvement: Score increase 3. Revision Phase (Apr. 10 – Aug. 10) greater than or equal to 4 points.  Team revised new labs based on instructor s’ feedback . -Small Improvement:  Overhauled ATOC 1070 syllabus to accommodate new curriculum. Score increase  Piloted radiation lab in summer 2010 sections (33 students). greater than 0 but less than 4 points. -No Change: Pre and Post- 4. Final Implementation (Aug. 10) assessment scores equal.  Incorporated finalized curriculum into fall 2010 syllabus. -Score Decrease: Post-assessment  Taught to 247 students in 14 sections during fall 2010 semester. score is less than pre-assessment score.