1 CHEM 516, Fall 2018: Chemical Literature Review Objectives: In this project, you will write a literature review paper on a modern research topic of your choice. Outcomes: You should select two possible topics to Dr. Nee in mid-September, as outlined in the syllabus (where all deadlines are indicated). If you are working on a research project already, you may want to choose a topic that is appropriate for your projects there. As you will be writing a thesis, you can be mindful of the literature you might need to review for your introduction section, or to help contextualize your work. Be specific in your topic selection, but select a topic about which there are at least ten to twenty peer-reviewed scientific journal articles from the past five years. If you are too general, your paper will lack focus, making it difficult to read. Too General Too Specific Well-focused Carbon dioxide and its effect on global climate change The use of Lidar measurements to simultaneously measure CO2 levels and temperature in Blodgett Forest, CA from 2012 to 2014 Using Lidar measurements to simultaneously measure temperature and CO2 levels Nanoparticles for Alternative Energy Applications Perylenediimide nanofrogs as transient acceptor donors in a nonpolar active medium Transient acceptor-donors in nonpolar active media Cytochrome C Femtosecond Raman spectra of the iron-nitrogen breathing motion following excitation at 550 nm The active site of Cytochrome C: vibrational analyses Requirements: Your paper must contain all of the following: 1. Your paper should contain references to at least ten peer-reviewed journal articles published since 2010 in ACS jounals (or other equivalently impactful journals like Science, Nature, or Nano Letters). There should be at least five other peer-reviewed journal articles cited as well, for an absolute minimum of fifteen peer-reviewed articles cited. Most students find that they need more references than the minimum, and that not every article they read will necessarily become incorporated into their paper. 2. Your paper should assimilate information from the different papers in a way that the individual papers do not. Find a common thread that is touched on by all of the papers, and work to expose that theme. Your paper must go beyond a simple summary of the papers cited, to make the whole greater than the sum of its parts. 2 3. Your paper must include at least one figure which you create, plus at least two additional figures which are either original or are taken from (and properly credited to) one of your references. You may need more figures, and tables might also be appropriate, particularly when comparing particular values across different work. In fact, many of the best reviews have tables that draw values from different work in a way that allows the reader to clearly see the differences in results between methods, or the performances of different compounds. The figures and tables should substantially enhance the readers understanding of the material in a way that text cannot accomplish concisely. The figure you create will likely be one that provides background or interpretation from many of the papers you cite. For that figure, it is not acceptable to simply recreate a figure from another work, or to combine figures from multiple papers: it must be a unique contribution to your review. 4. Figures and tables should be incorporated into the text, and either be half the width of the margin (in most cases) or full-margin width for a particularly complex figure (where shrinking it would make it unreadable). Half-margin figures should alternate between left-alignment and right-alignment throughout the document, with text wrapped around them, and captions the same width, including a figure number and a detailed description of the figure that can be understood without reading the main text. The main text should also describe the content of the figure, and should describe how it makes the point or argument you are trying to make. 5. Additionally, your paper must include at least one molecular structure which you have drawn using chemical drawing software. This can be included as part of one of the figures your create (as discussed above), but does not count as a figure by itself. In that case, it would be a chart (or a scheme), not a figure. Formatting: Your paper must be formatted according to the following guidelines: 1. margins on all sides, 10-point Palatino Linotype or 11-point Arial or Times New Roman font, 1.2-line spacing. Text should be right and left justified. Paragraphs should be indicated by a 10 point line break, no indentation. 2. The content of your paper should be sufficient to adequately describe the contributions of the papers you are compiling and there interconnectedness. Focus on telling a story, rather than summarizing eight articles. A typical length will be between twelve and twenty pages, not including the bibliography. 3. Your paper should be divided into sections with one-word to four-word section titles. Subsections are likely, but should be parallel within a section. Find a review article in a major journal to see how it is done there (but format using the ACS style). 3 4. References should be cited using the style of the Journal of the American Chemical Society. Citations should appear throughout the work, in accordance with that style. The bibliography entries should be numbered and arranged in the order in which they are cited, single spaced, with a 6-pt line space between entries. Watch the formatting of the bibliography very carefully the guidelines are not flexible, and entries must be consistent from reference to reference. Use a reference manager like EndNote or Zotero to do all of this for you, but even if you do, you must check formatting. Abbreviations for journals, if used, should be formatted consistently. 5. Figures and tables and their captions should be formatted in accordance with the style of the American Chemical Society. Process: There are multiple deadlines outlined in the syllabus for this project, with the intention of keeping you on task. You will need to submit your topics so that we can discuss them; I must approve your topic before you can move forward on your project. A formal outline will need to be submitted before you begin the main writing part, and you will have to submit a complete draft to me more than three weeks before the final deadline. Complete means that it contains the full text you will include, all of the figures you will use (and their captions, and has cited all of the references. Incomplete outlines and drafts will result in up to a 50 point deduction on the final paper. Think of it from the perspective of gaining as much as possible from my feedback and the feedback of your peers: if you know that there are many things still to do, the responses you get from me and from your classmates will likely be things that you already know. If, instead, you submit a completed document, ready for evaluation, you will learn much more from the review process, and your final paper will be substantially better. Working with your advisor: Your research advisor must be involved at all parts of this writing. You should choose your topic in consultation with that advisor, and your draft must be sent to them for review and discussion. Dr. Nee is not a content expert in your field to the same extent that your research advisor is. When you submit questions about your work electronically to Dr. Nee, please carbon copy (cc:) your advisor. Drafts should also be submitted to your advisor, with Dr. Nee copied. Peer Review: Review of manuscripts by other experts in similar fields is the cornerstone of scientific publishing. You will need to review at least two drafts from your classmates. As the editor, I will coordinate that process. Your written work will be evaluated (not for a grade) by your peers, who will make concrete suggestions for its improvement. You will need to summarize very concisely in a separate letter to me (the editor) your responses to the peer reviews and how your manuscript has changed accordingly. This letter should be a businessstyle letter, with headings, etc. as one might use in a professional context, and should accompany your final draft. Each review should include a brief (one-to-two-sentence) summary of the 4 article, then should focus on highlighting its strengths and, more importantly, identifying the most critical areas for improvement. Peer review will be done blind: no one will know who the reviewers of their work were. Peer reviews will not be used as a basis for grading, but responses to those reviews (did you make the expected improvements?) will factor into the total paper score. It is unethical to discuss your reviews or paper with the author without going through the editor. Therefore, you must write anything that should be said to the author in your review. Deadlines and Evaluation: The paper accounts for 1000 course points, as indicated in the syllabus (and reproduced below). It is your responsibility to submit electronic copies of required by the deadlines listed in the table. Each missed deadline will result in a loss of a full letter grade for your assignment. Title/Abstract/Byline/Affiliation 50 Introduction (phrase the questions and identify their relevance and importance) 150 Structure (organization, flow, argument-to-evidence connection) 200 Figures and tables (clarity, usefulness, communicative power) 200 Overall Writing and Formatting (use of correct tense, voice, perspective, punctuation, grammar, spelling, etc. consult the ACS Style Guide for assistance on all matters), including peer-review responses 200 Conclusions that go beyond a mere summary of what has been presented to address future needs in the field, outlook to potential advances, and other forward-thinking components 100 Citations: appropriate, cited throughout, correctly formatted bibliography 100 Total 1000 Preliminary topics selected (send email to Dr. Nee) September 21, 2018 Topic/title finalized; List of at least three citations in JACS format October 5, 2018 Formal three-level (minimum) outline (should be 2-3 pages long), includes all sections, subsections, and main ideas within each subsection, plus a list of figures and preliminary bibliography October 26, 2018 All figures, tables, and captions, including citations for any reprinted figures (tables should be recreated) November 2, 2018 Complete draft, including abstract, all figures, and properly formatted bibliography, due to research advisor and to Dr. Nee for comments November 16, 2018 Peer-review of two other papers due to Dr. Nee November 20, 2018 Second draft to Dr. Nee and to research advisor November 30, 2018 Final manuscript due Wed., Dec. 12, 2018
You should select two possible
Pssst…We can write an original essay just for you.
Any essay type. Any subject. We will even overcome a 6 hour deadline.
<< SAVE15 >>
Place your first order with code to get 15% discount right away!