"Elaine Jones" wrote in message
...
When I was in school meteorology was part of the Physical Geograpy
syllabus (sorry can't remember whether it was O or A level or both).

Is it taught today?


http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/education/teachers/
Tom

On 18 June, 10:31, John Hall wrote:
In article
,
*Richard Dixon writes:

The meteorology O-level may have died (I tried to do it in 1991 and
told it had been pulled - although had meteorology units in both GCSE
and A-level) but thankfully the demise at school level hasn't affected
the interest at University level: in my 7 years at Reading in the
1990s the graduate in-take increased. These days we have a lot to
thank the internet for in terms of increasing awareness and interest
in meteorology.

Am I right in my impression that at university level meteorology is now
taught as a branch of physics rather than as a branch of geography? My
reason for thinking that is that Met Office presenters occasionally seem
to show a lack of knowledge of basic geography.
--
John Hall * * * *"Hard work often pays off after time, but laziness always
* * * * * * * * * pays off now." *Anon

Back in the early 70's I studied Meteorology as part of my Geography
BSc. Strangely, when I applied for a job at the MetO, my BSc wasn't
science as they didn't consider Geography a science (even though I
specialised in meteorology & geomorphology). They were only interested
people with pure science degrees.

Still, probably all for the best, big organisations & me don't mix
well.

Graham
Penzance (sunny start, but increasing cloud now - mainly stratus - bit
of sc)

Graham Easterling wrote:

Back in the early 70's I studied Meteorology as part of my Geography
BSc. Strangely, when I applied for a job at the MetO, my BSc wasn't
science as they didn't consider Geography a science (even though I
specialised in meteorology & geomorphology). They were only interested
people with pure science degrees.

When I had to choose between Arts and Science for the sixth form in 1960,
the science subjects were Pure Maths, Applied Maths, Physics, Chemistry,
Botany, Zoology. The rest, as I recall, including Geography, were Arts
subjects. We had to choose four to take at A-level and I went on the science
side.

A couple of years later, I chose to get a job instead of going to university
as money was a bit short. I'd no idea of what I was going to do but had
always been interested in the weather. I was surprised when the headmaster
said I didn't need geography and that science subjects were required. He
also said that there weren't many jobs worse paid than teaching but, in the
Met Office, I'd found one. Later, in the forecasting courses, I realised why
Science and not Geography was so important.

--
Graham P Davis, Bracknell, Berks., UK. E-mail: newsman not newsboy
"I wear the cheese. It does not wear me."

For those looking to gain employment within forecasting or operational
meteorology WMO No. 258 is worth a look as it sets out guidelines for
education and training of meteorological personnel. MetO forecaster
recruitment for instance is aligned with these guidelines.

I also had to make a choice relatively early in my education to bias
towards maths and the sciences - OK if one knows what one wants to do
in future life at that age...

Steve.
www.rockbeareweather.co.uk

Steve Willington wrote:

For those looking to gain employment within forecasting or operational
meteorology WMO No. 258 is worth a look as it sets out guidelines for
education and training of meteorological personnel. MetO forecaster
recruitment for instance is aligned with these guidelines.

I also had to make a choice relatively early in my education to bias
towards maths and the sciences - OK if one knows what one wants to do
in future life at that age...

Steve.
www.rockbeareweather.co.uk


I decided at age 10 that I wanted to be a weather forecaster. I was helped
greatly by the fact that our geography teacher at secondary school had been a
weather forecaster during WW2. He taught us how to hand plot and analyse
surface charts - it wasn't in the curriculum but we enjoyed it. We did
geography as well as maths, physics and chemistry. Either geography or history
was compulsory even when following a maths/sciences path. As far as I know I'm
the only one of the class who ended up in a career in meteorology.


--
Norman Lynagh
Tideswell, Derbyshire
303m a.s.l.

On 18 June, 12:40, Graham P Davis wrote:
Graham Easterling wrote:
Back in the early 70's I studied Meteorology as part of my Geography
BSc. Strangely, when I applied for a job at the MetO, my BSc wasn't
science as they didn't consider Geography a science (even though I
specialised in meteorology & geomorphology). They were only interested
people with pure science degrees.

When I had to choose between Arts and Science for the sixth form in 1960,
the science subjects were Pure Maths, Applied Maths, Physics, Chemistry,
Botany, Zoology. The rest, as I recall, including Geography, were Arts
subjects. We had to choose four to take at A-level and I went on the science
side.

A couple of years later, I chose to get a job instead of going to university
as money was a bit short. I'd no idea of what I was going to do but had
always been interested in the weather. I was surprised when the headmaster
said I didn't need geography and that science subjects were required. He
also said that there weren't many jobs worse paid than teaching but, in the
Met Office, I'd found one. Later, in the forecasting courses, I realised why
Science and not Geography was so important.

--
Graham P Davis, Bracknell, Berks., UK. *E-mail: newsman not newsboy
"I wear the cheese. It does not wear me."

Whilst fully accepting your point that pure science is important in
modern meteorology, clearly studying meteorology as part of a BSc in
Geography does not make it an art. It certainly stretched my Physics
knowledge, I've still got my books on cloud physics purchased at
Dillons nearly 40 years ago. The trouble with classifying geography is
it can be studied from a human geography perspective (making of the
landscape, evolution of towns etc.) or a scientific perspective
(geology, geomorphology, hydrology, meteorology etc.)

By having such firm regulations as to which degree is really relevant,
it's easy to discount proven ability & aptitude. Also, a Steve W says,
how many people applying for courses really know what they want.

Steve Jackson probably has a useful view on this

Graham
Penzance (18.2C bright - glimpses of sun)

www.turnstone-cottage.co.uk/weather.html

On 18 June, 15:17, "Norman" wrote:

I decided at age 10 that I wanted to be a weather forecaster.

Same here - my careers guidance form was apparently one of the most
negative the careers bloke had seen as I'd simply tailored the
computer form to spit out "meteorologist".

And then at 21 at towards the end of my degree I had a long chat with
a then fellow member of the cricket team (now a chief forecaster at
the MO) who warned me that there were lots of night shifts involved.
That ended it for me there and then...!

Richard

On 18 June, 15:18, Graham Easterling
wrote:

By having such firm regulations as to which degree is really relevant,
it's easy to discount proven ability & aptitude.

Prime example - and he'll murder me for saying this on here - but
waghorn (a rare poster on here now) has an education in fine art - and
having taught himself meteorology over the years, recently published
his first paper with my former supervisor:

http://www.abuhrc.org/Publications/AA2.pdf

Proof if ever there was that you don't need the qualifications to have
the ability !

Richard

On Jun 18, 4:34*pm, Richard Dixon wrote:
On 18 June, 15:17, "Norman" wrote:

I decided at age 10 that I wanted to be a weather forecaster.

Same here - my careers guidance form was apparently one of the most
negative the careers bloke had seen as I'd simply tailored the
computer form to spit out "meteorologist".

And then at 21 at towards the end of my degree I had a long chat with
a then fellow member of the cricket team (now a chief forecaster at
the MO) who warned me that there were lots of night shifts involved.
That ended it for me there and then...!

Richard

I'm struggling to think of who that cricketer would be.

Anyhow I'm not keen on the night shifts either, sadly part of the
package - luckily the rest of the job makes up for it :^).

I also knew I wanted to be a forecaster from a young age, probably at
least as early as 10 years old. I lost track of that a bit during my
'A' Levels (lots of other things around that time to capture my
attention) and it took until I was 23 before I decided to finally join
the Met Office, doing my degree after I joined.

Steve.
www.rockbeareweather.co.uk

Richard Dixon wrote:

On 18 June, 15:18, Graham Easterling
wrote:

By having such firm regulations as to which degree is really relevant,
it's easy to discount proven ability & aptitude.

Prime example - and he'll murder me for saying this on here - but
waghorn (a rare poster on here now) has an education in fine art - and
having taught himself meteorology over the years, recently published
his first paper with my former supervisor:

http://www.abuhrc.org/Publications/AA2.pdf

Proof if ever there was that you don't need the qualifications to have
the ability !


Also, having the qualifications doesn't doesn't mean you have the ability.
I've known a few who, though they were well-encumbered with degrees, bring
to mind phrases such as "two short planks" and "Toc-H lamp".

When I started in the Met Office, someone said to me, "forecasting isn't a
science - it's an art!" In those days, at the sharp end of the business, I
think it was true but it's less so these days.

--
Graham P Davis, Bracknell, Berks., UK. E-mail: newsman not newsboy
"I wear the cheese. It does not wear me."