First of all, I have decided to increase the incentive for group projects.  The following formula will apply:

Single authored paper - 1300 words on the WEB, if not on the WEB, 1300 words plus ten annotated bibliography items.

Multi authored papers - must be linked on the WEB.  Each paper must include:
    1.  Introduction and Table of Contents with titles and links to all the other pages in the project.
    2.   Text of following length:
                     two authors:  1100 words each
                     three authors:  900 words each
                     four authors: 700 words each
                     five or more authors:  500 words each!

The catch here, however, is that your papers must make sense as a group, it must be ONE PAPER with two, three, four or five or more parts.  The Introduction (100 words maximum) must explain the project as a whole.  It will be the same for all participants.

Another catch is that you must organize your own groups.  These can be the same people as are in your Support Group, but only if you agree on a common theme or topic.  Or you may wish to pair up with others who share your interest.   Instead of support group meetings on March 5, we will divide up on Interest Group lines.  This will make it easier for you

The paper must be arranged around a common theme or topic.  I think some examples will make it clear what I mean.
 

1. A number of papers could be done on Jungian archetypes.  One way to do this would be to divide the archetypes up as Jennifer did, based on the Taro Cards:  zero - Fool;  one - Magician;  two - Virgin;  three - Mother;  four - Father.  Each student could write a paper on examples of one of these five archetypes.  There could be lots of other ways to organize papers on Jungian archetypes.  Each student might write about one of Jung's basic archetypes, e.g., the Shadow, Anima, Animus, Szygzy...  Or on the Archetypes as portrayed in different cultural products, e.g., Star Wars, Greek Mythology, Shakespeare, Asimov's Foundation series, Ayn Rand's novels, etc. etc. etc......
2. A paper could be done on artificial intelligence programs.  Each student could do a review of a particular program, giving references to papers about it and sites where it can be demonstrated.  This could be subdivided by topics, e.g., one on psychotherapist programs, one on medical programs, etc.
3. Another approach would be to do a paper on artificial intelligence in different areas, e.g., medicine, taxes, art, therapy, etc.
4. A paper could be organized on examples of the theory of evolution in different disciplines, with each student writing about one example.
5. A paper could be organized on examples of chaotic phenomena in different disciplines.  How has the concept of chaos been used in different fields?
6. Another way to organize a paper would be to focus on applying the Peircian archetypes to one cultural product such as: Shakespeare's Plays,  Classic StarTrek, Mash, Gilligan's Island, Cheers, the History of Philosophy, Freudian personality theory, or Starship Design, or to scientific issues such as the perception of color, or the functions of different areas of the brain.  These could be divided up in various ways, e.g., portraits of the characters on a TV series with reference to specific episodes (each of these probably has a WEB site, discussion groups, etc. on the WEB.)  Or, you could divide up the episodes, or compare the different versions of Star Trek.  Or compare characters in a Shakespeare play, or different plays.  Obviously, this would be hard to do unless you knew the material already.  Many of these are sketched briefly on the Supposition Error Web page which gives an idea of how they fit into the Peircian framework.
7. Any number of papers could be done on the topic of Hypertext Fiction.  This would simply involve a series of linked reviews of different hypertext writings.  To make this work well, it would be best if the papers had something in common, e.g., stories about mother/daughter relationships, science-fiction stories, etc.  We would be particularly interested in how the Internet as a medium influences the nature of the writing.  Deborah will be talking about this on March 12.
8. Critical reviews of library and informational resources available on the Internet, with discussion of the best teachniques for using these resources.  You could get help from Ann Scholz-Crane and other librarians in working in this area.  Each student could review resources in a particular area of research or study.
9. Critical reviews of instructional uses of the Internet, including online courses.
10. Discussion of economic issues related to the Internet, including analysis of business strategies in different fields and monopolization issues.   This kind of paper could be divided up by corporation, e.g., a comparison of Amazon.com's business strategy with Barnesandnoble.com, or of Microsoft with Netscape with Sun,  or contrasting different "portals" such as Yahoo, Excite, Netscape...   Extensive coverage of these issues is available in the New York Times online.
11. Some more advanced topics are also possible, particularly for students with background in a particular area.   For example, a project could be done on different theories of how the brain works or on the immune system or on different theories of language or on the merits of different computer languages.  Or perhaps on the periodicity of the chemical elements.  If some of you want to work on technical topics which are beyond my expertise, I'll ask Ben to help.  Ben has chapters or sections of chapters of the Webmind book on these topics, but we may not get to them this semester.