Term Project

Content

1. An inter- or multidisciplinary, mock grant proposal for a cognitive-science research project that would investigate some problem in cognition from the perspectives of 3 different academic disciplines, at least 2 of which must be "traditional" cognitive sciences. (If you are not sure what counts as "traditional cognitive science", please see me.)

   Such a proposal should contain:

   1. a summary of a cognitive-science-related problem area,
   2. a brief review of some of the relevant literature,
   3. a statement of open questions that you propose to research,
   4. and a description of what you would do to try to answer them.

   You will need to discuss how each discipline would contribute to the research.

   If you are majoring in cognitive-science-related academic discipline X, and your proposal covers disciplines X, Y, and Z, then the amount of material on X should be no more than 33%. (By the way, you don't have to include X as one of the disciplines, but it's probably a good idea to include it!)

2. A critical study of a book (a monograph or anthology) on some topic in cognitive science that is written (in whole or in part) by someone outside of your own academic discipline.

   A "critical study" should include both a summary of the book under discussion and an evaluation of it.

   The evaluation could consist of a summary of someone else's evaluation of it, or (better) it could consist of your evaluation of it. (If you choose merely to summarize someone else's evaluation, it would also be useful if you could adjudicate between the two at the end of the paper; i.e., who do you think is "right"?)

In either case, you must indicate how the topic is related to cognitive science, preferably to the material covered in lectures and readings.

Moreover, it should not just be a re-hash of either

1. a paper you have done (or are doing) for another course, or
2. material that you are already knowledgeable in.

In other words, the project should be a learning experience.

Deadlines

1. A term-paper proposal (TPP) for your term project is due no later than
   Tuesday, September 23.

   (This is approximately 1/3 of the way into the semester.)

   No late proposals will be accepted, and no term projects will be accepted without an approved proposal.

   • Your TPP will be "graded" as either:
     • OK [i.e., it's good; get started reading & writing!]
     • revise & resubmit [i.e., here are a few things to fix before I give you permission to go ahead]
     • do a new one [i.e., you're a bit off-track; maybe try something else]

     If I ask you to revise & resubmit or to do a new one, you will have 1 week to submit a new TPP. The longer it takes you to get an "OK", the less time you'll have to do the real work. So please put some serious effort into the proposal. If you'd like to discuss it with me before turning it in, let me know.

   • Here is a template for a TPP for a mock grant proposal (yes: that would be a proposal for a proposal :-):
     "Here is a problem that has been studied by disciplines X, Y, and Z. X says:.... Y says:.... Z says:.... [I.e., this is where you do your literature review.] There is one open problem that none of them have looked at. Here is how all 3 can work together to investigate it:..."

   The proposal for your term project can be as short as 1 page (a 1-paragraph description, perhaps plus a short bibliography) or as long as 2 pages (a 1-page description plus a 1-page bibliography), but probably shouldn't be much longer than that.

2. All reports are due no later than
   12:00 noon, Monday, December 8

   (which is the first day of final exams).

   • If I am in my office, please give me your report in person.
   • If I am not in my office, please put your report in my mailbox in Bell 211.
   • If I am not in my office and Bell 211 is locked, please give me your report as soon as possible later that day or the next.
   • Please do not slip them under my office door.
   • Please do not send your report by email; I will need hardcopy.

Briefly:

1. Your report must be on 8.5 x 11-inch paper.
2. It should be no longer than 10-15 pages (not counting the bibliography),
   i.e., approximately 2500-4000 words.
   • For the mock grant proposal, if you spend approximately 2 pages on each of the following, you will have a 12-page paper:
     1. statement of problem
     2. what X says about it
     3. what Y says about it
     4. what Z says about it
     5. an open research question
     6. how X,Y, and Z can work together to solve it

   • For the critical study of a book, if you spend approximately 4 pages on each of the folloiwng, you will have a 12-page paper:
     1. statement of the problem discussed in the book
     2. presentation of a monograph's position on the problem
        or an overview of the articles in an anthology
     3. critique of the book's position or the of (some of) the articles

3. It should be double-spaced.
4. It should be printed on only one side of the page.
5. Your report must be stapled in the upper left-hand corner.
   • Do not use folders or covers, unless your report is too thick to be stapled.
   • It must not include the printer's cover page.
6. The first page should include the following information, centered:
   1. descriptive title (e.g., not: "Cog Sci Project")
   2. your name
   3. course number (e.g., CSE 575, APY 526, etc.)
   4. date completed (e.g., Dec. 8, or whatever).

   followed by the abstract (see below)
   followed immediately by the body of your paper (which does not have to start on a new page).

   I strongly suggest that you learn to use LaTeX and ispell. In any case, please be sure to spell-check and proofread your paper.

Abstract:

This is the sort of information you might find yourself having to give, extemporaneously, in a job interview, in an informal discussion at a conference or convention, or even in a "real" job when your boss sees you in the hall or even in the mall :-)

The abstract should be completely self-contained; i.e., it should be understandable by someone who is not familiar with your topic, as well as by someone who does not bother to read the rest of your paper!

And your report should not assume that the reader has read the abstract!

• Consequently, your paper should repeat—and probably begin with—any important information from the abstract.

Writing Guidelines

All reports must make it crystal-clear to the reader in what way the topic explores interdisciplinary cognitive science. I.e., it should make explicit which disciplines you are focusing on, or how your topic fits into cognitive science (which, by definition, is interdisciplinary and not merely cognitive psychology or (cognitive) linguistics, etc.).

Don't use "box and arrow" diagrams without fully explaining them: What does each box represent? What does each (kind of) arrow represent?

Be sure to give the full source of any quotations. The best way to do this is by giving the author's last name + year + page reference; see "How to Write: How to Handle Citations" for details on how to cite references.

You should try at all costs to avoid using websites, especially including Wikipedia, as sources!

• Citations should be primarily to published journal articles and books. If you are not sure whether a source is acceptable, please ask me.

DO NOT PLAGIARIZE !!

• For advice on how to avoid accidental (or intentional :-) plagiarism, link to: "Academic Integrity" (see, especially, "What is Plagiarism [at Indiana University]?" (a great, interactive site where you can test your understanding of what counts as plagiarism) and my own "Plagiarism" webpage).

• Also be sure to re-read the section of the syllabus that discusses the penalties for plagiarism.

Grading Criteria:

• Is the topic relevant to the course?
  i.e., is it suitably cognitive-scientific? e.g., does it discuss some issue from the perspectives of multiple cognitive-science disciplines?
• Is the topic viable (i.e., manageable)?
• Is the topic clearly spelled out; is there a clear thesis?
• Are the arguments cogent?
• Is the overall presentation clear and well-written?
• Is there any original content? (Even a literature review should include the author's (i.e., your!) reasoned opinions.)
• Did you learn anything?