This honours course is designed as an introduction to contemporary theories, debates, and major scholarly traditions in international relations. As a core course offered in this field, the intention is to provide honours students with a general, but not elementary, overview. The course explores six traditions in international relations scholarship, three rationalist (neorealism, neoliberalism, and liberalism) and three constructivist (structural, agentic, and postmodern). Our primary concern is to examine and assess each approach’s foundational assumptions, method and scope of the problem defined, understanding of the units of world politics, how it conceptualises international institutions, and the relationship between agency and international structure. In addressing these and other questions, we will explore several issue areas of world politics, such as international security, international political economy, international law and organisations, policy diffusion, globalisation, humanitarian action, gender, human rights, democratisation, and the environment.

Learning Outcomes

Upon successful completion, students will have the knowledge and skills to:

Upon successful completion of this course, students will have the knowledge and skills to:

1. understand different international relations theories;
2. apply international relations theories to case studies and issue areas of world politics;
3. understand how world politics works; and
4. think, write, and argue critically and logically about issues of world politics from a political science perspective.

Additional Course Costs

There are no additional costs associated with this course.

Examination Material or equipment

Details about the material or equipment that is permitted in an examination room will be outlined during the semester and on the course’s Wattle site.

Required Resources

There is no required textbook. Instead, a number of articles and book chapters are required and can be downloaded from Wattle, along with supplementary recommended readings.

Recommended Resources

A large number of journals and periodicals exist that include the cutting edge developments of the discipline. Being familiar with these sources and surveying at least some of them regularly will assist you in this course.

International Organization

Global Governance

International Studies Quarterly

American Political Science Review

European Journal of International Relations

World Politics

International Security

Review of International Studies

Staff Feedback

Students will be given feedback in the following forms in this course:

·        News postings will provide feedback to the whole class on Wattle.

·        Workshops offer immediate feedback on your ideas and your understanding of course materials.

·        Your course convener is available to provide feedback on your essay plans prior to their due dates.

·        Your course convener will provide written feedback on your essays on Wattle.

Student Feedback

ANU is committed to the demonstration of educational excellence and regularly seeks feedback from students. Students are encouraged to offer feedback directly to their Course Convener or through their College and Course representatives (if applicable). The feedback given in these surveys is anonymous and provides the Colleges, University Education Committee and Academic Board with opportunities to recognise excellent teaching, and opportunities for improvement. The Surveys and Evaluation website provides more information on student surveys at ANU and reports on the feedback provided on ANU courses.

Other Information

The information provided is a preliminary Class Outline. A finalised version will be available on Wattle and will be accessible after enrolling in this course. All updates, changes and further information will be uploaded on the course Wattle site and will not be updated on Programs and Courses throughout the semester. Any questions or concerns should be directed to the Course Convenor.

Course Logistics

 

The course has one session per week on Thursdays 2:05-3:55 pm in LJ Hume Centre, Copland Building (Room 1171). Each session consists of short lecture and intensive class discussion.

 

As the course is a workshop in format, the course sessions will not be recorded. All the lecture notes and handouts, if any, will be emailed to your ANU email account.

 

You are expected to arrive to class on time, as late arrivals are disruptive to your fellow students. Please note that the use of mobile phones, including text messaging, is strictly prohibited in class. Please do not use your laptop computer during class for non-class activities (for example, email or web-surfing unrelated to class) because it detracts from your fellow students’ learning experience.

Extensions and penalties

 

As Wattle is the only acceptable way that you can submit your assessment tasks, you do not need to hand in a hard copy of your assessment. Your submission will be determined by the time at which your paper arrives within the dropbox as marked by Wattle Turnitin. Uploading a wrong paper (for example, a paper for a different course than ours) is no submission and will result in zero for a given assignment. It is your responsibility to ascertain that your assessment has been properly uploaded on Wattle.

 

Extensions and late submission of assessment pieces are covered by the Student Assessment (Coursework) Policy and Procedure. The course convener may grant extensions for assessment pieces that are not examinations or take-home examinations.

 

There will be no extensions granted, except for a documented medical or family emergency. If you need an extension, you must request it in writing on or before the due date of each assessment. Also, you must provide the course convener with appropriate verifying documentation at the time of your request. If you have documented and appropriate medical evidence that demonstrates you were not able to request an extension on or before the due date, you may be able to request it after the due date. Note that in case you might request a second extension after receiving the initial extension, the same ANU policy on extensions will apply to your case: you must contact your course convener before your extended due date expires and with appropriate updated documentation at the time of your second request. Please note that the maximum length of extension granted will be limited by the School’s policy on extensions.

 

Extension is not granted for the Research Proposal Presentation assessment.

 

Late submission of assessment will be accepted with the following penalty per the ANU’s Student Assessment (Coursework) Policy and Procedure. Late submission of assessment tasks without an extension are penalised at the rate of 5% of the possible marks available per working day or part thereof. Late submission of assessment tasks is not accepted after 10 working days after the due date, or on or after the date specified in the course outline for the return of the assessment item.

 

Late submission is not accepted for the Research Proposal Presentation assessment.

 

Late submission is not accepted for take-home examinations.

 

Note that you have almost the entire semester to work on your assessment tasks. Thus, time management is your responsibility.

Academic Integrity

 

Academic misconduct can seriously jeopardize your academic career, your future, and, if you are an international student, your ability to stay in Australia to study. It is the responsibility of each individual student to ensure that:

 

·        they are familiar with the expectations for academic honesty both in general, and in the specific context of particular disciplines or courses

·        work submitted for assessment is genuine and original

·        appropriate acknowledgement and citation is given to the work of others

·        they do not knowingly assist other students in academically dishonest practice.

 

Please note that I have zero tolerance for academic dishonesty including cheating, plagiarism, collusion, fabrication/submission of work that is not original, and recycling. Academic dishonesty will be punished by disciplinary action at the University level. For more details on the ANU’s Academic Misconduct Rules and what constitutes a breach of these rules, please see: https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2014L01662 (Academic Misconduct Statute 2014),

http://www.anu.edu.au/students/program-administration/assessments-exams/academic-honesty-plagiarism (Academic honesty & plagiarism), and

http://drss.anu.edu.au/asqo/breaches.php (What is a breach?). Specifically, the ANU defines plagiarism as follows:

 

“Plagiarism is copying, paraphrasing or summarising, without appropriate acknowledgement, the words, ideas, scholarship and intellectual property of another person. This remains plagiarism whether or not it is with the knowledge or consent of that other person. Plagiarism has also taken place when direct use of others' words is not indicated, for example by inverted commas or indentation, in addition to appropriate citation of the source (emphasis added).”

 

It must be noted that intention does not matter for determining whether plagiarism has occurred: Whether intentional or not, plagiarism is plagiarism and, if the end result of your writing constitutes plagiarism, it will be punished as such. Also, please note that self-plagiarism (that is, reusing, in whole or in part, one’s own previous work for our course assignments) is plagiarism and will be punished equally. My policy on exceptions to this general prohibition of self-plagiarism is specified in the Assessment Tasks section in the above. As the guideline for avoiding plagiarism in all your course assignments, you must refer to the section, “Successful vs. unsuccessful paraphrases,” which is available at the following webpage https://writing.wisc.edu/handbook/assignments/quotingsources/. This resource is also available at the end of the PDF version of this course outline on Wattle.

Referencing requirements

 

It is a requirement of this course that your essays conform to academic writing standards and referencing. The Chicago referencing style is required: you may use either in-text notes or footnotes. You may contact the ANU Academic Skills and Writing Centre for further advice. For details about the Chicago citation style, please see the ANU style guide website at

https://academicskills.anu.edu.au/resources/handouts/referencing-style-guides 

 

Research Quality Assurance: The lecturer may ask to speak with you regarding your research for your essays (the process by which you gathered and analysed your research materials). These meetings are usually designed to help students improve their research skills and ensure their approach to research is of university standard. To this end, please keep all the notes, plans, drafts and research that you use for this essay.

COURSE OUTLINE

 

(WEEK 1) February 28: Introduction and Course Overview          

 

Required reading (51 pages)

Stephen Van Evera, Guide to Methods for Students of Political Science (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1997), “Chapter 1. Hypotheses, Laws, and Theories: A User’s Guide,” pp. 7-48 (42 pages).

Theda Skocpol and Margaret Somers, “The Uses of Comparative History in Macrosocial Inquiry,” Comparative Studies in Society and History 22: 2 (1980), only pp. 174-176 para. 1, 181 para. 3-187 para. 1 (i.e. the section Comparative History as Macro-Causal Analysis) (8 pages).

Jeffry Frieden, “Research Proposal Template,” (N.d.) (1 page).

 

 

(WEEK 2) March 7: Rationalism I: Neorealism (aka Structural Realism)

 

Required reading (70 pages)

John J. Mearsheimer, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2001), “Chapter 1. Introduction” and “Chapter 2. Anarchy and the Struggle for Power,” pp. 1-54 (54 pages).

Stephen D. Krasner, “Realist Views of International Law,” American Society of International Law Proceedings 96 (2002), pp. 265-268 (4 pages).

Andrew M. Colman, Game Theory and its Applications in the Social and Biological Sciences, Second Edition (London: Routledge, 1999), only pp. 100-101 para. 2, 107 para. 2-108 para. 2, 110 para. 2-118 (12 pages).

 

Recommended reading

John J. Mearsheimer, “The False Promise of International Institutions,” International Security 19: 3 (1994-1995), pp. 5-49.

Sebastian Rosato, “Europe’s Troubles: Power Politics and the State of the European Project,” International Security 35: 4 (2011), pp. 45-86.

 

 

(WEEK 3) March 14: Rationalism II: Neoliberalism (aka Neoliberal Institutionalism)

 

Required reading (55 pages)

Robert O. Keohane, “The Demand for International Regimes,” International Organization 36: 2 (1982), pp. 325-355 (31 pages).

Beth A. Simmons, “International Law and State Behavior: Commitment and Compliance in International Monetary Affairs,” American Political Science Review 94: 4 (2000), pp. 819-835 (15 pages).

Robert O. Keohane, After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy, 1st Princeton Classic Ed. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2005), Preface to the 2005 Edition, pp. ix-xx (9 pages).

 

Recommended reading

Lisa L. Martin, “Interests, Power, and Multilateralism,” International Organization 46: 4 (1992), pp. 765-792.

Celeste A. Wallander, “Institutional Assets and Adaptability: NATO After the Cold War,” International Organization 54: 4 (2000), pp. 705-735.

Virginia Page Fortna, “Interstate Peacekeeping: Causal Mechanisms and Empirical Effects, World Politics 56: 4 (2004), pp. 481-519.

 

 

(WEEK 4) March 21: Constructivism I and II: Structural and Postmodern Constructivism

 

Required reading (80 pages)

Jeffrey T. Checkel, “The Constructivist Turn in International Relations Theory,” World Politics 50: 2 (1998), pp. 324-348 (25 pages).

John W. Meyer, John Boli, George M. Thomas, and Francisco O. Ramirez, “World Society and the Nation-State,” American Journal of Sociology 103: 1 (1997), pp. 144-181 (32 pages).

Helen M. Kinsella, “Securing the Civilian: Sex and Gender in the Laws of War,” in Michael Barnett and Raymond Duvall, eds., Power in Global Governance (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), pp. 249-272 (23 pages).

 

Recommended reading

Alexander Wendt, “Anarchy is what States Make of it: The Social Construction of Power Politics,” International Organization 46: 2 (1992), pp. 391-425.

Patricia Bromley, John W. Meyer, and Francisco O. Ramirez, “Student-Centeredness in Social Science Textbooks, 1970-2008: A Cross-National Study,” Social Forces 90: 2 (2011), pp. 547-570 (19 pages).

Martha Finnemore, “International Organizations as Teachers of Norms: The United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization and Science Policy,” International Organization 47: 4 (1993), pp. 565-597.

Neta C. Crawford, “Understanding Discourse: A Method of Ethical Argument Analysis,” Qualitative Methods 2: 1 (2004), pp. 22-25 (3 pages).

Jennifer Milliken, “The Study of Discourse in International Relations: A Critique of Research and Methods,” European Journal of International Relations 5: 2 (1999), pp. 225-254 (24 pages).

 

 

(WEEK 5) March 28: Rationalism III: Liberalism

 

Required reading (49 pages)

Andrew Moravcsik, “Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics,” International Organization 51: 4 (1997), pp. 513-553 (36 pages).

Ronald Rogowski, “Political Cleavages and Changing Exposure to Trade,” American Political Science Review 81: 4 (1987), pp. 1121-1137 (13 pages).

 

Recommended reading

Andrew Moravcsik, “The Origins of Human Rights Regimes: Democratic Delegation in Postwar Europe,” International Organization 54: 2 (2000), pp. 217-252.

 

 

APRIL 1: Research Question Proposals Due by 2:00 pm at Wattle Turnitin

 

 

(WEEK 6) April 4: Constructivism II: Agentic Constructivism

 

Required reading (61 pages)

Kathryn Sikkink, “Beyond the Justice Cascade: How Agentic Constructivism Could Help Explain Change in International Politics,” unpublished manuscript, Harvard University, (2011), only pp. 1-22 (22 pages).

Dongwook Kim, “International Nongovernmental Organizations and the Global Diffusion of National Human Rights Institutions,” International Organization 67: 3 (2013), pp. 505-539 (32 pages).

J Muir Macpherson, “Palace wars and privatization: did Chicago beat Cambridge in influencing economic policies,” European Management Review 3: 3 (2006), pp. 190-198 (7 pages).

 

Recommended reading

Michael N. Barnett and Martha Finnemore, “The Power, Politics, and Pathologies of International Organizations,” International Organization 53: 4 (1998), pp. 699-732.

 

 

April 11, 18: No Class. Teaching Break.

 

 

(WEEK 7) April 25: No Class – ANZAC Day Holiday

 

 

(WEEK 8) May 2: Two-Level Games and International Negotiations

 

Required reading (58 pages)

Eugénia da Conceição-Heldt, “Two-level games and trade cooperation: What do we now know?” International Politics 50: 4 (2013), pp. 579-599 (14 pages).

Corneliu Bjola and Ilan Manor, “Revisiting Putnam’s two-level game theory in the digital age: domestic digital diplomacy and the Iran nuclear deal,” Cambridge Review of International Affairs 31: 1 (2018), pp. 3-32 (28 pages).

Jacob Shamir and Khalil Shikaki, “Public Opinion in the Israeli-Palestinian Two-Level Game,” Journal of Peace Research 42: 3 (2005), pp. 311-328 (16 pages).

 

Recommended reading

Robert D. Putnam, “Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: The Logic of Two-Level Games,” International Organization 42: 3 (1988), pp. 427-460.

Andrea Cofelice, “Italy and the Universal Periodic Review of the United Nations Human Rights Council. Playing the two-level game,” Italian Political Science Review / Rivista Italiana di Scienza Politica 47: 2 (2017), pp. 227-250.

Barry O’Neill, “International Negotiation: Some Conceptual Developments,” Annual Review of Political Science 21 (2018), pp. 515-33.

 

 

(WEEK 9) May 9: Interstate Conflict

 

Required reading (73 pages)

Jack S. Levy, “The Causes of War and Conditions of Peace,” Annual Review of Political Science 1 (1998), pp. 139-165 (24 pages).

Jessica L. Weeks, “Strongmen and Straw Men: Authoritarian Regimes and the Initiation of International Conflict,” American Political Science Review 106: 2 (2012), pp. 326-347 (19 pages).

D. Scott Bennett and Allan C. Stam, “Research Design and Estimator Choices in the Analysis of Interstate Dyads: When Decisions Matter,” Journal of Conflict Resolution 44: 5 (2000), pp. 653-685 (30 pages).

 

Recommended reading

James D. Fearon, “Rationalist Explanations for War,” International Organization 49: 3 (1995), pp. 379-414.

 

 

(WEEK 10) May 16: Human Rights

 

Required reading (35 pages)

Beth A. Simmons and Allison Danner, “Credible Commitments and the International Criminal Court,” International Organization 64: 2 (2010), only pp. 225-239, 252 para. 3-254 (18 pages).

Margarita H. Petrova, “Rhetorical Entrapment and Normative Enticement: How the United Kingdom Turned From Spoiler Into Champion of the Cluster Munition Ban,” International Studies Quarterly 60: 3 (2016), pp. 387-399 (11 pages).

John W. Meyer, “The Nation as Babbitt: How Countries Conform,” Contexts 3: 3 (2004), pp. 42-47 (6 pages).

 

Recommended reading

Sarah Sunn Bush, “International Politics and the Spread of Quotas for Women in Legislatures,” International Organization 65: 1 (2011), pp. 103-137 (31 pages).

Thomas Risse and Kathryn Sikkink, “The socialization of international human rights norms into domestic practices: introduction,” in Thomas Risse, Stephen C. Ropp, and Kathryn Sikkink, eds., The Power of Human Rights: International Norms and Domestic Change (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), pp. 1-38 (38 pages).

Geoffrey P.R. Wallace, “International Law and Public Attitudes Toward Torture: An Experimental Study,” International Organization 67: 1 (2013), pp. 105-140.

 

 

MAY 20: Theoretical Argument Papers Due by 2:00 pm at Wattle Turnitin

 

 

(WEEK 11) May 23: The Environment

 

Required reading (36 pages)

Thomas Hickmann, “Science-Policy Interaction in International Environmental Politics: An Analysis of the Ozone Regime and the Climate Regime,” Environmental Economics and Policy Studies 16: 1 (2014), pp. 21-44 (20 pages).

Jennifer Hadden and Lucia A. Seybert, “What’s in a Norm? Mapping the Norm Definition Process in the Debate on Sustainable Development,” Global Governance 22: 2 (2016), pp. 249-268 (16 pages).

 

Recommended reading

Martha Finnemore and Kathryn Sikkink, “International Norm Dynamics and Political Change,” International Organization 52: 4 (1998), pp. 887-917.

 

 

(WEEK 12) May 30: Student Presentation and Conclusion

 

Recommended reading

Columbia University Center on Teaching and Learning, “How to Give Highly Effective Lectures—Job Talks and Conference Presentations,” (N.d.) (5 pages).

 

 

MAY 30: In-Class Research Proposal Presentations during 2:00-4:00 pm and PowerPoint Slides Due by 2:00 pm at Wattle Turnitin

 

Class Schedule

Week/Session	Summary of Activities	Assessment
1	Introduction and Course Overview
2	Rationalism I: Neorealism (aka Structural Realism)
3	Rationalism II: Neoliberalism (aka Neoliberal Institutionalism)
4	Constructivism I and II: Structural and Postmodern Constructivism
5	Rationalism III: Liberalism
6	Constructivism II: Agentic Constructivism	Monday, April 1: Research Question Proposals Due by 2:00 pm at Wattle Turnitin
7	No Class – ANZAC Day Holiday	April 23: Proposal results and feedback returned via Wattle Turnitin
8	Two-Level Games and International Negotiations
9	Interstate Conflict
10	Human Rights
11	The Environment	Monday, May 20: Theoretical Argument Papers Due by 2:00 pm at Wattle Turnitin
12	Student Presentation and Conclusion	Thursday, May 30: In-Class Research Proposal Presentations during 2:00-4:00 pm and PowerPoint Slides Due by 2:00 pm at Wattle Turnitin May 31: Proposal results and feedback returned via Wattle Turnitin

Assessment Summary

Assessment task	Value	Due Date	Return of assessment	Learning Outcomes
Class Participation	20 %	01/01/9999	01/01/9999	1, 2, 4
Research Question Proposal	20 %	01/04/2019	23/04/2019	1, 2, 3, 4
Theoretical Argument Paper	50 %	20/05/2019	31/05/2019	1, 2, 3, 4
Research Proposal Presentation	10 %	30/05/2019	01/01/9999	2, 4

* If the Due Date and Return of Assessment date are blank, see the Assessment Tab for specific Assessment Task details

Policies

ANU has educational policies, procedures and guidelines, which are designed to ensure that staff and students are aware of the University’s academic standards, and implement them. Students are expected to have read the Academic Misconduct Rule before the commencement of their course. Other key policies and guidelines include:

• Student Assessment (Coursework) Policy and Procedure
• Special Assessment Consideration Policy and General Information 
• Student Surveys and Evaluations
• Deferred Examinations
• Student Complaint Resolution Policy and Procedure

Assessment Requirements

The ANU is using Turnitin to enhance student citation and referencing techniques, and to assess assignment submissions as a component of the University's approach to managing Academic Integrity. For additional information regarding Turnitin please visit the ANU Online website. In rare cases where online submission using Turnitin software is not technically possible; or where not using Turnitin software has been justified by the Course Convener and approved by the Associate Dean (Education) on the basis of the teaching model being employed; students shall submit assessment online via ‘Wattle’ outside of Turnitin, or failing that in hard copy, or through a combination of submission methods as approved by the Associate Dean (Education). The submission method is detailed below.

Moderation of Assessment

Marks that are allocated during Semester are to be considered provisional until formalised by the College examiners meeting at the end of each Semester. If appropriate, some moderation of marks might be applied prior to final results being released.

Participation

Class participation marks will be based upon evidence of having done the assigned readings, evidence of having thought about the issues, contribution and participation in class and consideration and respect for other class members. As part of the class participation mark, you are required to email me at least two possible discussion questions about each week’s readings by 9:00 pm, the day before our workshop (i.e. every Wednesday) from Weeks 2 to 6 and 8 to 11. When submitting your questions, be sure to explain how your questions are relevant for each week’s readings or topics. Please come prepared to share your own questions and thoughts about each week’s course materials, especially the readings, and to proactively participate in exchange of ideas with your course convener and fellow students.

 

A roll will be called at each class by the convener. If you do not attend, it is not possible to gain participation marks. At the end of the semester, 1 point will be deducted from participation for each class missed after the second (i.e. you can miss 1 workshop session without penalty). Accordingly, if you attend 8 workshops total (missing 3), the maximum score you can get for participation is 8/10, given the 2 point deduction (and this assumes perfect participation for those workshop sessions you do attend).

 

Note that if you may arrive late in the course session, it is your responsibility to double check whether your convener has marked your presence.

Assessment Task 1

Class Participation

Due date: Twelve (11) workshop sessions will be run in weeks 1-6 and 8-12. Value: 20%

Class participation marks will be based upon evidence of having done the assigned readings, evidence of having thought about the issues, contribution and participation in class and consideration and respect for other class members. As part of the class participation mark, you are required to email me at least two possible discussion questions about each week’s readings by 9:00 pm, the day before our workshop (i.e. every Wednesday) from Weeks 2 to 6 and 8 to 11. When submitting your questions, be sure to explain how your questions are relevant for each week’s readings or topics. Please come prepared to share your own questions and thoughts about each week’s course materials, especially the readings, and to proactively participate in exchange of ideas with your course convener and fellow students.

 

A roll will be called at each class by the convener. If you do not attend, it is not possible to gain participation marks. At the end of the semester, 1 point will be deducted from participation for each class missed after the second (i.e. you can miss 1 workshop session without penalty). Accordingly, if you attend 8 workshops total (missing 3), the maximum score you can get for participation is 8/10, given the 2 point deduction (and this assumes perfect participation for those workshop sessions you do attend).

 

Note that if you may arrive late in the course session, it is your responsibility to double check whether your convener has marked your presence.

Assessment Task 2

Research Question Proposal

Due date: 1 April, 2:00 pm. Value: 20%

Word limit: 1,000 words of text in length, excluding footnotes (or endnotes), the references, tables, figures, appendices, and the cover sheet, if any, from the word count. Per ANU College of Arts & Social Sciences, an assignment must not deviate from the prescribed word limit either up or down by more than 10%. In other words, the acceptable word count for your paper is minimum 900 and maximum 1,100 words of text.

Details of task: You must write about an international relations topic of your choice and relating to the themes of the course. To maximise the utility of this course for your honours thesis project, you are advised and expected to write about the international relations topic that you chose for your honours thesis. Following Jeffry Frieden’s Research Proposal Template (assigned for Week 1 and available on Wattle), your research question proposal must include the following sections: (1) an introduction and (2) a section describing the dependent variable (i.e. the outcome to be explained) and justifying your case selection (i.e. why you choose both the topic and your specific country cases).

 

Note that for your convener to help you make early progress on your honours thesis project, you must get the permission of your course convener about your topic selection by 21 March before you start to write about it. You are welcome to approach your convener to discuss your paper topic well in advance of this due date.

 

As this Course Outline notes about academic integrity below, recycling (i.e. self-plagiarism) is expressly prohibited in our course. The only exception is that if you may work on the same research topic in our course and POLS4011 Research Training: Scope and Methods (and/or another honours course), you may reuse your own work submitted to the other course for our course’s assessment tasks. However, note that there are several caveats to note. First, you must ask the conveners of the other honours courses whether they explicitly permit you to reuse your work submitted to our course for their courses. Be aware that the other course conveners may prohibit and punish any assessment recycling. Second, the Head of SPIR has made it clear that dual submission (i.e. submitting the same paper for two different courses) is strictly prohibited. No exceptions. Thus, even if you are permitted in our course to work on the same research topic that you do in the other courses and certain overlap may be unavoidable, you must still write a brandnew, original paper for our course. Third, SPIR Honours Conveners have officially confirmed that the CASS and the SPIR never tolerate any assessment recycling. Per this SPIR policy, if you may work on the same research topic in two different courses, it is your sole responsibility to ensure that your paper will meet the ANU rules against self-plagiarism when submitted to Turnitin: dual submission will fail to pass Turnitin’s originality check, and it will be punished as an offence of academic integrity breach by the ANU. Last but not least, grading criteria will differ among different honours courses because of different learning outcomes. As such, it is your responsibility to meet the requirements and grading criteria of our course in completing and submitting the assessment tasks.

 

See below in the Theoretical Argument Paper assessment for more details on submission/formatting instructions.

 

Grading criteria: Your paper will be graded based on the following criteria:

(1) the quality of the argument;

(2) the overall quality of writing, including structure, spelling and grammar; and

(3) the quality and appropriateness of the research, including proper attribution and referencing.  

Assessment Task 3

Theoretical Argument Paper

Due date: 20 May, 2:00 pm. Value: 50%

Word limit: 2,500 words of text in length, excluding footnotes (or endnotes), the references, tables, figures, appendices, and the cover sheet, if any, from the word count. Per ANU College of Arts & Social Sciences, an assignment must not deviate from the prescribed word limit either up or down by more than 10%. In other words, the acceptable word count for your paper is minimum 2,250 and maximum 2,750 words of text.

Details of task: You must provide a sophisticated theoretical explanation to the same research question that you proposed to answer in your Research Question Proposal assessment, utilising International Relations theories you have learned in our course as well as other relevant social science theories. Following Jeffry Frieden’s Research Proposal Template (assigned for Week 1 and available on Wattle), your theoretical argument paper must include the following sections: (1) a one-paragraph summary of your research question; (2) a thorough, synthetic literature review; and (3) a full-blown section on your proposed theory (separately from your literature review). Each of (2) and (3) should be approximately 1000 words long.

 

In your theory section, you need to have your own argument and it must be richly informed by IR theories. Specifically, what is your main argument? What existing literatures do you build on in developing your argument? What is your theoretical story in detail? In other words, what are the causal mechanisms of your theory? For instance, you may want to address the following issues, although these are not prescriptive but suggestive or illustrative: who are the main political actors in your explanation?; are they primarily driven by material interests or identities and norms?; how do those actors cause the international relations outcome of your interest? For more advice on how to write a good IR theory, please read Van Evera (1997, 7-27 para. 2) assigned for Week 1.

 

Note that this assessment tests your mastery of the relevant theoretical literature on your topic: Do not include your actual empirical analysis as if it were a theory.

 

As this Course Outline notes about academic integrity below, recycling (i.e. self-plagiarism) is expressly prohibited in our course. The only exception is that if you may work on the same research topic in our course and POLS4011 Research Training: Scope and Methods (and/or another honours course), you may reuse your own work submitted to the other course for our course’s assessment tasks. However, note that there are several caveats to note. First, you must ask the conveners of the other honours courses whether they explicitly permit you to reuse your work submitted to our course for their courses. Be aware that the other course conveners may prohibit and punish any assessment recycling. Second, the Head of SPIR has made it clear that dual submission (i.e. submitting the same paper for two different courses) is strictly prohibited. No exceptions. Thus, even if you are permitted in our course to work on the same research topic that you do in the other courses and certain overlap may be unavoidable, you must still write a brandnew, original paper for our course. Third, SPIR Honours Conveners have officially confirmed that the CASS and the SPIR never tolerate any assessment recycling. Per this SPIR policy, if you may work on the same research topic in two different courses, it is your sole responsibility to ensure that your paper will meet the ANU rules against self-plagiarism when submitted to Turnitin: dual submission will fail to pass Turnitin’s originality check, and it will be punished as an offence of academic integrity breach by the ANU. Last but not least, grading criteria will differ among different honours courses because of different learning outcomes. As such, it is your responsibility to meet the requirements and grading criteria of our course in completing and submitting the assessment tasks.

 

Submission instructions:

·        To structure your essay, please put an appropriate section title at the beginning of each section of your paper.

·        As Turnitin does not accept certain file types (for example, Mac’s word processing program), please use only the Microsoft Word or PDF file formats for uploading your paper on Wattle.

·        You are required to use the Chicago Style of referencing that employs either in-text or footnote citations (of the author and year, page if direct quotation). You then type the complete citation in a bibliography at the end of your document. Also, use footnotes (but not endnotes) for any brief explanations needed which are not integral to your argument.

o  Details on the ANU website: https://academicskills.anu.edu.au/resources/handouts/referencing-style-guides

·        Your word count excludes your bibliography and tables/figures.

·        I prefer you use 12 point Times New Roman, double-spacing, and standard one-inch (2.54 cm) margins. I prefer you do not use a coversheet, as this looks like plagiarism on Turnitin!

·        Please put your University ID number and course title in the Header of your paper. Please write a word count at the end of the essay (before the bibliography).

·        Please put page numbers in the Footer of your paper.

 

Some advice

 

·        Do not cite any online sources (for example, Wikipedia), except for major news sources (such as Al Jazeera English, BBC News, Reuters, and The New York Times) and credible nongovernmental, intergovernmental, or governmental reports.

·        Articles and books should be your main references. It is perfectly legitimate to use academic articles downloaded from e-journal databases like JSTOR or HeinOnline.

·        Do not include direct quotations unless absolutely necessary; write in your own words. Abuse of direct quotations will be strongly penalised.

 

Grading criteria: Your paper will be graded based on the following criteria:

(1) your mastery of the course materials, particularly key IR theories and concepts

(2) the quality of the argument including both your literature review and theory development;

(3) the overall quality of writing, including structure, spelling and grammar; and

(4) the quality and appropriateness of the research, including proper attribution and referencing. 

Assessment Task 4

Research Proposal Presentation

Due date: 30 May, 2:00-4:00 pm. Value: 10%

Details of task: You must do an in-class oral presentation on your research project on 30 May during the class time. You prepare maximum ten minutes of remarks to summarise your research project for your convener and fellow students. Following Jeffry Frieden’s Research Proposal Template (assigned for Week 1 and available on Wattle), your research proposal presentation must include (1) a section on methodology and (2) a section on implications, in addition to all the other elements of your research project that you have developed in the Research Question Proposal and the Theoretical Argument Paper assessments. Research projects will be presented in the alphabetical order of student surname. You must use PowerPoint slides to make your presentation effective, and upload your PowerPoint slides by 2:00 pm, 30 May via Wattle Turnitin.

 

Note that you must attend the entire presentation session, and that no make-up work will be granted for missing this presentation session.

 

Grading criteria: All aspects of your presentation will be graded, such as the structure, clarity, effectiveness, and time management of your oral presentation and the quality of PowerPoint slides.

Academic Integrity

Academic integrity is a core part of our culture as a community of scholars. At its heart, academic integrity is about behaving ethically. This means that all members of the community commit to honest and responsible scholarly practice and to upholding these values with respect and fairness. The Australian National University commits to embedding the values of academic integrity in our teaching and learning. We ensure that all members of our community understand how to engage in academic work in ways that are consistent with, and actively support academic integrity. The ANU expects staff and students to uphold high standards of academic integrity and act ethically and honestly, to ensure the quality and value of the qualification that you will graduate with. The University has policies and procedures in place to promote academic integrity and manage academic misconduct. Visit the following Academic honesty & plagiarism website for more information about academic integrity and what the ANU considers academic misconduct. The ANU offers a number of services to assist students with their assignments, examinations, and other learning activities. The Academic Skills and Learning Centre offers a number of workshops and seminars that you may find useful for your studies.

Online Submission

You will be required to electronically sign a declaration as part of the submission of your assignment. Please keep a copy of the assignment for your records. Unless an exemption has been approved by the Associate Dean (Education) submission must be through Turnitin.

Hardcopy Submission

For some forms of assessment (hand written assignments, art works, laboratory notes, etc.) hard copy submission is appropriate when approved by the Associate Dean (Education). Hard copy submissions must utilise the Assignment Cover Sheet. Please keep a copy of tasks completed for your records.

Late Submission

Individual assessment tasks may or may not allow for late submission. Policy regarding late submission is detailed below:

• Late submission not permitted. If submission of assessment tasks without an extension after the due date is not permitted, a mark of 0 will be awarded.
• Late submission permitted. Late submission of assessment tasks without an extension are penalised at the rate of 5% of the possible marks available per working day or part thereof. Late submission of assessment tasks is not accepted after 10 working days after the due date, or on or after the date specified in the course outline for the return of the assessment item. Late submission is not accepted for take-home examinations.

Referencing Requirements

Accepted academic practice for referencing sources that you use in presentations can be found via the links on the Wattle site, under the file named “ANU and College Policies, Program Information, Student Support Services and Assessment”. Alternatively, you can seek help through the Students Learning Development website.

Returning Assignments

Assignments will be returned through the course Wattle site.

Extensions and Penalties

Extensions and late submission of assessment pieces are covered by the Student Assessment (Coursework) Policy and Procedure. The Course Convener may grant extensions for assessment pieces that are not examinations or take-home examinations. If you need an extension, you must request an extension in writing on or before the due date. If you have documented and appropriate medical evidence that demonstrates you were not able to request an extension on or before the due date, you may be able to request it after the due date.

Resubmission of Assignments

Students may resubmit their assignments on Turnitin once before the due date if they are not happy with their text-matching report. Turnitin allows only one resubmission per 24 hours. There are no other conditions under which assignments may be resubmitted.

Privacy Notice

The ANU has made a number of third party, online, databases available for students to use. Use of each online database is conditional on student end users first agreeing to the database licensor’s terms of service and/or privacy policy. Students should read these carefully. In some cases student end users will be required to register an account with the database licensor and submit personal information, including their: first name; last name; ANU email address; and other information.
In cases where student end users are asked to submit ‘content’ to a database, such as an assignment or short answers, the database licensor may only use the student’s ‘content’ in accordance with the terms of service – including any (copyright) licence the student grants to the database licensor. Any personal information or content a student submits may be stored by the licensor, potentially offshore, and will be used to process the database service in accordance with the licensors terms of service and/or privacy policy.
If any student chooses not to agree to the database licensor’s terms of service or privacy policy, the student will not be able to access and use the database. In these circumstances students should contact their lecturer to enquire about alternative arrangements that are available.

Distribution of grades policy

Academic Quality Assurance Committee monitors the performance of students, including attrition, further study and employment rates and grade distribution, and College reports on quality assurance processes for assessment activities, including alignment with national and international disciplinary and interdisciplinary standards, as well as qualification type learning outcomes.

Since first semester 1994, ANU uses a grading scale for all courses. This grading scale is used by all academic areas of the University.

Support for students

The University offers students support through several different services. You may contact the services listed below directly or seek advice from your Course Convener, Student Administrators, or your College and Course representatives (if applicable).

• ANU Health, safety & wellbeing for medical services, counselling, mental health and spiritual support
• ANU Diversity and inclusion for students with a disability or ongoing or chronic illness
• ANU Dean of Students for confidential, impartial advice and help to resolve problems between students and the academic or administrative areas of the University
• ANU Academic Skills and Learning Centre supports you make your own decisions about how you learn and manage your workload.
• ANU Counselling Centre promotes, supports and enhances mental health and wellbeing within the University student community.
• ANUSA supports and represents undergraduate and ANU College students
• PARSA supports and represents postgraduate and research students