This course deals with the practicalities of working in development.

It will critically examine the key institutional actors that implement development projects: NGOs, bilateral, and multilateral donors.

Within this broader institutional environment the course will critically examine the institutional processes and priorities, the role of advocacy, the ethics of development practice, how development workers operate in the field, and how development projects are conceived and managed.

Learning Outcomes

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

1. understand the range of organisations involved in development work and the issues they face in delivering strong development outcomes;
2. critically appraise such organisations in terms of their effectiveness and identify which development institution is most relevant in a particular context; and
3. appraise a development project or policy in terms of the likely political and institutional constraints.

Research-Led Teaching

The distinctive research led features of the course are the topics on NGOs, Philanthropic Foundations, and China as a Donors are all based on Dr Kilbys research and relevant chapters from his books will be used. In addition he chairs a Delegated Human Research Ethics Committee which gives him unique insights into the ethics of development. He has written extensively on gender and development and has received research grants for this work

Field Trips

None

Additional Course Costs

None

Required Resources

Internet access

Recommended Resources

This course will use the online learning management system—WATTLE—to provide resources in a digital form. If there are technical issues please advise Patrick Kilby immediately. You can log on to WATTLE using your ANU student number (uXXXXXXX) and ANU (ISIS) password: for the course and program details are all on the WATTLE site. There is also a MAAPD Program WATTLE Page which is a useful guide to the broader University Resources available.

There is a direct link to each of the required readings via the Library, and for each topic there is also a link to a sub-directory of Supplementary readings, which may also be of interest for that particular topic. The list of supplementary readings for each week is often quite long, and so it is not expected that you read them all, but rather have a look at the abstract or first paragraph of each and if it interests you then keep reading. These readings are intended to give you an idea of the breadth of ideas on a particular topic so you can extend your knowledge beyond what is discussed in class and is expected of the course. The supplementary list for each week is regularly updated. Note that the required and supplementary readings are accessed through the ANU Library, and as such are protected by copyright, and so are for the use of ANU students and staff only.

A suggested book for the course is on NGOs and development issues is Kilby, P. (2011) NGOs in India: The Challenges of Women’s Empowerment and accountability, Routledge, London; which available free online or can be purchased as paperback.

Staff Feedback

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

• written comments on Turnitin submissions
• verbal comments if requested
• feedback to the whole class

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

Overlength assignments will be penalised 10% of the final grade for more than 10% overlength. For example for 3,000 word essay an essay greater than 3,300 words will be penalised 10%. This excludes the reference lists or bibliography, but it does include in text citations (e.g. Smith 2009, p.21) and footnotes. 

The referencing style is in-text referencing.

Class Schedule

Week/Session	Summary of Activities	Assessment
1	Introduction (Theories of aid)	Tutorial
2	NGOs	Tutorial
3	Philanthropic Foundations	Tutorial
4	Multilateral Donors	Tutorial Forum 1
5	Bilateral Donors	Tutorial Forum 1
6	South-South - Cooperation (China, India, Brazil etc.)	Tutorial
7	Case Study - China	Tutorial
8	Delivering aid	Tutorial Forum 2
9	Humanitarianism	Tutorial Forum 2
10	Gender and Development	Tutorial
11	Ethics and Development	Tutorial
12	Advocacy and course wrap up	Tutorial

Tutorial Registration

These can be online using Zoom, or on campus and times will be determined based on time zone (for off campus students) and numbers

Assessment Summary

Assessment task	Value	Due Date	Return of assessment	Learning Outcomes
Tutorials: Either face-to-face on campus; or using Zoom on the internet	10 %	*	21/06/2022	1, 2, 3
Critical Review	25 %	18/04/2022	30/04/2021	1, 2
Project Critique	45 %	06/06/2022	20/06/2022	3
Online Forum 1	10 %	21/03/2022	04/04/2022	3
Online Forum 2	10 %	16/05/2021	30/05/2019	1, 2

* 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 Academic Integrity . 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.

Assessment Task 1

Tutorials: Either face-to-face on campus; or using Zoom on the internet

Participation in Tutorials (10%) is expected and they will be scheduled to suit most needs and time zones either on campus or online using Zoom. You will be expected to the discussion in a tutorial and also make a three minute presentation on your major assignment in the last tutorial.

Assessment Task 2

Critical Review

Purpose of assignment: To demonstrate the student’s capacity to engage with the literature of development practice and relevant institutions in terms of comprehension, analysis, engagement with authors’ arguments and critical assessment, and to communicate clearly in writing in an academic format.

Word limit: 2000 words

Instructions: Students must write a critical review (2000 words) of three readings related to one of these five earlier topics from the earlier part of the course.

1. NGOs
2. Philanthropic Fo0undation
3. Multilateral Donors
4. Western Bilateral donors
5. South-South Cooperation

At least one reading should be taken from the required readings for the relevant week, and up to two readings taken from the supplementary readings. 

A suggested approach to the essay might be:

• Introduce essay, the three papers and identify 3-4 common issues they are addressing;
• Briefly summarise the three papers particularly with respect to the 3-4 common issues identified
• Note the common and different points of view on these issues
• Analyse the papers’ arguments on these issues in terms of the strengths and weaknesses of the arguments.
• From your own point of view make an assessment of how convincing the arguments from the papers are, in how well they address the identified issues

Marking criteria: You will be assessed on the basis of your demonstrated understanding of the content, the quality of your critical analysis of the readings, your ability to structure your review and communicate in a formal academic writing style, and your ability to refer to academic and other sources appropriately and using an appropriate referencing style. You should follow standard guidelines for academic writing and in text referencing. 

Rubric

CRITERIA	EXCELLENT (80%+)	VERY GOOD (70-79%)	GOOD (60-69%)	POOR (50-59%)
Content (key issues, main points)	Clearly and concisely identifies and summarises all the key issues common to the three papers; clearly establishes their relevance to the critical review; follows through on all issues	Identifies and summarises all the key issues common to the three papers; establishes their relevance to the critical review to some extent; follows through on most of the issues.	Identifies and summarises some of the key issues common to the three papers; establishes their relevance to the critical review to a limited extent; follows through on some of the issues. Tends to treat the issues for each of the three papers separately and does not show the common linkages.	Identifies and summarises some of the key issues from only one or two of the papers and/or not common to the three papers; does not establish their relevance to the critical review; does not follow through systematically on the issues. Inadequate integration (e.g. reviews the three papers separately, resulting in three mini- essays
Critical analysis	High level of critical analysis; writer able to engage clearly with all the issues and analyse/ critique them very thoughtfully. Innovative insights in analysis are rewarded with grades of 85%+.	Good level of critical analysis; writer able to engage with most issues and analyse/critique them thoughtfully.	Some critical analysis; writer able to engage with at least some of the issues and analyse/critique them	Limited or no critical analysis; writer unable to engage with issues and analyse/critique them.
Structure (introduction, key issues, conclusion)	Very well structured; clear introduction identifies key issues and arguments; key arguments clearly highlighted through subheadings; strong conclusion pulls together key arguments and reiterates their importance/	Well structured; clear introduction identifies key issues and arguments; key arguments highlighted through use of subheadings; conclusion pulls together key arguments.	Some structure; introduction identifies papers clearly but weaker on identifying key issues and arguments; key arguments not well delineated; conclusion is brief and serves only to end the essay. Tends to treat the three papers separately.	Poor structure; very weak or no introduction; key arguments not well delineated; very weak or no conclusion. Reviews the three papers separately, resulting in three mini- essays).
Logic and clarity (flow, one point leading to the next)	Very logical flow, each point clearly leading onto the next, well ‘signposted’ throughout. Sentences very clearly written using plain English. Very good paragraph structure, with paragraphs clearly covering different points but very well connected to preceding and succeeding paragraphs	Logical flow, most points clearly leading onto the next, mostly well ‘signposted’. Sentences clearly written using plain English. Good paragraph structure, with paragraphs mostly well connected to preceding and succeeding paragraphs	Mostly good flow, but some rambling. Limited ‘signposting’. Lack of clarity in some sentences, indirect and/or convoluted language. Weak paragraph structure, with paragraphs of different lengths and poor topic focus.	Poor flow, significant rambling. Limited or no ‘signposting’. Lack of clarity in some or many sentences. Indirect and/or convoluted language. Weak paragraph structure, with paragraphs of different lengths and poor topic focus.

Assessment Task 3

Project Critique

Purpose of assignment: To facilitate the student’s understanding of both the importance of ‘development project’ documentation in development practice and its limitations in articulating the range of institutional and political issues faced by development practitioners. 

Word limit: 3000 words

Instructions: write a critical response to the existing development Project Designs provided (taken from World Bank, bilateral donor or NGO sources) with respect to the institutional and political issues likely to emerge for both donor and recipient in its implementation.

Marking criteria: You will be assessed on the basis of your demonstrated understanding of the content, the quality of your critical analysis of the readings, your ability to structure your review and communicate in a formal academic writing style, and your ability to refer to academic and other sources appropriately and using an appropriate referencing style. You should follow standard guidelines for academic writing and in text referencing. 

Rubric

CRITERIA	EXCELLENT (80%)	VERY GOOD (70-79%)	GOOD (60-69%)	POOR (50-59%)
Content (key issues, main points)	Clearly and concisely identifies and summarises all key political and institutional issues, and establishes their relevance to the success or otherwise of the project. These key issues are then followed through	Clearly and concisely identifies and summarises most of the key political and institutional issues, and more or less establishes their relevance to the success or otherwise of the project. These key issues are then followed through.	Identifies and summarises some of the key political and institutional issues, and more or less establishes their relevance to the success or otherwise of the project. At least some of these issues are then followed through.	Identifies and summarises some of the political and institutional issues, but does not address their relevance to the success or otherwise of the project. Few/none of the issues are followed through in a coherent manner.
Critical analysis	High level of critical analysis; writer able to engage clearly with all the issues and analyse/ critique them very thoughtfully. Innovative insights in analysis are rewarded with grades of 85%+.	Good level of critical analysis; writer able to engage with most issues and analyse/critique them thoughtfully.	Some critical analysis; writer able to engage with at least some of the issues and analyse/critique them.	Limited or no critical analysis; writer unable to engage with issues and analyse/critique them.
Structure (introduction, key issues, conclusion)	Very well structured; clear introduction identifies key issues and arguments; key arguments clearly highlighted through sub-headings; strong conclusion pulls together key arguments and reiterates their importance.	Well structured; clear introduction identifies key issues and arguments; key arguments highlighted through use of sub-headings; conclusion pulls together key arguments.	Some structure; introduction identifies papers clearly but weaker on identifying key issues and arguments; key arguments not well delineated; conclusion is brief and serves only to end the essay. Tends to treat the the three papers separately.	Poor structure; very weak or no introduction; key arguments not well delineated; very weak or no conclusion. Reviews the three papers separately, resulting in three mini- essays).
Logic and clarity (flow, one point leading to the next)	Very logical flow, each point clearly leading onto the next, well ‘signposted’ throughout. Sentences very clearly written using plain English. Very good paragraph structure, with paragraphs clearly covering different points but very well connected to preceding and succeeding paragraphs	Logical flow, most points clearly leading onto the next, mostly well ‘signposted’. Sentences clearly written using plain English. Good paragraph structure, with paragraphs mostly well connected to preceding and succeeding paragraphs.	Mostly good flow, but some rambling. Limited ‘signposting’. Lack of clarity in some sentences, indirect and/or convoluted language. Weak paragraph structure, with paragraphs of different lengths and poor topic focus.	Poor flow, significant rambling. Limited or no ‘signposting’. Lack of clarity in some or many sentences. Indirect and/or convoluted language. Weak paragraph structure, with paragraphs of different lengths and poor topic focus.

Assessment Task 4

Online Forum 1

Purpose of assignment: To demonstrate the student’s ongoing critical engagement with the key issues discussed in the course.

Forum Dates: Weeks 3 & 4,

Word limit: Postings should be about 150-200 words.

Instructions: You will be allocated to a small groups of 6-8 for this exercise. You and the other students in your group will interact with one another through two online workshops hosted on the WATTLE site each over two weeks. You will be expected to respond and contribute to the discussion. The Course Convenor will start the process off. You will be asked to respond to a discussion starter (150-200 words), and identify some key issues and pose two or three key questions for the rest of your group to consider. You will subsequently respond to, and making connections between, the discussion starter and the contributions of other members of the group. There will be a follow up question mid-way through the forum. 

Protocol for contributing to the online discussion & Language: Always use appropriate online etiquette (polite and correct language and spelling etc.) The posting should be about 150-200 words. Being concise, even when you have much to say is an important skill, so longer postings will be penalised.

Content: Responses should be well-considered and supported with ideas from the lectures, readings, other courses, your own experiences or prior knowledge. Always show how your response relates back to the previous discussion.

N.B. Keep to the point of the original discussion and the posed questions as much as possible (don't let the discussion stray). If you want to follow-up on a tangential idea or point please use the general class discussion area where you can ask question and make general observations.

Academic honesty: If you are paraphrasing or quoting from readings/articles/reports in your postings, please include an adequate acknowledgement (does not need to be a full citation).

Marking criteria: When contributing to your group’s online discussion, you will be assessed on the basis of the number of responses you make (i.e. at least two, but preferably more, significant responses to each discussion, and the follow-up questions by the convenor) and the quality of those responses, that is your understanding of the topic and your ability to engage with the discussion questions and other responses.

Rubric

CRITERIA	EXCELLENT (80%+)	VERY GOOD (70-70%)	GOOD (60-69%)	POOR (50-59%)	INADEQUATE
Number of contributions	Contribution in the two forums and Multiple postings of five or more in each.	Contribution in the two forums and at least three posting in each.	Contribution in the two forums and two postings in each.	Contribution of one posting in each forums only.	1 or no postings.
Response to discussion questions and demonstrated knowledge and understanding	Responds directly to discussion questions and colleagues' comments in a very thoughtful and insightful manner and refers appropriately to knowledge form lectures, readings and experience/opinions	Responds directly to discussion questions, and colleagues' comments, refers appropriately to knowledge from lectures, readings or experience.	Responds indirectly to discussion questions and colleagues' comments, and refers to knowledge from lectures, readings or experience.	Responds but does not refer to discussion questions or colleagues' comments and does not refer to any course content.	Does not refer to discussion questions and colleagues' comments, and does not refer to any course content.
Style of discussion starter	Good word length, very well-written, posted on time.	Good word length, well-written, posted on time or one day late.	Some problems with word length, writing style or timing.	Major problems with word length, writing style of timing.	Too short or too long and/or poorly written and/or more than one day late OR very poorly written.
Demonstration of knowledge and understanding of topic	Displays a high level of understanding of knowledge of topic from lectures, readings and experience/opinions.	Displays a good understanding of knowledge from lectures, readings and experience/opinions.	Refers appropriately to knowledge from lectures or readings or experience/opinions.	Refers primarily to unfounded opinion.	Does not refer to knowledge from any course content.

Assessment Task 5

Online Forum 2

Purpose of assignment: To demonstrate the student’s ongoing critical engagement with the key issues discussed in the course.

Forum Dates: Weeks 8 & 9

Word limit: Postings should be about 150-200 words.

Instructions: You will be allocated to a small groups of 6-8 for this exercise. You and the other students in your group will interact with one another through two online workshops hosted on the WATTLE site each over two weeks. You will be expected to respond and contribute to the discussion. The Course Convenor will start the process off. You will be asked to respond to a discussion starter (150-200 words), and identify some key issues and pose two or three key questions for the rest of your group to consider. You will subsequently respond to, and making connections between, the discussion starter and the contributions of other members of the group. There will be a follow up question mid-way through the forum. 

Protocol for contributing to the online discussion & Language: Always use appropriate online etiquette (polite and correct language and spelling etc.) The posting should be about 150-200 words. Being concise, even when you have much to say is an important skill, so longer postings will be penalised.

Content: Responses should be well-considered and supported with ideas from the lectures, readings, other courses, your own experiences or prior knowledge. Always show how your response relates back to the previous discussion.

N.B. Keep to the point of the original discussion and the posed questions as much as possible (don't let the discussion stray). If you want to follow-up on a tangential idea or point please use the general class discussion area where you can ask question and make general observations.

Academic honesty: If you are paraphrasing or quoting from readings/articles/reports in your postings, please include an adequate acknowledgement (does not need to be a full citation).

Marking criteria: When contributing to your group’s online discussion, you will be assessed on the basis of the number of responses you make (i.e. at least two, but preferably more, significant responses to each discussion, and the follow-up questions by the convenor) and the quality of those responses, that is your understanding of the topic and your ability to engage with the discussion questions and other responses.

Academic Integrity

Academic integrity is a core part of the ANU culture as a community of scholars. At its heart, academic integrity is about behaving ethically, committing to honest and responsible scholarly practice and upholding these values with respect and fairness.

The ANU commits to assisting all members of our community to 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 be familiar with the academic integrity principle and Academic Misconduct Rule, 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 Academic Misconduct Rule is in place to promote academic integrity and manage academic misconduct. Very minor breaches of the academic integrity principle may result in a reduction of marks of up to 10% of the total marks available for the assessment. The ANU offers a number of online and in person services to assist students with their assignments, examinations, and other learning activities. Visit the Academic Skills website for more information about academic integrity, your responsibilities and for assistance with your assignments, writing skills and study.

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

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

The grade and comments on your assignments will be available through Turnitin. If you open your assignment and click grademark on the top left the comments can be seen both within the text of the assignment and in a comments box on the bottom right.

Extensions and Penalties

Extensions and late submission of assessment pieces are covered by the Student Assessment (Coursework) Policy and Procedure. Extensions may be granted 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

Student cannot resubmit their assignment. The first submission on Turnitin is the final submission.

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