TIR Theory of International Relations

LYX104B10
BA IRIO; 2nd year

Module Handbook 2018-2019

(Standard Course Guide and Additional Information)

Dr C. Humrich and Dr Andreas Aagaard-Nøhr, TIR co-ordinators

 1. Standard Course Guide

0. Exam and resit dates Partial exams take place Saturday in syllabus weeks 8
and Thursday in syllabus week 16. A full resit takes
place Monday in syllabus week 19. See the exam
schedule, which will be made available at the Faculty of
Arts website (and updated regularly). See also items 9,
11, 12, and 14, below.

1. Title Theory of International Relations

Course unit code LYX104B10
Degree programme International Relations and International Organization
Study phase Bachelor, second year, semester 1, bloc 1+2
Course unit type Major
Lecturers Dr M.R. (Michel) Doortmont (group 3)
Dr C. (Christoph) Humrich (co-ordinator)
Dr ir M.R. (Menno) Kamminga (groups 6,7)
Dr D.U. (David) Shim
Dr A. (Andreas) Aagaard-Nøhr (co-ordinator, groups
10,11)
Dr A. (Annabelle) de Heus (groups 8,9)
Dr J. (John) Hogan (groups 1,5)
Dr D. (Davide) Schmid (groups 2,4)

2. Number of ECTS credit Total: 10 ECTS credits

points

3. Entry requirements Admission to the second year

4. Description of content The course unit Theory of International Relations

offers an introduction to the most important schools
and approaches within International Relations (IR)
theory, including (neo)Realism, (neo)Liberalism,
Marxism, Constructivism, the English School,
normative IR theorizing, Critical Theory,
Poststructuralism, Postcolonialism, and Feminism.
Reading the entire textbook at least once before the
start of the course unit (see items 5 (1, 2, and 3) and 12,
below) is strongly recommended. Having a good
overview will help students to deal with the approaches
that succeed each other rapidly in the syllabus weeks.

5. Literature Compulsory literature:

1) Dunne, Tim, Milja Kurki, and Steve Smith (eds.).
2016. International Relations Theories: Discipline and
Diversity, fourth edition, Oxford: Oxford University
Press - with exception of Chs. 2, 4, 8 and 14-15;
2) Reus-Smit, Christian and Duncan Snidal (eds.).
2008. The Oxford Handbook of International
Relations, Oxford: Oxford University Press, Ch. 19 by
Richard Shapcott (to be provided for free via the
Student Portal);
3) Selected readings (articles downloadable from the

1
 university library internet site, free for RUG students;
in order of appearance in the seminars):
a) Waltz, Kenneth N. 1988. The Origins of War in
Neorealist Theory. Journal of Interdisciplinary
History 18(4): 615-628;
b) Keohane, Robert O. 1998. International Institutions:
Can Interdependence Work?, Foreign Affairs 110, 82-
96
c) Wendt, Alexander. 1992. Anarchy Is What States
Make of It: The Social Construction of Power Politics.
International Organization 46(2): 391-425;
d) Buzan, Barry. 1993. From International System to
International Society: Structural Realism and Regime
Theory Meet the English school, International
Organization 47(3): 327-352;
e) Walzer, Michael. 1980. The Moral Standing of
States: A Response to Four Critics. Philosophy and
Public Affairs 9(3): 209-229;
f) Teschke, Benno. 1998. Geopolitical Relations in the
European Middle Ages: History and Theory,
International Organization 52(2): 325-358;
g) Linklater, Andrew. 1996. Citizenship and
Sovereignty in the Post-Westphalian State. European
Journal of International Relations 2(1): 77-103;
h) Sjoberg, Laura. 2012. Gender, Structure, and War:
What Waltz Couldn’t See. International Theory 4(1): 1-
38;
i) Ashley, Richard K. 1988. Untying the Sovereign
State: A Double Reading of the Anarchy Problematique,
Millennium 17(2): 227-262;
j) Grovogui, Siba N. 2002: Regimes of Sovereignty:
International Morality and the African Condition, in:
European Journal of International Relations 8(3):
315-338;
k) Reus-Smit, Christian. 2012. International Relations,
Irrelevant? Don’t Blame Theory. Millennium 40(3):
525-540.

6. Competences to be The course unit focuses on the development of the

developed following competences at an intermediate level:
1) knowledge and understanding of the most important
theoretical approaches in the analysis of international
relations;
2) the ability to apply generic academic skills, such as
logical reasoning and the ability to arrange
unstructured problems in a systematic way when
dealing with theory;
3) the ability to apply theoretical knowledge and
understanding to critically and systematically evaluate
a wide array of beliefs, ideas and data, and to identify
and analyse complex theoretical issues;
4) understanding of the role of theory in IR disciplinary
discourse and research practice;
5) the ability to process effectively and efficiently large
amounts of information and knowledge.

2
7. Learning objectives of the The student will learn to:
course unit 1) acquire and organize knowledge and understanding
at an intermediate level of key theoretical approaches
in the analysis of international relations;
2) apply logical reasoning and the capacity to
theoretically organize unstructured problems;
3) apply theoretical knowledge and understanding to
critically and systematically analyse and evaluate
various topics of IR;
4) value the role of theory in IR discourse, research,
and for practice;
5) process effectively and efficiently large amounts of
conceptual and theoretical textual material on
international relations.

8. Learning and teaching The course unit makes use of (plenary) lectures, in
strategies or methods which theories are presented in a textbook-like
manner, and (small-group) seminars, in which selected
readings are discussed and paper instruction (research
and writing of an argumentative theoretical paper) is
provided. Seminar attendance is mandatory; see
Teaching and Exam Regulations 2018-2019 Bachelor
IRIO, Part A, Article 3.7.
Students should always come prepared to the lectures
and seminars. There is usually one compulsory reading
text per contact event!
Together with the exam and paper writing schedule,
this format helps and incentivizes students to acquire:
1) theoretical knowledge and understanding about IR;
2) the ability to use academic skills; 3) the ability to
apply theory critically; 4) comprehension of the role of
theory in IR discourse and research; and 5) textual
management (see items 4, 6 and 7, above).

9. Assessment requirements Please note: Final grading is possible (only) if the

requirement of seminar attendance (see item 8, above)
and the deadline(s) for paper submission (see this
item, below) are met.

The assessment requirements are:

1) exam - in order to test competences and learning
objectives 1, 4, and 5 (see items 6 and 7, above):
(a) 2 digital multiple choice (mc) exams, each
consisting of 18 questions, each about half of the
compulsory literature (textbook chapters and primary
texts) AND about the lectures, syllabus weeks 1-7 and
weeks 11-16 respectively (see items 5, above, and 12,
below); weeks 3 and 6;
(b) full re-sit in week 19, consisting of 36 questions:
only possible (and mandatory for passing) if the
results for the two partial mc exams (taken together) do
not add up to an exam grade of 5,5 or higher.
2) paper - in order to test competences and learning
objectives 2, 3, and 4 (see items 6 and 7, above):

3
 (a) 1 paper of at least 2800 and at most 3000 words
(all included, so also the notes and bibliography, with
NO +/- 10% rule), which contains either a comparative
analysis of an aspect of two theories or a thorough
explication and critical discussion of a particular aspect
or problem of one theory; to be submitted on Thursday
in week 20 (17 January) before 10.00 hours;
(b) the paper must be both handed in as a hard copy in
the group lecturer’s mailbox and uploaded on the
Student Portal course page through Ephorus, the
automatic plagiarism scanner on the Student Portal.
Please note: Assignments containing plagiarism
cannot be graded, and the cases will be passed on to
the Board of Examiners of the department.
Confirmed plagiarism usually leads to exclusion from
the course for one year; see Teaching and Exam
Regulations 2018-2019 Bachelor IRIO, Part A, Article
7.18. It is, then, essential that students make sure the
texts they submit are free from plagiarism. This means
especially that you need to cite the relevant source as
precisely as possible whenever you: quote the exact
words of a source (always in quotation marks!);
paraphrase the words of a source (in your own words);
or use or refer to any ideas that are not your own. If
you have any doubts about plagiarism and techniques
for quoting, paraphrasing, or reference style, please
check any book on academic writing, like for example:
Kate L. Turabian. 2010. Student’s Guide to Writing
College Papers, fourth edition, Chicago: Chicago
University Press.

10. Assessment procedure In order to pass the course unit, (i) the (final) exam
grade must be a 5,5 at least, and (ii) the (final) paper
grade must be a 5,5 at least.

The final TIR grade, to be established at the end of

week 11, thus is composed as follows:
1) The (total) exam counts for 50% of the final grade;
2) The paper counts for 50% of the final grade.

Grading of mc exam and re-sit will occur as soon as

possible after the completed exam and will be based on
the (total) exam scores. Students can see their own
scores on their computer screens immediately after
each completed digital exam.
Grading of the paper will happen in two stages:
1) On Tuesday evening in week 21 (22 January),
students receive either a ‘minor’ or a ‘major’ fail
(meaning, respectively, slightly or considerably lower
than 5,5) or a pass (meaning 5,5 or higher);
2) In week 22, after the repair opportunity for those
students who received a “fail” - for which the
submission deadline is Thursday (31 January) 10.00
hours – students receive their definitive paper grade.
Please note: In case of using the paper repair
opportunity, the maximum paper grade is a 5,5.

4
11. Position of the course unit
in the degree programme
12. Weekly programme
The course unit builds on the first-year course units
International Politics and IRIO Skills (1+2). Students
are assumed to have mastered the IRIO skills for
researching and writing an academic paper; the course
unit will not (explicitly) teach these again but build on
them. Completing the course unit successfully is crucial
for being able to follow fruitfully the subsequent
courses Methodology and Research Practice (second
year) and Core Module (third year, for which the TIR
course unit is an entry requirement).
The course unit aims to contribute to the following
goals mentioned in Teaching and Exam Regulations
2018-2019 Bachelor IRIO, Appendix 1: e1, e2, e5, e6a,
e6b, e7, e8, e9, e10, e14, e16, and e17.
Please note: The multiple choice exams are integrated
within the course and do not require a separate exam
enrolment. All students enrolled in the seminars are
enrolled in the exams automatically.
Structure:
Every lecture covers one main textbook chapter. The
lecture is followed by seminars on the same topic.
First bloc:
Syllabus weeks 1, 2, 4, 6
- Fridays: 9-11 hours, lecture, Martiniplaza,
Springerzaal
Syllabus weeks 3 and 5
- Tuesdays: 20-22 hours, lecture, Geertzemazaal,
Academy building.
Syllabus weeks 2-7
- seminars following the lecture of the previous week.
Syllabus week 7
- submit an abstract about your paper idea (250 words)
to your lecturer
Exam Period:
Syllabus week 8
- Saturday: 9-11 hours, MC-exam, Aletta-Jacobshal,
room 2, Zernike Complex (partial exam covering
material first bloc)
- group office hours discussing paper abstracts (to be
scheduled by each lecturer individually)
Second bloc:
Syllabus weeks 11-16
- Mondays: 19-21 hours, lecture, Offerhauszaal,
Academy-building, seminars following the lecture
5
Syllabus week 16
- Thursday: MC-exam, 18.30-20.30, Aletta Jacobshal,
room 2, Zernike Complex (partial exam covering
material second bloc)
- to be scheduled by each lecturer individually:
individual office hours discussing paper writing

Syllabus week 19
- Monday: MC-re-exam, 18.30-21.30, Aletta
Jacobshal, room 3, Zernike Complex (full resit covering
material of blocs 1+2).

Syllabus week 20
- Thursday: paper submission (see item 9, above).

Syllabus week 21
- to be scheduled by each lecturer individually: office
hours for paper repairs

Syllabus week 22
- Thursday: paper re-submission (see item 9, above)

Content:
Syllabus week 1+2: introduction to IR theory
- lecture 1 (Humrich) and seminar 1 (all lecturers);
literature: Dunne et al., Introduction and Ch.1 + terms
in glossary;

Syllabus weeks 2+3: Realism

- lecture 2 (Kamminga) and seminar 2 (all lecturers);
literature: Dunne et al., Ch. 3 + terms in glossary;
Waltz.

Syllabus weeks 3+4: Liberalism

- lecture 3 (Shim) and seminar 3 (all lecturers);
literature: Dunne et al., Ch. 5 + terms in glossary;
Keohane

Syllabus weeks 4+5: Constructivism

lecture 4 (Shim) and seminar 4 (all lecturers);
literature: Dunne et al., Ch. 9 + terms in glossary;
Wendt.

Syllabus weeks 5+6: English School

- lecture 5 (Kamminga) and seminar 5 (all lecturers);
literature: Dunne et al., Ch. 6 + terms in glossary;
Buzan.

Syllabus weeks 6+7: Normative Theory

- lecture 6 (Kamminga) and seminar 6 (all lecturers);
literature: Dunne et al., Ch. 13 + terms in glossary;
Walzer.

6
 Syllabus week 11: Marxism
- lecture 7 (Humrich) and seminar 7 (all lecturers);
literature: Dunne et al., Ch. 7 + terms in glossary;
Teschke.
Syllabus week 12: Critical Theorizing
- lecture 8 (Humrich) and seminar 8 (all lecturers);
literature: Reus-Smit and Snidal, Ch. 19; Linklater.

Syllabus week 13: Feminism

- lecture 9 (Humrich) and seminar 9 (all lecturers);
literature: Dunne et al., Ch. 10 + terms in glossary;
Sjoberg.

Syllabus week 14: Poststructuralism

- lecture 10 (Shim) and seminar 10 (all lecturers);
literature: Dunne et al., Ch. 11 + terms in glossary;
Ashley.

Syllabus week 15: Postcolonialism

- lecture 11 (Shim) and seminar 11 (all lecturers);
literature: Dunne et al., Ch. 12; Grovogui.

Syllabus week 16: Conclusion

- lecture 12 (Kamminga) and seminar 12 (all lecturers);
literature: Dunne et al., Ch. 16 + terms in glossary;
Reus-Smit.

13. Breakdown of workload - 48 hours in class (lectures, seminars) plus exams &
preparation = ca. 2,5 ECTS;
- reading and studying of ca. 520 pages literature (5-6
pages per hour) = ca. 3 ECTS;
- researching (studying ca. 600 pages), and writing
paper = ca. 4,5 ECTS;
Total = 10 ECTS.

7
14. Availability of lecturers Please note: The lecturers are happy to offer
assistance, but you are urged not to ask questions to
which the answer can be found by consulting this
module handbook or the Faculty of Arts exam
schedule.

Dr M.R. (Michel) Doortmont

Email: m.r.doortmont@rug.nl
Phone: 050-3636002
Office: H1312.0531
Office hours: flexible (by appointment via secretariat)

Dr A. L. (Annabelle) de Heus
Email: a.l.de.heus@rug.nl
Phone: 050-3635356
Office: H1311.0117
Office hours: flexible (by e-mail appointment)

Dr J. (John) Hogan
Email: j.hogan@rug.nl
Phone: 050-3636012
Office: H1311.0117
Office hours: flexible (by e-mail appointment)

Dr C. (Christoph) Humrich
Email: c.humrich@rug.nl
Phone: 050-3638137
Office: H1315.0524
Office hours: flexible (by e-mail appointment)

Dr ir M.R. (Menno) Kamminga

Email: m.r.kamminga@rug.nl
Phone: 050-3637367
Office: H1315.0511
Office hours: Fridays 13.30-15.30 (by e-mail appointment)

Dr A. (Andreas) Aagaard-Nøhr
Email: a.a.nohr@rug.nl
Phone: 050-3636377
Office: H1312.0107
Office hours: Mondays 13.00-14.00h (by e-mail appointment)

Dr D. (Davide) Schmid
Email: d.schmid@rig.nl
Phone: 050-3636377
Office: H1312.0107
Office hours: flexible (by e-mail appointment)

Dr D.U. (David) Shim

Email: david.shim@rug.nl
Phone: 050-3637896
Office: H1315.0513
Office hours: flexible (by e-mail appointment)

8
 2. Brief Thematic Weekly LECTURE Overview

Calendar Lecture
Session Topic Texts
Week Date
Introduction to IR theory and its dominant
approach:
Introduction;
1 36 07 Sep Introduction to IR Theory
Chapter 1
2 37 14 Sep Realism Chapter 3
Completing the Mainstream Approaches of IR:
3 38 18 Sep Liberalism Chapter 5
4 39 28 Sep Constructivism Chapter 9
Focusing on norms: understanding and
prescribing
5 40 02 Oct English School Chapter 6
6 41 12 Oct Normative Theory Chapter 13
Critical ways of theorizing:
7 46 12 Nov Marxism Chapter 7
8 39 19 Nov Critical Theorizing Shapcott

9 40 26 Nov Feminism Chapter 10

10 40 03 Dec Poststructuralism Chapter 11
11 41 10 Dec Postcolonialism Chapter 12
12 41 17 Dec Conclusion: IR&Theory Chapter 16

Please note: The lectures will not be recorded. All TIR lecturers agree that
recording is not conducive to the didactical environment we wish to create.

9
 3. Rationale of the module in the BA program’s learning trajectory

In your first year’s propaedeutic phase you learned the way and standards of academic
work and writing (Skills). You know how to acquire relevant and reliable information -
be it from academic or practice sources. You have the competence to reproduce the
information and argument from texts you read, and to work yourself towards acquiring a
sufficient understanding of their content - enabling you to at least ask precise questions
where you are not able to attain understanding yourself. We assume these abilities as
preconditions for the course and thus will not detail them again during the course or as
requirements for the course’s assignments.

Part of the propaedeutic phase was also to introduce you to important characteristics
and prevalent features of past and present international relations as they are conducted
in the real world (IP, HIR, and IO). This module (TIR) introduces you to IR theory as the
theoretical generalization and reflection of these characteristics and features of real
world international relations. TIR will be the prelude to the second phase of your studies,
in which you will engage directly with the academic study of international relations. TIR
provides the first step for becoming able to conduct your own academic research on and
analysis of international relations in the second semester module “Methodologies and
Research Practice” (MRP). Though you will already be introduced to methodological
differences between theoretical approaches, which then will be looked at deeper in MRP,
the aim of TIR is first to transmit knowledge and understanding of the most important
theoretical approaches within IR theory. But this is really just the start. More
importantly we focus on helping you to acquire the competence to deal with theory: to
value the role of theory, use it for organizing knowledge and apply it to acquire
knowledge and understanding, reflect on it and the difference the different theories
make for looking at the world and acting in it.

The module thus follows the spirit of our faculty vision on competence- or student-
centred learning. While we will test your knowledge and understanding of theory in MC
exams, this is only the basis for really dealing and actively engaging with theory (after all
you cannot engage with something you do not know). The module is focused on the
seminars and the paper writing. The reason is that only through discussing the texts in
the seminars you will be able to acquire the competence to deal with theory. You will
have to prove this competence in the TIR paper.

Both lectures and seminars depend on your active preparations and participation. We
assume that you always have read and studied the texts yourself before we meet in the
lectures and seminars - the lectures will not just repeat what is in the texts; the seminars
will not present knowledge to you, but guide your (!) engagement with theory.

We believe we have found a compelling and logical way of organizing this module and
challenging and rewarding texts to study. We are looking forward to trying this out with
you, i.e. coaching you in your learning by ‘doing theory’.

10
 4. Detailed Thematic Weekly Overview

Syllabus Week 1+2/Calendar Week 36+37

Introduction to IR Theory and its Dominant Approach

Introduction to IR Theory
In our first substantial week on IR theory we aim to introduce you to the subject matter
of international theory and the practice of theorizing within the discipline of IR. We will
discuss the textbooks’ introduction and chapter 1. This has three aims: we will have a
look why the authors deem theory essential to the study of IR, we will have a look at the
history of IR in terms of theoretical debates, and we will reflect on different types of
theorizing and how this is connected to different views of IR as a social science. And
concern ourselves with the question why we should do theory at all: Do not all these
theoretical discussions divert our attention away from the practical requirements of
politics beyond the state?

Required Reading:
• Textbook Chapter Introduction+1; Reus-Smit:
Smith, Steve. 2016. Diversity and Disciplinarity in International Relations Theory. In: Dunne, Tim/Kurki,
Milja/Smith, Steve (Eds.): International Relations Theories. Discipline and Diversity, Oxford: OUP: 1-12.
Kurki, Milja/Wight, Colin. 2016. International Relations and Social Science. In: Dunne, Tim/Kurki, Milja/Smith,
Steve (Eds.): International Relations Theories. Discipline and Diversity, Oxford: OUP: 13-33.
Reus-Smit, Christian 2012: International Relations, Irrelevant? Don’t Blame Theory. In: Millennium 40: 3,
525-540.

11
Syllabus Week 2+3/Calendar Week 37-38

Realism
In this week we turn to the long (probably still or again) dominant - some say even: the
founding and formative – theoretical approach in IR: Realism. It comes in two variants:
Classical and Structural (or as mostly critics say: Neo-) Realism. Though classical realists
really deserve closer attention for their work, we limit ourselves to Structural Realism.
The primary text we will discuss is by Kenneth Waltz (the ‘father’ of so-called neo-
realism). It covers central characteristics of the structural variety of realist thinking. Not
only is structural realism usually easier to grasp than the classical variant, because of its
focus on systematic and parsimonious theory-building, it is at the moment also the more
influential variant of the two – at least in academic discourse.

Required Reading:
• Textbook Chapter 3; Waltz:
Mearsheimer, John J. 2016. Structural Realism. In: Dunne, Tim/Kurki, Milja/Smith, Steve (Eds.):
International Relations Theories. Discipline and Diversity, Oxford: OUP: 51-67
Waltz, Kenneth N. 1988. The Origins of War in Neorealist Theory. In: Journal of Interdisciplinary History
18: 4, 615-628.

You will find articles using realism as theoretical approach often but not exclusively in
the following journals:

Survival (ISSN 0039-6338)

Orbis (ISSN 0030-4387)
Foreign Affairs (ISSN 0015-7120)
International Security (ISSN 0162-2889)
International Organization (ISSN 0020-8183)

12
 Completing the current mainstream triangle of theoretical approaches

Syllabus Week 3+4/Calendar Week 38-39

Liberalism
Until the 1990s the theoretical landscape of IR was portrayed as consisting of a triangle:
realism as the dominant approach and liberalism (sometimes called “pluralism”) as more
idealist, and Marxist theory (sometimes called “structuralism”) as more critical
challengers. However, today Constructivism has taken the place of Marxism. In this week
we will turn first to Liberalism, which by now is firmly established as the second
mainstream approach to IR, and then to constructivism. Again we focus on the “Neo-”
variety of Liberalism only, though classical liberalism and the democratic peace research
emerging from it, surely belong to the most exiting theoretical approaches IR has to
offer. But here again the sheer complexity of contemporary academic discussion about
the democratic peace and the vast philosophical pedigree (including German
philosopher Kant with one of the most influential IR-texts ever: “On Perpetual Peace”)
push us to the narrower IR focused middle range theories about international
institutions neo-liberals came up with. We discuss a text by Keohane, one of the most
influential neo-liberal scholars.

NB 1: Do not confuse IR’s Neo-liberalism with the term as used by critics for the
currently influential ideas for political and economic order.

Required Reading:
• Textbook Chapter 5; Keohane
Sterling-Folker, Jennifer. 2016. In: Dunne, Tim/Kurki, Milja/Smith, Steve (Eds.): International Relations
Theories. Discipline and Diversity, Oxford: OUP: 88-106.
Keohane, Robert O. 1998. International Institutions: Can Interdependece Work?, Foreign Policy 110, 82-96.

You will find articles with a liberal theoretical background often but not exclusively in
the following journals:

Journal of Peace Research (ISSN 0022-3433 )

Cooperation&Conflict (ISSN 0010-8367)
International Organization (ISSN 0020-8183)
Journal of Conflict Resolution (ISSN 0022-0027)
International Studies Quarterly (ISSN 0020-8833)

13
Syllabus Week 4+5/Calendar Week 39-40

Constructivism
With Constructivism we now complete the current mainstream triangle of IR
approaches. Constructivism emerged in the 1990s as a principle challenger to rational-
choice based (neo-)realist and (neo-)liberal theorizing. Unlike the approaches discussed
before, Constructivism is the label of a very heterogeneous group, the members of which
do not even necessarily share common roots. Constructivism is thus probably best
characterized as a way of theorizing rather than a theory or theoretical approach of its
own. That means that we need to clarify what the term constructivist is supposed to
mean in the first place. As an example of constructivism we have Wendt’s now famous
sketch of a (certain kind of) constructivist theory of international relations.

NB: Make sure to start reading early this week. Wendt’s text is very long and not very
easy.

Required Reading:
• Textbook Chapter 9; Wendt:
Fierke, Karin M. 2016. Constructivism. In: Dunne, Tim/Kurki, Milja/Smith, Steve (Eds.): International
Relations Theories. Discipline and Diversity, Oxford: OUP, 161-178
Wendt, Alexander. 1992. Anarchy is what States Make of it: The Social Construction of Power Politics. In:
International Organization 46: 2, 391-425.

You will find articles using this theoretical approach often but not exclusively in the
following journals:

International Studies Quarterly (ISSN 0020-8833)

Cooperation and Conflict (ISSN 0010-8367)
European Journal of International Relations (1354-0661)
International Organization (ISSN 0020-8183)
Journal of International Relations and Development (ISSN 1408-6980)

14
 Focusing on Norms: Understanding and Prescribing

Syllabus Week 5+6/Calendar Week 40+41

English School
Though it has come to renewed prominence and significance in the academic discourse
only in recent years, the English School emerged in the middle of the last century. It was
often seen as a European variety of the predominant American Realism, but as we will
try to show, it really makes its own distinctive contribution. Buzan’s text links the
English School back to Neorealism and Neoliberalism. With its focus on the normative
foundations of international relations it is both close to Constructivism, but as we will
see, also Linklater’s Critical Theory makes use of it and normative theory can connect as
well.

Required Reading:
• Textbook Chapter 6; Buzan:
Dunne, Tim. 2013. The English School. In: Dunne, Tim/Kurki, Milja/Smith, Steve (Eds.): International
Relations Theories. Discipline and Diversity, Oxford: OUP: 107-126.
Buzan, Barry. 1993. From International System to International Society: Structural Realism and Regime
Theory Meet the English school, International Organization 47(3): 327-352.

You will find articles using this theoretical approach often but not exclusively in the
following journals:

Millennium (ISSN 0305-8298)

Review of International Studies (ISSN 0260-2105)
International Politics (ISSN 1384-5748)
International Relations (ISSN 0047-1178)
International Affairs (ISSN 0020-5850)

15
Syllabus Week 6+7/Calendar Week 41+42

Normative Theorizing
Normative theorizing is concerned with what is the morally right thing to do or what a
morally right social and political order would look like. Normative theory is only slowly
making its way back to IR. But in recent years many scholars have urged an inclusion of
normative theory and ethics in IR. After all, they argue: we want to be practical – and in
practice, ethics clearly matters. The question “what should we do” is never asked nor
answered in a purely pragmatic way. In the textbook chapter, basic ways of normative
theorizing are introduced, among them the distinction between cosmopolitanism and
communitarianism. In the seminar we discuss a text by communitarian Michael Walzer
in which he answers to some (cosmopolitan) critics of his work, and defends a relatively
strict moral norm of non-intervention.

Required Reading:
• Textbook Chapter 13; Walzer:
Erskine, Tony. 2016. Normative International Relations Theory. In: Dunne, Tim/Kurki, Milja/Smith, Steve
(Eds.): International Relations Theories. Discipline and Diversity, Oxford: OUP: 236-258.
Walzer, Michael. 1980: The Moral Standing of States: A Response to Four Critics. In: Philosophy and Public
Affairs 9: 3, 209-229.

You will find articles using this theoretical approach often but not exclusively in the
following journals:

Journal of Global Ethics (ISSN 1744-9634)

Ethics and International Affairs (ISSN 0892-6794)
Ethics and Global Politics (ISSN 1654-6369)
Military Ethics (ISSN 1502-7589)
Journal of International Political Theory (ISSN 1755-1722)

In this week you will have the opportunity to do a mid-term evaluation.

16
 Critical Theorizing

Syllabus Week 11/Calendar Week 46

Marxism
Once Marxism was seen as the principle challenger to Realism and Liberalism and thus
was part of the traditional triangle. Marxism is a broader social theory and comprised of
a whole family of theoretical approaches and schools. Most of our textbook chapter is
inspired by the 20th century Italian Marxist thinker Antonio Gramsci. By now,
Gramscianism is the most influential strand within Marxist IR analysis. Clarifying the
concepts that inspire critical analysis of societal hegemony and social pathologies we
already get a glimpse of what it means to engage in critical theorizing. However, our
primary text mostly has an explanative goal. Its author, Teschke, subscribes to so-called
political Marxism. A misnomer really, because it is less about being political than about
analyzing and explaining politics with Marxist theory. Teschke challenges common views
about the pre-history and origins of modern international relations as well as the
respective view of anarchy and sovereignty from his Marxist perspective.

NB: Make sure to start reading early this week. Teschke’s text is very long and not very
easy.

Required Reading:
• Textbook Chapter 7; Teschke:
Rupert, Mark. 2016. Marxism. In: Dunne, Tim/Kurki, Milja/Smith, Steve (Eds.): International Relations
Theories. Discipline and Diversity, Oxford: OUP: 127-144
Teschke, Benno. 1998. Geopolitical Relations in the European Middle Ages: History ad Theory,
International Organization, 52(2) 325-358.

You will find articles with a Marxist approach often but not exclusively in the following
journals:

Millennium (ISSN 0305-8298)

Historical Materialism (ISSN 1465-4466)
Rethinking Marxism (ISSN 0893-5696)
Review of International Political Economy (ISSN 0969-2290)
New Left Review (ISSN 0028-6060)

17
Syllabus Week 12/Calendar Week 47

Critical Theorizing
Critical theorizing in the broadest sense usually aims to uncover what goes
fundamentally wrong in modern societies. Mostly scholars refer to all critical theoretical
approaches by using lower case letters (critical theories). The upper case Critical Theory
more specifically refers to the so-called Frankfurt School approach of critical theorizing.
The latter has two basic varieties: one often called “productionist” and relating to a
Marxist style critique of political economy, one often called “communicative”, following
insights from German sociologist and philosopher Jürgen Habermas. As we have
discussed Marxist theory and thus characteristics of the productionist variety already, we
now focus on communicative critical theory. Andrew Linklater, the author of the text for
this seminar session, is the most prominent thinker for this latter variety in academic IR.

Required Reading:
• Shapcott; Linklater:
Shapcott, Richard. 2008. Critical Theory. In: Reus-Smit, Christian/Snidal, Duncan (Eds.): The Oxford
Handbook of International Relations, Oxford: OUP, 327-345 (available via Nestor).
Linklater, Andrew. 1996. Citizenship and Sovereignty in the Post-Westphalian State. In: European Journal
of International Relations 2:1, 77-103.

You will find articles using and developing this theoretical approach often but not
exclusively in the following journals:

Millennium (ISSN 0305-8298)

Alternatives (ISSN 0304-3754)
Constellations (ISSN 1351-0487)
Thesis Eleven (ISSN 0725-5136)
Philosophy and Social Criticism (ISSN 0191-4537)

18
Syllabus Week 13/Calendar Week 48

Feminism
This week we turn to a broader social theory defined by a group-specific perspective on
society as a whole (rather than an attitude or way of theorizing): feminism. There are
among others liberal, marxist, constructivist, and post-structuralist varieties of
feminism. The text we use this year, however, directly connects to the systemic view of
neo-realism and puts a feminist perspective against it which has both explanative and
critical ambitions.

Required Reading:

• Textbook Chapter 10; Sjoberg:

Tickner, J. Ann/Sjoberg, Laura. 2016. Feminism. In: Dunne, Tim/Kurki, Milja/Smith, Steve (Eds.):
International Relations Theories. Discipline and Diversity, Oxford: OUP: 179-195.

Sjoberg, Laura. 2012. Gender, Structure, and War: What Waltz Couldn’t See, International Theory 4(1), 1-38

You will find articles using this theoretical approach often but not exclusively in the
following journals:

Signs (ISSN 0097-9740)

International Feminist journal of Politics (ISSN 1461-6742)
Hypatia (ISSN 0887-5367)
Politics and Gender (ISSN 1743-923X)
Feminist Theory (ISSN 1464-7001)

19
Syllabus Week 14/Calendar Week 49

Poststructuralism
As the textbook chapter by David Campbell and Roland Bleiker emphasizes,
poststructuralism is not as much a theoretical approach as it is an attitude towards
theorizing. It has much of Critical Theory (upper case!) as discussed in the previous
week, but is a distinct form of critical theory (lower case!). While Critical Theorists still
believe in the possibility of determining true or right (or at least better) representations,
interpretations and practices, poststructuralists usually do not. Ashley’s text tries to
criticize our thinking as it is wedded to the sovereign state.

NB: Make sure to start reading early this week. Ashley’s text is very long and not very
easy.

Required Reading:
• Textbook Chapter 11; Ashley
Campbell, David/Bleiker, Roland. 2016. Poststructuralism. In: Dunne, Tim/Kurki, Milja/Smith, Steve
(Eds.): International Relations Theories. Discipline and Diversity, Oxford: OUP: 196-218.
Ashley, Richard K. 1988. Untying the Sovereign State: A Double Reading of the Anarchy Problematique,
Millennium 17(2), 227-262;

You will find articles using this theoretical approach often but not exclusively in the
following journals:

Alternatives (ISSN 0304-3754)

Millennium (ISSN 0305-5298)
Security Dialogue (ISSN 0967-0106)
Global Society (ISSN 1360-0826)
Theory, Culture and Society (ISSN 0263-2764)

20
Syllabus Week 15/Calendar Week 50

Postcolonialism
Though there are also Marxist and Critical Theoretical approaches, in most of its
varieties, Postcolonialism is an application of poststructuralist thinking to the
knowledge/power nexus in regard to the former colonies and the legacy of the age of
colonialism. A keyword here is Orientalism as a discursive formation defining the
relationship between the “West” and the “rest”. Postcolonialism’s main claim regarding
IR is that today the international system can still not be understood without taking this
legacy in account. Grovogui’s text thus focuses on sovereignty in the context of African
statehood.

Required Reading:
• Textbook Chapter 12:
Biswas, Shampa. 2016. Postcolonialism. In: Dunne, Tim/Kurki, Milja/Smith, Steve (Eds.): International
Relations Theories. Discipline and Diversity, Oxford: OUP, 219-235.

Grovogui, Siba N. 2002: Regimes of Sovereignty: International Morality and the African Condition, in:
European Journal of International Relations 8(3): 315-338.

You will find articles using this theoretical approach often but not exclusively in the
following journals:

Alternatives (ISSN 0304-3754)

Global Society (ISSN 1360-0826)
Interventions: International Journal for Postcolonial Studies (ISSN 1369-801X)
Postcolonial Studies (ISSN 1360-8790)
Third World Quarterly (ISSN 0143-6597)

21
Syllabus Week 16/Calendar Week 51

Conclusion
During this final week of lectures and seminars we will put IR theorizing into a diversity
of normative, global, and academic contexts. The last module lecture thus returns back
to the academic discipline and to reflecting about theorizing. After having discussed
theoretical approaches, ways of theorizing and the relevance of some social theories for
IR, three important concluding questions play a role in the last part of this module: 1)
does globalization undermine the very idea of politics between states and thus does away
with the discipline’s object? 2) in view of its theoretical pluralism, is IR a distinct
academic discipline at all?; and 3) do all these theoretical discussions divert our
attention away from the practical requirements of politics beyond the state? The
required reading from the textbook deals with the second, the primary text with the third
question! The lecture will refer also to the first question and thus deal with textbook
chapter 15 on globalization (which we encourage to read but not require).

Required Reading:
• Textbook Chapter 16, Reus-Smit:
Wæver, Ole. 2016. Still a Discipline after all these Debates? In: Dunne, Tim/Kurki, Milja/Smith, Steve
(Eds.): International Relations Theories. Discipline and Diversity, Oxford: OUP, 300-321.
Reus-Smit, Christian. 2012. International Relations, Irrelevant? Don’t Blame Theory. Millennium 40(3):
525-540.

In this seminar you will provided with information on opportunities for the end-of-
term evaluation.

22
 5. Some Rules and Suggestions for Successful Learning in the Module

Before lecture
1. Study the required textbook chapter. Note down your open questions.
2. Check the Student Portal for downloads and your mail for any news from your
lecturer.
3. Bring a copy of the required reading (in case you need to look something up), a
pen and paper, as well as your questions to the lecture.
4. Be on time for the lecture.

During lecture
5. Switch off your mobile phones and put them away. We recommend to also do this
with your computer and to follow the lecture completely “unplugged”: Studies
show that reading paper copies and taking notes on paper is much more
conducive to understanding and learning than to do it electronically.
6. Check whether your questions are answered during the lecture. If you do not
understand parts of the lecture ask the lecturer in the time slots he allocates for
this. Questions about the lecture will not be dealt with in the seminars!!

Before the seminars

7. Check the Student Portal and your mail for any news from your lecturer.
8. The textbook chapters are supposed to be background knowledge for the
seminar. Reread the texts for the lecture and read and thoroughly study the texts
for the seminar.
a. Note down all your questions you could not answer yourself.
b. Be able to account for your unsuccessful attempt to answer your questions
yourself!
c. Be able to explain the main concepts and arguments of the text.
d. Be able to relate the article to the textbook chapter.
e. Be able to locate particular arguments quickly in the text.
f. Think about some points that you would like to have discussed.
g. Have a reflected, critical opinion about the text!
9. Bring a copy of all required reading, a pen and paper, and your notes on the text.
10. Be on time for the seminar.

During the seminars

11. Switch off your mobile phones and put them away. Again we recommend doing
the same with your computer and to enjoy the seminar sessions completely
“unplugged”. You will be much more focused and better discussions will ensue.
12. Ask your questions! If you think that the discussion goes astray or if you cannot
follow anymore do not hesitate to voice your concerns!!

23
 6. Notes on your time planning and course work

As all of our courses, TIR requires disciplined studying and good time planning. The
time you need for the course is determined by the ECTS workload: In our case, 10 ECTS
or 280 hours. How you allocate these hours is of course your choice and also depends on
what else you are doing. We suggest that before or right at the beginning of the course,
you take a weekend off and read the textbook once in its entirety to get an overview. This
will help you to put things into context and know what to expect. But it should also help
you to identify an initial interest for your research paper. That is because we want you to
spend time on your research paper from the very beginning of the module. Time will be
reserved in the seminars to discuss the research paper, which requires that you are
already working on it. The office hours in week 8 and 51 will also only be fruitful if you
are already progressed to some degree on the way to your paper. Moreover, the paper is
worth 125 hours of work – in all likelihood, it will be very difficult to work these off in the
two lecture free weeks at the end of the semester only.

The discussions of the texts in the seminar sessions will contribute the more to your
understanding the better you are prepared. Your lecturer will NOT explain the text to
you – but you will discuss your questions in the course! You cannot acquire competences
without practicing these. Only if you confront your previously acquired understanding
with that of your classmates and lecturer you will be able to check whether you develop
the competences to deal with theoretical texts.
In order to study – and not just read – a text, you will need the time we calculate with.
To prepare a text for the seminar calculate with 10 textbook pages per hour and 7-8
primary text pages. Though we calculate with less per hour for the workload, you will
need the rest of the time for repetition and learning for the exams.

We believe that if you want to do the course properly, you will need all hours. We also
know that you have other courses. And yes, that is true: You might need to work more
than decent regular weekly workloads of employees in some of the weeks. The reason is,
that you will have more than one complete week off – if you manage the regular
schedule. We need this week to finish your paper corrections and if you need a repair,
this week is reserved for it to retain your chances of finishing the course successfully. If
this is of any comfort: doing the corrections and office hours will also require severe
overtime from the lecturers during the intensive teaching and correction weeks.

24
 7. TIR Paper

The following 5 aspects of your paper will be considered in the assessment of your paper:
1. The originality and relevance of the research
2. The content of the argument
3. The selection and use of sources
4. The structure of the argument and the text
5. The language and formalities

Aspect 1: The originality and relevance of the research

Requirements
You need to formulate the purpose of your paper in a way that the resulting paper takes
one of the following two forms:
1. a comparative analysis of one aspect of ideally not more than two (or three) theories:
e.g. “On some interesting similarities between the Marxist and realist conception of
power”.
2. an explication and critical discussion of a particular aspect or problem of one theory
[e.g. discussion of a particular theoretical (hypo-]thesis, a concept, etc.): e.g. “Why
Foucault’s notion of governmentality does not work well in a post-colonial context”.
The purpose should be original, i.e. aim at contributing at least something to the
academic debate not presented this way before.
The purpose should be relevant, i.e. it needs to be justified in terms of the academic
discourse why it is necessary and interesting to pursue.

Assessment
We will assess your paper in regard to the extent that it has a well-justified original and
relevant purpose.

Two often made mistakes in previous classes

1. The form of the paper is mistaken of the purpose. We want you to compare theories or
discuss aspects of them to develop your competence to deal with theory. But both are not
academic goals by themselves. The two forms need to serve a purpose, namely gain in
knowledge and understanding. Be therefore careful to specify (in terms of originality and
relevance) what the gain is of comparing or discussing theory in your paper.
2. The purpose or research question is too broad or abstract to be answered in a short
seminar paper. Thus, be careful to narrow down your purpose in such a way that you can
answer it in a short paper like ours!

25
Aspect 2: The content of the argument

Requirements
You need to make an argument, which (a) in its analytical depths and theoretical content is
the credible outcome of over 125 hours of work, and which (b) makes its case conclusively.

Assessment
We will assess the content of your paper in regard to the level of analytical skill and
theoretical understanding it displays, its consciousness and reflexiveness in regard to its
own argument and the persuasiveness of the argument. We will therefore ask, is the author
of the paper aware of conceptual distinctions and analytical tools that have been presented
in the literature, did s/he achieve the level of theoretical understanding and overview that
can be expected from the textbook and our seminar-articles, is s/he aware of possible
limitations of his/her argument and possible counterarguments.

Two often made mistakes in previous classes

1. The content of the paper is descriptive rather than analytical. That means you reproduce
content from other sources without really working with it. Working with the source for
instance means analysing and interpreting it in terms of your argument, categorizing and
evaluating it. Therefore: Do not just repeat what others have said. Make your own
argument!!!
2. The content is additive rather than argumentative. Often students produce papers in
which each section somehow has something to do with the argument, but the sections do
not add up to something greater than the sum of these parts. Again, the advice here can
only be: Make your own argument. Do NOT just present a collection of rather unrelated
thoughts on the same topic.

Aspect 3: Selection and use of sources

Requirements
According to the rules for the assessment and the workload you should digest and rely on
ca. 500-600 pages for your paper. These come in addition (!!) to the articles and
chapters read for the lectures and seminars.
But this is only an indication of workload. It is more important that the paper overall is the
credible outcome of more than 125 hours of work. A very deeply thought through and very
carefully crafted criticism of a theory based on just one book of 150pp and a handful of
articles might also do the trick. Conversely, just having read 600pp will not suffice. It
depends on what you do with it.
You are beyond your propaedeutic phase now therefore you are forbidden to
use textbooks as sources UNLESS necessarily required for your argument.

26
Assessment
We will assess your selection of sources in regard to their quantity and quality. The latter
will be a function of their relevance and pertinence for your topic and argument.
We will assess the use of the sources in regard to the extent that you drew from your
sources information and insight relevant for your argument.

Two often made mistakes in previous seminars

1. The reference list is not the result of a comprehensive and systematic literature search
and selection. Your references’ should be the most relevant and yielding for your research
question – neither just those you accidentally found on the shelf or with WorldCat and
Google, nor just those you had on your list when you stopped searching because you had
quantitatively enough. Getting ca. 600pp you actually can use and work with means that
you will probably need to skim and browse through many more pages!
2. The sources are not well used. Just referring to one line in a 300 page book once or for
alibi name-dropping if there is much more relevant stuff in the book, is not making good
use - and it will not make for 300 pages in the additional literature count. But even
worse, it means that you do not consider potential arguments and insights for your
paper. Therefore read the sources well and be sure to consider them in all their relevant
parts for your argument.

Aspect 4: The structure of the argument and of the text

Requirement
Your paper should have an introduction, main part and conclusion and the argument in
your paper should be structured in a consistent and coherent way. There are no more
particular requirements for the structure other than it strictly needs to serve the purpose
and needs of your argument, its persuasiveness AND its readability. A well-argued paper
more often than not also needs to be a well-structured paper.

Assessment
We will assess the structure of your text in regard to the extent that it supports your
content. We will assess the structure of your argument in regard to its consistency and
overall coherence and to the degree to which it contains ONLY and ALL necessary parts for
your argument.

Two often made mistakes in previous seminars:

1. It is not clear why the chosen structure is a necessary way to follow your purpose. Your
argument will be carried out in the main section of the paper. It is important for the
introduction that you give a justification of the structure of your paper and – even MORE
importantly - the structure of your argument, which involves an explanation of the choice
of sections, i.e. indicate what the conclusion of your paper or the answer to your research
question will be, how you will get to there and why this is the right way to do so.
2. Remember that the introduction and the conclusion should be linked in such a way that
they would make sense to a reader who has not read the main body of text in between.

27
Aspect 5: Language and other Formalities

Requirements
By contrast to your propaedeutic phase now our emphasis is on the content of your
argument! BUT: that does not mean that form and language are unimportant. On the
contrary: We assume that you master already the formal requirements of academic
writing. We also check whether you fulfil the formal requirements specified in section 9 of
the standard course guide. A paper insufficient in form will not be assessed for
content!!

Assessment
We assess the language of your paper in regard to the extent that the style and language
clearly and concisely communicate what is meant. We consider the form of your paper in
regard to the degree it is flawless. Only minor inconsistencies and mistakes are tolerated
here.

Two often made mistakes

1. The referencing and annotation is flawed. Despite all the efforts of skills, the availability
of Turabian and all the examples of how to do it right in form of the primary literature you
have, the majority of papers do not have correct annotation and referencing. This is not
tolerated anymore in the second year. Remember that if you need to correct this in the
resit, your overall paper grade will not be more than 5.5!!!
A particularly frequent mistake is that the reference list contains more sources than
referenced in the text. All sources you used and relevant to your text need to be referenced
also in the text somewhere. If they do not need to be referenced, they are clearly not
relevant to your text, and thus they also must not be included in the reference list. They do
not count into the 600 pp anyway if you did not make use of them for the paper!!
2. Related to that is the mistake to not reference in enough detail and clarity. Make sure to
support any piece of the argument which is not common knowledge or analytical with
sufficient referenced evidence. Be always clear enough who is speaking (you or another
author) in your argument and make the references detailed enough so that your and
others’ thought can be identified unequivocally.

8. Plagiarism

Make sure that the paper is your own project – and make sure that it is a project that you
have not handed in elsewhere. Any text that has been copied without a clear indication
that it is someone else’s work is considered to be plagiarism. Any re-use of already
graded material of yourself is self-plagiarism and absolutely prohibited – but you may of
course quote your previous insights as part of a new argument.

NB: A paper with detected plagiarism cannot be graded. See also the
plagiarism regulations in section 9 of the standard course guide, your Skills
material and the BA programme brochure.

28
 9. Assessment and feedback form for the TIR paper 2018-2019

Department of International Relations/International Organization,

University of Groningen
Title of Paper
Name of student
Student number
Grade

Technical criteria (does the paper meet the formal requirements?) Yes No
On the basis of Ephorus and/or other indications, do you suspect plagiarism?
If the answer is yes, the lecturer explains and reports below why plagiarism is
suspected. The student is required to respond to the allegation. Before the
allegations are dealt with, no further evaluation is possible
Has (quantitatively) enough (qualitatively) relevant literature been used and/or
is the paper the credible outcome of more than 125 hours (4,5 ECTS) of work?
Is the paper of the required length?
Are the citations in the body of the paper adequate in form and content?
Is the writing sufficiently clear and correct?
Is the overall presentation of the paper acceptable?
If the answer to any of these questions is “No”, the paper receives a failing grade.
The student will use the resit to correct the formal flaws. The overall paper grade
will not be higher than 5.5.

Substantive criteria (what is the appropriate grade for the paper?)

The lecturers will briefly appreciate the achievements of the paper on the basis of
the relevant indications in regard to the five quality aspects in the guidelines for the
paper and the grade definitions: originality and relevance of the question; the
theoretical and analytical quality of the paper; the structure of the paper and its
argument; the literature use; and the papers’ form. They will use grade indicators
like “excellent” (9-10), very good (8-9), good (7-8), satisfactory (6-7), sufficient (5.5-
6), insufficient. The appreciation will give sufficient justification and indication why
a particular overall grade has been given and where there are deficits in regard to
the respective learning outcomes.

29
 10. Grade Definitions TIR paper

A 10 will be awarded for a paper, which presents a formally flawless and well-structured
argument that directly connects to the disciplinary discourse and its pertinent literature
and is of extraordinary quality, especially in regard to originality and relevance for the
academic discourse, and which displays an analytical and theoretical level of argument
that matches works published in typical journals of the field.
A 9 will be awarded for a paper, which has a formally flawless and well-structured
argument based on a systematic and relevant selection of high quality literature and is
clearly above average in terms of originality and relevance as well as in regard to
analytical and theoretical level.
An 8 will be awarded for an insightful, well-structured paper, which in some important
points, particularly originality and analytical and theoretical level - is above average, and
displays a standard amount and selection of literature, the author’s familiarity with and
competent use of the relevant theory, as well as only very minor formal inaccuracies.
A 7 will be awarded for a convincing paper into which the student has put good effort
and which still displays competent quality of analysis and advanced argumentation. It
has a literature selection, which in amount and pertinence is standard and it displays no
more than some minor flaws in regard to structure and formal requirements.
A 6 will be awarded for a paper that still has an appropriate purpose or research
question, makes sufficient use of appropriate literature, presents a structured argument
which still shows engagement and thinking efforts and an acceptable level of analysis
and theoretical understanding, and displays no more than some minor flaws in regard to
structure as well as formal requirements.
Papers awarded a 5,5 (just passed) have marginal academic quality but still display basic
competence in terms of the learning outcome. This means they fulfil the following
minimum requirements:
- They have an identifiable purpose or research question of relevance
- a reference list that still shows ability to independently identify and select relevant
literature
- basic analytical and descriptive skill and basic comprehension of theory and its role in
academic writing.
- a structured argument that is distinct from merely additively describing what is in
cases, documents, or other authors’ works and opinions and which is tied to the
answering of the research question or fulfilling of the research paper’s purpose.
- Only minor flaws in form, particularly no major flaws in regard to referencing
(identifying and listing used work of third persons) and understandable and correct
use of language.
Papers considered a ‘minor fail’ are lacking in the basic quality defined above in any one
aspect, but can with some minor efforts be brought up to the minimum standard within
five days.
Papers considered a ‘major fail’ are well below the basic quality defined above in more
than one respect and – if they can be repaired at all - bringing them to the minimum
standard will require considerable efforts and highly focused work within five days.

30