PO6007 Portfolio Assessment Brief

What Learning Outcomes Will Be Assessed?

1) Show a detailed knowledge of how, in at least 2 cases, genocide and crimes against humanity have been committed

3) Compare and contrast the nature, scope and functions of state-sponsored mass murder in at least 2 cases during and after the Cold War

4) Evaluate arguments relating to issues of uniqueness, generality and precedent and question the uses to which such different evaluations may be put historically and politically

Marking Criteria (you work will be assessed against these aspects):

●Structure and clarity: this includes the focus on the issues raised by the questions, and the relevance of discussions, the structure and logical coherence of answers and the clarity of arguments;

●Analysis and critical engagement: this deals with the bulk of your arguments and focuses on how you engage critically with the literatures on the given topics and on how you articulate your own arguments based on the relevant readings.

●Evidence and accuracy: this covers the use of accurate data concerning the areas you investigate. It broadly relates to how you support the claims you make with evidence that is appropriate for the issues you are discussing.

●General written expression and academic standards: this criterion deals with the quality of your writing (grammar, clarity, etc.) and with the standard of referencing and of the bibliography.

What do you mean by a portfolio?

A portfolio is a grouping of assessments that are marked collectively. In this case, your portfolio will consist of three pieces that collectively equal 50% of the module grade. They will be marked collectively, so make sure all three pieces are of a high standard.

What type of pieces should I write?

You should write three interrelated pieces that operate both individually and cohesively as a whole. You may choose, for instance, to examine a theme, such as intervention or sexual violence, a particular time period, such as the 1990s, or focus on an aspect of genocide and crimes against humanity that can cut across different instances such as the use of militias.

How long should each piece be?

Try to be relatively consistent in the length of each piece. With each piece being around 600 to 700 words.

What about referencing?

As with all Politics Dept assessments, use Harvard referencing. Similarly, maintain the same standard of sources that you would do on other assessments, with academic work privileged above other sources where possible.

What about Primary Sources?

Engaging with primary sources, such as legal judgements and diplomatic cables, is highly encouraged. That said, make sure you understand the sources you draw from. If in doubt, speak to Pete or Radu about a source

What about submission?

Submit all three pieces in the same document.

What about structure and signposting?

How many case studies do I need to engage with?

What about the material from last term?

What can I focus on?

There is a large range of topics or themes you could focus on. The following is meant to give you some food for thought and are suggestive rather than exhaustive.

●Intervention (You could think about rubrics such as R2P, whether intervention can stop acts of mass violence and if it is a valid tool of the ‘international community?)

●The UN (How effective is the UN? Do states engage adequately with UN led processes and policies?)

●The media (Do media framings matter? What role should the media play? Do the media adequately and accurately report genocides and crimes against humanity?)

●Gender (How important is gender in how people experience genocides and crimes against humanity? Should state responses to genocide take gender into account?)

●Sexual violence (How has sexual violence been used in genocide? What are the short and long term consequences of sexual violence in the context of genocide?)

●Paramilitaries (How have paramilitaries been used? What has been their impact? Can one generalise across cases?)

●The modern state (Is the modern state a key component of genocidal practices? Do states have a moral responsibility to act to stop genocidal practices?)

●Documentation (What records are kept about, or in response to, genocide? Who has access to them? How should they be drawn on?)

●Citizenship (How do(?) conceptions of citizenship, and related terms, contribute to genocide? How are inside and outside groups created?)

●(Neo-)Imperialism and/or empire (How important have (Neo-)Imperialism and/or empire been in genocidal processes? Are there differences between empires?)

●The Genocide Convention (Is the Genocide Convention fit for purpose? How developed is jurisprudence drawing on the Genocide Convention?)

●Semantics and definitions (i.e. genocide v ethnic cleansing) and/or labels (Urbicide, Auto-Genocide, Classicide) (How important are labels in the context of mass violence? How important is it to develop academic labels?)