GERM3800
Holocaust Memory, Migration, and
‘Multiculturalism’ in
Video Still from TANYA URY’s Jacob’s Ladder – Blind Spot : Maria
Amman & a girl search the floor for a lost contact lens outside
Dr Annette Seidel Arpacı
Contents
Schedule
2007-08
Examples of Texts for Review
Description:
This
module introduces students to a range of critical questions and theoretical
approaches in the context of
The module will focus on the divide as well as the interconnection between
representations of cultural and ethnic ‘difference’ and constructions of
selfhood in the German-speaking world. Not only will we interrogate stereotypes
(and self-images) of Jews, Turks, Black Germans, migrants, and other ‘others’
in contemporary German discourses, but we will do so against the background of
the exclusions and atrocities that shaped German society and its relation to
those deemed ‘other’ in the 20th century. We will discuss exclusionary
ideologies such as antisemitism and racism and how German colonialism and
National Socialist crimes affect the cultural self-positioning of minoritised
individuals in today’s
The course is aimed at discussing the complexity of minoritised experience and
its representation in contemporary
On
completion of this module, students should be able, in the format of oral
discussion/presentation and in written assignments,
·
to
demonstrate that they have deepened their knowledge of concepts and approaches
to the study of contemporary German society and politics;
·
to
autonomously analyse and discuss a wide range of texts and views;
·
to
analyse and apply secondary sources.
·
to
use secondary and primary sources to independently formulate and present a
cogent and coherent analysis of relevant historical/current events and their
representation(s) in socio-political debates and/or cultural production.
-----
!
This module demands a lot of reading, watching movies etc., and you should only
opt for it if you are prepared to study the above questions intensely! Please note that the major commitments you
have are to attend regularly and to do the preparatory reading and/or other
assigned course work! Check also the undergraduate handbooks for
regulations, deadlines and guidelines for written work. There will be readings
for each seminar, and these must be carefully studied, notes taken and
questions identified. What is the project of a specific article? What is being
argued? Why? What terms are being used or defined? What questions does this
text raise? In addition, for some seminars I will give you questions to think
about while reading the preparatory texts. ‘Text’ refers also to visual works
which means that the above questions can be asked similarly while watching a
film in preparation of the seminar. During most of the seminars you will work
in groups and we will discuss visual images, film and audio pieces.
Each
week we will spend 10-30 minutes with assessed student presentations plus
discussion, the precise length of time depending on the number of students
presenting (10 min per presentation). I will ask every student to prepare one assessed
presentation for this module, and this way you build up an archive of material
and information from this module that may be of use for a future project. You
should decide upon the date and topic of your presentation early on, ideally in
the first week.
Our
module will not require an exam. You will suggest your own topic for your essay
and you will discuss the title with me. Below you will find sample topics for
essays. Further down you can also find a sample list of books, artworks, films
about which you may write reviews during reading week. Your own suggestions of
works for review are very welcome! The reviews are to be handed in at the Dept
office on the first seminar day (Wednesday) after reading week before noon.
Finally, you are strongly encouraged to do a significant amount of background
reading, see bibliography below.
I
will provide you with a course reader during the first session. It includes the
information you find here and additionally the materials that we will use in
the seminars.
The
module is conducted in English, and German is not a prerequisite!
Video Still from HITO STEYERL’s Die leere
Mitte/The Empty Centre. At
Teaching:
11 x 2-hour seminars
Compulsory film viewings, screening times to be announced (only longer pieces
not screened during seminar). There are additional events (lectures, talks,
workshops) designed to tie in with this module – please do attend these
whenever possible.
An oral presentation (singly
or in pairs/groups up to three) (10%)
1 x 1,000 word review of literature
or visual work (20%), to be handed
in at the Dept office, deadline: 14
November 2007, at noon.
1 x essay (3,000 words) (70%), to be handed in at the Dept office, deadline: NOON on first day of the exam period
2008, to be handed in at the Dept office.
NB: the presentations run throughout the Semester.
Video Still, Die leere Mitte/The Empty Centre,
Dir. Hito Steyerl,
Schedule 2007-08,
Semester 1
Wednesday
11am-1pm, Michael Sadler Building LG17
GERM3800
Holocaust Memory,
Migration, and ‘Multiculturalism’: Course Schedule
Dr Annette Seidel Arpacı
Semester 1,
starting in week 9 (week beginning 24 September)
|
Week |
STAFF |
|
SEMINAR |
|
9 |
ASA |
|
What does it mean to speak about
Holocaust memory and migration in today’s |
|
10 |
ASA |
|
Starting with the Self/Other: Racism/Antisemitism,
and Concepts and Representations of ‘Ethnicity’, ‘Culture’ and ‘Otherness’
Group work/close
reading of
|
|
11 |
ASA |
|
Memory and History/ Memory, Testimony
and Biography:
·
Fleischmann, Lea, ‘Why I am Leaving This Country’, in Fringe
Voices: An Anthology of Minority Writing in the Federal Republic of Germany, eds. Antje Harnisch, Anne-Marie
Stokes and Friedemann Weidauer (Oxford: Berg Publishers, 1998), pp. 47-56. Close reading of extracts from
|
|
12 |
ASA |
|
Memory and Visual Works: Seeing or
Reading? Schwarz auf Weiss/Black
and White: The Back of the Images, Dir. Klub Zwei, Video, 5 min. (Austria/UK, 2003). Normality 1-11, Dir. Hito Steyerl, Video,
(Germany/Austria, 1999/2003).
'Sites Unseen:
Shimon Attie's Acts of Remembrance, 1991-1996 (Chapter 3), pp. 62-89; 'Memory, Countermemory, and the End of
the Monument' ( |
|
13 |
ASA |
|
‘Literature’ versus ‘Journalism’/Caricature
and Polemics: Drawing/Writing (in) the Margins
‘Heimat? –
No Thanks!’ pp. 37-42; ‘The Germanization of the Holocaust’, pp. 102-112.
‘The Reluctant German’, unpublished translation of the
essay ‘Deutscher wider Willen’ in Deutschbuch, pp. 113-133. ‘Goodbye The German
original is titled ‘Goodbye, Discussion of
Images: Skinhead in İstanbul by Muhsin Omurca, Moishe Hundesohn by Daniel Haw
|
|
14 |
ASA |
|
Leave to stay?
(Post)Memory/Biography ·
Kurt, Kemal, ‘Not an Oriental (Fairy) Tale’, in Fringe Voices: An
Anthology of Minority Writing in the Federal Republic of Germany, eds. Harnisch et al (Oxford: Berg
Publishers, 1998), pp. 264-271. ·
Şenocak, Zafer,Atlas of a Tropical ·
Huyssen, Andreas, ‘Diaspora and Nation: Migration Into Other Pasts,’
in New German Critique, no. 88 (Winter 2003), pp. 147-164. ·
Peck, Jeffrey M., ‘Jews and Turks:
Discourses of the “Other”’, in Peck, Being Jewish in the New ·
ASA, ‘National Memory's “Schlüsselkinder”: Migration, Pedagogy, and
German Remembrance Culture’, in German
Culture, Politics and Literature into the Twenty-First Century: Beyond
Normalization, eds. Stuart Taberner and Paul Cooke ( |
|
15 |
|
|
READING WEEK |
|
16 |
ASA |
|
The Presence of the Past:
Discussion of the film Die leere
Mitte/ The Empty Centre, Dir. Hito Steyerl,
|
|
17 |
ASA |
|
Gendered Memory/Bodies of Memory Discussion of visual works by Tanya Ury
|
|
18 |
ASA |
|
More
than (spoken) Words: Poetry/Prose/Performance, Rap and Hip Hop
Extracts from:
‘1990: Home/land and Unity from an Afro-German
Perspective’, pp. 45-60; ‘Racism and Oppression in Unified Germany’, pp.
101-112.
|
|
19 |
ASA |
|
‘Multiculturalism’: Positionality
or Identity?
Extracts:
Concluding Discussion/Feedback on
the Module |
|
|
|
|
WINTER HOLIDAYS |
|
|
|
|
|
·
Additional Events:
Wednesday, 10 October 16.00-18.00, Rupert Beckett Lecture
Theatre,
Dr. Matthias Küntzel (
Please
email m.hunke@leeds.ac.uk for a
ticket. This is solely for keeping track of the numbers – there is no charge!
Wednesday, 24 October 17.00, Michael Sadler LG19,
Dr. Tamar Lewinsky (
Thursday, 15 November 17.00, Michael Sadler, room to
be confirmed,
Ainhoa Montoya Arteabaro (
To be confirmed: Monday, 19
November 17.00, Michael Sadler, room to be announced,
Jan Surmann (
Precise time TBA: Hopefully we will also be
able to invite again Trude Silman and Brett Harrison from the
project Making a New Life: Holocaust
Survivors in
You will be required to:
1) Deliver an approximately 10-minute
presentation to the group from topics discussed in or arising from the
seminars. If you are working in pairs, your presentation should be
approximately 20 minutes. Similarly a larger group of three would have to
present for 30 minutes.
2) To accompany each presentation you will
need to give each member of the seminar group a handout which helps them follow
your presentation. Your handout should include an outline of the presentation
and a bibliography.
Aims:
The aims of the presentation are as
follows:
1) To demonstrate your understanding of
the key issues involved in the topics covered.
2) To develop a deeper knowledge and
understanding of the issues involved and the alternative views and attitudes
through further reading and/or viewing and to present these to the group.
3) To develop the skills required for
effective research.
4) To deliver a structured presentation to
the group within a specific time span drawing on a range of communication
skills.
Your
presentation will be judged according to the following criteria (as appropriate
to the topic)
Content/Knowledge/Research
·
To what extent is the presentation directly relevant to the title?
. How accurate and useful is the material
presented?
·
Have the presenters studied a variety of sources?
·
Has s/he located sources independently?
·
Has s/he looked at a range of alternative views and come to a well argued
conclusion?
Communication
·
Is the presentation lively and interesting?
·
How well has it been structured?
·
Is the handout supportive of the presentation?
·
Has it been properly referenced?
·
To what extent have the presenters considered the needs of his/her audience in preparing for this exercise?
Planning
·
(For pairs or groups of three) Have the presenters worked together as a team?
·
Have the presenters worked within the time constraints?
·
Does the presentation have a clear logical structure?
Discussion
·
Have the presenters thought of ways to stimulate group discussion (e.g. by
formulating seminar questions)?
·
Do the presenters deal adequately with questions from the audience?
Marks will be awarded
in three categories:
1. Structure and clarity. (40)
2. Content: understanding of the demands
made by the set topic and provision of a full answer. (40)
3. Presentational techniques, illustration
of argument. (20)
Examples of possible topics for the
presentation:
Discussion of
-
Works by May Ayim
-
Comics and satire (such as ‘Moishe
Hundesohn’)
-
Tanya Ury’s ‘Who’s BOSS’ or other works by
the artist
-
Shimon Attie’s ‘Writing on the Wall’
-
Songs and lyrics by Brother’s Keepers and
others
Bibliography / Background
(Remember: when citing these works you need to give full bibliographical details)
Adelson, Leslie A., ‘Touching Tales
of Turks, Germans, and Jews: Cultural Alterity, Historical Narrative, and
Literary Riddles for the 1990s,’ in New German Critique, no. 80
(Spring-Summer 2000), pp. 93-124.
---------, The Turkish Turn in Contemporary German
Literature: Towards a new Critical Grammar of Migration (
Anderson, Benedict, Imagined
Communities (London: Verso, 1983).
Barkan, Elazar, and Marie-Denise Shelton, eds., Borders,
Exiles, Diasporas (Stanford: Stanford U P, 1998).
Blommaert, Jan and Jef
Verschueren, Debating Diversity: Analysing the Discourse of Tolerance
(London and New York: Routledge, 1998).
Bodemann, Michal Y. and Gökçe
Yurdakul, eds., Migration, Citizenship,
Ethnos (
Bodemann, Michal Y., ed., Jews, Germans, Memory: Reconstructions of
Jewish Life in
Boetcher Joeres, Ruth-Ellen and Marjorie Gelus, eds., Women
in German Yearbook 2003: Feminist Studies in German Literature and Culture,
vol. 19 (
Boyarin, Daniel, Daniel Itzkovitz and Ann Pellegrini, eds., Queer
Theory and the Jewish Question (
Brandt, Birgit, Transforming
Citizenship from Below: Turkish Berliners and the Politics of Citizenship (
Buruma, Ian and Avishai Margalit, Occidentalism: A Short
History of Anti-Westernism (
Campt, Tina
M., Other Germans: Black Germans, and the
Politics of Race, Gender and Memory in the Third Reich (
Cheyette, Bryan, ‘Venetian Spaces: Old-New Literatures and
the Ambivalent Uses of Jewish History,’ in Reading the ‘New’ Literatures in
a Postcolonial Era, ed. Susheila Nasta (
Derrida, Jacques, and Anne
Dufourmantelle, Of Hospitality: Anne Dufourmantelle invites Jacques Derrida
to respond (Stanford: S U P, 2000).
Derrida,
Jacques, ‘Deconstruction and the Other’, in Dialogues
with Contemporary Thinkers, ed. R. Kearney (Manchester: M U P, 1994).
Fanon, Frantz, Black Skin, White Masks (London: Pluto
Press, 1986).
Geller, Jay
Howard, Jews in Post-Holocaust
Gilman, Sander L. and Karen Remmler, eds., Reemerging
Jewish Culture in
Gilman Sander L. and Jack Zipes, eds., Yale Companion to
Jewish Writing and Thought in German Culture 1096 – 1996 (New Haven: Yale U P,
1997).
Gilman, Sander L., Multiculturalism
and the Jews (forthcoming, 2006).
Göktürk,
Deniz, ‘Turkish Delight – German Fright: Unsettling Oppositions in
Transnational Cinema’ (2000), http://eipcp.net/transversal/0101/goektuerk/en
Hall, Stuart, ‘Minimal Identities’, in Identity – The Real Me (London: ICA, 1987).
Halbwachs, Maurice, On Collective Memory, ed., trans.
and with an introduction by Lewis A. Coser (Chicago and London: U of Chicago P,
1992).
Herbert, Ulrich, A history of Foreign Labor in
Herbert, Ulrich, Hitler's foreign workers: enforced foreign
labor in
Hirsch, Marianne, ‘Marked by Memory: Feminist Reflections on
Trauma and Transmission,’ in Extremities, eds. Nancy K. Miller and Jason
Tougaw (2002), pp. 71-91.
Horrocks, David and Eva Kolinsky, Turkish culture in German society today (Oxford: Berghahn, 1996).
Huyssen, Andreas, Present
pasts: urban palimpsests and the politics of memory (Stanford: S U P,
2003).
Ifekwunigwe, Jayne O., Scattered Belongings: Cultural
Paradoxes of ‘Race,’ Nation and Gender (London and New York: Routledge,
1999).
Kilomba,
Grada, ‘Becoming a Subject’, in Eggers et al, Mythen, Masken und Subjekte (Münster: Unrast, 2005).
Klemperer, Victor, The Language of the Third Reich LTI –
Lingua Tertii Imperii: A Philologist’s Notebook (
Ladd, Brian,
The Ghosts of
Lappin, Elena, ed., Jewish Voices – German Words: Growing
Up Jewish in Postwar
Lutz, Helma, Anne Phoenix and Nira Yuval-Davis, eds., Crossfires:
Nationalism, Racism, and Gender in
Margalit,
Avishai, Ethics of Memory (Cambridge/Mass.:
Harvard U P, 2002).
Margalit,
Mazon,
Patrizia and Reinhild Steingrover, eds., Not
so Plain as Black and White: Afro-German Culture and History, 1890-2000 (U
of
Miller, Nancy K. and Jason Tougaw, eds., Extremities:
Trauma, Testimony, and Community (
Mitscherlich, Alexander and
Margarete Mitscherlich, The Inability to Mourn: Principles of Collective Behavior (New York: Grove Press, 1975).
Morris, Leslie and Jack Zipes, eds., Unlikely History:
The Changing German-Jewish Symbiosis, 1945-2000 (
Moses, Rafael, ed., Persistent Shadows of the
Holocaust: The Meaning to Those Not Directly Affected (Madison: International U
P, 1993).
Mosse, George, L., The Crisis of
German Ideology (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1966).
Oguntoye, Katharina, May Opitz & Dagmar Schultz, Showing our Colors: Afro-German women speak
out, edited by and with a foreword by Audre Lorde (U of Massachusetts P,
1991).
Osborne, Peter, and Stella Sandford, eds., Philosophies of Race and
Ethnicity (
Rapaport, Lynn, Jews in
Said, Edward, Orientalism
(London: Penguin, 1978).
Santner, Eric L., Stranded Objects: Mourning, Memory, and
Film in Postwar
Schlant, Ernestine, The Language of Silence: West German
Literature and the Holocaust (New York and London: Routledge, 1999).
Sieg, Katrin, Ethnic
Drag: Performing Race, Nation, Sexuality in West-Germany (
Silverman, Max, ed., Frantz Fanon's Black Skin, White Masks:
New Interdisciplinary Essays (Manchester: M U P 2005).
Stern, Frank, The
Whitewashing of the yellow badge: antisemitism and philosemitism in postwar
Suleiman, Susan Rubin, ed., Exile and Creativity:
Signposts, Travelers, Outsiders, Backward Glances (Durham and London: Duke
U P, 1998).
Tebbutt, Susan, ed., Sinti
and Roma in German-speaking Society and Literature (Oxford: Berghahn,
1998).
Tunstall, Kate E.
, ed., Displacement, Asylum, Migration
(
Young, Robert J. C., Postcolonialism: An Historical Introduction
(
Examples of possible texts for
Review (
(These are just a few
examples. You are very welcome to make your own suggestions! German-speakers
please note that if you should want to choose a piece not available in
translation or with subtitles, you will have to provide your own translations
for all direct quotes).
Frankenthal,
Hans, The Unwelcome One: Returning Home from Auschwitz (Evanston:
Northwestern University Press, 2002).
Hügel-Marshall, Invisible woman:
Growing up Black in
Kaminer, Wladimir, Russian Disco (London: Random House/Ebury Press, 2002).
Özdamar, Emine Sevgi, Mother Tongue (Toronto: Coach House Press, 1994).
Writings by various authors to be found in anthologies
(for reference see in Bibliography and Course schedule above):
Lappin, Jewish
Voices – German Words.
Oguntoye et al, Showing our
Colors: Afro-German women speak out.
Harnisch et al, Fringe Voices: An
Anthology of Minority Writing (excerpts)
Gelbin et al, AufBrüche, (multilingual, excerpts).
Popoola and Sezen, Talking home – Heimat aus unserer
eigenen Feder, (multilingual).
Films:
‘The Empty Centre’, Dir.
'Solino', Dir. Fatih Akin, Germany 2001.
'Lola und Bilidikid', Dir. Kutlug Ataman, Germany
2002.
'Kanak Attack', Dir. Lars Becker, Germany 2001.
‘Alles auf Zucker’, Dir. Dani Levy, Germany, 2004.
Visual art/Performance art for instance by:
Tanya Ury
Shimon Attie
The Department of German accepts no responsibility
for the content of any pages on external web servers.
|
Tom Cheesman’s translation
of Zafer Şenocak’s novel ‘Gefährliche Verwandtschaft’ |
|
|
Correspondence:
Zafer Şenocak – Abdelkader Benali (May 2006) |
http://www.qantara.de/webcom/show_article.php/_c-627/_nr-13/i.html |
|
Henryk Broder’s website |
|
|
Tanya Ury’s Jacob’s Ladder/Blind Spot and her other works |
|
|
Kanak Attak network |
Germ 3800 Holocaust Memory, Migration, and
‘Multiculturalism’
Sample Essay titles
Candidates
should avoid substantial overlap with material already covered in assessed work
submitted for this or other modules, and must choose a different topic from
that of their presentation.
Write
an essay of in response to one of the following titles. Essays should be word
processed following the Departmental Guidelines for the Presentation of Written
Work and should be submitted in person or sent by recorded delivery to the
Department to arrive by the deadline.
All students must complete a Declaration of Academic Integrity (plagiarism)
form which can be collected from the Office at any time.
1. Discuss the position of ‘minority
authors’ in relation to irony and ‘self-critical joke work’ (Bhabha)!
2.
In how far is the aspect of gender
relevant in the artworks we have discussed? (Choose one example and argue!)
3.
The
memory of the Holocaust is an important part of the trialogue between Germans,
Jews and Turks. (Discuss!)
4.
There is a growing debate about
multiculturalism in today’s
5.
How
does the film Die Leere Mitte present
migration to
Essay length and submission dates: Students taking GERM3800 (20 credits): 3000 words; to
be submitted to the German Dept Office by NOON on first day of the exam period
2008 (60%).
The Department of German operates marking schemes for essays,
dissertations, assignments and presentations in line with the University’s
classification of degrees using the 20-90 module grade scale. Please note the
following for your assessed work on this module:
The level of knowledge and
critical understanding of the topic demonstrated by the candidate; the ability
to organise and present this knowledge in a coherent and convincing manner; the
ability to identify and make clear the key issues involved in answering the
question; the ability to express ideas fluently in appropriate, correctly
spelled and punctuated, and grammatically accurate language. For essays submitted as coursework,
references and bibliographical details should be presented as set out in the
Departmental guidelines on the submission of written work. Essays that do not conform to these standards
will achieve a lower mark.
To achieve a First class mark (70-90%) a Level 3 essay will typically have a number of the following characteristics:
Ø will demonstrate
a high level of knowledge and a full understanding of the topic,
Ø will show a full
understanding of the requirements of the question, covering all the ground
required to give a full answer;
Ø will show a high level of critical analysis;
Ø will have a clear
structure and coherent argument throughout, clearly identifying the key issues;
Ø will offer full
support for all points made;
Ø will make use of
a good range of primary and secondary sources;
Ø will be well
written throughout, stylistically clear and fully adequate to express ideas;
Ø will conform
fully to the standards outlined in the Departmental guidelines for the
presentation of written work including clear and appropriate referencing,
correct spelling and punctuation.
To achieve a mark in the Upper Second category (60-69%) II, i mark, a Level
3 essay will typically have a number
of the following characteristics:
Ø will demonstrate
a good level of knowledge and an understanding of the topic,
Ø will show a good
understanding of the requirements of the question, covering most of the ground
required to give a full answer;
Ø will show a high
level of critical analysis;
Ø will have a clear
structure and coherent argument throughout, clearly identifying the key issues;
Ø will offer
support for the points made;
Ø will make use of
a range of primary and secondary sources;
Ø will be largely
well written throughout, stylistically clear and adequate to express ideas;
Ø will largely
conform to the standards outlined in the Departmental guidelines for the
presentation of written work including clear and appropriate referencing,
correct spelling and punctuation.
To achieve a mark in the Lower Second category (50-59%), a Level 3 essay
will typically have a number of the
following characteristics:
Ø will demonstrate
a reasonable knowledge and understanding of the topic,
Ø will show a
reasonable understanding of the requirements of the question, covering at least
half the ground required to give a full answer;
Ø may show some
level of critical analysis although the answer may be largely exposition;
Ø will show some
attempt at a clear structure although the line of argument may not always be
clear and coherent. At least half of the key issues will be identified although
there may be some irrelevant material;
Ø will offer some
support for the points made;
Ø will make use of
a limited number of primary and secondary sources;
Ø may not be well
written, but will be adequate to express ideas;
Ø may not conform
to the standards outlined in the Departmental guidelines for the presentation
of written work including clear and appropriate referencing, correct spelling
and punctuation.
To achieve a Third Class mark (40-49%), a Level 3 essay will
typically have a number of the
following characteristics:
Ø will demonstrate
a reasonable knowledge and understanding of the topic,
Ø will demonstrate
only a limited knowledge and understanding of the topic,
Ø will show little
understanding of the requirements of the question, covering less than half the
ground required to give a full answer;
Ø will not
demonstrate critical analysis;
Ø will be badly
organised and the line of argument will be unclear and incoherent. Fewer than
half of the key issues will be identified and there will be a significant
amount of irrelevant material;
Ø will offer inadequate
support for the points made;
Ø will make use of
few if any primary and secondary sources;
Ø will not be well
written, language may be inadequate to express ideas;
Ø will not conform
to the standards outlined in the Departmental guidelines for the presentation
of written work including clear and appropriate referencing, correct spelling
and punctuation.
To achieve a fail mark, an essay will typically show signs of at least
one of the following characteristics:
Ø will demonstrate
very limited knowledge and understanding of the topic;
Ø will show little
or no understanding of the requirements of the question, covering little if any
of the ground required to give a full answer;
Ø will not
demonstrate any critical analysis;
Ø will show little
or no shape or direction, will be badly organised and the line of argument
unclear and incoherent. Few if any of the key issues will be identified and
there will be a significant amount of irrelevant material;
Ø will offer little
or no support for the points made;
Ø will make use of
few if any primary and secondary sources;
Ø will not be well
written, language may be inadequate to express ideas;
Ø will not conform
to the standards outlined in the Departmental guidelines for the presentation
of written work including clear and appropriate referencing, correct spelling
and punctuation.
Essay
evaluation profile
NB: the
mark given to this essay is provisional, subject to confirmation by the
external examiner
Name:
....................................................... Question: ..............................………….
Marker:
.................................................... Moderator:............................…………..
Overall Class: .......................................... Mark:
.....................................................
Organisation
Strong
introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction vague or absent
Clear
progression of argument . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Points made at random or repeated
unnecessarily
Firm
conclusion based on argument. . . . .
. . . . . . . . . Conclusion
absent
Grasp of issues
Issues
understood in detail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Failure to grasp essential details
Broader
issues grasped and . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Broader context absent
presented
Analysis
Key issues
clearly identified . . . . . . . . . . . . . . issues not made clear
Coherent
and convincing argument. . . . .
. . . . . . . . . implausible,
incoherent or muddled
Expression
Clear,
well-formed sentences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sentence structure muddled
Correct
and effective use of words . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . Words and
concepts used
and concepts inaccurately
Use of sources
Sources
assimilated, well-used . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Reliant on undigested source and adequately
acknowledged
material,
poorly acknowledged
Good
bibliography, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . poor bibliography,
references complete references
incomplete or absent
Comments: