Specifications:
– Make sure you use proper citations or references and include a bibliography, organized alphabetically.- Remember that you are required to make an argument. That is, you must answer the question (or questions) set, and in doing so defend or justify your position. – Discuss their intended thesis/argument (i.e., your answer to the question) and their essay plan with the course convener or with their tutor. Criteria:
1. Each essay assignment will ask you to make an argument in answer to the question set, drawing on lectures, required readings, and supplementary readings (which may extend beyond the materials listed here). A mere summary of lectures and readings is not sufficient.
2. In making your argument, you will be expected to draw on and engage critically with the relevant conceptual and theoretical frameworks, as well as empirical materials as appropriate. It is not sufficient to draw on only one concept or theory; you will also be expected to show why other competing concepts or theories are not relevant or are inadequate as frameworks for answering the question.3. Assigned marks will reflect the overall clarity and cogency of the argument advanced and its appropriateness as an answer to the question set, with particular reference to: a. the thesis statement – this is your argument/answer to the question. The introduction to your essay must contain a thesis statement and an outline of the organisation of your essay. b. understanding of the concepts/theories discussed and ability critically to apply them. These are short essays so it is not possible or necessary to lay out the assumptions of the concepts or theories you are discussing in all their details. However, when using concepts and theories you must use them correctly, i.e., in a manner that demonstrates you understand what they mean and how they work. c. ability to draw on appropriate empirical materials and integrate them coherently into the overall argument. Again, these are short essays so it is unlikely you will spend a large part of the essay laying out an empirical case. However, you will need to make reference to empirical materials and when you do it is necessary to use them appropriately – i.e., demonstrating where and how they relate to your overall argument. d. ability to draw appropriate implications from positions advanced. This means showing where and how your argument relates to the question posed – i.e., how the points you have made individually or together lead to a conclusion that supports your overall argument/thesis. Think of this as a kind of sign-posting: telling the reader where you are in the argument and how the point just made relates to your overall thesis.e. the coherence of the conclusion with the overall argument. Your essay must contain a conclusion. The conclusion should follow logically from your argument – put another way, in your introduction you should state your thesis/argument; in the body of your essay you should develop your argument – i.e., show to the reader the reasoning process you have gone through that leads you to the position you hold, i.e., your thesis; and in the conclusion re-state your position and, if appropriate, draw out any wider implications it might have. Recommended resources to be used in the essay:Doyle, Michael. 1986. Liberalism and world politics, American Political Science Review 80: 1151-1169. EOwen, John. 1994. How Liberalism Produces Democratic Peace, International Security 19(2): 87-125. ERichardson, James L. 1997. Contending liberalisms: past and present, European Journal of International Relations 3(1): 5-33. ERosato, Sebastian. 2003. ‘The Flawed Logic of Democratic Peace Theory,’ American Political Science Review 97(4): 585-602. EHayes, Jarrod. 2011. The democratic peace and the new evolution of an old idea, European Journal of International Relations 18(4): 767-791.Mann, Michael. 1996. Authoritarian and liberal militarism: a contribution from comparative and historical sociology, in Steve Smith et al. (eds.) International Theory: Positivism and Beyond (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press)Jahn, Beate. 2005. Kant, Mill, and illiberal legacies in international affairs, International Organization 59(1), 177-207. EWaltz, Kenneth. 2000. Structural realism after the Cold War, International Security 25(1), pp. 5-41. EMichael E. Brown, Sean M. Lynn-Jones, and Steven E. Miller (eds). 1996. Debating the Democratic Peace (Cambridge, MIT Press)
