The 3 questions are mentioned below
Engagement Journal.
Use of the Oxford referencing style is mandatory. All papers will be checked through plagiarism software.
Question 1
How have concepts of national security changed in recent years? Use specific examples. 700 words
Readings
Prime Minister Kevin Rudd “The First National Security Statement to the Australian Parliament” 4 December 2008 accessed at http://www.royalcommission.vic.gov.au/getdoc/596cc5ff-8a33-47eb-8d4a-9205131ebdd0/TEN.004.002.0437.pdf [15 January 2012] [14 pages]
Dr Carl Ungerer and Dr Anthony Bergin “The devil in the detail: Australia’s first National Security Statement”ASPI, 10 December 2008 accessed at http://www.aspi.org.au/publications/publication_details.aspx?ContentID=192 [19 January 2012] [6 pages]
Attorney-General Hon Robert McClelland MP “Address to the National Security College Senior Executive Development Course Dinner 10 March 2011” accessed at
Dr Carl Ungerer “The case for an Australian national security strategy” ASPI Policy Analysis, 28 July 2011 accessed at http://www.aspi.org.au/publications/publication_details.aspx?ContentID=304&pubtype=-1 [28 July 2012] [11 pages]
Question 2
What are the consequences to the role and function of State Police, given the growth of private policing? 700 words
Readings
Bayley, D. & Nixon, C., “The Changing Environment of Policing, 1985 – 2008”, New Perspectives in Policing, National Institute of Justice, September 2010
Stone, C. & Travis, J., “Toward a New Professionalism in Policing”, New Perspectives in Policing, National Institute of Justice, March 2011
Question 3
Can the credible threats to Australian national security be prioritised, and if so what criterion can be used for such prioritisation. 700 words
· Readings
David Baldwin “The Concept of Security” Review of International Studies (1997), 23, pp 5-26 accessed at http://tau.ac.il/~daniel/pdf/37.pdf [14 January 2013] [21 pages]
Rod Lyon and Hayley Channer “Strategic interests and Australian grand strategy”, ASPI Policy Analysis Paper 108 Thursday, 7 February 2013 accessed at http://www.aspi.org.au/publications/publications_all.aspx
General Critique Guidelines
Whenever you read an essay, use the following questions to guide your response. First, keep in mind that, although you may not be a writing expert, you are THE reader of this essay and your response is a valid one. I have found that almost every reader, regardless of experience, can identify the primary strength and weakness in an essay, although their method of describing those issues may be different. The author will welcome your response and your ability to explain your reaction in a new way. Although the author is not required to, and really shouldn’t, respond to everything you say, he or she will take your comments seriously and consider how the essays has enlightened or confused you. Therefore, comment freely, although respectfully. Keep in mind that it is better to begin by noting the strengths of the essay before pointing out the areas that need improvement. I would always include a personal response to questions like the following: What about the essay most connects with your experience? Moves you? Provokes you? Entertains you?
So that is how to respond. So how do you critique? For every essay, regardless of the mode, consider the broad categories of content, organization, style, and correctness.
1. Content: Consider the topic (its appropriateness and interest for the assignment as well as a clear focus suitable to essay length) and the way the topic is developed (clarity sufficiency of its argument, its scope, subcategories, amount and type of examples, anecdotes, evidence, etc.).
2. Organization: Consider how the essay is introduced and concluded (especially looking for a “frame” to the essay, where the intro and conclusion refer to the same idea), whether the thesis is located in the most helpful place (direct or implied), how the essay is structured, whether the order or extent of development is successful, as well as how individual paragraphs are organized (clear topic sentences, appropriate and concrete evidence, logical organization of evidence).
3. Style: Style can refer to the overall style of an essay: whether the tone is appropriate (humorous, serious, reflective, satirical, etc.), whether you use sufficient and appropriate variety (factual, analytical, evaluative, reflective), whether you use sufficient creativity. Style can also refer to the style of individual sentences: whether you use a variety of sentences styles and lengths, whether sentences are worded clearly, and whether word choice is interesting and appropriate.
4. Correctness: Correctness refers to grammar, punctuation, and form of the essay. You do not need to know the exact grammatical term or rule to know when a sentence is not correct. Even though you may not know the term dangling modifier, you could identify that the following sentence is not correct:
Rolling around in the bottom of the drawer, Tim found the missing earring. Certainly the earring was rolling, not Tim!]
You could also easily tell that the following sentence actually contains two sentences that need punctuation between them:
The new manager instituted several new procedures some were impractical. [You need to add punctuation (period) after "procedures" and capitalize "some."]
Feel free to mark the essay at the point of the error with a specific recommendation (“run-on sentence”) or a general comment (“this sentence sounds wrong to me”). You can also simply put an “X” by any sentence that seems incorrect. See the back of WR for commonly used Correction Symbols.
Further Directions for Specific Assignments
Below are more detailed questions to consider when responding to individual types of essays. First, make sure that you have reviewed the description of the essay mode in the Essay Assignment Guidelines. Use at least one or two of these when responding to an essay. Do not simply answer yes or no; offer specific evidence from the text and elaborate on the reasons behind your answer.
Personal Essay Critique:
1. Does the writer have a clear but understated purpose to the essay?
2. Does it avoid being overly moralistic or heavy-handed?
3. Does the essay contain suspense or tension that is resolved in some way?
4. Do you have any suggestions for organizing the essay, such as focusing in on one event rather than many, providing more background, turning explanation into action, etc.?
5. Does the essay make good use of concrete description, anecdote, and dialogue?
6. Does the essay help you to feel the emotions rather than just describe the emotions of the author?
7. Does the essay reveal a significant aspect of the writer’s personality?
8. Does the writer seem authentic?
9. Is this a passionate piece? Is it creative?
Critical Review Critique
1. Does a direct thesis convey both the subject and the reviewer’s value judgment?
2. Does the review provide a summary or description to help you experience the film, music, event, etc.? Note places where the author provides too much or too little detail.
3. Does the essay clearly identify relevant criteria for evaluation? Are they appropriate, believable, and consistent?
4. Are any important features of the reviewed subject omitted?
5. Logos (logic, content): Does the essay provide sufficient, relevant, and interesting details and examples to adequately inform and entertain?
6. Ethos (author): Does the author’s judgment seem sound and convincing?
7. Pathos (emotional appeals): Does the author responsibly and effectively utilize emotional appeals to the audience?
8. Does the author include adequate reference to the opposition and respond to that opposition appropriately?
Information Essay Critique: The questions posed about an informative essay will vary, depending on the purpose and strategy of the essay. The SMGW suggests evaluating for the following issues:
1. Is topic clearly explained and sufficiently focused?
2. Does the content fit the audience?
3. Is it organized effectively?
4. Are definitions clear?
5. Are other strategies (classification, comparison/contrast, analysis) used effectively?
6. Are sources used sufficiently, effectively, and appropriately?
You might also assess the following criteria:
1. Does the author utilize vivid detail, interesting examples, and lively language?
2. Does the essay avoid emphasizing judgment over explanation?
3. Does the essay have a clear focus or implied thesis?
Comparison/Contrast Essay Critique
1. Is the purpose for a comparison or contrast evident and convincing?
2. Does the essay identify significant and parallel characteristics for comparison?
3. Does the author adequately explain, analyze, or reflect on the comparison or contrast?
4. Does the author provide appropriate transitions words to indicate comparison and contrast?
5. Is the treatment of each side of the comparison or contrast in balance?
6. Does the essay provide sufficient, relevant, and interesting details?
Feature Article Critique
1. Does this article interest you? Do you think it will interest the intended audience? Can you suggest ways to increase interest?
2. Can you tell what the “angle” or implied thesis is? Does the author avoid editorial judgment on the subject while still keeping the purpose clear?
3. Has the writer done sufficient research? What questions have gone unasked or unanswered? Whose point of view or what information would add further to the completeness of the feature?
4. Is the subject presented vividly with sensory images, graphic detail, and figurative language? Do you have suggestions of details or images to include?
5. Does the writer use an appropriate mixture of anecdote, quotation, description, and explanation? Would more or less of one of these improve the essay?
6. Are the beginning and ending paragraphs interesting and appropriate for the specific audience? Consider the need for a “lead sentence” if intended for a newspaper.
Documented Argument Critique
1. Is the thesis clear, argumentative, and effective? Why or why not?
2. Are the topic and thesis are reasonable for the assignment, audience, and context of the essay?
3. Does the author define his or her terms and provide sufficient background information? What ideas or terms are undefined or inadequately explained?
4. Is the thesis supported by clear reasons? Are the reasons clearly worded and supported sufficiently?
5. Do the reasons fit logically together and are they placed in the right order?
6. Does the author adequately address the opposition? What is another opposing argument he/she should or could have addressed?
7. Has the author done adequate research?
8. Are the works cited adequately introduced and explained before citing from them?
9. Does the paper contain an appropriate blend of well-placed quotations within a context of the author’s own words and paraphrases from other sources?
10. Is the writer clearly in charge, naturally introducing and interacting with sources rather than merely reporting on them?
11. Do you find the argument convincing? What might you add or omit?
No comments:
Post a Comment