Order 325118: You can select from the given topic list and inform us
tutorthammy
instructions.pdf
The completion of a 3,000 word Research Essay allows students to develop core
disciplinary knowledge, enhance research skills, show effective written communication
skills, and demonstrate originality and critical thinking.
The essay should flow logically from the introduction to the evidence in the main body
to the conclusion. It should reflect wide reading across a diverse body of academic
literature, and should demonstrate critical analysis and objectivity.
The Essay will be marked according to set assessment criteria with a focus on
comprehension, analysis and argument, written expression, structure and organisation,
and referencing.
The grading rubric is available below.
Please submit your paper using the Turnitin dropbox below.
Footnotes are included in your final word count; bibliography and title page are not.
Select one essay topic from the following list
Essay Questions
1. Is classical strategic theory relevant to war in the twenty-first century?
2. Critically assess the role of strategic culture in shaping a nation’s behaviour in
war.
3. Critically assess the relative effectiveness of different types of approaches to
making strategy.
4. What type of relationship between soldiers and statesmen best serves effective
strategy-making and why?
5. Coercion has been described as ‘a seductive form of military strength,
because, like modern courtship, it offers gratification without commitment’ –
discuss.
6. It is generally assumed that superior military power should bring victory in
war, yet there are many cases when weaker groups have triumphed over
stronger adversaries. How can we explain their success in these wars?
7. Does the use of force still have utility for Western states?
8. Contemporary warfare have been described as ‘combat as politics’ – what
Please use the IEEE Referencing style (footnotes/bibliography) for your assignment.
Criteria and weighting Excellent (HD) 85-100 Very good (D)
(75-84) Good (Cr)
(65-74) Needs improvement (P)
(50-64) Fail
(0-49)
1. Substantive content and analysis (30%)
Deep and critical understanding of core concepts and issues. Analysis is finely balanced and coherent. It displays significant and distinctive originality, creativity and insight in identifying and conveying competing arguments.
Provides strong evidence of the integration and evaluation of critical ideas and concepts. Analysis shows insight and ability in considering competing arguments, with some evidence of originality and creativity.
Sound understanding of core concepts and issues with some evidence of critical evaluation. Analysis is broadly clear and convincing with evidence of attempt at providing relevant justification.
Displays some demonstration and understanding of concepts and ability to replicate basic ideas. Routine analysis and argumentation with minimal justification, some confusion, and problematic communication.
Missing, partial or faulty understanding of key concepts. Missing, undeveloped or confused argumentation.
2. Argument structure and presentation (30%)
Essay has a focused, coherent and clear argument. The paper follows a clear thread throughout and is structured in a manner that is entirely clear to the reader. Seamless transitions and signposts between sections throughout. Paragraphs flow logically and support the main argument.
Essay contains a clear and logical argument that is clearly organised and is generally easy to follow. Effective use of transitions and signposts between sections and paragraphs are relevant and well-ordered.
An argument and structure is present, but it can be difficult to follow at points and the reader must largely reconstruct it from the text. Some useful transitions and signposts between paragraphs.
Student attempts, but fails, to make a coherent argument (e.g., starts with a question/statement that is not developed) and while there is evidence of structure it is unclear and difficult to follow. Minimal transitions and unclear progression between paragraphs.
No attempt is made to develop a logical argument. The paper is unstructured and poorly presented.
Grading Rubric
3. Style and grammar (20%)
Excellent prose All sentences are complete and grammatical. Good, clear examples are used to illuminate concepts and issues. Information is accurate. Paper has been spell-checked and proofread, and has no errors, and no rhetorical questions or slang.
Clear and readable prose. All sentences are complete and grammatical. Information is accurate. Paper has been spell-checked and proofread, and has very few errors, and no rhetorical questions or slang.
Generally clear prose. A few sentences are incomplete and/or ungrammatical. Information is mostly accurate. Paper has some spelling errors, rhetorical questions, and/or uses of slang.
Frequently awkward prose. Many sentences are incomplete and/or ungrammatical. Information is sometimes inaccurate. Paper contains a numerous spelling errors, rhetorical questions and/or uses of slang.
The text is largely unintelligible, incomplete and ungrammatical.
4. Evidence and referencing (20%)
Evidence is used from a wide range of sources. The student has displayed independent initiative in going beyond lecture material and course readings, utilising other relevant scholarly books, websites, journal articles, etc. All evidence is correctly cited in footnotes and bibliography.
Evidence is used from a good range of sources, including lectures material and course readings. This is supported with some further sources. All evidence is properly cited in footnotes and bibliography, with limited errors.
Provides necessary evidence to convince reader of most aspects of the main argument but not all. The importance/relevance of evidence provided is not clear. All evidence is cited in footnotes and bibliography, but there are problems with completeness or format of some citations.
Not enough evidence is provided to support the student’s argument, or evidence is incomplete, incorrect, or oversimplified. Information from lectures and readings is not effectively used. Some pieces are unreferenced or inaccurately referenced, and there are numerous problems with completeness and formatting of citations.
Either no evidence is provided, or there are numerous factual mistakes, omissions or oversimplifications. There is little or no mention of information from lectures and readings. No attempt is made to cite evidence.
