Purpose: This assessment task requires you to write a report analysing an event in International Relations that has been presented in the media (this event will be provided to you). This assessment helps you to achieve Unit Learning Outcomes 3 and 5. The work-scenario outlined at the end of this section provides the wider rationale for this assessment and thus demonstrates this task’s relevance to future careers and work situations. Tutorial sessions in Week 5 will briefly discuss this assessment.
Instructions: You will choose one of the four cases identified in the Assessment 2 Questions document/folder (to be uploaded below by end of Week 3) and write a 1,500 word case analysis. This task requires you to:
(a) First, provide a succinct summary of the event that was presented in the media, drawing on at least four quality external sources (must include at least two sources from the “grey” literature) to supplement your summary and facilitate the next part of the task. These sources are in addition to the media article provided, which can form part of the event summary as the lead-in to this section. [Note: For more on what “grey literature” means, see the learning section on Additional Information and Resources on Moodle.
(b) Second, identify which theoretical approach best depicts the event or issues as you have outlined them in your Case Summary and apply it to explain the event and to say what logical predictions could be made about how this situation or event might unfold over the next few months/years based on your choice of theory. This section requires you to provide evidence from the event and the research you have done to elaborate on it will help you support your theoretical reading of the event in question. You should use relevant academic sources to support your theoretical analysis. More guidelines are available in the Work Scenario section below.
(c) Third, suggest and discuss how an alternative IR theoretical approach could offer new/different insights that might see a different conclusion, or that yield similar outcomes/conclusion even though the theoretical mechanisms might differ. The alternative approach must be from a different theoretical approach from that you selected for the main theoretical interpretation (eg. if your main theoretical approach was from Realism, your alternative could be from Liberalism or Constructivism; it should not be from Realism). Do note that this section should not be purely conjecture with no basis in reality. Find evidence that there are openings in the event/situation, no matter how small, that make your suggested alternative plausible. You should use relevant academic sources to support your theoretical analysis. More guidelines are available in the Work Scenario section below.
(d) End the report with a Conclusion that sets out your argument on the event based on your theoretical analysis of the case. In other words, this final conclusion draws out what you think about the event and especially how two different theoretical approaches suggest either different trajectories of the event or perhaps they show similar trajectories because of the features of the event in question.
(e) In addition, your report will contain a succinct abstract summarising your case report (placed at the top/start of your report) and a final section on references/sources cited. The abstract will be a one paragraph summary of your entire report that enables a reader to quickly grasp the content of your report. This is a crucial part of writing reports, theses, presentations, and strategic plans, among others. Since your abstract summarises your entire report, this is usually the last part you will write (although you may already have an idea of its contents as you begin writing your report). Note: the abstract is NOT an introduction (such as those written for essays); it is a factual summary of the contents of your report summarising each section so a reader (or whoever set you this task) will know at once what your report says.
Format/Structure of the Case Study: This case study analysis will be written as a report under six headings (you could supplement the suggested headings with a sub-title, eg “Primary Theoretical Interpretation: Power Transition”; or “Alternative Theoretical Reading: A constructivist interpretation”):
Abstract of Report
Case/Event Summary
Primary Theoretical Interpretation
Alternative Theoretical Reading
Conclusion
References (only those sources cited in the Report; make sure you fulfil the source requirements for writing parts (a), (b) and (c) above.
Cases and Marking Rubric: The cases to be analysed (including tips and guidelines) will be uploaded below as “Additional files” by the end of Week 3. Tutorial sessions in Week 5 will discuss this assessment task.
Work Scenario: Wider rationale for this assessment
It is often the case that because of your knowledge of IR, you may be asked by your manager/boss at your organisation (whether a government or company or NGO or international organisation) to provide a brief analysis of an event she/he read or heard about in the media. Your boss would like to know what the event means, its background, how it might unfold over time, and whether there are other ways of interpreting the situation. Your report could be among other reports your employer uses to make strategic decisions about the future direction of the organisation in the light of the reported event.
This is why you have been given a media article of a fairly current event or problem as most people, including bosses, get their first news of events in world politics from the media. You will be given an article from the mainstream journalism/media because of the higher likelihood that good journalism practices/ethics will be followed. Hence you are not being asked to comment on or evaluate the truth or bias of the media report itself.
The assessment tests your understanding of the key theoretical approaches we have covered in Weeks 1-4. It does this by calling on you to apply that knowledge to a current event and to draw conclusions about that event when interpreted through your choice of theoretical approach. Your choice would be shaped by the empirical developments of the event itself. So, your choice of primary theoretical approach also involves looking at the event itself and understanding its dominant dynamics. This is why writing an informative summary of the event beyond what is presented in the provided media article is a vital part of this task. This task also involves the ability to apply theories to events in world politics in order to draw some conclusions about future trajectories (however tentative these may be) from that application.
This assessment also tests your ability to consider how different theoretical approaches offer different or even similar views of the event/problem. This is why this assessment asks you to consider how a different theoretical approach could provide an alternative reading of the situation. Doing so could show you that actors relevant to the event might act differently or adopt a different policy option and thereby could change the course of the event. However, you may also find that the alternative theoretical reading in fact reinforces the primary dynamics. For example, you have expected tensions in a region to grow (by using a realist approach as your primary interpretation) but you also realise that a constructivist reading tells you how those tensions could get worse due to negative historical memories, or how tensions could be weakened if earlier collaborative engagements are revived [note these are only hypothetical examples]. Thus, you could see future outcomes similar to your original analysis, or you could see a more optimistic view or even a more pessimistic view. Do note that this section should not be purely conjecture with no basis in reality. Find evidence that there are openings in the event/situation, no matter how small, that make your suggested alternative plausible. This is why writing an informative case summary section is so vital to this task.
You may be wondering why an assessment task weighted at 45% involves writing “only” 1,500 words. This is because you are being assessed on your skill in producing a succinct yet informative case study report. It involves a suite of skills in writing succinctly — from composing narrative and argumentation, in judging what is relevant and should be prioritised in the report, in determining what does not need to be in the report or could be shorter as it is of lower priority or relevance. This is part of what makes this unit a capstone unit, drawing on knowledge and skills developed through tasks completed in previous units even if these are from other courses/areas of study. The skill of producing succinct and coherent reports is relevant and much sought after in the real-world of work and hence is a transferable skill.
