western democracy in crisis: the rise of populism and post ... · the information domain....

1

Course Syllabus (Summer Programme)

Western Democracy in Crisis: the Rise of Populism and

Post-truth Politics (POL214G)

Contact Details for Professor

Name: Antonios Nestoras

E-mail: [email protected]

Mobile: 0489 108 243

Lectures

Tuesdays 14h00-18h00 & Thursdays 09h00-13h00

Course Description

This course will examine one of the defining political puzzles of our time: from the EU

referendum in the United Kingdom to the presidential election in the United States

and the rise of populist forces everywhere in Europe, there is a growing realization

that truth may no longer be relevant to politics. ‘Post-truth’ politics – the Oxford

Dictionaries word of the year – threatens to turn Western liberal democracy upside-

down. The public scorns at politicians, technocrats and experts; conspiracies and

viral hoaxes run rampant in social media; objective facts are less influential in

shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief. We will use an

mailto:[email protected]

2

interdisciplinary approach – with lectures, group activities and assignments – to

examine the philosophical underpinnings, the evolution and the effects of populism.

In the course of seven weeks we will consider a range of questions such as: is

populism a crisis of democracy or a legitimate revolt of the masses against their

shrinking political importance? To what extent can populism be considered as a

descendant of eighteenth century Romanticism? What are the ‘post-truth’ challenges

to the European Union, the transatlantic security and the liberal world order?

Learning Objectives

By the end of this course, students should:

In terms of knowledge

• Have acquired profound knowledge of the theoretical and historical

frameworks in the academic literature on populism. He is able to apply these

frameworks in order to understand and interpret the current processes and

dynamics in international affairs.

• Have gained an understanding of the main actors and the main processes that

contributed to the rise of populism and is able to apply this knowledge in order

to examine current international affairs.

• Have gained insight into the broad societal context conducive to the rise of

populist politics and is able to take this societal context into account in the

analysis and interpretation of current problems in international affairs.

In terms of skills

• Have improved the ability to apply common qualitative and quantitative

research methods and is able to apply these in the field of international affairs.

• Have improved the ability to communicate clearly, fluently and accurately; as

well in a written report as in an oral presentation.

3

• Have developed the ability to apply a multi-disciplinary perspective in his

analysis of international affairs.

In terms of attitude

• The bachelor has an open and academic attitude, characterized by accuracy,

critical reflection and academic curiosity.

• The bachelor is able to work in a multi-cultural team.

Teaching Method

This is a research-oriented course with a heavy reading requirement. Students will be

given the theoretical tools to examine a populist movement of their choice (either in

groups or individually, depending on class composition). Ex-cathedra teaching will be

combined with group discussions, short essays and other in-class activities.

Course Materials

The course will not use a textbook. The professor will provide all required readings.

Course Outline

Week Topic

W1 – S1 Introduction to the Course: defining (liberal) democracy:

W1 – S2 Legal holiday – no class

W2 – S1 The liberal democratic recession and the return of authoritarianism

W2 – S2 Populism: pathological form, ideology or corrective for democracy?

W3 – S1 Other approaches: populism as a style, discourse and strategy

4

W3 – S2 Populism as an (anti)-intellectual movement: a romantic revival?

W4 – S1 Themes: globalization, immigration and foreign policy

W4 – S2 Culture: the postmodern shift in the western concept of truth

W5 – S1 Technology: post-truth culture and the network society

W5 – S2 Implications: international order, cyberspace and net-wars

W6 – S1 Presentations of Group/Individual Projects

W6 – S2 Presentations of Group/Individual Projects

W7 Final Exams

Detailed course schedule

Week 1 – Session 1 (May 23)

Introduction

• Introduction to the course: objectives, schedule and assignments

Defining (liberal) democracy: history, theory and conditions

• What is and what is not democracy? Principles and procedures that make

democracy possible. Liberal Democracy, Democratization and International

Order. Historical examination of waves of democratization.

Essential Readings

Dahl, R. A. (2000). On Democracy. New Haven: Yale University Press, Ch. 4 & 5

Schmitter, P. C., & Karl, T. L. (1991). What democracy is. and is not. Journal of

Democracy. , 23, 75-88

Recommended Readings

5

Lipset, S.M. (1959). Some Social Requisites of Democracy: Economic Development

and Political Legitimacy. The American Political Science Review, Vol. 53, No.

1, pp. 69-105

Moore, B. (1967). Social origins of dictatorship and democracy. Boston, MA : Beacon

Press, Ch. VII

Schumpeter, J. A. (2006). Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. New York:

Routledge, Ch. XXI & XXII

Week 1 – Session 2 (May 25)

Legal Holiday – no class

\Week 2 – Session 1 (May 30)

The liberal democratic recession and the return of authoritarianism

• The end of democratic transition, the end of democratization? Elections

without democracy. Democratic contestation and tensions. Non-democracies,

competitive authoritarianism, and illiberal democracies, pseudo-democracies

and hybrid regimes.

Essential Readings

Zakaria, F. (1997). The rise of illiberal democracy. Foreign Affairs. 76(6), pp. 22-43

Diamond, L. (January 01, 2002). Thinking About Hybrid Regimes. Journal of

Democracy, 13, 21-35


Carothers, T. (January 01, 2002). The end of the transition paradigm. Journal of

Democracy (print), 5-21

Levitsky, S., & Way, L. A. (January 01, 2002). The rise of competitive

authoritarianism. Journal of Democracy (print), 51-65

6

Diamond, L. (January 01, 2015). Facing Up to the Democratic Recession. Journal of

Democracy, 26, 1, 141-155

Week 2 – Session 2 (June 1)

Populism: pathological form, ideology or corrective for democracy?

• Populism as a pathological form. Populism as a perennial possibility in

democracy. Populism as a political logic and legitimate revolt of the masses.

Populism as a thin-centered ideology. Characteristics and variations of left and

right populism in the West.

Essential Readings

Abts, K., & Rummens, S. (October 01, 2007). Populism versus democracy. Peace

Research Abstracts Journal, 44, 5.

Kaltwasser , C. R. (2012). The ambivalence of populism: threat and corrective for

democracy, Democratization, 19:2, 184-208

Canovan, M. (March 01, 1999). Trust the People! Populism and the Two Faces of

Democracy. Political Studies, 47, 1, 2-16


Laclau, E. (2007). On populist reason. New York: Verso, Ch 1 & 4

Schedler, A. (January 01, 1996). Anti-political-establishment Parties. Party

Politics, 2, 3, 291-312

Barr, R. (January 01, 2009). Populists, Outsiders and Anti-Establishment

Politics. Party Politics, 15, 1, 29-48

Mudde, C. (September 01, 2004). The Populist Zeitgeist. Government and

Opposition, 39, 4, 542-563


Other approaches: populism as a style, discourse and strategy

7

• Populism as a political style and as a discursive technique. Framing analysis

and populism. Populism and political communication. Populist mobilization.

Essential Readings

Hofstadter, R. (1964). The paranoid style in American politics. Harper’s Magazine

Moffitt, B., & Tormey, S. (June 01, 2014). Rethinking Populism: Politics, Mediatisation

and Political Style. Political Studies, 62, 2, 381-397


Jagers, J. & Walgrave, S. (2007). Populism as political communication style: An

empirical study of political parties' discourse in Belgium. European Journal of

Political Research, 46, 3, 319-345

Jansen, R. S. (2011). Populist Mobilization: A New Theoretical Approach to

Populism. Sociological Theory, 29, 2

Aslanidis, P. (April 01, 2016). Is Populism an Ideology? A Refutation and a New

Perspective. Political Studies, 64, 88-104


Populism as an intellectual movement: a revival of political romanticism

• The philosophy of Enlightenment. Rationalism, Empiricism and the concept of

truth in the Enlightenment. Romanticism as an attack on the Enlightenment.

Anti-elitism and anti-intellectualism: the lasting effects of Romanticism.

Political romanticism. Populism as a romantic revival.

Essential Readings

Outram, D. (2013). Enlightenment. Cambridge University Press, Ch. 1

8

Schmitt, C. (2011). Political romanticism. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1986, Ch. 2,

pp. 51-108


Berlin, I., & Hardy, H. (2001). The roots of romanticism. Princeton: Princeton Univ.

Press, Ch. 1, 2 & 7


Themes: Globalization, immigration and foreign policy

• From mercantilism to the dominance of the (neo)-liberal model. Globalization

and its discontents in the West. Anti-globalization movements and the return of

economic nationalism.

• The anti-immigration discourse of the European far right. Anti-immigrant

frames and strategies in the European refugee crisis.

• The foreign policy discourse of left and right populist parties. Anti-American

narratives and the rise of pro-Russian populism in Europe. Europeanism

versus Eurasianism.

Essential Readings

Polanyi, K. (1946). Origins of our time: The great transformation. London: V.

Gollancz, Chapters 12 & 13

Calhoun, Craig (2013) Occupy Wall Street in perspective. British journal of sociology,

64 (1). pp. 26-38


Hjerm, M., & Nagayoshi, K. (2011). The composition of the minority population as a

threat: Can real economic and cultural threats explain

xenophobia?. International Sociology, 26, 6, 815-843

9

Balfour, R. et al. (2016) ‘Europe’s Troublemakers: The Populist Challenge to Foreign

Policy’, European Policy Centre, Ch. 4 & 5


Culture: the postmodern shift in the western concept of truth

• Understanding the post-truth culture. From the absolute to the elusive: the

post-modern shift of the concept of truth in western societies. What is ‘new’

about fake news? The decline of truth and the rise of bullshit.

Essential Readings

Frankfurt, H. G. (2010). On bullshit. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press,

Introduction

Jencks, C. (January 01, 1987). Postmodern and Late Modern: The Essential

Definitions. Chicago Review, 35, 4, 31-58


Harvey, D. (2008). The condition of postmodernity: An enquiry into the origins of

cultural change. Cambridge: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 3-65

Lyotard, J. F. (2010). The postmodern condition: A report on knowledge.

Minneapolis, Minn: Univ. of Minnesota Press, Appendix: Answering the

question: what is postmodernism?

Baudrillard, J. (2008). Simulacra and simulation. Ann Arbor, Mich: Univ. of Michigan

Press, Chapter: On Nihilism


Technology: post-truth culture and the network society

• The revolution in information technology. The Network Society: the changing

concepts of space and time. Instant communication and social media. Facts,

emotions and the psychology of the network masses.

Essential Readings

10

Bimber, B. (January 01, 1998). The Internet and Political Transformation: Populism,

Community, and Accelerated Puralism. Polity, 31, 133

Hurwitz, R. (November 01, 1999). Who Needs Politics? Who Needs People? The

Ironies of Democracy in Cyberspace. Contemporary Sociology, 28, 6, 655-661


Castells, M. (2010). The information age: Economy, society, and culture. Volume I:

The Rise of the Network Society. Chichester, West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell,

pp. 28-76, 440-464 and 484-509

Gilbert, D. T. (January 01, 1991). How mental systems believe. American

Psychologist, 46, 2, 107-119


Implications: international order, cyberspace and net-wars

• From unipolar to multipolar international system. International competition in

the information domain. Cyberspace as a battle-space. Old wars and net-wars.

Information warfare, propaganda and wars of ideas.

Essential Readings

M, . M. M. E. (June 01, 2010). From Global Village to Virtual Battlespace: The

Colonizing of the Internet and the Extension of Realpolitik. International

Studies Quarterly, 54, 2, 381-401

Eriksson, E. A. (September 01, 1999). Viewpoint: Information warfare: Hype or

reality?. The Nonproliferation Review, 6, 3, 57-64


Hughes, R. (2010). A Treaty for Cyberspace. International Affairs, 86, 2, 523-541

Dugin, Alexander. The Fourth Political Theory (London: Arktos, 2012), pp. 11-31.

Millerman, M. (2014) ‘Theory Talk #66: Alexander Dugin on Eurasianism, the

Geopolitics of Land and Sea, and a Russian Theory of Multipolarity’

Week 6 – Session 1 and Session 2 (June 27 and June 29)

11

Presentations of group/individual project

Week 7 (exam date and time tbc)

Preparation and final exams

Course Assessment

The students will be evaluated on the basis of their performance as follows

• QQCs 25%

• Group or

Individual Paper 35%

• Final examination 40%

• TOTAL 100%

Description of Assignments and Grading Criteria

QQCs (25%): The course involves a demanding reading schedule and discussion of

assigned readings in class forms a major part of each session. In the beginning of

each lecture, the students will have to submit a Question, a Quote and a Comment

for each assigned reading. QQCs are designed to ensure student participation and a

structured, meaningful discussion of texts in the class. (The professor will provide a

template). Grading: 0.5 points for each QQC, plus bonus points for consistency.

Group/individual Research Paper (35%): Using the theoretical frameworks of the

literature presented and discussed in class, students will be asked to examine one,

two or more populist movements. The projects will examine the main narratives and

strategy of the populist actors along the following axes: reasons for emergence,

intellectual and cultural context, electoral base and targeted groups or constituencies,

12

narratives used in foreign policy-globalization-immigration, policy implications and

influence, stance on fake news, appeals to emotion and conspiracy theories. The

final format of this assignment will depend on final class size and composition.

Depending on class size, the groups may consist of two or three students; or, if class

is too small, the students may tackle the assignment with individual research papers.

Depending on class composition and language range the case studies can vary from

Brexit to Trump, from Russian foreign policy narratives to Le Pen’s French Front

National, etc. Week 6 of the course will be dedicated to the presentation of on-going

projects, discussion and exchange of ideas in the class. This will be an opportunity

for the students to get feedback from the professor and fellow students for their on-

going projects, with the primary purpose of sharpening the theoretical consistency,

the argument and focus on their own research papers. [Deadline for submission: end

of Week 6 (July 2), via Turnitin]

Final exam: will include 10 multiple choice questions (10%); two long open answers

on definitions and concepts approximately half a page each (20%); one long answer

comparing/contrasting theoretical approaches (30%); one longer essay, two pages

maximum (40%).

Detailed grading criteria and rubrics for each assignment to be provided

Grading Scale of Vesalius College

Vesalius College grading policy, in line with the Flemish Educational norms, is now

as stated follows:

Letter grade Scale of 20 Scale of 100

A 17.0-20.0 85-100

A- 16.1-16.9 81-84

B+ 15.3-16.0 77-80

http://turnitin.com/en_us/higher-education

13

B 14.5-15.2 73-76

B- 13.7-14.4 69-72

C+ 13.1-13.6 66-68

C 12.3-13.0 62-65

C- 11.5-12.2 58-61

D+ 10.7-11.4 54-57

D 10.0-10.6 50-53

F 0-9.9 0-49

Additional Course Policies

Late papers will not be accepted unless there are serious legitimate reasons.

Provision of a signed medical note is required, and notice must be given prior to the

deadline.

Academic Honesty Statement

Academic dishonesty is NOT tolerated in this course.

Academic honesty is not only an ethical issue but also the foundation of scholarship.

Cheating and plagiarism are therefore serious breaches of academic integrity.

Following the College policy, cheating and plagiarism cases will be communicated in

writing to the Associate Dean for Students and submitted to the Student Conduct

Committee for disciplinary action.

If you refer to someone else’s work, appropriate references and citations must be

provided. Grammar, spelling and punctuation count, so use the tools necessary to

correct before handing in assignments.

15

Appendix 1: Major Learning Objectives, Teaching Methods, Testing and Feedback Questionnaire

Course code and course name: POL214G – Western Democracy in Crisis: the Rise of Populism and post-truth politics

Instructor: Nestoras

Summary:

Number of assignments used in this course: 2

Number of feedback opportunities in this course (either written or oral): each session (oral); after presentation (oral); assignment (written)

Number and types of teaching methods: Ex-cathedra – Class discussion – Audio-visual – In-class activities (sorting, concept mapping, etc.)

Does your course require graded student oral presentations? No

Major Learning Objectives Course Learning objectives

addressing the Major

Objectives (choose the

most important ones that

your course actually

addresses)

Methods used to Teach

Course Objectives

Methods (and

numbers/types of

assignments) used to test

these learning objectives

Type, Timing and

Numbers of Feedback

given to Student

The bachelor has a profound

knowledge of the main actors

and the main processes in

European and global

international affairs and is able

to apply this knowledge in the

current international affairs.

The bachelor has gained an

understanding of the main

actors and the main processes

that contributed to the rise of

populism and is able to apply

this knowledge in order to

examine current international

affairs.

Ex-cathedra

Class discussion

Audio-visual

Activities

Final exam

QCCs

Research project

Feedback on QCCs during

class discussion

Oral feedback after

presentation of project

Written feedback with

grades

The bachelor has a

demonstrable insight in the

theoretical and historical

The bachelor has a profound

knowledge of the theoretical

and historical frameworks in

Ex-cathedra

Class discussion

Final exam

QCCs


class discussion

16






addresses)


Course Objectives

Methods (and

numbers/types of



Type, Timing and

Numbers of Feedback

given to Student

frameworks in the academic

literature on international

affairs. He is able to apply these

frameworks in order to

understand and interpret the

current processes and dynamics

in international affairs.

the academic literature on

populism. He is able to apply

these frameworks in order to

understand and interpret the

current processes and

dynamics in international

affairs.

Audio-visual

Activities

Research project Oral feedback after



grades

The bachelor has insight into the

broad societal context and is

able to take this societal context

into account in the analysis and

interpretation of current

problems in international affairs.

The bachelor has insight into

the broad societal context

conducive to the rise of

populist politics and is able to

take this societal context into

account in the analysis and

interpretation of current

problems in international

affairs.

Ex-cathedra

Class discussion

Audio-visual

Activities

Final exam

QCCs

Research project


class discussion

Oral feedback after



grades

The bachelor knows and is able

to apply common qualitative

and quantitative research

methods and is able to apply

these in the field of international

affairs.

The bachelor knows and is

able to apply common

qualitative and quantitative

research methods and is able to

apply these in the field of

international affairs.

Ex-cathedra

Readings

Class discussion

Research Project Oral feedback after



grades

17






addresses)


Course Objectives

Methods (and

numbers/types of



Type, Timing and

Numbers of Feedback

given to Student

The bachelor has an open and

academic attitude, characterized

by accuracy, critical reflection

and academic curiosity.

The bachelor has an open and

academic attitude,

characterized by accuracy,

critical reflection and

academic curiosity.

Ex-cathedra

Readings

Class discussion

Final exam

QCCs

Research project


class discussion

Oral feedback after



grades

The bachelor is able to apply a

multi-disciplinary perspective in

his analysis of international

affairs.

The bachelor is able to apply a

multi-disciplinary perspective

in his analysis of international

affairs.

Ex-cathedra

Readings

Class discussion

Research project Oral feedback after



grades

The bachelor is able to work in

a multi-cultural team.

The bachelor is able to work in

a multi-cultural team.

Class discussion

Activities

Presentation of project Once after the presentation

Student will receive

feedback from the whole

class

The bachelor recognizes the

importance of life-long learning.

- - - -

The bachelor is able to

communicate clearly, fluently

The bachelor is able to

communicate clearly, fluently

Class discussion Presentation of project Once after the presentation

Student will receive

18






addresses)


Course Objectives

Methods (and

numbers/types of



Type, Timing and

Numbers of Feedback

given to Student

and accurately; as well in a

written report as in an oral

presentation.

and accurately; as well in a

written report as in an oral

presentation.

Activities feedback from the whole

class

The bachelor is able to include

ethical judgments in his analysis

of current problems in

international affairs and assesses

the impact of these ethical

judgments on the solutions

proposed for current

international affairs.

- - - -

19

Appendix 1: Rubric for Research Paper 200-level

Criterion Description Points Comments (or directly in paper)

Introduction and Research Question / Statement / Puzzle

( /8 Points)

Explain Choice of Topic and why it is academically relevant /2

Clear and Concise Research Question / Research Statement /4

Outline of structure of the paper and main argument /2

Literature Review

( /12 Points)

The literature review identifies the relevant (i.e. to the chosen topic) arguments and debates in the literature and places the student’s own topic in the wider academic context

/3

It compares, contrasts and synthesizes the main authors and arguments /3

It evaluates strengths and weaknesses of the literature and identifies clear gaps the student’s paper addresses

/3

Based on the Literature Review, the student also identifies major theories and core concepts that have been applied by authors to the topic at hand and applies some of them in the analysis part of the paper (see Analysis / Discussion criteria)

/3

Methods

( /8 Points)

The student chooses, explains and justifies an appropriate method to tackle the research question

/4

The student demonstrates the ability to select and present suitable data for the analysis /4

Analysis / Discussion

Extensive Analysis and Arguments supported by strong empirical examples and data /8

Use and synthesis of a good number of sources and references to support key arguments directly addressing the research question

/8

20

Criterion Description Points Comments (or directly in paper)

( /32 Points) The student explains and shows awareness of appropriate theoretical debates that have been used in the literature to examine similar problems and applies some concepts to the analysis

/8

Critical and dialectic (thesis/antithesis/synthesis) evaluation of strengths and weaknesses of core assumptions and arguments of other authors in non-prejudicial and open-minded manner

/8

Structure

( /20 Points)

The paper is structured in a coherent and logical way – with clear subsections – supporting the clarity of the argument and analysis

/10

A coherent line of argumentation, linking empirical examples back to answering the main research question.

/10

Formal Aspects

( /10 points)

Correct use of language (spelling, grammar, expression) /3

Correct citation and bibliography /3

Appropriate Number of Sources /4

Conclusions

( /10 points)

Stating in clear and succinct manner the result of the analysis and main answer to the research question

/4

Critical, open-minded and non-defensive evaluation the validity of the student’s own arguments and results to explore further avenues of research

/6

TOTAL Final and Overall Comments: Total

21

EXPLANATION OF POINT VALUES FOR EACH MARKER

Criterion/Marker Excellent / Very good (A/A-) Good / Average / Below Average (B+ to D) Fail (F)

Introduction and Research Question / Statement / Puzzle

(8 points maximum)

2

1,5 – 1

0,5 – 0

Choice of Topic The author provides a clear and convincing explanation of

the choice of topic and highlights its significance The author provides an explanation which is,

however, not fully convincing No or very weak

explanation provided

Clear Research Question / Clear

Research Statement

4 3-2 1,5 - 0

The author provides a clear and meaningful research question. The research question is focused enough to

enable an in-depth analysis and is relevant and ambitious enough to allow for original and critical engagement with

empirical developments, theories and author debates. The author provides a research statement on how to

tackle the overarching research question.

The author provides a research question, but it lacks clarity, conciseness or is not

ambitious enough (self-evident research question). Muddled or unclear research

statement

Poorly designed research question

No research statement

Outline of Structure and Main Argument

2

1,5 – 1

0,5 – 0

The author provides a clear outline of the main argument and will how she/he will structure the paper

The author provides an outline of the main argument and an indication of the structure

– but lacks clarity No or very weak outline

Literature Review Analysis (12 points) 3

points per marker

3 – 2.5

2 – 1,5

1 – 0

22


Relevant arguments and debates /

academic context

The literature review identifies the relevant (i.e. to the chosen topic) arguments and debates in the literature

and places the student’s own topic in the wider academic context

The literature review identifies some relevant (i.e. to the chosen topic) arguments

and some debates in the literature. The student places his or her own topic in an academic context – but this is not fully

explored

No relevant literature is provided or only weakly explored. Limited or no wider academic context

provided

Compare, Contrast and Synthesis

The student compares, contrasts and synthesizes a wide range of key authors and arguments in the literature

review

The student mentions some of the key authors and arguments, but does not fully

and actively synthesize the material or compares and contrasts in a limited manner;

or only does one of the two

No or very weak synthesis and/or

comparing & contrasting or

arguments and authors

Evaluation of Strengths/Weaknesses

and Gaps

The literature review evaluates strengths and weaknesses of the literature and identifies the relevant gaps the

student’s paper addresses

Some strengths and weaknesses of the literature are identified but the gap the

student’s paper seeks to address is not fully clear

No or very weak evaluation – gaps not explained or weakly

explained

Identifying Key Theories and Core

Concepts

Based on the Literature Review, the student also identifies major theories and core concepts that have

been applied by authors to the topic at hand and applies some of them in the analysis part of the paper (see

Analysis / Discussion criteria)

The student identifies theories / concepts, but they are not completely relevant and/or

not clearly and correctly defined

No or irrelevant theories/concepts

identified

Methods (8 points) –

4 points per descriptor 4 3-2 1,5 - 0

Appropriate Method The student chooses, explains and clearly justifies an appropriate method to tackle the research question

The student chooses a method, but it lacks proper justification and is only partially

relevant / or not fully explained

No or irrelevant methods – no or weak

explanation/justification

23


Selection of suitable Data

The student demonstrates the ability to identify and present suitable data for the main analysis

The student identifies and presents some data, but not always the most suitable

No or poorly selected/presented data

Analysis/Discussion

(32 points) 8 – 6,5 6 – 4 3 - 0

Extensive Analysis and Arguments with

empirical examples, data and facts

Analytical arguments are illustrated with the help of clear and insightful empirical examples. The author frequently substantiates arguments with the help of up to date data.

The arguments are presented in a succinct way so as to answer directly the overall research questions and sub-

questions, ensuring a high level of relevance.

Arguments are occasionally supported by empirical examples. The author occasionally

substantiates arguments with the help of data even though this data is outdated.

Arguments are not always linked back to the main research question

Arguments are mostly unsubstantiated claims,

absence of data or empirical examples and large passages that do

not address the research question, undermining the

relevance of the main body.

Synthesis of wide range of sources

Wide use and synthesis of sources and references to support key arguments directly addressing the research question. The use of literature displays the author’s in-

depth knowledge of the subject-matter.

Occasional use and synthesis of sources and references to support some arguments –

some but not all arguments directly address the research question (i.e. passages of

irrelevant analysis/discussion)

No or very weak synthesis of sources –

arguments do not address the research

question directly

Explanation and application of

theory/concepts

The student explains and shows awareness of appropriate theoretical debates that have been used in the literature to examine similar problems and applies

some concepts to the analysis

Some application of concepts/theoretical aspects of the analysis in the paper

No or very limited explanation and

application of theories and concepts

Evaluation of arguments

Critical and dialectic (thesis/antithesis/synthesis) evaluation of strengths and weaknesses of core

assumptions and arguments of other authors in non-

Evaluation of strengths and weaknesses of some assumptions and arguments, but often

counter-arguments are not presented or

No or very limited evaluation of strength

and weaknesses –

24


prejudicial and open-minded manner (including the presentation of counter-arguments)

straw-man arguments are provided. Some evidence of selective argumentation

highly biased or selective line of argumentation

Structure ( /20 points) – 10points per

marker 10 – 8,5 8 – 5 4 - 0

Clear Structure The paper is structured in a coherent and logical way – with clear subsections – supporting the clarity of the

argument and analysis

The structure is generally logical and coherent, but at places unclear – the sub-

sections could be clearer or better organized

No or very unclear/incoherent

structure

Clear and coherent line of argumentation

A coherent line of argumentation (red thread running through the entire paper), linking theories and empirical examples back to answering the main research question.

Argumentation line is not always clear or coherent – theories and examples are not always linked back to the main research

question

Unclear / absent line of argumentation –

fragments not linked to the research question

Formal Aspects (10)

Language and Spelling Correct use of language - correct spelling, grammar, and

English expression (3 – 2.5) Use of language with occasional flaws in

spelling, grammar and expression (2 – 1,5)

Very flawed use of language with many

spelling and grammar mistakes

(1-0)

Citation Correct and consistent use of citation method and correct

bibliography (3 – 2.5) Occasional mistakes in citation method and

bibliography (2 – 1,5)

Recurring mistakes in citation and

bibliography (2 – 1,5)

25


Number of Academic Sources

Appropriate number of academic sources used (please check progression document for your specific Major:

Business Studies: at least 12 sources; CMM: 20, IA: 10-15) (4 - 3,5)

Acceptable number of sources

(3 – 2)

Inadequate number of sources used (1,5 – 0)

Conclusion (10)

Results (4) The student states in clear and succinct manner the result of the analysis and main answer to the research question.

(4-3,5)

General conclusions are provided, but research question is not fully answered. (3 –

2)

Unclear conclusions / absence of conclusions. Research question is not

answered

(1,5 - 0)

Evaluation of own arguments and further avenues for research

(6)

Critical, open-minded and non-defensive evaluation the validity of the student’s own arguments and results to

explore further avenues of research (6 – 5)

Some evaluation of the validity of own arguments, but more critical engagement

with own arguments and further avenues for research not fully developed (4,5 – 3)

No or weak evaluation of own arguments. No

or weak outline of further research

avenues

(3 – 0)

western democracy in crisis: the rise of populism and post ... · the information domain....

Documents