Demonstrated participation and engagement is a requirement of this unit. This assessment has one major component: 

1. Weekly participation in the iLearn discussion forums. You are required to participate in at least 10/12 classes. This is a pass/fail assessment and is worth 15%. 
2. Participation consists of an aprroximately 200 word post regarding the weekly discussion question. You are required to demonstrate engagement with class content and readings, and participate genuinely in discussions and activities.

Role play 1 will take place in week 8. You will be assigned group members after the HECS census date, but general research and reading on the case study should begin ASAP. A hypothetical scenario based upon a traditional security threat will be posted well beforehand to frame the role play. The task will consist of three graded components: 

1. iLearn post (5%): a 200 word post to the groups set up for the task, describing what you individually ​think would be the best option. Label this post "to be graded". This needs to be posted one week before the task ie week 7. You are encouraged to then continue the discussion regarding your course of action with your group members. This discussion will not be graded, so it is important to clearly label your graded post. 
2. Online participation (5%): The scenario will play out in class. This will consist of: 
   • One collective group iLearn post of your group's initial response to the scenario by 5pm AEST Monday of Week 8.
   • Tuesday and Wednesday will consist of iLearn group interaction, where you can talk with other groups and negotiate. 
   • A second individual group post representing your group's position after negotiations by 5pm AEST Wednesday of Week 8.
   • Thursday and Friday will consist of further group discussion to see if a resolution to the scenario can be found. 
   • Reflection - what have we learnt?
3. Peer Assessment (5%): an individual rating of each of your fellow group members, out of 5. To be emailed to Dr Bromfield no later than CoB the Monday of Week 9. An average of the ratings will be taken as the grade. 

Assessment Criteria

1. Quality of iLearn post, including scholarly and contextually appropriate rationale (5%). 
2. Quality of active participation in the in-class scenario (5%). 
3. Average of peer grade (5%). 

Role play 2 will take place in week 11. Your assigned group members and scenario actor will roll-over from the first role play, but general research and reading on the case study should continue after week 8. A new hypothetical scenario, based upon a non-traditional security threat, will be posted well beforehand to frame the role play. The task will again consist of three graded components: The task will consist of three graded components: 

1. iLearn post (5%): a 200 word post to the groups set up for the task, describing what you individually ​think would be the best option. Label this post "to be graded". This needs to be posted one week before the task ie week 10. You are encouraged to then continue the discussion regarding your course of action with your group members. This discussion will not be graded, so it is important to clearly label your graded post. 
2. Online participation (5%): The scenario will play out in class. This will consist of: 
   • One collective group iLearn post of your group's initial response to the scenario by 5pm AEST Monday of Week 11.
   • Tuesday and Wednesday will consist of iLearn group interaction, where you can talk with other groups and negotiate. 
   • A second individual group post representing your group's position after negotiations by 5pm AEST Wednesday of Week11.
   • Thursday and Friday will consist of further group discussion to see if a resolution to the scenario can be found. 
   • Reflection - what have we learnt?
3. Peer Assessment (5%): an individual rating of each of your fellow group members, out of 5. To be emailed to Dr Bromfield no later than CoB the Monday of Week 12. An average of the ratings will be taken as the grade. 

Assessment Criteria

1. Quality of iLearn post, including scholarly and contextually appropriate rationale (5%). 
2. Quality of active participation in the in-class scenario (5%). 
3. Average of peer grade (5%). 

Word Length: 1000-1200 words. 

This first assessment is a formative assessment - a preparatory assignment for the major essay. It requires three major components:  

1. A review of the literature on the theory to your essay question (approx. 500 words).

2. A review of the scholarly and secondary literature on essay question (approx. 500 words).

3. A brief statement of your approach to the essay question and justifying that rationale (approx. 200 words). 

Word limit: 1000-1200 words. N.B. The reference list and title page will be excluded from the word count. Everything else, including sub-headings, references, quotes, tables/data, footnotes etc., will be included in the final count. Please do not write less or more than the set word ranges – penalties will be applied for those who do not follow these instructions.

N.B. This assignment is not a plan for your essay. Essays that fail to do the above and waste time setting out the precise detail of their essays or rehearsing their arguments for the essay, will grade poorly, or even fail.

A literature review requires a comprehensive survey on what has been written on a topic. You should set out what has been written on your essay question, including what the major debates, controversies, schools of thought, and data that exist are. Further, you are required to explain the rationale behind your approach to the essay question in the final section. What theory/typology will you adopt and why? What evidence will you need and why? Your selection of cases will play an important role here and needs to be explained too.

Since this is a review of the literature, you are required to find and cite a minimum of 15 peer-reviewed and scholarly sources. At least 10 sources must be found independently, and cannot be set readings. Reports and research from governments, international organisations, NGOs, think tanks etc, or media reports from reputable sources will in all likelihood be required and may be appropriately included and cited too (especially in section 2 on the case study), but will not count towards the 15 peer-reviewed and scholarly sources.

Assessment Criteria

1. Quality of research and meeting of requirements.
2. Quality of review of theory.
3. Quality of review of case study. 
4. Quality of rationale. 
5. Quality of expression, structuring, and referencing. 

Word Length: 2000-2500 words. 

The major essay is a summative assessment - the culmination of the preparatory work conducted in the first assessment and your further research. You should have acted on the feedback and advice given in your previous assessment and discussions and further engaged with research on your topic.

The essay has one major component:

1. Answer your essay question in an essay format. 

This assignment has three minor components:

1. State your thesis, and clearly signal your argument, in your introduction (approx. 250 words).

2. Provide a brief literature review and justification of your focus immediately after the introduction (approx. 300 words). 

3. Use the remainder of your essay to skilfully and persuasively mount your argument, employing the theories/concepts/typologies that you have identified. 

Word limit: 2000-2500 words. N.B. The reference list and title page will be excluded from the word count. Everything else, including sub-headings, references, quotes, tables/data, footnotes etc., will be included in the final count. Please do not write less or more than the set word ranges – penalties will be applied for those who do not follow these instructions.

Like the first assessment, you are required to find and cite at least 15 peer-reviewed and scholarly sources, 10 of which must be found independently, and and cannot be from the set readings. Further secondary literature from reputable government, international organisation, NGO, media, etc. sources will also be required, but will not count towards the 15 peer-reviewed materials.

Further guidance on the structure of the assessments will be provided well-beforehand in an essay writing workshop and will be hosted on iLearn. 

Assessment Criteria

1. Quality of research and meeting of requirements.
2. Quality of argumentation. 
3. Quality of expression, structuring, and referencing, and meeting of requirements.