Module POC2098 for 2021/2
- Overview
- Aims and Learning Outcomes
- Module Content
- Indicative Reading List
- Assessment
Undergraduate Module Descriptor
POC2098: Comparative Politics
This module descriptor refers to the 2021/2 academic year.
Please note that this module is only delivered on the Penryn Campus.
Module Aims
Our aim is that by the end of the module you should be able to explain, through comparative analysis, what the key determinants of regime stability and regime change are, how political regimes and institutions vary, and how their effects are mediated or constrained by other factors. You should be able to respond to particular questions about these institutions, drawing on the relevant literature. You should also be able to deal in the abstract with the issue of the relative merits of different comparative approaches and methods.
On successfully completing the programme you will be able to: | |
---|---|
Module-Specific Skills | 1. Explain the major theories of comparative politics, their strengths and weaknesses 2. Demonstrate comprehensive knowledge of a variety of regimes and institutions 3. Apply the theories of comparative politics to answer questions related to the functioning of regimes and institutions |
Discipline-Specific Skills | 4. Use key concepts in political science effectively 5. Synthesize and critically evaluate a variety of theories and arguments in the field 6. Discuss the similarities and differences in the politics of a range of countries |
Personal and Key Skills | 7. Demonstrate the ability to work independently, within a limited time frame, and without access to external sources, to complete a specified task. 8. Engage in spontaneous discussion and defence of arguments 9. Eemonstrate competent written analytical and organizational skills 10. Write essays effectively, using a range of resources to support your argumentation |
How this Module is Assessed
In the tables below, you will see reference to 'ILO's. An ILO is an Intended Learning Outcome - see Aims and Learning Outcomes for details of the ILOs for this module.
Formative Assessment
A formative assessment is designed to give you feedback on your understanding of the module content but it will not count towards your mark for the module.
Form of assessment | Size of the assessment (eg length / duration) | ILOs assessed | Feedback method |
---|---|---|---|
Comparative research designproject outline | 300 words | 1-3, 5-6, 9 | Verbal or written |
Summative Assessment
A summative assessment counts towards your mark for the module. The table below tells you what percentage of your mark will come from which type of assessment.
Coursework | Written exams | Practical exams |
---|---|---|
100 | 0 | 0 |
...and this table provides further details on the summative assessments for this module.
Form of assessment | % of credit | Size of the assessment (eg length / duration) | ILOs assessed | Feedback method |
---|---|---|---|---|
Portfolio | 50 | 2,000 words | 1-7, 9 | Written |
Essay | 50 | 2,500 words | 1-6, 8-10 | Written |
Re-assessment
Re-assessment takes place when the summative assessment has not been completed by the original deadline, and the student has been allowed to refer or defer it to a later date (this only happens following certain criteria and is always subject to exam board approval). For obvious reasons, re-assessments cannot be the same as the original assessment and so these alternatives are set. In cases where the form of assessment is the same, the content will nevertheless be different.
Original form of assessment | Form of re-assessment | ILOs re-assessed | Timescale for re-assessment |
---|---|---|---|
Portfolio | Portfolio (2,000 words) | 1-7, 9 | August/September re-assessment period |
Essay | Essay (2,500 words) | 1-6, 8-10 | August/September re-assessment period |
Indicative Reading List
This reading list is indicative - i.e. it provides an idea of texts that may be useful to you on this module, but it is not considered to be a confirmed or compulsory reading list for this module.
Basic reading:
Clark W.R., Golder M., Golder S.N. (2013), Principles of Comparative Politics, Washington DC: CQ Press.
King G., Keohane R., Verba S. (1994), Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research, Princeton: Princeton University Press.