Module POC2120 for 2021/2
- Overview
- Aims and Learning Outcomes
- Module Content
- Indicative Reading List
- Assessment
Undergraduate Module Descriptor
POC2120: Power and Democracy
This module descriptor refers to the 2021/2 academic year.
Please note that this module is only delivered on the Penryn Campus.
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 |
---|---|---|---|
Group portfolio (3-6 students) | 1,500 words | 1-6 | Verbal comments from tutor and peer-review in class |
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 |
---|---|---|---|---|
Essay | 50 | 2,000 words | 1-6 | Written comments |
Portfolio | 50 | 2,000 words | 1-6 | Cohort feedback/completed marking template |
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 |
---|---|---|---|
Essay | Essay (2,000 words) | 1-6 | August/September reassessment period |
Portfolio | Portfolio (2,000 words) | 1-6 | August/September reassessment 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:
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.
Ackerman, Bruce & James Fishkin (2002) ‘Deliberation Day’, The Journal of Political Philosophy 10 (2): 129-152.
Brennan, Jason (2011) ‘The Right to a Competent Electorate’, The Philosophical Quarterly 61 (245): 700-724.
Canovan, Margaret (1999) ‘Trust the People! Populism and the two Faces of Democracy’, Political Studies 47: 2-16.
Gilroy, Paul (2012) ‘‘My Britain is fuck all’: zombie multiculturalism and the race politics of citizenship’, Identities: Global Studies in Culture and Power 19 (4): 380-397.
Green, Jeffrey (2010) The Eyes of the People: Democracy in an Age of Spectatorship. Oxford University Press, ch.1 & 2 (excerpts).
Medina, Jose (2012) ‘Active Ignorance, Epistemic Others, and Epistemic Friction’ in The Epistemology of Resistance. Oxford: Oxford University Press, ch.1.
Saward, Michael (2009) ‘Authorisation and Authenticity: Representation and the Unelected’, Journal of Political Philosophy 17 (1): 1-22.
White, Jonathan & Lea Ypi (forthcoming) ‘Political Parties’ in Jeffrey King and Richard Bellamy (eds) The Cambridge Handbook of Constitutional Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Woodley, Deva (2019) ‘Black Feminist Visions and the Politics of Healing in the Movement for Black Lives’ in Ay?e Gül Altýnay et al (eds) Women Mobilizing Memory. New York: Columbia University Press: 219-237.
Young¸ Iris Marion (2001) ‘Activist Challenges to Deliberative Democracy’, Political Theory 29 (5): 670-690.