Module POL3069 for 2021/2
- Overview
- Aims and Learning Outcomes
- Module Content
- Indicative Reading List
- Assessment
Undergraduate Module Descriptor
POL3069: Globalisation and the Politics of Resistance
This module descriptor refers to the 2021/2 academic year.
Module Aims
The main aim of this module is to critically explore the theory and practice of contemporary forms of ‘resistance’ politics - including trade union movements, women’s movements, ecological movements, youth movements, indigenous peoples’ movements, anti-capitalist activism, ‘black power’ and anti-racist movements, religious fundamentalisms, human rights campaigns etc - in light of three lines of inquiry. First, it turns to the theoretical/conceptual underpinning of the notion of resistance and seeks to address the following three questions: 1) Who is the subject of resistance?; 2) Under what conditions does resistance emerge?; 3) What kinds of practices are involved in resistance politics? How do we know resistance when we see it?
Second, it aims to empirically map three forms of concrete activism, examining the historically specific conditions under which it emerged, the different actors involved, their practices as well as their impact. The three case studies that we study are voted on and decided by the class and the reading list that accompanies each is put together co-operatively by all the students. When assessing each case we will reach for a comparative perspective asking what, if any, common ground these movements share and what tensions separate them.
Third, in the last part of the course, we identify and reflect on some of the political and theoretical dilemmas thrown up by studying and practising resistance politics. For example, what do we mean by ‘progressive’ movements? Indeed, what are our criteria for deciding who is ‘progressive’ (good) and who is ‘reactionary’ (bad)? Another, related question concerns what are the appropriate strategies for bringing about social change? What strategies are politically effective and which ones are counterproductive? Moreover, in terms of moral considerations which strategies are justifiable and, more particularly, is violence ever justified? If so, when? Finally, who speaks for whom in a movement? Is there an inherent tension between efforts to open up and democratise a movement, on the one hand, and gain political representation and leverage among ‘the powers that be’, on the other? While I have identified three possible dilemmas here, I am open to discussing others if there is an interest.
| On successfully completing the programme you will be able to: | |
|---|---|
| Module-Specific Skills | 1. demonstrate an in-depth knowledge of the theoretical field of resistance politics; 2. demonstrate an empirical knowledge of particular contemporary social movements in world politics; |
| Discipline-Specific Skills | 3. demonstrate an ability to find, use and analyse a range of materials including major historical studies, IR and politics journals and news sources; 4. demonstrate an ability to critically analyse both empirical and theoretical material and to deploy theoretical arguments and 'apply' them to empirical case studies; 5. demonstrate an ability to articulate their own ethical and political points of view and defend them with well structured and rigorous arguments; |
| Personal and Key Skills | 6. demonstrate an ability to communicate effectively both formally in presentations and informally in class discussions; 7. demonstrate an ability to write clearly and coherently; 8. demonstrate an ability to work independently as well as in a team. |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Essay outline 1 | 1 page of A4 | 4-5 | Written and oral |
| Essay outline 2 | 1 page of A4 | 4-5 | Written and oral |
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 |
|---|---|---|
| 80 | 0 | 20 |
...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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Peer assessed presentation | 20 | 20 minutes | 2-3, 5-6, 8 | Verbal peer feedback |
| Essay 1 | 40 | 2,500 words | 1, 4-5, 7 | Written and oral feedback |
| Essay 2 | 40 | 2,500 words | 1-2, 4-5, 7 | Written feedback |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Peer assessed presentation | Either they will have to redo the presentation as a group or as an individual they will be asked to do a 1,000 word summary of their contribution to the teams presentation | 2-3, 5-6, 8 | As soon as possible but before the end of term or in the second case in August/September |
| Essay 1 | Essay (2,500 words) | 1, 4-5, 7 | August/September reassessment period |
| Essay 2 | Essay (2,500 words) | 1-2, 4-5, 7 | August/September reassessment period |
Re-assessment notes
If the group fail then they will have to redo the presentation as soon as possible after the presentation date. They will be capped at 40%. If they are deferred they will have to redo the presentation as soon as possible and will receive their full marks. If an individual fails to show up for the presentation and do not seek mitigation then they will get a 0%. If they do get mitigation then they will be deferred in the presentation and will have to submit a 1,000 word summary of their contribution to the team presentation.
