Should the Developed world be responsible for human rights protection in the developing world? Assignment | Professional Essay Writers

Should the Developed world be responsible for human rights protection in the developing world?

 

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
Should the Developed world be responsible for human rights protection in the developing world? Assignment | Professional Essay Writers
Just from $13/Page
Order Essay
  1. Do a literature search to develop your perception of the debate.
  2. Outline the debate. This means demonstrating the various different perspectives that academics have taken when seeking to analyse this question.
  3. Identify three key authors whose work is frequently cited in articles that address the debate.
  4. Briefly summarise the contributions these key authors are making to the debate. Make sure to paraphrase (putting others’ words/ideas into your own words), rather than use direct quotations, as it will save you words, which you will need for the analysis.
  5. Critically analyse the question in light of the authors’ views. Weigh each other against each other. What contributions do they make to the debate, what impediments do they present/reflect?
  6. Provide a short comment on where you position yourself in relation to the general debate and the key authors.
  7. Remember, the essay is an assessment of your literature review skills. It is not about answering the question, it is about being able to show that you know what the different aspects of the debate are about and then being able to position specific authors’ positions within the debate.
  8. Your reflections are designed to develop critical reading skills and help you learn how to identify what the nuances of the author’s arguments are.
  9. Now take this knowledge you have gained from the reflections and apply it more broadly to the essay. You are not to replicate what is in the reflections, but rather to build upon it.

 

Purpose of the Essay

 

  • To demonstrate your critical analysis of the literature
  • To demonstrate knowledge of the wider debate and situate
  • positions within this wider context
  • To show how tensions within human rights concepts affects the
  • practice of promoting and protecting human rights
  • To show that you are theoretically aware of the various, and often
  • conflicted, aspects of these debates and how these tensions affect
  • human rights practice

 

 

 

 

 

 

The aim of an essay is:

  • NOT to come down on one side or the other, but rather to present
  • the theoretical arguments that are at odds with each other, or that
  • NOT to come down on one side or the other, but rather to present
  • the theoretical arguments that are at odds with each other, or that
  • NOT to come down on one side or the other, but rather to present

the theoretical arguments that are at odds with each other, or that

agree with each other

 

  • AND to critically assess how these positions fit within the larger
  • context of the debate. What contribution to the debate do these
  • positions make? What is left out? What can these two positions tell
  • AND to critically assess how these positions fit within the larger

context of the debate. What contribution to the debate do these

positions make? What is left out? What can these two positions tell

  • us about the tensions inherent in human rights concepts/practice?

 

Structure of the Essay

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Analyse rather than Describe

  • You are not simply being asked to describe the content of the
  • required readings or to summarise their arguments. You are being
  • asked to analyse the arguments (strengths/weaknesses) in relation
  • to the contribution they make to the debate and how these limits or
  • You are not simply being asked to describe the content of the

required readings or to summarise their arguments. You are beingasked to analyse the arguments (strengths/weaknesses) in relation

to the contribution they make to the debate and how these limits or

advances human rights protection.

  • You are demonstrating that you understand what the author(s)
  • aims are, how they have accomplished these aims, and what
  • contribution their approach makes to the debate. If you feel they
  • have hindered the debate then you can say that too; provide

 

  • You are demonstrating that you understand what the author(s)

aims are, how they have accomplished these aims, and what

contribution their approach makes to the debate. If you feel they

have hindered the debate then you can say that too; provide

reasons why you feel this way.

 

  • Additional sources should be used to supplement and flesh-out

your analysis, rather than be the central foci of your essay. The

required readings are the central foci.

 

  • You are demonstrating an overall understanding of the question

(debate) via a focused analysis of the required readings and

additional sources.

 

Guiding Questions

  • When conducting your critical analysis,think about:
  • What argument(s) form the debate?
  • What contribution do these arguments make to the debate?
  • How do they relate to one another?
  • Who is making them? Are there factions? Do most people agree?
  • How do these arguments help us understand the tensions within
  • human rights practice?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Organisation of Lit review, options:

  • Chronological
  • Advancements
  • Geographical
  • Questions

5.3    Marking Criteria

  Outstanding  (85+) Excellent  (70-84) Very Good (60-69) Good  (50-59) Bare Pass (40-49) Bare Fail (30-39) Absolute Fail (<30).
Complex understanding and knowledge Demonstrates  complex, independent  and insightful understanding of a range of  key concepts theoretical approaches and debates  that could not be improved upon at this level,  recognizing and evaluating their contested nature examining Demonstrates  complex understanding of  key concepts,  theoretical approaches and debates,  recognizing and evaluating their contested nature although with a few improvements possible Demonstrates complex  understanding of  key concepts, theoretical approaches and debates,  recognizing and evaluating their contested nature,  although with some omissions and inconsistencies and  a number of areas of improvement possible Demonstrates good understanding of key concepts, theoretical approaches and debates recognizing and evaluating their contested nature  however with a number of omission and inconsistencies that require significant improvement Demonstrates an adequate indepth understanding of key concepts, theoretical approaches and debates  however key elements are missed or omitted with little recognition or evaluation of their contested nature Does not demonstrate sufficient understanding of  key concepts, theoretical approaches and debates nor  recognizing and evaluating their contested nature Does not show any understanding of  key concepts,  theoretical approaches and debates 
Critical thinking   and application of concepts and theory Demonstrates insightful , indepth and sophisticated critical thinking and application  of key concepts and  theoretical approaches to current debates , developing or applying new knowledge or applying knowledge in a new way Demonstrates indepth critical thinking and  application  of key concepts and theoretical approaches to current debates  which are applied in an insightful way developing or applying new knowledge or applying knowledge in a new way  Demonstrates very  good critical thinking  and  application of key concepts and theoretical approaches  to current debates  with only minor omissions Demonstrates good critical thinking and  application of key concepts and theoretical approaches although with some omissions, errors and lack of clarity.  Demonstrates adequate critical thinking and  understanding of key concepts and theoretical approaches which required more clear and consistent application Fails to demonstrate critical thinking  and  clear understanding of key concepts and theoretical approaches  nor ability to apply them in a consistent manner No critical thinking nor  engagement with key concepts and theoretical approaches.
Clarity of communication and expression Excellent communication with engaging and appropriate academic expression that could not be improved upon at this level.  . All terms are fully and clearly explained. Demonstrates very successful and full editing and redrafting prior to submission Excellent communication with engaging and appropriate academic expression with only minor areas of improvement needed. All terms are fully and clearly explained. Demonstrates successful and full editing and redrafting prior to submission Very good communication with appropriate academic expression, however lacks clarity in some areas. Evidence of editing and redrafting prior to submission Good communication although academic expression and clarity both could be improved upon.  Editing and redrafting could be improved prior to submission Adequate communication although has some consistent issues in relation to the lack of clarity and/ or academic f expression. The work required more comprehensive editing and redrafting prior to submission Communication is confused, with a lack of clarity and academic expression. Little evidence of editing or redrafting prior to submission No coherence or clarity and failure to meet academic level of expression.

No evidence of editing or redrafting prior to submission 

Research Demonstrates information literacy, synthesis of an independent and extensive range of research and use of scholarly sources, which are relevant, accurate, and fully support the analysis.  Demonstrates information literacy, synthesis and  use of  an extensive range of research and scholarly sources which  are  relevant, accurate, and fully supports the analysis Demonstrates a very good level of  information literacy, ,synthesis and  use of a significant amount of research and scholarly sources  which are relevant, accurate, and fully supports the analysis although could be more comprehensive Demonstrates a good  level of information literacy and uses a satisfactory  amount of research  which is mostly relevant, accurate, and  fully supports the analysis although with reliance on core texts  Demonstrates adequate but limited information literacy and uses an adequate amount of research although not entirely relevant, accurate, or does not supports the analysis. There is  an over-reliance on core texts Does not demonstrate information literacy and does not use an adequate amount of research with little use of academic sources, or research is not relevant, adequate, nor supports the analysis. No evidence of information literacy , uses little or no research or use of sources and research that lack any relevance nor support the analysis
Structure and focus An excellent structure that could not be improved at this level.   It is logical and balanced, fully focused on the question and develops a comprehensive and insightful argument. A very strong structure that is logical and balanced, fully focused on the question that is posed that allows a comprehensive argument. A very good structure, although there could be minor improvements to ensure a logical and balanced development of argument fully focused on the question. A good structure although it could be strengthened to ensure a more logical and balanced analysis. The structure of the paragraphs and overall structure could be improved to ensure focus on the question. An adequate structure although requires substantial improvement to provide a more logical and balanced argument, and to ensure the focus is fully on the question. A poor structure that is not logical or balanced, and fails to fully focus on the question. The work is not structured in any meaningful way and fails to focus on the question.
Group Work Complete synthesis of arguments with all team members working in full coordination to the extent that the work could not be improved at this level.   Evidence of very good coordination and team work between all team members  to produce a coherent and unified piece of work Good coordination between  team members although there could be improvement in the synthesis of individual work for a more unified collective output Some evidence of coordination of individual effort although this needed substantial improvement to produce a more unified collective output Little evidence of collective work, with either a disproportionate amount of work done by a single person or little coordination of individual outputs resulting in a weak collective effort Fails to evidence collective  work with extremely limited evidence of coordination or input by all team members No evidence of collective work nor coordination of individual inputs
Substantiveness         Meets expectations within 10% – no penalty applied

Does not meet expectations:

        +/- 10-19% 5 mark penalty

        +/- 20-29% 10 mark penalty

        +/- 30-39% 15 mark penalty

        +/- 40-49% 25mark penalty

        +/- 50-59% 30 mark penalty

        > 60% 0 marks awarded

Timeliness         Meets deadline – no penalty applied

Does not meet deadline and no mitigation in place

        + 1 day 5 mark penalty

        + 2 days 10 mark penalty

        + 3 days 15 mark penalty

        + 4 days20mark penalty

        + 5 days 25 mark penalty

        + 6 day 30 mark penalty

        + 7 days 35 mark penalty

        + 8 days 40 mark penalty

        + 9 days 45 mark penalty

        10 + days 0 marks awarded

 

 

Place Order
Grab A 14% Discount on This Paper
Pages (550 words)
Approximate price: -
Paper format
  • 275 words per page
  • 12 pt Arial/Times New Roman
  • Double line spacing
  • Any citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard)

Try it now!

Grab A 14% Discount on This Paper

Total price:
$0.00

How it works?

Follow these simple steps to get your paper done

Place your order

Fill in the order form and provide all details of your assignment.

Proceed with the payment

Choose the payment system that suits you most.

Receive the final file

Once your paper is ready, we will email it to you.