Arctic World Politics Literature Seminar (5cr)

Evaluation scale

H-5

Objective

After completion of the course the student is able to
- recognise existing interdisciplinary discussions and debates and assess their relevance from the perspective of Arctic World Politics
- identify new research questions and approaches that are topical for Arctic World Politics based on the review of existing research and state of art
- assess independently the scope and quality of existing research relating to the research theme or topic of one's own choosing, and to select literature that is most relevant for closer study
- recognise what are the next steps that need to be taken for an independent MA thesis project.

Execution methods

Teachin profile: HYBRID 1.

Accomplishment methods

Seminars, independent study and written course assignments.

Content

The aim of this course is to help the student identify relevant research questions and to design an independent MA thesis project based on a review of existing research. During the course, the students have an opportunity to familiarise themselves with research themes and topics of their own choosing and to map and discuss the relevant literature together with the study group and the responsible teacher.

Assessment criteria, satisfactory (1)

Fail (0): Performance is highly deficient or erroneous. The work may be based on serious misunderstandings.

Sufficient (1): The author has identified some key concepts and aspects in the research field. Performance is lacking in scope, superficial, or corresponds poorly to the assignment. The author merely lists things out of context, or addresses them one-sidedly. The work may contain errors or obscurities.

Satisfactory (2): The author has identified the key concepts and aspects in the research field. The performance mainly repeats the content of the course or addresses them one-sidedly.

Assessment criteria, good (3)

Good (3): The author has addressed the issue comprehensively. Performance corresponds to the assignment, manifesting skills to analyse and justify the content of the course. The work may contain some deficiencies.

Very good (4): The author has addressed the issue comprehensively. Performance manifests comprehension, insight, and skills to critically analyse and argue the content of the course.

Assessment criteria, excellent (5)

Excellent (5): The work demonstrates independent and original thinking, and it is exceptionally well written and implemented.