LAW2224 Theories of LawEssay template

Homework answers / question archive / LAW2224 Theories of Law Essay template – Word count (without footnotes) (maximum allowed 1750): Essay One Titles: 1

LAW2224 Theories of Law Essay template – Word count (without footnotes) (maximum allowed 1750): Essay One Titles: 1

Law

Share With

LAW2224 Theories of Law Essay template –

Word count (without footnotes) (maximum allowed 1750):

Essay One Titles:

1. Draft your own title.

If students wish to draft their own title they may do so. The proposed title must be sent via email by the end of week 2. It will be approved by the end of week 3.

2. Consider Hart's idea of an obligation and determine whether or not morality should be taken into account while defining law.

Original Sources

HLA Hart, The Concept of Law (Clarendon Press, 1961).

William Starr, ‘Law and morality in H.L.A. Hart’s legal philosophy’ (1984) 67(4) Marquette Law Review 673-689.

3. Consider Kelsen’s positivism and determine whether the basic norm requires law to be moral.

Original Sources

Hans Kelsen, Pure Theory of Law (Law Book Exchange, 2005).

Leslie Green, ‘Positivism and Conventionalism’ (1999) 12(1) Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence 35.

4. Legal realism describes the work of judges. Examine whether judicial decision-making also produces abstract rules.

Karl Llewellyn, Bramble Bush: Some Lectures on Law and Its Study (New York, 1933) and The Common Law Tradition: Deciding Appeals (Little Brown, Boston, 1960) (both available electronically through HeinOnline, Legal Classics)

Nicholas Aroney and James Allan, ‘An Uncommon Court: How the High Court of Australia Has Undermined Australian Federalism’ (2008) 30 Sydney Law Review 245

Brian Leiter, ‘Legal Realism and Legal Positivism Reconsidered’ (2001) 111(2) Ethics 278.

5. What role does religion play in modern legal systems if Positive Law is unbiased, scientific, and objective?

Original sources

Thomas Aquinas’ Summa Theologica (both are available electronically through the Library)

Jonathan Crowe, ‘Is Natural Law Timeless?’ (2021) 33(1) Bond Law Review 1.

Germain Grisez, ‘Natural Law, God, Religion, and Human Fulfillment’ (2001) 46 American Journal of Jurisprudence 3.

6. Determine whether a just legal system requires moral criteria using modern natural legal theories.

Original sources

Jake Monaghan, ‘On Enforcing Unjust Laws in a Just Society’ (2018) 68(273) The Philosophical Quarterly 758-778.

Jonathan Crowe, ‘Natural Law Theories’ (2016) 11(2) Philosophy Compass 91-101.

ASSESSMENT INFORMATION

The Assessment requires two Essays from each student, and a degree of regular, quality engagement with material across the course (the Course Engagement mark). As a result, you can be selective about the deeper reading that you undertake for the course, but you must have some regular engagement with the material covered in the course over the semester. Essay 1 deals with a choice of topics from modules 2–6; and Essay 2 deals with a choice of topics from modules 8–12. All the titles in Essays 1 and 2 allocate some marks for research. Students will be asked to answer Exercise 7 and two other Exercises of their choice (although there are rules governing which Exercises you can choose).

The Assessment helps students to realise the learning outcomes of the course in the following way:

Assessment LO1 LO2 LO3 LO4 LO5

Essay 1 ? ? ? ?

Course Engagement ? ? ? ? ?

Essay 2 ? ? ? ?

As the table shows, a student will not have been able to realise all the course learning outcomes unless they have completed Course Engagement and at least one of the Essays. The ‘required summative assessment’ in this course is:

• Course Engagement; and

• At least one of either Essay 1 or Essay 2.

Of course, you are urged to do all the summative assessments—Essay 1, Course Engagement and Essay 2—if you wish to maximise the marks gained and pass the course.

The effect of this structure for Assessment is that you will be required to come to terms with most of the 12 modules, but approximately five modules in some depth. Having noted that, module 1 (which is not directly assessed at all) gives the framework for the course, and you may well get lost and confused if you do not look at this module at all.

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR ALL WRITTEN ASSESSMENT – ESSAYS AND COURSE ENGAGEMENT (ONLINE STUDENTS)

CHECKLIST

A1. The following checklist should be used for all written assignments in the course: Essay 1, Course Engagement (online students) and Essay 2.

• Attach the relevant front page for the assignment to the front of the assignment.

• By the due date, submit on StudyDesk the assignment (with required front page attached).

WORD LIMITS

B1. How word length is calculated. The word count must be calculated in accordance with a Microsoft Word word count (not including footnotes or endnotes). This limit does not include footnote references (to cases, legislative provisions, books, articles and websites). It also does not include any restatement of the question. However, the word limit does include text set out in the footnotes: ie the word limit cannot be circumvented by relocating text from the body of the answer to the footnotes, or by placing text in the footnotes in the first place. For any word count, ‘text’ includes quotes from sources used, whether those quotes are in inverted comments, indented, or otherwise styled. In other words, whether they are located in the body of the answer or in footnotes, quotes of any kind are included in the word count. The Microsoft Word word-count automatically picks them up.

B2. Word count identified. You must indicate this word count on the title page of the Essay or Course Engagement

B3. Strict compliance with word length. As the assignment is submitted electronically, a student’s compliance with the word length for each Essay and Course Engagement (for online students) can be quickly validated by the marker. If a false word count is given, this may result in misconduct proceedings being brought for making a false declaration.

B4. The word limit is a definite maximum. The marker of the assignment is entitled to stop marking when the nominated assignment word length has been reached. Any material more than the assignment word length need not be included in the marking. It is not the case that a 10% variation is allowed for the word limit: ie that students can exceed the word limit by 10%, or fall short of the word limit by 10%, without being exposed to a penalty. The word limit is a maximum limit only. There is no minimum word length for the assignment.

TURNITIN

C1. Checking for copying. Turnitin software will be used to check for copying from public sources and other submissions made to the University. It is up to you to ensure you have properly cited and referenced material, and not copy from others. As law students, you are conscious of the serious repercussions for you if the University makes a determination of misconduct against you, including any determination for cheating or plagiarism. You are all aware that it has potential to prevent or hinder admission as a lawyer, and that, in Queensland, the Court of Appeal has insisted that the question of an applicant’s record of misconduct be dealt with in open court (before hundreds) at the ceremonial sittings for admission. Please, for your own sake, just don’t do it. Disappointingly, plagiarism and cheating have been detected before in this course, and determinations of misconduct have been made against students. Please, again, don’t hazard it – just don’t do it!

C2. What to do with a Turnitin report.

• Check to see if the areas identified as similar, if they are really quotations, are in inverted commas or indented. In all cases, check to see that the areas identified as similar are properly referenced in footnotes. Or,

• Consider revising your assignment according to the recommendations provided in the Turnitin report — which will mean removing material, adding inverted commas, indenting, or adding footnote references.

C3. What to watch with Turnitin. The similarity index may identify ‘similarities’ that are not problematic, eg:

• Quotes that are properly identified as such (by inverted commas or indenting) and referenced, and paraphrases that are properly referenced.

• Repeat submissions. If you submit to Turnitin, get a report, make some changes, and then submit a second time – the second submission will naturally report a high degree of similarity with your own first submission (maybe above 90 per cent).

• Front pages. If you submit to Turnitin with the required front page attached, and other students do the same, the front page (which includes all of the marking criteria) will give rise to similarities between the submissions.

C4. Who sees the Turnitin report? The marker of the assignment will see: (a) whether you have lodged on Turnitin; and (b) the Turnitin report. The marker has a discretion as to how it will be used.

MARKING AND RETURN

C5. How to collect. Each submission will be returned with the mark. The marker’s comments will be available on Turnitin.

The marks will also later appear on StudyDesk and GradeBook.

C6. Conditions for marking. An assignment will be marked only on condition that it:

• Is submitted though StudyDesk; and

• Has the front page attached to the front of the assignment.

REFERENCING AND STYLE

C7. Referencing style. The School of Law references the Australian Guide to Legal Citation (AGLC). You must reference in accordance with the AGLC, and you will note in the marking criteria for each assignment that marks are given for referencing in accordance with the AGLC.

EXTENSIONS AND LATE SUBMISSIONS

C8. Submissions by due date. Assignments must be submitted by the due date or an approved extension date.

C9. Applications for extension: Please follow the link provided on the Assessment page of StudyDesk.

C10. Late submissions. If an Assessment is submitted after the published deadline without an approved extension of time, the available Mark will be reduced consequently. In this case, the available Mark is reduced by 5% (of the original available Mark) for each Calendar Day or part day that the Assessment is late. An Assessment submitted more than one (1) week after the submission deadline will have a Mark of zero recorded.

C11. A zero Mark will be awarded for an Assessment if it is submitted after an approved extension date..

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE ESSAYS

The following are general instructions for Essay 1 and Essay 2. These instructions do not apply to Course Engagement.

D1. Choice of title. Each Essay has a choice of titles. You must do one (and only one) of the titles for each Essay.

D2. Word length. For both essays, the word limit is 1750 words.

D3. Research. You will note in the criteria for marking that 10 marks are allocated for Research, and this will be for material you have found yourself. You should only use published sources. Websites can be used, but you are urged to use them carefully and not to rely on them too much. Also, please note other instructions about research in paragraphs D4, D5, D6 and D7 (below).

D4. Original sources. You will also note in the criteria for marking that eight marks are allocated for Use of Original Sources. We think it important that you read and come to terms with the original sources. So, instead of relying on Ratnapala’s (or some other writer’s) account of Plato for an Essay Title on natural law, you would be expected to have read, understood and referenced Plato’s Republic or Laws. Each Essay Title will clearly state what are considered ‘original sources’, and you must use those relevant to the title. Ie, you need not use all original sources listed, but you must use some if you want any of those marks. Furthermore, no marks will be given for borrowing references to original sources that are found in Ratnapala.

D5. How to do research in jurisprudence? Most of the research you have done in your law program so far has been into legislation and case law, as well as law journals. For these Essays, you should use the same electronic research methods that you have used for other courses. However, legislation will usually be irrelevant, and most titles will also not require any consideration of cases. Law journals may be needed. When beginning to research your titles:

• Look at the relevant sections of Ratnapala. They will point you to any relevant books or articles, all of which are listed in Study Desk (Reading material) .

• Look up the material in the reference texts listed Study Desk (Reading material) .

• Look at the original sources and read the relevant sections of the works of the key theorist you are considering in the title.

• Do any other online searches about the issues raised by the title that you are trying to answer and follow up the original sources mentioned in them.

• Be prepared to look at philosophical and social theory journals as well as law journals.

D6. Textbook and Selected Readings. Readings prescribed from Ratnapala and in the Selected Readings are not research – because we have already given you these references. You may refer to them, and you may footnote them in your Essay. You may even get marks for these references for your ‘Answers the Title’ criterion. However, references from Ratnapala and Selected Readings will not gain marks for the ‘Research’ criterion. As a result, the 10 marks for the Research criterion will be allocated based on material you refer to other than Ratnapala or Selected Readings. Some Selected Readings, however, will qualify as ‘original sources’ (see paragraph D5).

D7. Prohibited references. In your Essay, you must not refer to:

• Wikipedia; or

• The Study Book.

Naturally, you may begin your work with Wikipedia, the Study Book or any other source you like. However, you should not refer to Wikipedia; it is unreliable. You should not refer to the Study Book; it is not a published source.

D8. No bibliography. Please do not attach a bibliography or List of References to the Essay. If you do, you will not be penalised; but nor will marks be given for any references in a bibliography or List of References. Your footnotes will reveal the sources you have used.

PAPER 3: COURSE ENGAGEMENT

COURSE ENGAGEMENT

E1. Nature of Assessment. Course Engagement marks for online students aim to ensure that you cover and understand material across the course. For online students, you are to complete and submit answers to three Exercises.

E2. Word length. The word limit for Course Engagement is 1500 words.

Please note that, although you are required to answer three Exercises for Course Engagement there is no word limit for any one Exercise. Ie, you may write more than 500 words for one Exercise and fewer than 500 words for another. It is up to you how you allocate your word ration between your answers to the three Exercises. Obviously, not every answer will demand the same explanation. Equally, if you answer 600 words for Exercise A and 150 words for Exercise B, you may question whether you have given Exercise B the attention it deserves. Use your judgment.

E3. Front page for submission. The Course Engagement must be submitted using the ‘Course Engagement’ template on StudyDesk.

This template prompts all of the relevant procedural information needed for Course Engagement, and includes the criteria and mark sheet for the submission. Use of this front page will speed the marking and, therefore, the turnaround of the assignment.

E4. Criteria. The marking criteria are set out on the marking template posted in study desk.

E5. Which Exercises? For Course Engagement, you must submit answers to three different Exercises (and all Questions in each of the Exercises) found in the course material in each module. These must be –

• Two Exercises 2–12.

• Exercise 7.

E6. Titles. New titles will be posted in the StudyDesk.

RECONSIDERATION OF MARKS

F1. When is reconsideration available? All care is taken in the marking of the Essays and the awarding of Course Engagement marks. Individual mark sheets based on the criteria will be returned with each assignment submitted by a student, and at the request of any on-campus student who wants Course Engagement marks explained. Once a mark is allocated to an assignment, the only ground on which it will be reconsidered is that the student has shown in writing that –

• The marking criteria have not been legitimately applied to that particular assignment; and

• A legitimate application of all of the criteria to that assignment would lead to a higher mark.

F2. No right to a second marking and moderation. There is no right to a second marking of an assignment. Again, it is only in the circumstances of E1 that a reconsideration of a mark will be undertaken. Also, moderation of Assessment is undertaken in relation to all grades in the course once those grades are finalised and recommended. There is no moderation of individual assignments. Ie, moderation is not second marking.

F3. Procedure. If you are unhappy with a mark on an assignment, you are advised: (1) to consider the mark sheet returned with the assignment; (2) to consider any comments made by the marker about the assignment; and (3) to mark the assignment yourself using all of the marking criteria. Then, you should only consider applying for reconsideration if it is clear that the marking criteria have been applied incorrectly to your overall disadvantage. Eg, you may have reasons to suggest that, for Essay 1, if correctly applied the Research criterion would give you two more marks but that the Answer to Title criterion would lead to four marks being taken off. It is best not to ask for reconsideration in a case like that. However, where you have reasons to believe that, if all of the criteria were applied correctly, a higher mark would clearly result, you should email the course leader with:

• Your marked assignment;

• The mark sheet; and

• Written reasons that explain how, if all the criteria had been applied correctly, the overall mark would have been higher.

In relation to the last, an assertion that ‘criterion X was not applied properly’ – with nothing more – is not giving reasons.

F4. Irrelevant considerations. The following reasons (or words of similar effect) are not grounds for reconsideration:

• ‘I don’t like the mark.’ (An acceptable motive to seek reconsideration, but not in itself a reason.)

• ‘I am two marks from the cut-off for a B, and I would like a B for the course.’

• ‘I got a better mark in [another assignment in the course]’.

• ‘I got a better mark in [another course]’.

• ‘I put a lot of effort into this assignment’.

• ‘This is a failing mark, and I don’t like to fail [or I don’t normally fail].’

• ‘I am an HD and A student’.

• ‘I worked with [another student], and she got [a higher mark]’. (Also a dangerous reason to give!)

• ‘I know [an influential person]’.

In short, the only grounds justifying reconsideration are those in F1, and anyone seeking reconsideration is best to limit any submissions to stating reasons that establish those grounds.