1

UNIT GUIDE 2016/17

SOCI30100 / SOCIM0020 Social Networks Teaching Block: 2

Weeks: 13-24

Unit Owner: Siobhan McAndrew Level: H/6 and M/7

Phone: 0117 3317536 Credit points: 20

Email: siobhan.mcandrew@bristol.ac.uk Prerequisites: None

Office: 2.02, 11 Priory Road Curriculum area:

N/A

Unit owner office hours:

4.30-5.30pm Tuesdays 11.15-12.15pm Wednesdays Scheduled office hours do not run during reading weeks, though you can still contact tutors for advice by email and to arrange individual appointments

Timetabled classes:

Lectures: Lecture Room 1, 3-5 Woodland Road, Arts Complex, 9-10am Tuesdays. Seminar Group A: 4-6pm Mondays. Seminar Group B: 11-1pm Tuesdays. Venues TBC. You are expected to attend ONE seminar each week. Your online personal timetable will inform you to which group you have been allocated. Seminar groups are fixed: you are not allowed to change seminar groups without permission from the office. Weeks 6, 12, 18 and 24 are Reading Weeks; there is no regular teaching in these weeks. In addition to timetabled sessions there is a requirement for private study, reading, revision and assessments. Reading the required readings in advance of each seminar is the minimum expectation. The University Guidelines state that one credit point is broadly equivalent to 10 hours of total student input.

Learning Outcomes On completion of this unit, successful students will be able to:

demonstrate critical engagement with key texts in the study of social relationships and social networks;

define and critically assess network concepts such as social capital, homophily, centrality, clique, bonding, bridging;

compile information on social ties from offline or online social networks, and use simple methods to create network diagrams and measures using NetDraw;

assess claims related to the benefits and risks of bonding and bridging social ties.

Requirements for passing the unit:

Satisfactory attendance at seminars

Completion of all formative work to an acceptable standard

Attainment of a composite mark of all summative work to a passing standard (40 or above)

Details of coursework and deadlines Assessment: Word count: Weighting: Deadline: Day: Week: Group project: 1,500 word research report

1,500 words 15% incorporating a peer evaluation worth 5%

9.30am 17 March 2017

Friday 20

3,000 word essay 3,000 words 85% 9.30am on 26 May 2017

Friday Summer Assessment Period

2

Summative essay questions will be made available on the SOCI30100 Blackboard site.

Instructions for the submission of coursework can be found in Appendix A

Assessment in the school is subject to strict penalties regarding late submission, plagiarism and maximum word count. A summary of key regulations is in Appendix B.

Marking criteria can be found in Appendix C.

The Unit Aims

This unit will examine the importance of networks for social life and the rise of the ‘network society’. We begin by focusing on concepts and tools: concepts such as connectedness, social capital, social support and homophily (the tendency of ‘birds of a feather to flock together’) as well as how we judge how central someone is to a social network. You will receive training in how to use NetDraw, a simple network visualisation program. No prior knowledge of SNA or NetDraw is assumed. You will be shown how to make lists of links between individuals and how to import these lists to create network diagrams for visual presentation. The remainder of the unit investigates a number of different examples of the study of networks in social life. We will focus on the following cases:

- the importance of networks for creativity and ‘art worlds’ - crime, bullying, and terrorist networks - how networks are leveraged for career success - gender, ethnicity, marginality and social capital.

Social Network Analysis (SNA) has become very prominent in recent years in sociology. It provides a relational perspective compatible with a wide range of theoretical positions. The tools for studying social networks complement traditional qualitative and quantitative methods. New areas of application include criminal networks, terrorist networks, online networks, cultural networks, and economic networks. Outside sociology, network analysis is used by biologists, psychologists, in economic and business research, and in linguistics. The unit will provide training in analysing social networks using NetDraw and possibly NodeXL (a free plugin for Excel) and Mozdeh (for the analysis of Twitter networks). These practical skills are attractive to employers in a number of sectors, such as digital media agencies, the Civil Service, think tanks, policing, and research organisations. The Assessments

Both the mid-term and end-of-term assessments are summative.

The first is a group project accounting for 15% of the final grade. You will work in groups of about 4 to co-

produce a research report, where you provide an analysis of network-related data. To encourage co-

operation, a third of this grade will be judged using your peers’ reviews of your contribution. This follows a

model used in some units in Politics as well as in other institutions, and is known to work well.

The end-of-term assessment will be a traditional essay on a subject relating to the course content.

3

General Readings and Resources for the Course as a Whole

Steve Borgatti, Martin Everett and Jeffrey Jones, Analyzing Social Networks (London: SAGE, 2013). This

easy-to-follow text focuses on the concepts and network analytic methods.

University of Exeter, ‘Methods Matter presents: Episode 4 - Network analysis’,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvZuAlBDfUg

Steve Borgatti, resources for social network analysis, http://www.analytictech.com/networks/topics.htm

Nicholas Christakis and James Fowler, Connected: The Amazing Power of Social Networks and How They

Shape our Lives (London: Harper Press, 2011). A book designed to appeal to a wider, popular market –

highly recommended.

Nick Crossley, Elisa Bellotti, Gemma Edwards, Martin Everett, Johan Koskinen, and Mark Tranmer, Social

Network Analysis for Ego-Nets (London: SAGE, 2015). This focuses on methods where we can’t gather

data on the whole network but can gather data on the networks of a number of individuals.

Robert Hanneman and Mark Riddle, Introduction to Social Network Methods (University of California

Riverside, 2005). Free introductory textbook on social network analysis. Available online as html or pdf.

This is an excellent guide to the core concepts and techniques.

If you really get into the method, the following website provides UCINET software as well as resources for how to use it: https://sites.google.com/site/ucinetsoftware/home. You can download a free trial version for your own use for up to 60 days. NetDraw is available as part of UCINET but UCINET can do a lot more. Jonathan Rowson, Steve Broome and Alasdair Jones, ‘Connected Communities: How Social Networks Power and Sustain the Big Society’, Royal Society for the Encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce (September 2010), http://www.climateaccess.org/sites/default/files/Rowson_Connected%20Communities.pdf An excellent policy-focused overview of SNA with specific application to civic engagement.

A number of social network analysts are active on Twitter: follow @NAChristakis, @Fire_and_Skill,

@SOSheaSNA, @MitchellSNA, @nodexl, @NSMNSS.

The journals Connections and Social Networks have great examples of new applications of the concepts

and methods.

Finally: keep an eye on the sociology and social networks blogosphere for fresh developments.

4

Weekly Schedule

Week 13: Introduction to Social Networks and Social Capital. Essential Readings Bonnie Erickson, ‘Social Networks: The Value of Variety’, Contexts, Winter 2003, pp: 25-31, http://www.asanet.org/sites/default/files/savvy/images/members/docs/pdf/featured/erickson.pdf. A short, informal article which points the way to the more scholarly literature. Lee Rainie and Barry Wellman, Chapter 1, ‘The New Social Operating System of Networked Individualism’, pp. 3-20, in Networked: The New Social Operating System (MIT Press, 2012), https://mitpress.mit.edu/sites/default/files/titles/content/9780262017190_sch_0001.pdf. Also informal and accessible. Robert D. Putnam, Chapter 1: ‘Thinking about Social Change in America’, in Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community (New York: Simon and Schuster, 2000), http://www.nytimes.com/books/first/p/putnam-alone.html. Chapter 1 was published by the New York Times, prefiguring how influential this book was to become. Also essential, also very readable. Lab 1 Which will incorporate Lecture 1: ‘Are We Bowling Alone?’ Introductions: ‘Famous for Three Minutes’ – prepare ONE slide to introduce yourself, summarising what you do, your dissertation (if you are doing one), your other units, and plans for next year. You will send this to me ahead of the first session. This session will also introduce the unit as a whole. Lecture 2: Social Networks: The Core Concepts. Week 14: Theoretical Approaches to Social Capital and Social Networks: Social Capital as a Collective Resource. Essential Readings James S. Coleman, ‘Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital.” American Journal of Sociology (1998), vol. 94: S95-S120. Recommended Readings Sally B. Kilgore, ‘The Life and Times of James S. Coleman: Hero and Villain of School Policy Research’, Education Next, 16/2 (Spring 2016), http://educationnext.org/life-times-james-s-coleman-school-policy-research/. A very warm biographical article by one of his former students, which shows how his theorisation of social capital transformed the sociology of education. Alejandro Portes, ‘Social Capital: Its Origins and Applications in Modern Sociology’, Annual Review of Sociology (1998), 24: 1-24. The AnnRevSoc is a prestigious journal which publishes review essays summarising the state of the art of a given literature. This is intentionally a little old so that you can see the historical development of work on ‘social capital’ in sociology. Lab session:

- Discussion of the Week 13 readings - Introduction to NetDraw: Graphing Networks.

Lecture 3: Social Capital: Insights from Coleman and Putnam.

5

Week 15: Theoretical Approaches to Social Capital and Social Networks: Cultural Capital.

Essential Readings

Pierre Bourdieu (first published 1986), ‘The Forms of Capital’, in A.H. Halsey, H. Lauder, P. Brown, and

A.S. Wells (eds.) Education: Culture, economy, society (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2006), pp. 46-58.

Essential reading from this most cited of sociologists.

Nan Lin, ‘Building a Network Theory of Social Capital', Connections, 22/1 (1999), pp. 28-51. Nan Lin is one of the world’s leading sociologists and social capital theorists; he and Erickson bridge the survey-based and network analysis approaches to the study of social networks. This is a good introduction to his work. Essential. Recommended Readings John Goldthorpe, ‘“Cultural Capital”: Some Critical Observations’, Sociologica, vol. 2 (2007), pp. 1-23, doi: 10.2383/24755. In work with Tak Wing Chan, Goldthorpe has argued that ‘cultural capital’ has been theorised very badly, and that Bourdieusian work is generally highly flawed. This is a good example of his work in the area, and is very highly recommended.

You will be allocated to your groups for the group work this week.

Lab session:

- Discussion of the Week 14 readings

- Exercises using NetDraw: Calculating and Graphing Centrality.

Lecture 4: Social Capital: Insights from Bourdieu and Lin. Week 16: Networks and Influence Essential Readings Nick Crossley and Gemma Edwards, ‘Cases, Mechanisms and the Real: The Theory and Methodology of Mixed-Method Social Network Analysis’, Sociological Research Online, 21/2 (2016), 13, http://www.socresonline.org.uk/21/2/13.html, doi: 10.5153/sro.3920. Miller McPherson, Lynn Smith-Lovin, and James M Cook, ‘Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks’, Annual Review of Sociology, 2001. 27: 415–44 http://aris.ss.uci.edu/~lin/52.pdf Nicholas A. Christakis and James H. Fowler, 'The Spread of Obesity in a Large Social Network over 32 Years', New England Journal of Medicine (2007), vol. 357, pp. 370-379, doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa066082. Lab session Discussion of the Week 15 readings Exercises using NetDraw: Sub-Groups and Communities in the Network How to Gather Your Own Network Data Lecture 5: Methodology and the Study of Social Networks (25 minutes) Lecture 6: Homophily, Heterophily and Influence in Social Networks (25 minutes)

6

Week 17: Relational Sociology, Networks and Culture Essential Readings Wendy Bottero and Nick Crossley, Worlds, Fields and Networks: Becker, Bourdieu and the Structures of Social Relations, Cultural Sociology, 5/1 (2011), pp. 99-119. An award-winning piece which challenges the Bourdieusian focus of most British cultural sociology, highlighting the contribution of Howard Becker and social network analysis as a method. Nick Crossley, ‘Relational Sociology and Culture: A Preliminary Framework’, International Review of Sociology (2015), 25/1, pp. 65-85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03906701.2014.997965 Recommended Readings Ann Mische, ‘Relational Sociology, Culture, and Agency’, Sage Handbook of Social Network Analysis, edited by John Scott and Peter Carrington (SAGE 2011). Lab Session Discussion of the Week 16 readings Preparation for your Group Project Lecture 7: Relationality, Culture and Social Networks Week 18: READING WEEK Week 19: Networks and Creativity Essential Readings Begin with this short article and this blog: Jordan Ellenberg, ‘Six Degrees of Innovation: What Broadway Musicals Tell Us About Creativity’, Slate.com, 23 March 2012, online. Siobhan McAndrew, ‘How Networks Help us Create’, 14 August 2014, RSA Guest Blog, https://www.thersa.org/discover/publications-and-articles/rsa-blogs/2014/08/how-networks-help-us-create Then choose two of the readings below (and you must choose two). Daniel Allington, Byron Dueck and Anna Jordanous, ‘Networks of Value in Electronic Music: SoundCloud, London, and the Importance of Place’, Cultural Trends (2015), 4/3, pp. 211-222, doi: 10.1080/09548963.2015.1066073 A delightful paper lead-authored by a former visual artist, now digital media scholar. The team extracted data automatically from SoundCloud and then identified the city-to-city links via the locations of those sharing music and following other musicians online. Nick Crossley, Siobhan McAndrew and Paul Widdop, ‘Introduction’, Social Networks and Music Worlds (Routledge: Abingdon, 2014). An informal overview of why SNA is useful for the sociology of music – written for music specialists assuming no SNA knowledge. Brian Uzzi and Jarrett Spiro, ‘Collaboration and Creativity: The Small World Problem’, American Journal of Sociology, vol. 111 (2005), pp. 447-504. A study of what determines the success of Broadway musicals: is it being highly connected or is it being less of an insider? Michaël C. Waumans, Thibaut Nicod, and Hugues Bersin, 'Topology Analysis of Social Networks Extracted from Literature', PLoS One (2015), 10/6, e0126470. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0126470 This is highly technical and involves automatic data extraction and processing of text rather than human processing of

7

data. However, what they have tried to do is absolutely dazzling. This provides an overview of networks in Harry Potter novels. Lab session:

- Discussion of the Week 17 readings - Further preparation for the group reports

Lecture 8: Social Networks and Art Worlds. Week 20: Positive and Negative Ties Essential Readings This week, make sure you read the blogs and news pieces – and read them first, because they provide a gateway to the more complex work in the journal articles. N. B. Ellison, C. Steinfield, and C. Lampe, ‘The Benefits of Facebook “Friends:” Social Capital and College Students’ Use of Online Social Network Sites’, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, vol. 12 (2007), pp. 1143–1168. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00367.x Gijs Huitsing, Tom A.B. Snijders, Marijtje A.J. Van Duijn, and Rene Veenstra, 'Victims, Bullies, and Their Defenders: A Longitudinal Study of the Coevolution of Positive and Negative Networks', Development and Psychopathology, 26 (2014), pp. 645–659, doi:10.1017/S0954579414000297 Bob Hirshon, ‘Popularity and Bullying’, http://sciencenetlinks.com/science-news/science-updates/popularity-bullying/ Maarten Selfhout, William Burk, Susan Branje, Jaap Denissen, Marcel van Aken, and Wim Meeus, ‘Emerging Late Adolescent Friendship Networks and Big Five Personality Traits: A Social Network Approach’, Journal of Personality (2010), vol. 78, pp. 509-538. Cornell University Course Blog, ‘Network Effects in Bullying’, https://blogs.cornell.edu/info2040/2015/11/17/network-effects-in-bullying/ Lab session:

- Discussion of the Week 19 readings - Group presentations, discussion and feedback

Lecture 9: Friendship and Bullying. Week 21: Criminal and Terrorist Networks Essential Readings This week, make sure that you choose at least one reading on terrorist networks and at least one on crime networks – so that we can compare the structures in class. Begin with the following blogs – again, it they are short and accessible gateways to the more technical readings. The BBC piece gives a politically-important real-life example. BBC, ‘Phone-Hacking Scandal: Who's Linked to Who?’, 13 September 2011, originally published at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14846456 but no longer available; see http://ars-uns.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/ars-escandalo-de-hackeo-de-telefonos-en.html for an archived version. Essential

8

John Robb, ‘Mapping Terrorist Networks’, 23 April 2004, Global Guerrillas blog, http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/globalguerrillas/2004/04/mapping_terrori.html Essential The choose one of the following policy readings, illustrating how the social network analysis of crime is used for policy analysis: Daniel Gunnell, Joseph Hillier and Laura Blakeborough, ‘Social Network Analysis of an Urban Street Gang Using Police Intelligence Data’, Home Office Research Report 89, January 2016, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/491578/horr89.pdf OR Anine Kriegler, Using Social Network Analysis to Profile Organised Crime’, Policy Brief 57, Institute for Security Studies, September 2014, https://issafrica.s3.amazonaws.com/site/uploads/PolBrief57.pdf Recommended Readings The following are academic treatments: Paolo Campana, ‘Explaining Criminal Networks: Strategies and Potential Pitfalls’, Methodological Innovations, vol. 9 (2016), pp. 1-10. Valdis Krebs, ‘Mapping Networks of Terrorist Cells’, Connections, 24/3 (2002), pp. 43-52, http://www.sfu.ca/~insna/Connections-Web/Volume24-3/Valdis.Krebs.web.pdf This is highly-influential, instantly renowned in the field. A must-read – treat this as essential. Carlo Morselli, Cynthia Giguere and Katia Petit, ‘The Efficiency/Security Trade-Off in Criminal Networks’, Social Networks, 29/1 (2007), pp. 143–153. Recommended. Lab Session:

- Discussion of the Week 20 Readings - Introduction to Mozdeh.

Lecture 10: How do Crime and Terrorist Networks Differ? Week 22: Networks and Career Success Essential Readings Again, begin with the Simmons piece which introduces you to the business-focused work of Ronald Burt. The Granovetter article is a contemporary classic and absolutely essential. Both the Lin and Erickson articles are very highly-cited. Much of this will have useful findings for your own job search, whenever that may be. Mark Granovetter, ‘The Strength of Weak Ties’, American Journal of Sociology, vol. 78 (1973), pp. 1360-80. Enormously influential, this essay concerns the advantages of acquaintances as well as close friends both for individuals and for communities.

Michael Simmons, ‘The No. 1 Predictor of Career Success According To Network Science’, Jan 15, 2015,

Forbes.com, http://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelsimmons/2015/01/15/this-is-the-1-predictor-of-career-

success-according-to-network-science/#77a2b28d3623

9

Recommended Readings Ronald S. Burt, ‘The Network Structure of Social Capital’, in Robert I. Sutton and Barry M. Staw (eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior, vol. 22 (Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 2000), http://faculty.chicagobooth.edu/ronald.burt/research/files/nssc.pdf Recommended. Bonnie Erickson, ‘Culture, Class, and Connections’, American Journal of Sociology, vol. 102 (1996), pp. 217-51. The article shows that knowing many kinds of people goes with knowing a lot about different types of culture - and also knowing about culture matters at work. Highly, highly recommended. Travis J. Grosser, Virginie Lopez-Kidwell and Giuseppe Labianca, ‘A Social Network Analysis of Positive and Negative Gossip in Organizational Life’, Group and Organization Management, 35/2 (2010), pp. 177-212. An interesting study of the function of gossip in the workplace, when to use it, and when not to use it. Nan Lin, ‘Social Networks and Status Attainment’, Annual Review of Sociology, vol. 25 (1999), pp. 467-87. Authoritative review of research on networks and getting a job.

Further Readings

Alfred L. Luna, Decima Christine Garcia, Shih Yung Chou, and Sara Jackson, ‘Can “Tight” Groups at Work be Detrimental? A Theoretical View of Gossip from the Network Tie Strength and Density Perspective’, Global Journal of Business Research, 7/1 (2013), pp. 91-100. Not central to the field – but this may be very useful in the workplace in future.

Lab Session

- Discussion of the Week 21 Readings - Introduction to NodeXL

Lecture 11: Networks and Career Success. EASTER BREAK Week 23: Networks and Marginality. Essential Readings Here, we look at some themes which you may have covered in other units, specifically gender and social capital, and ethnicity and social capital. We look at both social resources, and the effects of diversity on community-level social capital. Ronald Burt, ‘Gender and Social Capital’, University of Chicago Graduate School of Business, Selected Paper 80 (1999), https://www.chicagobooth.edu/~/media/5D37F25A4B0B4979955F69722A6A021F.pdf An important overview of how women are perceived differently in the workplace and how they adapt different strategies, in terms of networking, to get ahead. Essential, and particularly so looking forward beyond the unit and your degree programme. Robert D. Putnam, ‘E Pluribus Unum: Diversity and Community in the Twenty-first Century The 2006 Johan Skytte Prize Lecture’, Scandinavian Political Studies, 30/2 (2007), pp. 137-174. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x/abstract A much-cited, oft-challenged article on the relationship between community-level ethnic diversity and social trust. Arguably essential.

10

Recommended Readings Aisha Birani and Wolfgang Lehmann, ‘Ethnicity as Social Capital: An Examination of First-Generation, Ethnic-Minority Students at a Canadian University’, International Studies in Sociology of Education, 23/4 (2013), pp. 281-297, doi: 10.1080/09620214.2013.822715 A very interesting and relatable study of how ethnicity can function as a resource when making the transition to university. Recommended. Jody Mellor, ‘The Significance of Bonding Capital: Class, Ethnicity, Faith and British Muslim Women's routes to University’, in Yvette Taylor (ed.), Classed Intersections: Spaces, Selves, Knowledges (Routledge, 2010), pp. 73-91. This is available in its entirety via Google Books. Alejandro Portes and Erik Vickstrom, ‘Diversity, Social Capital, and Cohesion’, Annual Review of Sociology, vol. 37 (2011), pp. 461–79, 10.1146/annurev-soc-081309-150022 An overview of a challenging literature in how immigration and diversity affect cohesion and social capital. Vilius Semenas, ‘Ethnic Diversity and Social Capital at the Community Level: Effects and Implications for Policymakers’, Inquiries Journal, 6/04 (2014), pp.1-2, http://www.inquiriesjournal.com/articles/888/ethnic-diversity-and-social-capital-at-the-community-level-effects-and-implications-for-policymakers This is either an undergraduate or graduate student essay, and short – you will have to go to the originals for the final essay, of course. I would not expect you to cite this as an authoritative source, but it may provide a route into the literature. Lab session: This will be treated as a writing workshop. You will bring drafts of your essays or detailed plans, and work in groups of two (randomly assigned) to provide peer review of each other’s work. Lecture session: Lecture 12: Gender and Social Capital (25 minutes) Lecture 13: Ethnicity and Social Capital (25 minutes) Week 24: READING WEEK

11

Appendix A

Instructions on how to submit essays electronically

1. Log in to Blackboard and select the Blackboard course for the unit you are submitting work for. If you cannot see it, please e-mail spais-ug@bristol.ac.uk with your username and ask to be added.

2. Click on the "Submit Work Here" option at the top on the left hand menu and then find the correct assessment from the list.

3. Select ‘view/complete’ for the appropriate piece of work. It is your responsibility to ensure that you have selected both the correct unit and the correct piece of work.

4. The screen will display ‘single file upload’ and your name. Enter your name (for FORMATIVE ASSESSMENTS ONLY) or candidate number (for SUMMATIVE ASSESSMENTS ONLY) as a submission title, and then select the file that you wish to upload by clicking the ‘browse’ button. Click on the ‘upload’ button at the bottom.

5. You will then be shown the essay to be submitted. Check that you have selected the correct essay and click the ‘Submit’ button. This step must be completed or the submission is not complete.

6. You will be informed of a successful submission. A digital receipt is displayed on screen and a copy sent to your email address for your records.

Important notes

You are only allowed to submit one file to Blackboard (single file upload), so ensure that all parts of your work – references, bibliography etc. – are included in one single document and that you upload the correct version. You will not be able to change the file once you have uploaded.

Blackboard will accept a variety of file formats, but the School can only accept work submitted in .rtf (Rich Text Format) or .doc/.docx (Word Document) format. If you use another word processing package, please ensure you save in a compatible format.

By submitting your essay, you are confirming that you have read the regulations on plagiarism and confirm that the submission is not plagiarised. You also confirm that the word count stated on the essay is an accurate statement of essay length.

If Blackboard is not working email your assessment to spais-ug@bristol.ac.uk with the unit code and title in the subject line.

How to confirm that your essay has been submitted

You will have received a digital receipt by email and If you click on the assessment again (steps 1-4), you will see the title and submission date of the essay you have submitted. If you click on submit, you will not be able to submit again. This table also displays the date of submission. If you click on the title of the essay, it will open in a new window and you can also see what time the essay was submitted.

12

Appendix B

Summary of Relevant School Regulations

(Further information is in the year handbook) Attendance at classes SPAIS takes attendance and participation in classes very seriously. Seminars form an essential part of your learning and you need to make sure you arrive on time, have done the required reading and participate fully. Attendance at all seminars is monitored, with absence only condoned in cases of illness or for other exceptional reasons. If you are unable to attend a seminar you must inform your seminar tutor, as well as email spais-absence@bristol.ac.uk. You should also provide evidence to explain your absence, such as a self-certification and/or medical note, counselling letter or other official document. If you are unable to provide evidence then please still email spais-absence@bristol.ac.uk to explain why you are unable to attend. If you are ill or are experiencing some other kind of difficulty which is preventing you from attending seminars for a prolonged period, please inform your personal tutor, the Undergraduate Office or the Student Administration Manager. Requirements for credit points In order to be awarded credit points for the unit, you must achieve:

Satisfactory attendance in classes, or satisfactory completion of catch up work in lieu of poor attendance

Satisfactory formative assessment

An overall mark of 40 or above in the summative assessment/s. In some circumstances, a mark of 35 or above can be awarded credit points.

Presentation of written work Coursework must be word-processed. As a guide, use a clear, easy-to-read font such as Arial or Times New Roman, in at least 11pt. You may double–space or single–space your essays as you prefer. Your tutor will let you know if they have a preference. All pages should be numbered. Ensure that the essay title appears on the first page. All pages should include headers containing the following information:

Formative work Summative work Name: e.g. Joe Bloggs Unit e.g. SOCI10004

Seminar Tutor e.g. Dr J. Haynes Word Count .e.g. 1500 words

**Candidate Number**: e.g. 12345 Unit: e.g. SOCI10004

Seminar Tutor: e.g. Dr J. Haynes Word Count: e.g. 3000 words

Candidate numbers are required on summative work in order to ensure that marking is anonymous. Note that your candidate number is not the same as your student number. Assessment Length Each piece of coursework must not exceed the stipulated maximum length for the assignment (the ‘word count’) listed in the unit guide. Summative work that exceeds the maximum length will be subject to penalties. The word count is absolute (there is no 10% leeway, as commonly rumoured). Five marks will be deducted for every 100 words or part thereof over the word limit. Thus, an essay that is 1 word over the word limit will be penalised 5 marks; an essay that is 101 words over the word limit will be penalised 10 marks, and so on. The word count includes all text, numbers, footnotes/endnotes, Harvard referencing in the body of the text and direct quotes. It excludes, the title, candidate number, bibliography, and appendices.

13

However, appendices should only be used for reproducing documents, not additional text written by you. Referencing and Plagiarism Where sources are used they must be cited using the Harvard referencing system. Inadequate referencing is likely to result in penalties being imposed. See the Study Skills Guide for advice on referencing and how poor referencing/plagiarism are processed. Unless otherwise stated, essays must contain a bibliography. Extensions Extensions to coursework deadlines will only be granted in exceptional circumstances. If you want to request an extension, complete an extension request form (available at Blackboard/SPAIS_UG Administration/forms to download and School policies) and submit the form with your evidence (e.g. self-certification, medical certificate, death certificate, or hospital letter) to Catherine Foster in the Undergraduate Office. Extension requests cannot be submitted by email, and will not be considered if there is no supporting evidence. If you are waiting for evidence then you can submit the form and state that it has been requested. All extension requests should be submitted at least 72 hours prior to the assessment deadline. If the circumstance occurs after this point, then please either telephone or see the Student Administration Manager in person. In their absence you can contact Catherine Foster in the UG Office, again in person or by telephone. Extensions can only be granted by the Student Administration Manager. They cannot be granted by unit convenors or seminar tutors. You will receive an email to confirm whether your extension request has been granted. Submitting Essays

Formative essays Summative essays

Unless otherwise stated, all formative essay

submissions must be submitted electronically via Blackboard

All summative essay submissions must be

submitted electronically via Blackboard.

Electronic copies enable an efficient system of receipting, providing the student and the School with a record of exactly when an essay was submitted. It also enables the School to systematically check the length of submitted essays and to safeguard against plagiarism. Late Submissions Penalties are imposed for work submitted late without an approved extension. Any kind of computer/electronic failure is not accepted as a valid reason for an extension, so make sure you back up your work on another computer, memory stick or in the cloud (e.g. Google Drive or Dropbox). Also ensure that the clock on your computer is correct. The following schema of marks deduction for late/non-submission is applied to both formative work and summative work:

Up to 24 hours late, or part thereof Penalty of 10 marks

For each additional 24 hours late, or part thereof

A further 5 marks deduction for each 24 hours, or part thereof

Assessment submitted over one week late

Treated as a non-submission: fail and mark of zero recorded. This will be noted on your transcript.

14

The 24 hour period runs from the deadline for submission, and includes Saturdays, Sundays, bank holidays and university closure days.

If an essay submitted less than one week late fails solely due to the imposition of a late penalty, then the mark will be capped at 40.

If a fail due to non-submission is recorded, you will have the opportunity to submit the essay as a second attempt for a capped mark of 40 in order to receive credit points for the unit.

Marks and Feedback In addition to an overall mark, students will receive written feedback on their assessed work.

The process of marking and providing detailed feedback is a labour-intensive one, with most 2-3000 word essays taking at least half an hour to assess and comment upon. Summative work also needs to be checked for plagiarism and length and moderated by a second member of staff to ensure marking is fair and consistent. For these reasons, the University regulations are that feedback will be returned to students within three weeks of the submission deadline.

If work is submitted late, then it may not be possible to return feedback within the three week period.

Fails and Resits If you fail the unit overall, you will normally be required to resubmit or resit. In units where there are two pieces of summative assessment, you will normally only have to re-sit/resubmit the highest-weighted piece of assessment. Exam resits only take place once a year, in late August/early September. If you have to re-sit an exam then you will need to be available during this period. If you are not available to take a resit examination, then you will be required to take a supplementary year in order to retake the unit.

15

Appendix C

Level 6 Marking and Assessment Criteria (Third / Final Year)

1st (70+) o Excellent comprehension of the implications of the question and critical understanding of the theoretical & methodological issues

o A critical, analytical and sophisticated argument that is logically structured and well-supported

o Evidence of independent thought and ability to ‘see beyond the question’

o Evidence of reading widely beyond the prescribed reading list and creative use of evidence to enhance the overall argument

o Extremely well presented: minimal grammatical or spelling errors; written in a fluent and engaging style; exemplary referencing and bibliographic formatting

2:1 (60–69) o Very good comprehension of the implications of the question and fairly extensive and accurate knowledge and understanding

o Very good awareness of underlying theoretical and methodological issues, though not always displaying an understanding of how they link to the question

o A generally critical, analytical argument, which shows attempts at independent thinking and is sensibly structured and generally well-supported

o Clear and generally critical knowledge of relevant literature; use of works beyond the prescribed reading list; demonstrating the ability to be selective in the range of material used, and the capacity to synthesise rather than describe

o Very well presented: no significant grammatical or spelling errors; written clearly and concisely; fairly consistent referencing and bibliographic formatting

2:2 (50–59) o Generally clear and accurate knowledge, though there may be some errors and/or gaps and some awareness of underlying theoretical/methodological issues with little understanding of how they relate to the question

o Some attempt at analysis but a tendency to be descriptive rather than critical;

o Tendency to assert/state opinion rather than argue on the basis of reason and evidence; structure may not be entirely clear or logical

o Good attempt to go beyond or criticise the ‘essential reading’ for the unit; but displaying limited capacity to discern between relevant and non-relevant material

o Adequately presented: writing style conveys meaning but is sometimes awkward; some significant grammatical and spelling errors; inconsistent referencing but generally accurate bibliography.

3rd (40–49) o Limited knowledge and understanding with significant errors and omissions and generally ignorant or confused awareness of key theoretical/ methodological issues

o Largely misses the point of the question, asserts rather than argues a case; underdeveloped or chaotic structure; evidence mentioned but used inappropriately or incorrectly

o Very little attempt at analysis or synthesis, tending towards excessive description

o Limited, uncritical and generally confused account of a narrow range of sources

o Poorly presented: not always easy to follow; frequent grammatical and spelling errors; limited attempt at providing references (e.g. only referencing direct quotations) and containing bibliographic omissions.

16

Marginal

Fail

(35–39)

o Unsatisfactory level of knowledge and understanding of subject; limited or no understanding of theoretical/methodological issues

o Very little comprehension of the implications of the question and lacking a coherent structure

o Lacking any attempt at analysis and critical engagement with issues, based on description or opinion

o Little use of sources and what is used reflects a very narrow range or are irrelevant and/or misunderstood

o Unsatisfactory presentation: difficult to follow; very limited attempt at providing references (e.g. only referencing direct quotations) and containing bibliographic omissions

Outright

Fail

(0–34)

o Very limited, and seriously flawed, knowledge and understanding o No comprehension of the implications of the question and no attempt

to provide a structure o No attempt at analysis o Limited, uncritical and generally confused account of a very narrow

range of sources o Very poorly presented: lacking any coherence, significant problems

with spelling and grammar, missing or no references and containing bibliographic omissions