麻豆传媒高清版

Overview

The module aims to offer an in-depth examination of politics in diverse parts of Europe between the end of the Second World War and the post-Cold War Era. It will address the ways in which democracy has manifested itself. In this vein, it will also analyse transitions from dictatorship to democracy across Europe. Furthermore, it will examine whether the Communist regimes in Eastern Europe during the Cold War should be described as "totalitarian".

This module explores key themes, issues , events, and political processes through selected case studies of European countries throughout the post-war period. Examples may include: The political geography of Europe; Late Stalinism and de-Stalinisation; Post-fascist liberal democracies: West Germany and Italy; Gaullism from the 1940s to the 1960s; Communist regimes in Eastern Europe; Post-authoritarian transformations in Southern Europe since the mid-1970s; Gorbachev, reform of the Soviet Union, and the collapse of communism.

Assessment Strategy

-threshold -D+ (48%) Work is marked D+ if it: shows evidence of acceptable amounts of reading, but does not go much beyond what was referenced in lecture notesand/or a basic textbook; covers much of the necessary ground but fails to discuss one or a few vital aspects of a topic; deploys relevant material but partlyfails to combine it into a coherent whole, or sustains a clear argument only for the greater part of the piece; deploys some evidence to support individualpoints, but sometimes fails to do so, or shows difficulty in weighing evidence, or chooses unreliable evidence; displays an awareness that the past can beinterpreted in different ways but without devoting sustained discussion to this; is for the most part correctly presented but has sections where there areserious problems in presentation, style, spelling, grammar, or paragraph construction (but see section on dyslexia below); and uses references andbibliography where needed but occasionally misunderstands their appropriate use or makes mistakes in their presentation.D (45%) Work is marked D if it: shows evidence of an acceptable minimum of reading, based partly on lecture notes and/or a basic textbook; coverssome of the necessary ground but fails to discuss some large and vital aspects of a topic; deploys some relevant material but partly fails to combine it intoa coherent whole or sustains a clear argument for only some parts of the piece; deploys some evidence to support individual points but often fails to do soor shows difficulty weighing evidence or chooses unreliable, atypical or inappropriate evidence; shows some awareness that the past can be interpretedin different ways but the differences will not receive sustained discussion or analysis; is often correctly presented but has sections where there are seriousdifficulties in presentation, style, spelling, grammar, or paragraph construction (but see section on dyslexia below); and uses references and bibliographywhere needed but sometimes misunderstands their appropriate use or makes serious mistakes in their presentation.D- (42%) Work is marked D- if it: shows evidence of an acceptable minimum of reading, based largely on lecture notes and/or a basic textbook; coversparts of the necessary ground but fails to discuss some large and vital aspects of a topic; deploys some potentially relevant material but fails to bring ittogether into a coherent whole or sustains a clear argument for only parts of the piece; occasionally deploys evidence to back some individual points butoften fails to do so or shows difficulty weighing evidence or chooses unreliable, atypical, or inappropriate evidence; may show some awareness that thepast can be interpreted in different ways but the differences will not receive sustained discussion or analysis; is in part correctly presented but hassections where there are serious difficulties in presentation, style, spelling, grammar, or paragraph construction (but see section on dyslexia below); anduses references and bibliography where needed but sometimes misunderstands their appropriate use or makes serious mistakes in their presentation.

-good -B+ (68%) Work will receive a B+ mark if it is consistently strong in: covering the necessary ground in depth and detail; advancing a well structured,relevant, and focused argument; analysis and deployment of an appropriate range of historical evidence and consideration of possible differences ofinterpretation; and is correctly presented with references and bibliography where appropriate.B (65%) Work will receive a B mark if it: is clear that it is based on solid reading; covers the necessary ground in depth and detail; advances awell-structured, relevant, and focused argument; analyses and deploys an appropriate range of historical evidence and considers possible differences ofinterpretation; and is correctly presented with references and bibliography where appropriate.B- (62%) Work will receive a B- mark if it: is clearly based on solid reading; covers the necessary ground in some depth and detail; advances aproperly-structured, relevant, and focused argument; analyses and deploys an appropriate range of historical evidence and considers possible differencesof interpretation; and is correctly presented with references and bibliography where appropriate.

-excellent -A+ (87%) At this level, first-class work will also have its argument supported by an impressive wealth and relevance of detail, but will further deploy theevidence consistently accurately and give indications of deploying unexpected primary and secondary sources. It will habitually demonstrate a particularlyacute and critical awareness of the historiography, including conceptual approaches, and give a particularly impressive account of why the conclusionsreached are important within a particular historical or archaeological debate. It will show a particularly sophisticated approach to possible objections,moderating the line taken in the light of counter-examples, or producing an interesting synthesis of various contrasting positions. It will be original work.The standards of content, argument, and analysis expected will be consistently first-class work. In essays standards of presentation will be very high.A (80%) At this level, first-class work will have its argument supported by an impressive wealth and relevance of detail. It will usually also demonstrate anacute awareness of historiography, and give an impressive account of why the conclusions reached are important within a particular historical or2 of 5 30 Mar 2017archaeological debate. It may show a particularly subtle approach to possible objections, moderating the line taken in the light of counter-examples, orproducing an interesting synthesis of various contrasting positions. Overall, the standards of content, argument, and analysis expected will be consistentlysuperior to top upper-second work. In essays and dissertations standards of presentation will be high.A- (74%) A first-class mark at this level is often earned simply by demonstrating one or more of the features of a good upper-second essay to a peculiardegree, for example presenting a particularly strong organization of argument, strong focus, wide range of reading, engagement with the historiography,depth of understanding, an unobjectionable style, and strong presentation.

-another level-C+ (58%) Work will receive a C+ mark if it: shows evidence of solid reading, but remains partially superficial; covers the important aspects of the relevantfield, but in some places lacks depth; advances a coherent and relevant argument; employs some evidence to back its points; and is presentedreasonably well with only a few or no mistakes. It will also contain appropriate references and bibliography, which may, however, be slightly erratic and/orpartially insufficient.C (55%) Work will receive a C mark if it: shows evidence of solid reading, but remains superficial; covers most of the important aspects of the relevantfield, but lacks depth; advances a coherent and largely relevant argument; employs some limited evidence to back its points; and is presented reasonablywell with only limited mistakes. It will also contain appropriate references and bibliography, which may, however, contain some mistakes or be slightlyerratic and/or partially insufficient.C- (52%) Work will receive a C- mark if it: shows evidence of solid reading, but little knowledge of in-depth studies (for first-year work the student may nothave read beyond a few standard works; at second or third year the student may not have read a good selection of journal articles and specialistmonographs); covers most of the important aspects of the relevant field, but lacks depth or misses a significant area (for second- and third-year work thismay mean that it fails to deploy the historical details found in specialist literature); advances a coherent, and sometimes relevant argument, but driftsaway from tackling the task in hand (for example, by ordering the argument in an illogical way, becoming distracted by tangential material, or lapsing intonarrative of only partial pertinence); usually employs evidence to back its points, but occasionally fails to do so or deploys an insufficient range; displaysan awareness that the past can be interpreted in different ways, but may fail to get to the heart of the central scholarly debate or fully understand a keypoint (in second- and third-year work this may extend to a failure to discuss important subtleties or ambiguities in the evidence, or to a lack of awarenessof the current state of historical debate); is reasonably well presented and contains appropriate references and bibliography, but makes some mistakes inpresentation or appropriate use.

Learning Outcomes

• To critically evaluate and employ a wide range of primary sources as well as situate them into their background

• To develop a critical awareness of political transformations in Europe in the period in question from a comparative and transnational perspective

• To develop an in-depth understanding of rival historiographical approaches to politics in contemporary Europe

• To develop clear and nuanced arguments based on solid evidence