School of Philosophical and Historical Inquiry
Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences
Department of Gender and Cultural Studies
GCST2610 Intimacy, Love & Friendship
Semester 1, 2012
Unit Overview Guide
Unit coordinator: Dr Melissa Gregg
Room J406, Quadrangle Building
Email address: melissa.gregg@sydney.edu.au
Phone: (02) 93513657
Consultation Hours: Friday, 10am-1pm
Please note: Tutors are not paid to answer email outside teaching days.
For queries outside teaching days, call the course convenor by office
phone (above), make an appointment to meet with the course convenor in
person, or leave a message on the course website.
GCST2610 Intimacy, Love & Friendship
UNIT DESCRIPTION
This unit examines the representation and practices of intimate relations focusing especially
on the intersection between intimacy and constructions of gender. Divided into three
sections, the unit will examine theories of love and friendship, contemporary cultural
representations of love, desire and friendship, and the ethics and politics of erotics. This unit
will also examine new technologies of intimacy, and discuss their implications for gender and
sexuality.
OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES
The aims of this Unity of Study are to:
• Introduce some dominant ideas and debates about love, intimacy and friendship,
especially within gender and cultural studies
• Analyse and critique these approaches in relation to their implications for
constructions of gender and subjectivity more broadly
• Develop awareness of how theoretical debates intersect with lived experience by
exploring current anxieties about intimacy, love and friendship in a range of media
platforms
By the end of the course students will be able to:
• Understand theories of intimacy, sexuality and friendship within gender and cultural
studies
• Apply critical skills to media representations of intimacy, love and friendship
• Evaluate public debates and concerns about intimacy, sexuality and friendship
• Understand the relationship between intimacy and the public sphere
• Demonstrate research, writing and oral communication skills through a variety of
assessment tasks
• Demonstrate independent thinking and interpretation
• Develop group work skills through discussion in tutorials and online
• Demonstrate self-directed learning skills through reflection exercises and meeting
deadlines
LEARNING STRUCTURE
The course comprises 1 x 2 hour lecture and 1 x 50 minute tutorial per week. Some online
participation is expected over the course of the semester.
UNIT SCHEDULE
Week 1 – Introduction
Week 2 – Privacy
Week 3 – Authenticity
Week 4 – Distinction
Week 5 – Intimate Media
Week 6 – Falling in Love**
** Denotes assessment due.
Week 7 – Moving in Together
Week 8 – Getting Married
Week 9 – Adultery
Week 10 – Polyamory
Week 11 – Intimate Citizenship
Week 12 – The Commercialisation of Intimacy
ASSESSMENT TASKS AND DUE DATES
NB: Both the mid-­‐semester and final essays are compulsory to pass the unit. Tips on writing essays to achieve best possible results are outlined below under “Marking Criteria”. All assessments due at the SOPHI Office must be lodged by 4pm on the due date. •
Tutorial attendance and participation 10%. Continuous assessment.
Tutorials are a vital part of the course experience. Tutorials provide the time to
discuss readings and concepts introduced in lectures so that everyone can
understand and share thoughts on the material. Students will be assessed on their
commitment to attend class regularly and punctually. You will also be assessed on
your willingness to discuss course content with others and to do so with respect for a
range of viewpoints. Specific details of attendance requirements are included below.
If you miss a tutorial, or would like to boost your participation mark, students will be
able to continue class discussions in tutorial groups set up on the class Blackboard
site. This is where you can also ask questions about course material and offer ideas
for class debate. You can also offer feedback on other students’ reflections (see
below).
•
Online reflection (500 words) 10%. Due in the week chosen by each student.
Sometimes our best thoughts occur to us after class. This applies to teachers as well
as students! “On reflection” is an exercise that will give you the opportunity to reflect
on the readings for one week of the course in greater detail. At the start of semester,
students will choose a topic from the course outline that is of interest to them. During
the week of your chosen topic, read the set texts, come to the lecture and tutorial,
and then write 500 words describing what you have learned about the topic. You will
be assessed on how well you summarise the week’s set readings (in your own
words), and how you relate the topic to examples either in class or in contemporary
culture. Extra marks will go to students showing insights based on their own
examples and further scholarly reading. This assessment is due within one week of
your chosen topic (i.e. by the following Thursday) and must be uploaded in your
tutorial space on the course eLearning site.
•
Mid-semester essay: (1500 words) 30%. Due Friday, April 20.
Using at least three theories introduced in the course so far, write an essay
answering the following questions. Do you use media technologies to form and
maintain friendships? What examples have you seen – either in your own life or in
popular culture – of media being used to create or withhold intimacy?
•
Final essay (2000 words) 50% Due Friday, June 8.
Students will have a choice of questions. These will be distributed in lectures and
online in week 7.
READING REQUIREMENTS
All Required Reading is in the Course Reading Pack, available for purchase at the University Copy Centre. Further Reading is available online or in Fisher Library. Week 1 – Introduction
8 March
Required Reading
• Dale Carnegie, Selections from ‘Six Ways To Make People Like You’, in How to Win
Friends and Influence People (Revised edition) Eden, North Ryde, 1988; [Original
publication 1936].
• Sherry Turkle, ‘Introduction’, in Alone Together: Why We Expect More From
Technology and Less From Each Other, Basic Books, New York, 2011: 1-17.
Further Reading
• Lynn Jamieson, Intimacy: Personal Relationships in Modern Societies, Polity Press,
1998/2005.
• Jolie O’Dell, ‘“How to Win Friends & Influence People” Gets A Thoroughly Digital
Refresh’, Venture Beat, 6/10/2011: http://venturebeat.com/2011/10/06/win-friendsinfluence-people/
Week 2 – Privacy
15 March
Required Reading
• Christina Nippert-Eng, ‘Introduction: Islands, Oceans and Beaches’, in Islands of
Privacy: Selective Concealment and Disclosure in Everyday Life, University of
Chicago Press, 2010: 1-19.
• danah boyd, ‘Making Sense of Privacy and Publicity’, Talk at SXSW. Austin, Texas,
13/3/2010: http://www.danah.org/papers/talks/2010/SXSW2010.html
Further Reading
• Emily Nussbaum, ‘Kids, the Internet and the End of Privacy’, The Weekend
Australian Magazine, March 24-5, 2007 [Library e-Reserve]
• Matt Richtel, ‘Young, in Love and Sharing Everything, Including a Password’, The
New York Times, 18/1/2012: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/18/us/teenagerssharing-passwords-as-show-of-affection.html?_r=1&smid=fb-share&pagewanted=all
• Sam Biddle, ‘When to Give Your Girlfriend Your Password’, Gizmodo, 30/12/2011:
http://gizmodo.com/5870226/when-to-give-your-girlfriend-your-password
• Zadie Smith, ‘Generation Why?’ The New York Review of Books, 25/11/2010.
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2010/nov/25/generationwhy/?pagination=false
• Mark Andrejevic, ‘The Work of Being Watched: Interactive Media and the Exploitation
of Self-Disclosure’, Critical Studies in Media Communication, 19, 2 (June): 230-248.
• Michael Warner, ‘Public and Private’ in Publics and Counterpublics, New York: Zone
Books; Cambridge, Mass: Distributed by MIT Press, 2002.
Week 3 – Authenticity
22 March
Required Reading
• Erving Goffman, ‘Regions and Region Behavior’, The Presentation of Self in
Everyday Life, The Overlook Press, New York, 1973.
• Arlie Russell Hochschild, ‘Managing Feeling’, from The Managed Heart:
Commercialization Of Human Feeling, Berkeley, University of California Press, 1983.
Further Reading
• Dominic Pettman, ‘Love in the Time of Tamagotchi’, Theory, Culture & Society, 26, 23, 2009: 189-208
• Sherry Turkle, ‘Love’s Labour Lost’, in Alone Together: Why We Expect More From
Technology and Less From Each Other, Basic Books, New York, 2011: 103-125
• Rob Horning, ‘Authenticity Issues and the New Intimacies’, Marginal Utility [Blog],
Pop Matters, http://www.popmatters.com/pm/post/153970-/
Week 4 – Distinction
29 March
Required Reading
• Pierre Bourdieu, ‘Elective Affinities’, in Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement
of Taste, Richard Nice (trans) Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1984.
• Melissa Gregg, ‘Facebook Friends: Security Blankets and Career Mobility’, in Work’s
Intimacy, Polity Press, 2011: 87-101.
Further Reading
• Richard Beck, ‘5.4: Pitchfork, 1995-present’, n+1, 2011: http://nplusonemag.com/54
Week 5 – Intimate Media
5 April
Required Reading
• John B. Thompson, ‘Self and Experience in a Mediated World’, The Media and
Modernity: A Social Theory of the Media, Polity, Cambridge, 1995: 207-34.
• Illana Gershon, ‘Remediation and Heartache’, The Breakup 2.0: Disconnecting Over
New Media, Cornell University Press, Ithaca and London: 91-121.
Further Reading
• Larissa Hjorth and Kyoung-hwa Yonnie Kim, ‘The Mourning After: A Case Study of
Social Media in the 3.11 Earthquake Disaster in Japan’, Television and New Media,
12 (6) 2011: 552-559
• Jimmy Sanderson and Pauline Hope Cheong, ‘Tweeting Prayers and Communicating
Grief Over Michael Jackson Online’, Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 30
(5) 2010: 328–340
•
•
Planet Diana: Cultural Studies and Global Mourning, Research Centre in
Intercommunal Studies, University of Western Sydney, Kingswood, NSW: 1997.
http://www.deathswitch.com
**MID SEMESTER BREAK – 12 April – NO CLASS**
Week 6 – Falling in Love
19 April
Required Reading
• David Shumway ‘Introduction: A Brief History of Love’, Modern Love: Romance,
Intimacy, and the Marriage Crisis, New York University Press, New York, 2003: 1-27.
• Alain de Botton, ‘Romantic Fatalism’, Essays in Love, Picador, London, 1993: 1-10.
Further Reading
• John Armstrong, ‘The Romantic Vision’, Conditions of Love, WW Norton and Co,
New York, 2002: 1-7.
• Lauren Berlant, ‘Love, a Queer Feeling’ in Tim Dean and Christopher Lane (eds)
Homosexuality and Psychoanalysis, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 2001.
• Roland Barthes, A Lover’s Discourse, Richard Howard (trans), Hill and Wang, New
York, 1977.
• Tania Modleski, Loving With A Vengeance: Mass-Produced Fantasies For Women,
Methuen, New York, 1984.
• Janice Radway, Reading the Romance: Women, Patriarchy, and Popular Literature,
University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, c1984.
Week 7 – Moving in Together
26 April
Required Reading
• William H. Whyte, ‘The Web of Friendship’ & ‘This Outgoing Life’, in The
Organization Man, Penguin, Harmondsworth, 1963 [1956]: 303-336.
• Laura Kipnis, Selection from ‘Domestic Gulags’ in Against Love: A Polemic,
Pantheon Books, New York, 2003: 82-94.
Further Reading
• Jean-Claude Kaufmann, Gripes: The Little Quarrels of Couples, Helen Morrison
(trans), Polity, Cambridge, 2009.
• Jacqui Taffel, ‘Love keeps its distance’, Sydney Morning Herald, 26/3/2007:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/relationships/love-keeps-itsdistance/2007/03/26/1174761337906.html#
• Katy Guest, ‘Loving together and living apart’, The Independent,
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/loving-together-amp-living-apart466281.html
• Zygmunt Bauman, ‘Falling In and Out of Love’, Liquid Love: On the Fragility of
Human Bonds, Polity, Cambridge, 2003.
• Peter T. Kilborn, Next Stop, Reloville: Life Inside America's New Rootless
Professional Class, Henry Holt, 2009.
Week 8 – Getting Married
3 May
Required Reading
• Michael Warner, ‘Beyond Gay Marriage’, The Trouble with Normal: Sex, Politics, and
the Ethics of Queer Life, Free Press, New York, 1999: 81-147.
• Finance Minister Penny Wong's address to the ALP national conference on gay
marriage, The Australian, 3/12/2011.
Further Reading
• April Fraser, ‘Have Modern Brides Forgotten Feminism?’ Sunday Life, June 23, 2010.
http://www.theage.com.au/lifestyle/lifematters/have-modern-brides-forgottenfeminism-20100622-ytyp.html
• Susan Maushart, Wifework: What Marriage Really Means for Women. Text
Publishing, Melbourne, 2001.
• Marilyn Yalom, A History of the Wife, Pandora, London, 2001.
Week 9 – Adultery
10 May
Required Reading
• Suzanne Leonard, ‘“I Hate My Job, I Hate Everybody Here”: Adultery, Boredom, and
the “Working Girl” in Twenty-First-Century American Cinema’, Interrogating
Postfeminism: Gender and the Politics of Popular Culture, Diane Negra and Yvonne
Tasker (eds), Duke University Press, 2007: 100-131.
• Stevi Jackson and Sue Scott, ‘The Personal is Still Political: Heterosexuality,
Feminism and Monogamy’, Feminism and Psychology, 14 (1) 2004: 151-157.
Further Reading
• Laura Kipnis, ‘Adultery’, in Intimacy, Lauren Berlant (ed), University of Chicago
Press, Chicago, 2000: 9-47.
• Adam Philips, Monogamy, Random House, New York, 1996.
• Suzanne Leonard, ‘“That’s All I Intend to Share Right Now”: Adultery and Privacy in
The Good Wife’, FlowTV, 2/3/2010: http://flowtv.org/2010/07/thats-all-i-intend-toshare-right-now/
Week 10 – Polyamory
17 May
Required Reading
• Dossie Easton and Catherine A Liszt, ‘Infinite Possibilities’, The Ethical Slut: A Guide
to Infinite Sexual Possibilities, 2nd Edition, Celestial Arts, San Francisco, 2009: 46-54.
• Becky Rosa, ‘Anti-Monogamy: A Radical Challenge to Compulsory Heterosexuality?’
Stirring it: Challenges for Feminism, Gabriele Griffin, Marianne Hester, Shirin Rai and
Sasha Roseneil (eds) Taylor & Francis, London: 107-120.
Further Reading
•
•
Victoria Robinson, ‘My Baby Just Cares For Me: Feminism, Heterosexuality and
Non-monogamy’, Journal of Gender Studies, 6 (2) 1997: 143-157.
Marcia Munson and Judith P. Stelboum (eds) The Lesbian Polyamory Reader: Open
Relationships, Non-Monogamy, and Casual Sex, Haworth Press, New York, 1999.
Week 11 – Intimate Citizenship
24 May
Required Reading
• Rob Cover, ‘Biopolitics and the Baby Bonus: Australia’s National Identity, Fertility,
and Global Overpopulation’, Continuum: Journal of Media & Cultural Studies 25 (3):
2011: 439-451.
• Jenny Kaighin, ‘Different Ways of “Doing Family” in Australia: Queerying the Impact
of Same-Sex Law Reform’, Queering Paradigms II: Interrogating Agendas, Burkhard
Scherer and Matthew Ball (eds), Peter Lang, Oxford, 2011: 259-274.
Further Reading
• Melissa Gregg, ‘Normal Homes’, M/C Journal "Home" Vol 10, 4 (August) 2007:
Available online: http://journal.media-culture.org.au/0708/02-gregg.php
• Senthorun Raj, ‘Displaced Subjectivities: The Queer Refugee Body in Law’, Dialogue
8 (1) 2010: http://www.polsis.uq.edu.au/dialogue-vol-8-issue-1
• Elizabeth A. Povinelli, The Empire of Love: Toward a Theory of Intimacy, Genealogy,
and Carnality, Duke University Press, Durham, 2006.
• Judith Butler, ‘Is Kinship Always Already Heterosexual?’ differences, 13.1, 2002.
• Kath Weston, Families We Choose: Lesbians, Gays, Kinship, Columbia University
Press, New York, 1991.
• Immigration Nation (DVD), SBS Television.
Week 12 – The Commercialisation of Intimacy
31 May
Required Reading
• Eva Illouz, ‘The Rise of Homo Sentimentalis’, in Cold Intimacies: The Making of
Emotional Capitalism, Polity Press, London, 2007: 1-39.
• Alison Hearn, ‘Variations on the Branded Self: Theme, Invention, Improvisation and
Inventory’, in The Media and Social Theory, David Hesmondhalgh and Jason
Toynbee (eds), Routledge, London, 2008: 194-210.
Further Reading
• Anthony Giddens, The Transformation of Intimacy: Sexuality, Love and Eroticism in
Modern Societies, Polity Press, Cambridge, 1992.
• Alan Liu, The Laws of Cool: Knowledge Work and the Culture of Information,
University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 2004.
• Mary Evans, The Future of Love’ in Love: An Unromantic Discussion, Polity 2003.
• Melissa Gregg, ‘The Break-Up: Hardt and Negri’s Politics of Love’ in Jack Z. Bratich
(ed), Journal of Communication Inquiry Special Issue on Autonomism and
Communication, 35(4) 395–402.
INFORMATION FOR STUDENTS ON ASSESSMENT OF COURSEWORK
Assessment
Students are required to:
• attend lectures and tutorials (or seminars);
• participate in class discussion;
• complete satisfactorily such written work, presentations and examinations as may be
prescribed; and
• meet the standards required by the University for academic honesty
Attendance requirements
Departments in the School of Philosophical and Historical Inquiry (SOPHI) require
satisfactory class attendance as part of participation in a unit of study. Attendance below
80% of tutorials/seminars without written evidence of illness or misadventure may be
penalised with loss of marks. Students should be aware that non-attendance at 50% or more
of classes without due cause is likely to result in them being deemed not to have fulfilled
requirements for the unit of study; they thus run the risk of an Absent Fail result being
returned. Attendance at less than 50% of classes, regardless of the reasons for the
absences, will automatically result in the student’s case being referred to the Departmental
examiners’ meeting for a determination as to whether the student should pass or fail the unit
of study, or, if a pass is awarded, the level of penalty that should be applied. Students
should not take a unit of study unless they can meet the above attendance requirement.
For further details see the Faculty of Arts Attendance Policy at:
http://sydney.edu.au/arts/current_students/policies.shtml
Grade distribution
Departments within the School of Philosophical and Historical Inquiry follow Academic Board
and Faculty of Arts guidelines in awarding a determined percentage of each grade.
Departments may scale marks in order to fit these grade guidelines.
A. General philosophies of assessment practice
1. The Department favours ‘deep learning’ over ‘shallow learning’. In other words, we
are more interested in evidence that students have made conceptual developments
in their ways of understanding and interpreting the world than in their familiarity with
'facts', figures and dates.
2. Original and thoughtful argument is valued more highly than polished regurgitations
of lectures or set reading.
3. Evidence of a thoughtful response to the conceptual framework of any individual unit
is valued more highly than pre-existing skills of, for example, debate and expression.
4. Students are encouraged to explore areas of particular interest to themselves, and
will be rewarded for initiative and ingenuity in discovering relevant material.
5. An idea that cannot be expressed clearly probably has not been understood clearly.
We therefore value evidence of logical, coherent thought, argument and expression
in essays.
6. While recognising that the political and ethical values of students vary widely, the
School does not reward or condone unreasoned polemic or racism or sexism.
B. Marking criteria
In assessing written work, academic staff look for demonstrated effort, abilities and skills in
the following areas. Note that individual units are likely to have additional and more specific
requirements and criteria. These should be made clear to students by the coordinator in
each unit.
1. Content
• extent of reading
•
•
•
•
accuracy of knowledge
breadth and depth of knowledge
relevance of information
sufficiency of evidence and documentation
2.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Understanding
understanding of problem or project
judgement of significance of material
awareness/understanding of different arguments in reading
recognition of implications of evidence
ability to think critically
grasp of relevant theory
understanding of ethics and values relevant to reading and subject matter
3.
•
•
•
•
Independence
judgement and initiative in reading and research
originality in use and interpretation of evidence
development of argument
independence in use of concepts and language
4.
•
•
•
•
Style
correctness of grammar and scholarly documentation
organisation and presentation of material
clarity of writing style
originality and creativity of writing style
C. Guide to interpretation of grades
This guide indicates broadly the qualitative judgements implied by the various grades which
may be awarded. A more precise evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of individual
essays will be provided in examiners’ comments. Evaluation is made with due consideration
of the different standards likely to be achieved by students in junior and senior units.
Below 50% (Fail)
Work not of an acceptable standard.
Work may fail for any or all of the following reasons: unacceptable levels of paraphrasing;
irrelevance of content; polemical assertion without evidence or analysis; presentation,
grammar or structure so poor it cannot be understood; submitted very late without extension.
50-54% (Low Pass)
Work of an acceptable standard.
Written work contains evidence of minimal reading and some understanding of the subject
matter, offers descriptive summary of material relevant to the task, but may have a tendency
to be purely descriptive, to paraphrase or rely on polemical assertion rather than careful
analysis and argumentation. The work makes a reasonable attempt to organise material
logically and comprehensibly and to provide scholarly documentation. There may be gaps in
any or all of these areas.
55-59% (Medium Pass)
Work of a satisfactory standard.
Written work meets basic requirements in terms of reading and research, and demonstrates
a reasonable understanding of subject matter. Offers a synthesis of relevant material and
shows a genuine effort to avoid paraphrasing. The work has a logical and comprehensible
structure and acceptable documentation, and attempts to mount an argument, though there
may be weaknesses in particular areas.
60-64% (High Pass)
Work has considerable merit, though Honours is not automatically recommended.
Written work contains evidence of a broad and reasonably accurate command of the subject
matter and some sense of its broader significance. It offers some evaluation and synthesis of
material and demonstrates an effort to go beyond the essential reading. The work contains
clear focus on the principal issues, understanding of relevant arguments and diverse
interpretations, and a coherent argument grounded in relevant evidence, though there may
be some weaknesses with regard to clarity and/or structure of the argument. Clearly written
and properly documented.
Note that roughly 45-50% of students in junior levels of study and 25-50% of students in
senior level units of study will receive marks within the Pass range each semester.
65-69% (Low Credit)
Written work contains evidence of comprehensive reading and some evidence of
independent thought. It offers a synthesis and critical evaluation of material and takes a
position in relation to various interpretations. It makes a coherent and sustained argument,
drawing on relevant concepts from readings. Interdisciplinary work at this level demonstrates
some awareness of the fields and contexts that inform the work. Well written and properly
documented.
70-74% (High Credit)
Highly competent work, demonstrating clear capacity to complete Honours successfully. This
level of work is considered “above average”.
The work shows evidence of extensive reading and initiative in research, a sound grasp of
subject matter and appreciation of key issues and context. The work engages critically and
sometimes creatively with the question or task, and attempts an analytical evaluation of
material. It makes a good attempt to critique various interpretations, and shows evidence of
the ability to conceptualise and problematise issues and to go beyond the face value of core
concepts. It demonstrates some evidence of the ability to think theoretically as well as in
concrete terms. Interdisciplinary work at this level has a reasonably strong awareness of the
fields and contexts that inform the work. Well written and properly documented.
75-84% (Distinction)
Work of a superior standard.
Written work demonstrates initiative in research and reading, complex understanding and
original analysis of subject matter and its context. The work takes a critical, interrogative
stance and makes a good attempt to move beyond the underlying assumptions of a topic,
recognizing key concepts, theories and principles. Interdisciplinary work at this level
successfully integrates differing perspectives. The work is properly documented and the
writing is characterised by style, clarity, and some creativity.
85%+ (High Distinction)
Work of exceptional standard.
Written work demonstrates initiative and originality in research and reading; clear, critical
analysis of the examined material; and innovative, insightful interpretation of evidence.
Interdisciplinary work at this level effectively incorporates different perspectives to develop a
rich and thorough analysis of its object of study. It makes an important contribution to
debate, engages with the values, assumptions and contested meanings contained within
original evidence, and develops abstract or theoretical arguments on the strength of detailed
research and interpretation. The work is properly documented, and the writing is
characterised by creativity, style, and precision.
SCALING
The final grade a student receives is based on the standard of his or her own performance
across all the tasks set for a unit. Assessment tasks are designed so students can
demonstrate how well they have achieved a unit’s outcomes. While marks for individual
assessment tasks may give a good indication of the likely final mark or grade for the unit,
they do not guarantee a specific grade or final mark.
From time to time, final results for a unit may need to be adjusted or scaled. This can
happen, for example, if it is found that the marking process has not accurately represented
the actual standards achieved by students. If adjustment to raw scores is needed, this is
always done with care and attention to individual students’ work. The marking process
involves consultation and cross-checking to ensure that results faithfully reflect standards
expected in the Faculty of Arts at the University of Sydney.
Academic dishonesty
SOPHI departments are committed to the principles of academic honesty as set out in the
Academic Dishonesty and Plagiarism in Coursework Policy. Students have a responsibility
to familiarise themselves with these principles.
According to the Policy the definition of academic dishonesty includes but is not limited to:
• recycling: the resubmission for assessment of work that is the same or substantially
the same as work previously submitted for assessment in the same or in a different
unit of study;
• fabrication of data;
• the engagement of another person to complete or contribute to an assessment or
examination in place of the student, whether for payment or otherwise;
• communication, whether by speaking or some other means, to other candidates
during an examination;
• bringing into an examination forbidden material such as textbooks, notes, calculators
or computers;
• attempting to read other student’s work during an examination; and/or
• writing an examination or test paper, or consulting with another person about the
examination or test, outside the confines of the examination room without permission.
• copying from other students during examinations
• inappropriate use of electronic devices to access information during examinations.
Plagiarism
Plagiarism is the theft of intellectual property. SOPHI departments are opposed to and will
not tolerate plagiarism. Students have a responsibility to understand the full details of the
University’s Academic Dishonesty and Plagiarism in Coursework Policy which can be
downloaded from the University’s Policy online website.
All students are required to include a signed statement of compliance with work submitted
for assessment, presentation or publication certifying that no part of the work constitutes a
breach of the University’s policy on plagiarism. This statement of compliance is printed on all
assignment/essay cover sheets and written work will not be marked if the compliance
statement is unsigned.
According to the policy, plagiarism means presenting another person’s work as one’s own by
presenting, copying or reproducing the work without appropriate acknowledgment of the
source. Common forms of plagiarism include but are not limited to:
• presenting written work that contains phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs or
longer extracts from published or unpublished work (including from the internet)
without appropriate acknowledgement of the source; or
• presenting written work of another person without appropriate acknowledgement of
the source.
Legitimate cooperation between students is permitted and encouraged but students should
be aware of the difference between cooperation and collusion. Discussion of general themes
and concepts is allowed but students are not permitted to read each other’s work prior to
submission or cooperate so closely that they are jointly selecting quotes, planning essay
structure or copying each other’s ideas.
While plagiarism is never acceptable, there is a distinction between negligent plagiarism and
plagiarism that involves dishonest intent.
Negligent plagiarism is defined in the policy as “innocently, recklessly or carelessly
presenting another person’s work as one’s own work without appropriate acknowledgement
of the source”. In cases of negligent plagiarism the student will be counselled and referred to
appropriate services for assistance. Further action may be taken, including requiring the
student to resubmit or undertake another assessment task, undertake remedial action, or in
some cases a fail grade may be applied to the work or part of the work.
Dishonest plagiarism is defined in the policy as “knowingly presenting another person’s work
as one’s own work without appropriate acknowledgement of the source”. Where academic
dishonesty or dishonest plagiarism is proven as not serious enough to constitute potential
student misconduct under Chapter 8 of the University of Sydney By-Law 1999 the student
will be counselled and referred to appropriate services for assistance. They will also be
issued with a written warning explaining the consequences of any subsequent breaches of
the University’s policy. Further action may be taken including requiring the student to
resubmit or undertake another assessment task, undertake remedial action, or in some
cases a fail grade may be applied to the work or part of the work, or a fail grade or mark
penalty may be applied to the unit of study.
In cases where academic dishonesty or dishonest plagiarism is proven as serious enough to
constitute potential student misconduct under Chapter 8 of the University of Sydney By-Law
1999 the case will be referred to the Registrar.
Students are encouraged to think for themselves. In assessing students’ work academic staff
look for evidence of understanding and capacity for independent thought; it is always
disappointing to discover plagiarism. Written work containing plagiarism will be assessed
according to its academic merit, but may fail because it does not meet the minimum
standard required.
Submission of written work
Essays and assignments must be submitted in typewritten hard copy by 4.00pm on the due
date through the School (SOPHI) office, located on Level 3, Lobby H, in the Main
Quadrangle. Students may not hand essays or assignments directly to their lecturer or tutor.
Online submission of essays and assignments through elearning is available in some units
of study.
A completed and signed cover sheet must be attached to the front of all written work
submitted through the School office. Written work will not be marked if the plagiarism policy
compliance statement on the cover sheet is unsigned. All incoming essays and assignments
are date stamped. Students submitting work through elearning must read and accept
the plagiarism policy compliance statement for their work to be submitted.
Students must retain a copy of all written work submitted.
Late submission and extensions
Essays and assignments not submitted on or before the due date are subject to penalty.
SOPHI departments conform to the Faculty’s Policy on Late Work which states that late work
is penalised at the rate of two marks (out of 100) per day. In this instance, ‘two marks’
means two full points off the awarded mark, not two percent of the awarded mark. For
assignments marked out of a maximum total other than 100, the penalty will apply pro rata.
For example, for assignments marked out of 40, the penalty will be 0.8 marks per day.
Only coordinators, either of individual units or of the junior and/or senior curricula have the
authority to grant extensions. Requests for extension must be made via the Faculty’s online
assessment consideration system at
http://sydney.edu.au/arts/current_students/online_application.shtml
Late essays or assignments will not be accepted (except where applications for special
consideration are lodged) beyond the designated return date for the relevant written work. In
cases where documented misadventure or serious illness prevents students from submitting
work before the designated return date an alternative assessment task will be set.
For further details see the Faculty’s Late Work Policy at:
http://sydney.edu.au/arts/current_students/policies.shtml
Special consideration: illness or misadventure
Student requests for special consideration are assessed in accordance with the principles
set out in Part 5 of the Academic Board policy on Assessment and Examination of
Coursework. Students intending to submit an application for special consideration should
make themselves familiar with the full details of this policy.
Applications for Special Consideration must be made as soon as possible and within five
working days of the due date of the assessment. Where circumstances prevent this, a
student may still apply but must provide a reasonable case for the delay in submitting their
application.
Only illness or misadventure during the session or occurring at the time of an examination
will warrant Special Consideration for academic performance. The academic judgement as
to whether Special Consideration will be granted will depend upon both the nature of the
illness or misadventure and its timing with respect to the assessment.
All applications for Special Consideration must be made via an online system. To access this
system please go to:
http://sydney.edu.au/arts/current_students/online_application.shtml
If students miss an exam because of illness or misadventure they should first notify the
department concerned and then apply for Special Consideration using the online system.
Requests for Simple Extensions of less than five working days for non-examination based
assessment are also covered by the online system.
Special arrangements
Special Arrangements may be made available to any student enrolled in a Faculty of Arts
and Social Sciences unit of study, who is unable to meet assessment requirements or attend
examinations, because of one or more of the following situations:
1. essential religious commitments or essential beliefs (including cultural and
ceremonial commitments)
2. compulsory legal absence (e.g. jury duty, court summons, etc),
3. sporting or cultural commitments, including political/union commitments, where the
student is representing the University, state or nation,
4. birth or adoption of a child,
5. Australian Defence Force or emergency service commitments (including Army
Reserve), and
6. Where the Faculty can form the view that employment of an essential nature to the
student would be jeopardise and that the student has little or no discretion with
respect to the employment demand
Applications for special arrangements are also handled through the same online system as
Special Consideration (see above).
Applications for Special Arrangements should be made at the beginning of semester with
regard to religious beliefs or commitments relating to moveable feasts, prayer or worship
times, or with regard to other requirements of a student’s religion. Applications for other
types of commitment should be made as soon as possible after being notified of a
requirement to be absent from the University. With regard to examinations held during
University-wide examination periods, applications should be submitted within two weeks of
the examination timetable.
Appeals
The Department stands behind its marking process. All care is taken to ensure that marking
is consistent and fair and that markers adhere to the assessment criteria as advertised.
Marking is regarded as an important part of the teaching and learning experience and
markers provide constructive feedback to assist student progress.
In some rare cases, a student may be of the opinion that the mark does not reflect the
quality of his/her work. In pursuance of the University of Sydney 'Student Appeals Against
Academic Decisions', if a student wishes to lodge an appeal against the grade awarded, the
Faculty resolves to adhere to the guiding principles of that document as follows.
Step 1:
The student should contact the Unit of Study Coordinator in writing to arrange for a time to
discuss the mark. At this stage the student must complete and take with them an Appeal for
Reassessment (Departmental) form which can be downloaded at:
http://sydney.edu.au/arts/current_students/undergraduate_forms.shtml)
Section B of this form is completed by the Department. This should happen within fifteen
working days of marks being made available to students.
If the Unit of Study Coordinator is not available the student should contact the Chair of
Department/Program Director or Undergraduate Coordinator. Normally this consultative
process is productive and the student is satisfied with the outcome achieved at this point.
Step 2:
If the student is not satisfied with the outcome of the discussion with the coordinator or chair,
then he/she may appeal formally against the grade awarded.
Before beginning a formal appeal at the Faculty level the student should first read the
Academic Board Resolution on 'Student Appeals Against Academic Decisions'. Students are
advised to lodge the appeal within 15 working days of the outcome of discussions at
department level as outlined above.
The appeal must be lodged through the Faculty Office (attention Dean of the Faculty of Arts
and Social Sciences) and include the following:
•
•
•
•
•
A completed Appeal for Reassessment (Faculty) form (student to fill in) which can be
downloaded from:
http://sydney.edu.au/arts/current_students/undergraduate_forms.shtml
A written statement outlining the reasons for appeal. The written statement should
draw attention to such matters as perceived injustice in terms of bias or inconsistent
application of the grade descriptors published by the Department;
A completed Appeal for Reassessment (Departmental) form (Section B of this form
must be completed and signed by the Department);
Your relevant assessment task
Any additional supporting documentation.
Elearning
Many units of study have an elearning site, which may be used to post lecture notes, links
relevant to the units, and occasional class announcements about assignments, exam
preparation and so on. If there is a website for your unit, it is your responsibility to check the
site at least once a week.
To log on to the university’s main elearning system, go to the University homepage. Click on
MyUni under Current Students. In MyUni, click on the link, “USYD eLearning”. Alternatively,
you can bookmark the login page directly at http://elearning.sydney.edu.au/.
Log in with your unikey. You will see a list of all elearning sites available to you. These may
be in either the new elearning system, Blackboard Learn, or the old elearning system,
WebCT CE.
If you have any difficulties logging in or using the system, visit the Student Help area of the
Sydney eLearning site, http://sydney.edu.au/elearning/student/ .
Learning Assistance
Students experiencing difficulties with their written expression, including essay writing style
or structure can seek assistance from the Learning Centre, which runs workshops on a
range of subjects including study skills, academic reading and writing, oral communication,
and examination skills. The centre offers programs specifically designed for students from a
non-English speaking background. The Learning Centre is located on Level 7 of the
Education Building A35 (beside Manning House); contact them on 9351 3853 or email
learning.centre@sydney.edu.au . For further information visit the Learning Centre website at
http://sydney.edu.au/stuserv/learning_centre/.
Online learning assistance is available via the Write Site, which offers modules on grammar,
sources and structure to help students develop their academic and professional writing skills.
Each module provides descriptions of common problems in academic and professional
writing and strategies for addressing them. Students can view samples of good writing and
also do some practice activities in error correction. For further information visit the Write Site
at http://writesite.elearn.usyd.edu.au.
Learning assistance is also available to Indigenous Australian students via the Koori Centre
and includes academic skills group workshops covering topics such as concentration
strategies, writing for specific disciplines, time management, research and reading
strategies, academic writing styles and referencing. The Koori Centre is located on Level 2
of Old Teachers College A22; contact 9351 2046 or 1800 622 742 (toll free) or email
koori.centre@sydney.edu.au. For further information visit the Koori Centre website at
http://sydney.edu.au/koori .
Other support services
Disability Services is located on Level 5, Jane Foss Russell Building G20; contact 8627 8422
or email disability.services@sydney.edu.au. For further information visit their website at
http://sydney.edu.au/stuserv/disability/.
The Counselling Service is located on Level 5, Jane Foss Russell Building G20; contact
8627 8433 or email counsell@stuserv.usyd.edu.au. For further information visit their
website at http://sydney.edu.au/stuserv/counselling/.
Note: All Academic Board policies referred to above are available online at
http://sydney.edu.au/policy.
Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences
GRADUATE ATTRIBUTES
Research and Inquiry. Graduates of the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences will be able to
build upon and extend their knowledge and understanding through research, inquiry and
creativity.
They will:
•
possess a body of knowledge relevant to their fields of study, and a firm grasp of the
principles, practices, and boundaries of their discipline;
•
be able to acquire and evaluate new knowledge through independent research;
•
be able to identify, define, investigate, and solve problems;
•
think independently, analytically and creatively; and
•
exercise critical judgement and critical thinking to create new modes of understanding.
Information Literacy. Graduates of the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences will be able to use
information effectively in a range of contexts.
They will:
•
recognise pertinent information needs;
•
use appropriate media, tools and methodologies to locate, access and use information;
•
critically evaluate the sources, values, validity and currency of information; and
•
use information in critical and creative thinking.
Personal and Intellectual Autonomy. Graduates of the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences
will be able to work independently and in ways informed by openness, curiosity and a desire to
meet new challenges.
They will:
•
be independent learners who take responsibility for their own learning;
•
set appropriate goals for ongoing intellectual and professional development, and evaluate
their own performance effectively;
•
be intellectually curious, open to new ideas, methods and ways of thinking, and able to
sustain intellectual interest;
•
respond effectively to unfamiliar problems in unfamiliar contexts; and
•
work effectively in teams and other collaborative contexts.
Ethical, Social and Professional Understanding. Graduates of the Faculty of Arts and Social
Sciences will hold values and beliefs consistent with their role as responsible members of local,
national, international and professional communities.
They will:
•
understand and practise the highest standards of ethical behaviour associate with their
discipline or profession;
•
be informed and open-minded about social, cultural and linguistic diversity in Australia and
the world;
•
appreciate their ethical responsibilities towards colleagues, research subjects, the wider
community, and the environment;
•
be aware that knowledge is not value-free.
Communication. Graduates of the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences will value and employ
communication as a tool for negotiating and creating new understanding, interacting with others,
and furthering their own learning.
They will:
•
possess a high standard of oral, visual and written communication relevant to their fields of
study, including where applicable the possession of these skills in languages other than
English;
•
recognise the importance of continuing to develop their oral, visual, and written
communication skills;
•
be able to use appropriate communication technologies.