Title: SOCIAL, POLITICAL AND LEGAL FRAMEWORKS OF HUMAN RIGHTS
Code: MSWPG7213
School/Faculty: School of Arts
TeachingPeriod: 2020/20
Author: Rob Townsend
Program Level:
| AQF Level of Program | ||||||
| 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | |
| Level | ||||||
| Introductory | ||||||
| Intermediate | ||||||
| Advanced |
Pre-requisites: (MSWPG7101 and MSWPG7102 and MSWPG7108)
Co-requisites: Nil
Exclusions: Nil
CreditPoints: 15.00
ASCEDCode: 090501
Description of the course for handbook entry:
This course seeks to address the range of contemporary issues in Australian and global politics, economics and societies. It will draw on the long conceptual history of thinking through ‘the rights of the human’, it will focus on the practice history and development of both Australian and international human rights regimes. Students will become familiar with the substantive and procedural elements of international and local human rights laws and gain practical experience debating the applicability of human rights instruments. Students will engage with a range of case studies which will include consideration of human rights issues raised by the Northern Territory Intervention, mandatory detention of refugees, torture and ill-treatment during ‘the war on terror’ and the issue of human rights and corporations.
GradeScheme: Graded (HD, D, C, etc.)
Placement Component: No
Supplementary Assessment: Yes
Where supplementary assessment is available a student must have failed overall in the course but gained a final mark of 45 per cent or above and submitted all major assessment tasks.
Organisation:
Delivery Mode:
Online via Adobe Connect
Structure:
Workshops/seminars on 25 September, 9 October and 23 October, 2020
Staff:
| Type | Name | Room | Telephone | |
| Course Coordinator | Rob Townsend | Online | r.townsend@federation.edu.au | |
| Tutor | Michelle Hood | Online | m.hood@federation.edu.au |
Timetable:
| Type | Day | Time | Room | Staff / Comment |
| Workshop 1 | Friday 25/9 | 10-12 & 1-3 | Online | Rob Townsend |
| Workshop 2 | Friday 09/10 | 10-12 & 1-3 | Online | Rob Townsend |
| Workshop 3 | Friday 23/10 | 10-12 & 1-3 | Online | Rob Townsend |
Additional consultation time can be booked by contacting the staff member concerned directly.
Learning Outcomes:
Knowledge:
K1. Appraise and critique the historical development of current Australian and international human rights regimes
K2. Determine the institutions, substantive protections and procedural mechanism for enforcing human rights
K3. Evaluate the human right based social movements for First Nations’ people, mental health consumers and refugees
K4. Determine and critique the challenges associated with various human rights systems and processes
K5. Assess and predict the increasing role of human rights as a practice framework in Social Work globally and in Australia
Skills:
S1. Engage in a critical analysis about human rights issues
S2. Evaluate the role of human rights in the contemporary world
S3. Evaluate some of the philosophical bases of conundrums with human rights law and processes
S4. Debate issues in society which give rise to human rights cases being raised and determined
S5. Debate human rights practice as it relates to Social Work as a profession and to practitioners in a range of contexts
Application of knowledge and skills:
A1. Capacity to communicate oral and written arguments effectively
A2. Ability to conduct rigorous academic and practice research relevant to studying and practicing human rights law
A3. Ability to apply standards, ethics and values of Social Work in human rights contexts
A4. Apply skills for practice in government and/or non-government sectors
Values and Graduate Attributes:
Values:
V1. Work respectfully and effectively with individuals, groups and communities
V2. Appreciate the role of capacity building, participatory practice and social inclusion in enhancing the social and cultural lives of individuals, groups and communities
V3. Work toward community and individual rights of self-determination
V4. Explore and respond to personal and professional ethical issues within processes of human rights law and practice
Content:
Scope:
This course seeks to address the range of contemporary issues in Australian and global politics, economics and societies. It will draw on the long conceptual history of thinking through ‘the rights of the human’, it will focus on the practice history and development of both Australian and international human rights regimes. Students will become familiar with the substantive and procedural elements of international and local human rights laws and gain practical experience debating the applicability of human rights instruments. Students will engage with a range of case studies which will include consideration of human rights issues raised by the Northern Territory Intervention, mandatory detention of refugees, torture and ill-treatment during ‘the war on terror’ and the issue of human rights and corporations.
Sequence:
The following is an approximate guide to the sequence of topics in this course.
| Topic 1: Conceptualising Human Rights | |
| This topic provides a brief introduction to debates in human rights and their application to social work practice. It will introduce you to the philosophical underpinnings of human rights from pre-enlightenment to contemporary post-enlightenment debates. Aside from considering critiques of the enlightenment inspired human rights from a number of standpoints, such as post-colonialism and post-modernism, cultural and minority rights, it will also explore how the public/private divide within modernity affects social work practice. | |
| Topic 1A: Philosophical traditions in Human rights approach | Prescribed Reading (s): Ife, J. (2012.) Human rights beyond traditional formulations- chapter 2. Ackerly, B. (2008). Universal Human Rights in a world of difference, Chapter 1 & 2. Reichert, E. (2006). Building the foundation: Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In Reichert, E Understanding Human Rights:an exercise book. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications. Additional Reading (s): Ackerly, B. (2008). Universal Human Rights in a difference world of difference, Chapter 3. Brown, C (199) Universal Human Rights: a critique, N & Dunne (eds.) Human Rights in global practice, New York: Cambridge University Press. Cushman,T. (2012). Philosophical foundations of human rights. In T. Cushman (ed.), Handbook of Human Rights (pp.9-22). London: Routledge. Ife, J. (2012). Human rights in a globalized world- Chapter 1. Wornka, J. (2011). Overview of Human Rights: The UN Conventions and Machinery. In Lynne M. Healy and Rosemary J. Link (eds.). Handbook of International Social Work: Human Rights, Development, and the Global Profession. Oxford: Oxford University Press. |
Topic 1 B: Human rights approaches and social work practice | Prescribed Reading (s): Ife, J. (2012). Public and private human rights’- chapter 3 Staub-Bernasconi, S. (2011). Human Rights and Their Relevance for Social Work as Theory and Practice. In Lynne M. Healy and Rosemary J. Link (eds.) Handbook of International Social Work: Human Rights, Development, and the Global Profession, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Additional Reading (s): Radacic, I. (2007). Human rights of women and the public/private divide in international human rights law. Croatian Yearbook of European Law and Policy, 3, 415-442. |
| Topic 1 C: Culture and Human Rights | Prescribed Reading (s): Kurasawa, F. (2012). Human rights as cultural practice. In T. Cushman (Ed.), Handbook of Human Rights (pp.155-63). London: Routledge. Additional Reading (s): Ife, J (2012). Culture and human rights -chapter 4. Brown, C (1999). Universal Human Rights: a critique. In Wheeler, N & Dunne, T (eds.) (1999). Human rights in global practice, New York: Cambridge University Press. |
| Topic 2: Human Rights approaches for social work practice | |
| This section provides an overview of the debates on how human rights can be embedded in social work. It analyses the tensions between rights, needs and obligations that underpin social work practice. Furthermore, it also considers the challenges for social work practice embedded with human rights focus. | |
| Topic 2 A: Human Rights, needs and obligations | Prescribed Reading (s): Ife, J (2012). Human rights and human needs- chapter 5 Ife, J (2012). Human rights and obligations-chapter 6 Additional Reading (s): Ackerly, B (2008). Universal Human Rights in a world of difference, Chapter 8. Fukuda-Parr, S (2006). Millennium Development Goal 8: Indicators for international human rights obligations?. Human Rights Quarterly, 28, 966-997. |
| Topic 2 B: Social workers as human rights workers | Prescribed Reading (s): Ife, J (2012). Participation in the human rights discourse’ chapter 8. Healy, L (2008). Exploring the history of social work as a human rights profession. International Social Work, 51, 735-748. |
Reichert, E (2011). Social Work and Human Rights: a foundation for policy and practice, (Introduction chapter). Additional Reading (s): Dominelli, L (2007). Human rights in social work practice: an invisible part of the social work curriculum. In E.Reichert (Ed.), Challenges in human rights: a social work perspective (pp.1-16). New York: Columbia University Press. Hawkins, C & Knox, K (2014). Educating for international social work: human rights leadership. International Social Work, 57, 248- 57. | |
| Topic 3: Ethics, human rights and social work practice | |
| It provides a brief overview of the philosophical foundations of ethics in social work practice. It also outlines the connections between social work ethics as demonstrated through the Code of Ethics and human rights. Furthermore, it draws attention to how practice principles can be achieved within a human rights framework. | |
| Topic 3A: Code of ethics and human rights in the social work context | Prescribed Reading (s): Congress, E (2012). Global ethical principles and dilemmas. In Healy, L & Link, R (eds.) Handbook of international social work: human rights, development, and the global profession (pp.297- 304). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ife, J. (2012). Ethics and human rights- chapter 7. Additional Reading (s): Healy, L (2007). Universalism and cultural relativism in social work ethics. International Social Work, 50, 11-26. Steen, J (2006). The roots of human rights advocacy and a call to action. Social Work, 51, 101-05. |
| Topic 3B: Human rights and implications for the process of Social work practice | Prescribed Reading (s): Ife, J. (2012). Achieving human rights though social work practice Chapter 10. Additional Reading (s): Ife, J. (2012). Respecting human rights in social work practice chapter 11. Briskman, L. (2008). Recasting social work: human rights and political activism Eileen. Younghusband Lecture, Durban, South Africa, http://info.humanrights.curtin.edu.au/local/docs/Recasting_Social_ Work.pdf. |
| Topic 4: Prospects, Issues and challenges for Human rights practice | |
| This section analyses the prospects for human rights centered social work practice. It will also discusses the issues and challenges human rights discourses face in a neo-liberal and rapidly globalizing world. |
| Topic 4A: Challenges for Human rights Discourse | Prescribed Reading (s): Ife, J. (2012). Conclusion: prospects for human rights practice Chapter 12. Additional Reading (s): Lundy, C. & van Wormer, K. (2006). Social and economic justice, human rights and peace: the challenge for social work in Canada and the USA. International Social Work, 50, 727-39. Reichert, E (2006).The international side of human rights and social work. In Reichert, E Understanding Human Rights: an exercise book. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications. |
Recommended Text (s):
Ife, J. (2012). Human Rights and Social Work: Towards Rights-Based Practice. Melbourne: Cambridge University Press.
Learning Tasks and Assessments:
| Learning Outcomes Assessed | Assessment Task | Assessment Type |
K2, K3, K4 S1, S4, S5 A1 | Students will form pairs develop an online presentation to argue a case study for one of a range of human rights issues. | Presentation |
| K1, K2, K3, K4 S3, S4, S5 A1, A2 | Students will write up their case-study from the presentation as individual pieces of work linking the case study to literature and case law. | Case study |
| K3, K4, K5 S1, S2, S3 A2, A3, A4 | Critical essay on one issue of national and international human rights, linking law, literature, case examples and critical analysis. | Research essay |
| Task | Released | Due | Weighting |
| Assessment 1 : Group Presentation | Week 1 | Thursday 8th October 11pm | 25.0% |
| Assessment 2: Case Study (Real) | Week 1 | Sunday 25th October 11pm | 30.0% |
| Assessement 3 Research Essay | Week 1 | Friday 6th November 11pm | 45.0% |
The following tasks will be graded.
Assessment Task 1: Presentation Due Date: October 8, 11pm, 2020
Value: 25%
Details of task: This task requires students to form pairs and research a chosen topic (see below list of topics available) which has international, national, and local relevance. Students are required to analyse, evaluate and then present a clear and consistent argument by examining how international human rights and national legislative frameworks interact by contextualising them within the human rights discourse. Students will prepare a PowerPoint presentation to be submitted on Moodle (ie not presented live) with text, audio and video embedded.
List of Topics:
- Mandatory detention of asylum seekers
- Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (ATSI) self-determination
- International rights of refugees
- Rights of citizens during COVID-19 state of emergency
- A submission to the UN on a specific issue, e.g. gender rights
Students will envisage themselves as leading a team of social workers working in a non-governmental agency required to present a case to the United National Human Rights Council. The presentation needs to address the following areas (please note this is a guide only):
- Brief background to the chosen topic.
- An analysis of the current trends and issues related to the chosen topic.
- A critical evaluation of the legislative frameworks, the institutional, and procedural mechanism for enforcing human rights as related to the chosen topic.
- How it impacts on social work as a profession and its attempt to advocate for social justice and human rights of individuals, families, and communities.
Check out this website: https://humanrights.gov.au/
Format: Your presentation will take a form that is chosen by the group (use of PowerPoint, video, you- tube, maps etc) and will take 15 minutes. The presentation will then be uploaded onto Moodle to be marked. We will ask for pairs of students to volunteer to discuss their topic/presentation during the online seminar on October 9.
Word limit: 15 minutes
Marking Criteria:
| Non Pass 0-49 | Pass 50-59 | Credit 60-69 | Distinction 70-79 | High Distinction 80-100 | |
| Structure of | Doesn’t demonstrate | Exhibits basic logic | Competent | Very sound | Demonstrates very |
| the | a logical and | but doesn’t have | demonstration of | demonstration | high level of logic |
| presentation | coherent focus in | coherency in the | logic and coherency | of logic and | and coherency in |
| (ie. A clear | analysing the | focus of the | in the focus of the | coherency in | the focus of the |
| argument, | chosen topic | chosen topic | chosen topic | the focus of the | chosen topic |
| linking | chosen topic | ||||
| between | |||||
| different | |||||
| parts, | |||||
| justification | |||||
| etc) (25%) | |||||
| Content | Doesn’t demonstrate | Exhibits basic | Competent | Very sound | Demonstrates high |
| (quality of | critical | understanding of | demonstration of | critical analysis | level of critical |
| arguments, | analysis/evaluation | the issue, mainly | critical | /evaluation of | analysis/evaluation |
| the quality of | of issues, supported | descriptive and | analysis/evaluation | issues and | of issues and ability |
| research etc.) | by evidence and the | supported by some | of issues supported | ability to | to critique |
| absence of a clear | evidence but | by evidence but a | critique | alternative positions | |
| (40%) | consistent | doesn’t | clear and consistent | alternative | and a strong |
| argument. | demonstrate | argument is not | positions with a | consistent and clear | |
| critical/evaluation | developed. | consistent | argument embedded | ||
| or consistent | argument | right through the | |||
| argument. | developing. | presentation. | |||
| Delivery & | Doesn’t demonstrate | Demonstrates | Competently | Very sound | Demonstrates very |
| Ability to | an ability to explain | basic ability to | explains the content, | explanation of | high ability to |
| communicate | content clear and | explain the | engages the | content, mostly | explain content, |
| succinctly and not | content but is not | listeners sometimes | engages the | engage the listeners | |
| (35%) | engage the | able to | but is not able and | listeners and | at all times and |
| listeners. | consistently | develop in depth | develop some | consistently develop | |
| develop in depth | from the content on | depth from the | in depth from the | ||
| from the content | the slides. | content on the | content on the | ||
| on the slides. Or | slides. | slides. | |||
| engage the | |||||
| listeners at all | |||||
| times. |
Assessment Task 2: Case Study Due Date: October 25, 2020 by 11pm
Details of task: This task requires students to write up their case-study from the presentation as individual pieces of work linking the case study to literature, international, national and state legislative frameworks and legal cases wherever applicable. Please note, a clear position/argument must be stated on the issue.
Some of the areas that the case study needs to cover are (please note: this is a guide only do not use
this structure to organise your paras):
- Brief background to the chosen topic and summary of the current issues
- Appraise and critique the historical development of current Australian and international human rights regimes.
- A critical evaluation of the legislative frameworks, the institutional, and procedural mechanism for enforcing human rights as related to the chosen topic.
- How it impacts on social work as a profession and its attempt to advocate for social justice and human rights of individuals, families, and communities.
Word limit: 1200 words (A variation of plus or minus ten percent only is permitted)
Value: 30%
Marking Criteria:
| Non Pass 0-49 | Pass 50-59 | Credit 60-69 | Distinction 70-79 | High Distinction 80-100 | ||
| Analysis/argu | Doesn’t identify, | Summarises the | Identifies and | Clearly identifies | Cleary identifies the | |
| ment | summarise the issue, | issue though some | summarises the | the issue and the | issues and the | |
| consider the | aspects incorrect, | issue clearly, | embedded | embedded challenges. | ||
| (40%) | international, | presents the | analyses the | challenges. | Identifies influence of | |
| national context, | context in a limited | context by | Analyses the | context and questions | ||
| critique existing | way, descriptive in | relying on | context and | assumptions. | ||
| literature and | analysis and | established | acknowledges the | Integrates different | ||
| develop a clear | position is | literature, | complexity but | disciplinary | ||
| argument/position | simplistic or not | engages | doesn’t engage in | standpoints. | ||
| clear or consistent. | tentatively in | great depth. Fully | Own position | |||
| discussion of | integrates | demonstrates | ||||
| other positions | perspectives from | sophisticated, | ||||
| and own | variety of sources | integrative thought | ||||
| position is | and anomalies | and is developed | ||||
| generally clear | are used | clearly throughout. | ||||
| but gaps exist. | effectively but | |||||
| gaps remain in | ||||||
| terms of accuracy and nuance. Clearly presents and justifies own view while qualifying contrary views. | ||||||
| structure and | Doesn’t havedemonstrate | Demonstrates | Organisation of | Demonstrates | Demonstrates a very | |
| depth of | clear and logical | basic level of | ideas, linking of | very sound logic, | high level of para | |
| research | development of | structure and logic | paras is at a | clear flow and | organisation, clear | |
| (20%) (e.g. | ideas/arguments. | in the organisation | reasonable level | linking between | structure in the flow | |
| flow, linking | of ideas with flow | but is not | paras but few | and transition | ||
| between | Little or no | and para | consistent and | gaps remain in | between ideas. | |
| sections, good | demonstrated | organisation either | some | terms of | Demonstrated very | |
| paragraph | research and reliant | abrupt or not well | information | consistency of | high level research | |
| structure.) | on non-academic | developed. Low | needs more | ideas. | with mostly academic | |
| sources (e.g. | level research | work. | peer reviewed | |||
| extensive use of | skills, relying on | Evidence of | Demonstrated | academic sources; | ||
| (20%) Depth of | Wikipedia and web- | only few academic | some relevant | very good | evidence based on | |
| research (e.g. | based opinion | sources; | academic | research skills, | appropriate | |
| Peer reviewed | pieces) | reading, using | using | interpretation of | ||
| journals/books | reasonable | predominantly | reading | |||
| /chapters, | academic | quality academic | ||||
| critical and | sources; | sources; | ||||
| analytical | response | juxtaposes | ||||
| works) | incorporates | alternative | ||||
| research into | evidence | |||||
| response |
| Clarity of | Writing &/or | Writing, structure, | Presents | Indicates | Presents a high level |
| Expression | structure &/or | syntax & | moderate level | advanced | of skill in articulating |
| presentation is/are | presentation is | of writing skill. | recognition of | and presenting ideas | |
| (15%) | poor. No evaluation | inconsistent. | An obvious | academic register | / issues in a clear and |
| or discussion. | Mostly description | attempt at | in writing (e.g. | concise way. | |
| There is description | rather than | formal | diction) and | ||
| or personal opinion | evaluation & | academic | analysis of | ||
| only with no | discussion or not | expression, but | material | ||
| supporting logic or | well supported by | is lacking | |||
| evidence; no | evidence; limited | analysis | |||
| integration of | integration of | ||||
| research. The paper | material. | ||||
| is hard to read due | |||||
| to consistent syntax | |||||
| and/or language | |||||
| errors. | |||||
| Referencing | Non-adherence to | Inaccuracy with | General | Near perfect | Perfect adherence to |
| style | prescribed style (ie. | prescribed format; | adherence to | adherence to all | all prescribed essay |
| (5%) | APA) | pervasive citation | essay writing | prescribed essay | writing conventions |
| and referencing | conventions | writing | |||
| errors | conventions |
Assessment Task 3: Research Essay Due Date: November 6 by 11pm
Details of task: Critical essay on ONE issue of national and international human rights, linking law, literature, case examples and critical analysis. For example, topics could include, Syrian refugee crisis, war on terror and the rights of detainees, poverty, hunger and child exploitation and womens rights.
Pleasenote: you cant choose the same case study that you completed in Assessment 1 and Assessment
Word limit: 2500 words (A variation of plus or minus ten percent only is permitted).
Value: 45% percent of total marks
Marking Criteria:
| Non Pass 0-49 | Pass 50-59 | Credit 60-69 | Distinction 70-79 | High Distinction 80-100 | |
| Analysis/argu | Doesnt identify, | Summarises the | Identifies and | Clearly identifies | Cleary identifies the |
| ment | summarise the issue, | issue though some | summarises the | the issue and the | issues and the |
| (60%) | consider the | aspects incorrect, | issue clearly, | embedded | embedded challenges. |
| international, | presents the | analyses the | challenges. | Identifies influence of | |
| national context, | context in a limited | context by | Analyses the | context and questions | |
| critique existing | way, descriptive in | relying on | context and | assumptions. | |
| literature and | analysis and | established | acknowledges the | Integrates different | |
| develop a clear | position is | literature, | complexity but | disciplinary and | |
| theoretical | simplistic and the | engages | doesn’t engage in | epistemological ways | |
| standpoint. | theoretical | tentatively in | great depth. Fully | of knowing. | |
| standpoint is | discussion of | integrates | |||
| simplistic or doesn’t | other positions | perspectives from | Own position | ||
| consider other | and the | variety of sources | demonstrates | ||
| viewpoints. | theoretical | and anomalies | sophisticated, | ||
| standpoint is | are used | integrative thought | |||
| generally clear | effectively but | and is developed | |||
| but gaps exist. | gaps remain in | clearly throughout. | |||
| terms of accuracy and nuance. Clearly presents and justifies own theoretical standpoint while qualifying contrary views |
| Structure and | Doesn’t demonstrate | Demonstrates | Organisation of | Demonstrates | Demonstrates a very |
| depth of | clear and logical | basic level of | ideas, linking of | very sound logic, | high level of para |
| research | development of | structure and logic | paras is at a | clear flow and | organisation, clear |
| ideas/arguments. | in the organisation | reasonable level | linking between | structure in the flow | |
| (25%)(e.g. | Little or no | of ideas with flow | but is not | paras but few | and transition |
| flow, linking | demonstrated | and para | consistent and | gaps remain in | between ideas. |
| between | research and reliant | organisation either | some | terms of | Demonstrated very |
| sections, good | on non-academic | abrupt or not well | information | consistency of | high level research |
| paragraph | sources (e.g. | developed. Low | needs more | ideas. | with mostly academic |
| structure.) | extensive use of | level research | work. | peer reviewed | |
| Wikipedia and web- | skills, relying on | Evidence of | Demonstrated | academic sources; | |
| based opinion | only few academic | some relevant | very good | evidence based on | |
| pieces) | sources; | academic | research skills, | appropriate | |
| reading, using | using | interpretation of | |||
| reasonable | predominantly | reading | |||
| academic | quality academic | ||||
| sources; | sources; | ||||
| response | juxtaposes | ||||
| incorporates | alternative | ||||
| research into | evidence | ||||
| response | |||||
| Clarity of | Writing &/or | Writing, structure, | Presents | Indicates | Presents a high level |
| Expression | structure &/or | syntax & | moderate level | advanced | of skill in articulating |
| (10%) | presentation is/are | presentation is | of writing skill. | recognition of | and presenting ideas |
| poor. No evaluation | inconsistent. | An obvious | academic register | / issues in a clear and | |
| or discussion. | Mostly description | attempt at | in writing (eg | concise way. | |
| There is description | rather than | formal | diction) and | ||
| or personal opinion | evaluation & | academic | analysis of | ||
| only with no | discussion or not | expression, but | material | ||
| supporting logic or | well supported by | is lacking | |||
| evidence; no | evidence; limited | analysis | |||
| integration of | integration of | ||||
| research. The paper | material. | ||||
| is hard to read due | |||||
| to consistent syntax | |||||
| and/or language | |||||
| errors. | |||||
| Referencing | Non-adherence to | Inaccuracy with | General | Near perfect | Perfect adherence to |
| style | prescribed style (i.e. | prescribed format; | adherence to | adherence to all | all prescribed essay |
| (5 %) | APA) | pervasive citation | essay writing | prescribed essay | writing conventions |
| and referencing | conventions | writing | |||
| errors | conventions |
Assistance with Online Submission
Students are often asked to submit assessments online. Here are a few useful links that introduce students to the Turnitin software:
About Turnitin
Student Guidance on Turnitin
Student Turnitin Access 2013 (Moodle Support Shell)
Closing the Loop / Student Feedback:
No major issues raised by previous cohort. Students in the 2019 cohort to be encouraged to provide more detailed feedback.
Assessment Criteria:
In order to receive a passing grade in this course, students must receive an overall passing mark in the combined result of all assessment tasks.
Topics Assessed :
All topics covered during this course are subject to assessment.
`Turnitin` Submission:
In order to verify the originality of assessment tasks, students may be required to use Turnitin plagiarism software to check their assignment before submission. Full details of requirements and how to use Turnitin will be provided by the Course Coordinator.
Special Consideration:
If students are adversely affected by life circumstances a discretionary assessment extension of up to five University working days for one assessment task may be granted at the discretion of the tutor, lecturer, or course coordinator (dependent on faculty process) upon a direct request by the student via the Discretionary Assessment Extension form.
However if a student has experienced or encountered some form of disadvantage or impediment (medical reasons; hardship/trauma; compassionate grounds; other significant cause) in more than one course and requires more than five working days extension, then they may apply for Special Consideration.
For further information on Discretionary Assessment Extensions and Special Consideration, including access to the policy, procedures or associated forms, see http://federation.edu.au/current-students/essential-info/administration/special-consideration
Available Grades:
A list of the available grades, a description of the corresponding required student performance and the required percentages for the Course is given in the University Handbook. https://federation.edu.au/students/essential-info/administration/exams/results The Course Coordinator may standardise raw marks before allocating grades.
Plagiarism:
It is important to learn from the work of others and you are encouraged to explore the library, World Wide Web resources and have discussions with other students. However work for assessment must be entirely the student’s own work. Plagiarism is the presentation of the expressed thought or work of another person as though it is one’s own without properly acknowledging that person. You must not allow other students to copy your work and must take care to safeguard against this happening. In cases of copying, normally all students involved will be penalised equally; an exception will be if you can demonstrate the work is your own and you took reasonable care to safeguard against copying. Plagiarism is a serious offence. As set out in the University Regulation 6.1.1 students who are caught plagiarising will, for a first offence, be given a zero mark for that task. A second offence will result in a failing grade for the Course(s) involved and any subsequent offence will be referred to the Student Discipline Committee. More
information about the plagiarism policy and procedure for the university can be found at http://federation.edu.au/students/learning-and-study/online-help-with/plagiarism
Academic Regulations:
Supplementary information concerning teaching, learning, and assessment may be provided from time to time in response to unforeseen circumstances. This may include changes in times or location of classes, order of the schedule or due dates for assignments. Announcement of these matters in classes and placement of a notice on the course Moodle page shall be deemed to be official notification. FedUni has a range of educational policies, procedures and guidelines, which you can find at http://policy.federation.edu.au/category_list.php?catalogue_id=115
Student Support:
The University provides many different kinds of services to help you gain the most from your studies. You can see the list of Student Services contacts at http://federation.edu.au/students#Assistance_support_and_services Students who have a disability or medical condition are welcome to contact the Disability Liaison Unit to discuss academic support services. The role of the DLU is to support the development of a learning and working environment that maximise participation in University life by students with a disability
Learning Management System:
This course makes use of Moodle to support your learning. You can access Moodle from the FedUni home page or at https://moodle.federation.edu.au/login/index.phpIf you do not have access for this course you should notify your course co-ordinator immediately
Presentation of Academic Work:
General Guide to Writing and Study Skills
Materials (Readings):
| Seminars | Topics readings |
| Seminar 1 | Topic 1 (A, B, C), and Topic 2 (A) are covered in Seminar 1. Read these resources to prepare yourself for the seminar: Prescribed Reading (s): Ife, J. (2012). Human rights beyond traditional formulations- chapter 2. Ackerly, B (2008). Universal Human Rights in a difference world of difference, Chapter 1. Ackerly, B (2008). Universal Human Rights in a difference world of difference, Chapter 1 & 2. Reichert, E (2006). Building the foundation: Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In Reichert, E Understanding Human Rights: an exercise book. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications. Prescribed Reading (s): Ife, J (2012). Public and private human rights’- chapter 3 Staub-Bernasconi, S (2011). Human Rights and Their Relevance for Social Work as Theory and Practice. In Lynne M. Healy and Rosemary J. Link (eds.) Handbook of International Social Work: Human Rights, Development, and the Global Profession, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Prescribed Reading (s): Kurasawa, F (2012). Human rights as cultural practice. In T. Cushman (ed.), Handbook of Human Rights (pp.155-63). London: Routledge. Prescribed Reading (s): Ife, J (2012). Human rights and human needs- chapter 5 Ife, J (2012). Human rights and obligations-chapter 6 The lecture content will be followed by some seminar activities |
| Seminar 2 | Topic 2 (B), Topic 3 (A), B) and Topic 4 Prescribed Reading (s): Ife, J (2012). Human rights and human needs- chapter 5 Ife, J (2012). Human rights and obligations-chapter 6 Prescribed Reading (s): Ife, J (2012). Participation in the human rights discourse’ chapter 8. Healy, L (2008). Exploring the history of social work as a human rights profession. International Social Work, 51, 735-748. Prescribed Reading (s): Congress, E (2012). Global ethical principles and dilemmas. In Healy, L & Link, R (eds.) Handbook of international social work: |
| human rights, development, and the global profession (pp.297- 304). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ife, J (2012). Ethics and human rights- chapter 7. Prescribed Reading (s): Ife, J (2012). Achieving human rights though social work practice Chapter 10. Prescribed Reading (s): Ife, J (2012). Conclusion: prospects for human rights practice Chapter 12. | |
| Seminar 3 | Presentations followed up by questions/queries related to assessments |
Note that some material in lectures, assignments and other resources provided to students may
contain direct quotations from the text book(s) and references listed.
Adopted Reference Style:
APA7
