Intended learning outcomes: Learning Outcome:
LO1:
Learn about translation theories and methods relating to translation of
cultures. You
will explore and understand the key academic frameworks used to interpret
different cultures in the literature.
LO2:
Confidently and effectively mediate across cultural differences in the real
world. You
will evaluate how scholars approach cultural gaps, building a foundation for
your own practical skills.
LO3:
Understand otherness and communicate beyond borders. You will analyze academic
debates on how diverse perspectives are communicated across cultural boundaries.
Professional Skills:
Intercultural Competence &
Global Awareness: The ability to critically
analyze and understand complex cultural identities at national, regional, or
group levels. This cultivates the nuanced intercultural understanding and
respect for diversity expected of SOAS graduates in global professional environments.
Critical Evaluation of
Cultural Constructs: Moving beyond essentialist or
stereotypical views of culture to critically examine how cultural boundaries
are formed, represented, and maintained.
Advanced Professional
Communication: Developing the ability to
construct a persuasive, evidence-based argument. This hones analytical writing
skills essential for future careers in international relations, policy-making,
media, and research.
As for how we assess your essays, please see:
https://www.soas.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2022-07/marking-criteria-policy.pdf
|
|
Evaluation Category
|
70%+ (First / Excellent)
|
60-69% (2:1 / Good)
|
50-59% (2:2 / Satisfactory)
|
40-49% (Third / Basic Pass)
|
<40% (Fail)
|
|
Application of Theoretical Frameworks
|
Applies
the two chosen frameworks creatively and directly to museum observations
with deep insight.
|
Applies
the two frameworks clearly and correctly to the museum observations.
|
Basic
application of the frameworks, though sometimes superficial.
|
Limited
application; struggles to connect theory with practical observation.
|
Fails
to apply the required frameworks or misunderstands key theoretical
concepts.
|
|
Critical Analysis of Exhibits
|
Offers
highly sophisticated, independent critical analysis of representation and
translation strategies.
|
Offers
sound critical analysis of the exhibits, demonstrating a clear
understanding of core debates.
|
Provides
some analysis, but tends to be overly descriptive rather than critically
evaluating.
|
Highly
descriptive summary with very limited critical evaluation of the exhibits.
|
Purely
descriptive summary of the museum visit with little to no critical
analysis.
|
|
Structure, Clarity & Academic Style
|
Exceptionally well-structured.
Flawless academic style and referencing.
|
Well-structured
and clear. Good academic style and referencing, with only minor errors.
|
Acceptable
structure and clarity, but may have some issues with flow or academic tone.
|
Poorly
structured with frequent errors in academic style or referencing, but
readable.
|
Unclear,
lacks coherent structure, or has significant issues with referencing and
academic integrity.
|
|
