Assessment Criteria Identify Key Concepts Understanding and Accuracy Critical analysis, evaluation and synthesis

1. Ability to identify key concepts and legal issues relevant to the question Recognition of the parameters of the task (the legal and contextual issues) Rationale for the prioritisation of certain issues Clear and logical structure to the response and close correlation between question and response  Fulfilment of these criteria will usually be evidenced in the introduction.

recognition of the parameters of the task (the legal and contextual issues) Understand your limits and state them – highlight your focus. You cannot study EVERYTHING!

rationale for the prioritisation of certain issues Purpose: Maintain the focus of the essay. Avoid: Going off on a tangent in the essay – something to refer back to.

clear and logical structure Maintain a ‘narrative’ – Introduction, analysis, conclusion. Sub-headings Link sections i.e. ‘flow’

close correlation between question and response. Are you answering the question? Is that reflected in your introduction and conclusion? What is YOUR central argument?

Fulfilment of these criteria will usually be evidenced in the introduction!

2. Understanding and accuracy of legal content For example: Relevant primary and secondary legal sources identified accurately i.e. What is the law? What does it relate to? What are the MAIN legal issues? Ability to summarise and explain the law and communicate doctrinal arguments succinctly rather than by extensive quotation from statutes or cases.

relevant primary and secondary legal sources identified accurately, International Law: Treaties Customary international law General principles Case law National Law: Statutes

ability to summarise and explain the law Treaties Relevant articles e.g. rights enshrined? Statutes Relevant sections Case law Decisions How did they come to that decision?

communicate doctrinal arguments succinctly rather than by extensive quotation from statutes or cases ‘Filter’ what is necessary How does it support YOUR argument? Skill: Synthesis in your own words.

Critical analysis, evaluation and synthesis For example: Evidences a capacity to identify complexity and uncertainty in the law Examine and appraise the comparative merits of different legal arguments advanced by others (evidence of wider reading) Assess proposals for reform, and to recognise contextual arguments relevant to the question. To reach conclusions that are summative, logical and persuasive (i.e. based on the analysis and evaluation presented).

evidences a capacity to identify complexity and uncertainty in the law Law is not perfect. Slow process, especially in international law. Dynamic process. Identify areas of change or even lack thereof.

to examine and appraise the comparative merits of different legal arguments advanced by others Do you agree with certain academics? Yes, why? No, why? Or is it somewhere in the middle? Identify why you agree/disagree and its relevance to your argument. Example: Scholar A says XYZ, Scholar B says ABC. This paper suggests that it is actually XBC because…

assess proposals for reform Recommendations/suggestions Gaps in the law Are there new legal instruments pending? If so, what provisions SHOULD they contain?

recognise contextual arguments relevant to the question Link back to different aspects of your learning/reading Are there wider issues that limit the potential for reform? Theoretical debates?

reach conclusions that are summative, logical and persuasive (i.e. based on the analysis and evaluation presented) Substantiate your answer with examples, case law, statute provisions or academic arguments i.e. ‘prove it’. Explain why it is relevant to your argument. Link your conclusion back to your introduction and your central argument.