International security; concepts and theories

Essay question:

Does neo-conservatism offer anything distinctive or innovative to the study on international security, or is it simply ‘liberalism with teeth’?

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
International security; concepts and theories
Just from $13/Page
Order Essay
  • The essay should not be longer than 5000 words but more that 4900 words
  • The comments below are feedback from the last essay and need to be considered so as to get a better grade.

 

Feedback

 

Comprehension

The essay demonstrates a moderate understanding of the literature and showcases a limited range of sources relevant to the question.  As a result, there is only a limited demonstration that both the literature and the essay question has been engaged with.  This undermines the essays ability to demonstrate higher-level adherence to comprehension benchmarks, as set out in the marking criteria. In this vein, it is notable that the essay fails to set out a clear, concise and thorough argument that runs from beginning to end.  This affects the structure and flow of the essay, where within each of the sections some comprehension is demonstrated, but in the macro sense, there is a limited demonstration that the author understands how all of this fits together.  In particular, the introduction, at just a single paragraph is very weak and does not set up the essay’s argument, or establish the stasis of the debate. As a result, it is not always clear that the range of sources utilised has been fully comprehended and deployed in a manner that entirely addresses the research question.

Analysis

The essay demonstrates an adequate level of analysis throughout multiple sections. However, the essay is overly descriptive. It consistently relies on a thin review of the literature, rather than presenting a concise argument.  As a result, there is little by way of an argument reinforced by concise analytical premises.  The author needs to use the research material to provide a foundation for their analysis, rather than rely on describing the sources too overtly. The strongest analytical section is the “Securitisation Theory” section, but this is followed by an overly descriptive analysis.  Given the thin level of analysis in this latter section, it is evident that the essay fails to move consistently forward towards an analytically informed conclusion. This, of course, is not to say that there is not evidence of intelligent comment relevant to the question being made, but rather that the essay would benefit considerably from more analytical depth.

 

Critique

The essay demonstrates an adequate appreciation of the main issues and the ability to make appropriate critical points.  However, the essay’s argument is unclear and underdeveloped, which is evident most strongly within the introduction and conclusion. The descriptive nature of the essay undermines the critical comments that are made within the essay, and as a result, the critique lacks depth and persuasive power.  This weakens the critique further as the critique does not flow in and through the essays macro-structure to arrive at an argument. Nevertheless, sufficient critical abilities are demonstrated in the essay.

Presentation

For the most part, the essay provides a competent structure. The length is also appropriate and controlled. However, there is a deviation from expected academic standards with regards to the essays referencing consistency and failure to provide an adequate bibliography.

Overall Comments and Suggestions for Improvement

This is an acceptable essay that provides a good point to move up from in the future.  In terms of doing this, and meeting the higher marking criteria it would be advisable to primarily focus on three large aspects of essay writing: 1) establishing a clear and consistent argument that runs in and through the essay; 2) do not rely on describing the literature in place of developing an argument – analysis and critique are more important than description as they demonstrate comprehension and move your argument forward, and 3) consult the university guidelines on academic standards of referencing and format.  To assist in this, it would be particularly fruitful to make sure that you strengthen your introduction.  This needs to do three things, 1) Provide a context to the question set; 2) set out the argument that runs throughout the essay and 3) tie the structure of the essay to the argument being made so that there is a rationale flow throughout the essay. Failing to set out the argument in the introduction (and conclusion) leads the author to waste valuable space rather than reasoning and developing the argument fully.  The key to moving up the marking scale is to produce a strong coherent well-reasoned argument, which is theoretically informed and empirically backed up. The above points will allow you to not only sharpen the essay but also force you to be more rigorous in your engagement with the content. Nonetheless, this is an acceptable effort that will no doubt hold you in good stead for the future.