PS93: Introduction to International Relations
MIDTERM 1
ANSWER GUIDE
Fall 2002
I. The following are concepts that were developed in
lecture, readings, or section. Identify,
give an example, and briefly explain the significance in at most one paragraph,
pick only two, 20 points. (Roughly 5
Minutes).
Duke’s grading criteria are as follows: A=exceptional;
B=superior; C=satisfactory; D=low pass; F=low pass.
To get the full exceptional + (10 points) for each
identification, the answer must include (1) a full and accurate definition; (2)
an apt and well-chosen example; and (3) complete and accurate discussion of the
significance of the concept. An
exceptional (9.5) answer might have all of that but missing some trivial
aspect. A superior (8.5) answer might
have a poorly chosen example or a minor-to-moderate error. A satisfactory (7.5) answer might have a more
serious error or fail to complete one component (eg.
Not have an example or fail to define).
A low pass (6.5) is a serious attempt to answer the question but have
several serious errors or missing two components. A fail (0 to 5.5) is a serious attempt to
answer the question but is fundamentally incorrect – partial credit should be
given to answers that have some correct information indicating student
awareness of the broader topic. No
attempt at answering, or a joke-attempt or otherwise unserious attempt gets a
zero. Mixed grades (exceptional-minus
9.0, etc.) are answers that fall in between these basic categories.
II. Short Answer A.: These are “hot
quotes” from the readings. Please choose one and identify in one paragraph what
it means and where the author would be positioned on our mental map of
International Relations, 20 points, (Roughly 5
minutes).
Exceptional (18-20) answers must correctly explain what the
quote is saying and correctly identify it on the mental map and must be free
from all but the most trivial errors.
Superior (16-17) answers must correctly explain what the quote is saying
and correctly identify it on the mental map but may have a moderate error or
omission (e.g. failing to talk about relative gains in the first quote). Satisfactory (14-15) answers have a serious
error on one component (eg. Positioning
the quote wrong or incorrectly explaining what the quote means) or moderate
errors on both. Low pass (12-13)
answers have a serious-moderate errors on both
components. Failing scores (0-12) have
fundamentally wrong responses; partial credit can be given to answers that are
fundamentally wrong on this quote but nevertheless contain information of
merit. Students do not need to offer the
name of the author, but if they do and it is incorrect the lose 1 point.
III. Essay: worth 60 points, (Forty minutes).
Imagine you are working for a foreign embassy. Your task is to write a memo explaining to
your home country what actions the
To streamline your thinking, your boss asks you to answer
the following three questions:
1. Group the predictions of US actions by the level of analysis of research
used to make that prediction. (Image 1,1.5,2, and 3).
2. Which level offers the best predictive capability and
why?
3. What will be the international
repercussions of that
This is not a particularly tough essay question, but it is
probably hard to do very well on it. Students do not have much time to answer
it so we will not be sticklers on writing style or format. We should give reasonably generous partial
credit for outlines or fragmentary answers (exceptional essays will have a
consistent and clean style, but if time constraints pushed a student into
outlining, then they can still have a superior grade). Also, there is no fixed rubric students will
use. They can write this as an essay or
as a memo
The minimum, however, for a superior B grade is that the student answer each of the three questions accurately:
(1) define all three levels
correctly and be able to identify the kinds of predictions that causal
arguments from that level of analysis would make.
(2) pick one of the levels as
offering the best predictive capability and make an argument why. There is no single correct answer though some
cases are easier to make than others (eg. I doubt a
student can make a convincing case that level 1 offers the best prediction)
(3) pick a level of analysis that
best explains the likely international repercussions. Again, there is no single correct answer,
though obviously system level explanations have an advantage here. There are, however, excellent examples of
level 2 explanations: German response is primarily a function of its domestic
politics, for instance.
A B range essay thus must be comprehensive, but will be
weaker than an exceptional A range essay on one or more points: (1) it will be
clear that the student knows the levels of analysis conceptually but is weak in
applying it to the U.S.-Iraq case; (2) the student simply asserts the
superiority of one level of analysis over the other without a convincing
argument as to why.
A range essays have everything that the B essays have plus:
(1) free from all but trivial errors about the levels of analysis or the facts
of the case; (2) is deft in applying the concepts to the case; (3) makes a
convincing and clever case for why one level is superior to the others in this
instance; (4) good organization in essay; (5) make effective use of readings,
sections, and lectures. High A essays have some mark of originality and/or get
at some of the ambiguities in the theory (for instance, they do not merely
assert that all three levels are operating at the same time or that one is
better than the other but they show how the levels interact and mutually
reinforce each other to generate the outcome).
C range essays are missing one of the three question
elements and/or serious mistakes in discussing the levels of analysis.
D range essays are missing more than one of these elements
and have mistakes in the material that is covered.
F essays are not a serious attempt to answer it.
Bonus Question (1 pt): Name the famous
actress who Dr. Feaver “dated”?
Hint: She went to Harvard Elizabeth Shue