HOW TO WRITE AN ASSIGNMENT

HOW TO WRITE AN ASSIGNMENT

 

 

 

1.      As a first step, Read, read, read!!! Read from a variety of sources, including books, scholarly journals, business and trade journals, newspapers and websites, making notes of helpful passages or references as you go.  These passages and references can later form much of the basis of the evidence underlying the argument in your paper.

 

2.      Peruse the current literature (academic and practical) on your topic, looking for controversies and contentious issues.  You can narrow the scope of your investigations by selecting a specific issue within your topic.  

 

3.      Justify, in a sentence or two, why you want to research the issue.

 

4.      Think of a central hypothesis, thesis or theme to your paper.

 

5.      Frame about 5 focus questions surrounding the main issue, so that you can focus your research, and your paper does not digress into areas which are only peripherally relevant.

 

6.      As a very broad guide, your paper should be structured along the following lines:

 

       Abstract

 

1.         INTRODUCTION

        Background

        Purpose of Paper

        Methodology

        Scope of Paper

        Structure of Paper

 

2.    CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK (or theoretical approach)

       

          (Sub-headings depend on the conceptual framework used, but try to answer the

           “who, what, when, where, why, how” questions that people are likely to ask about

           the framework. This section might include a discussion of the historical background, a literature review, and how the issue under discussion has become a problem in recent times. Are there differences in opinion between relevant experts in the area?  Why?  Can these be resolved at theoretical level?)

 

3.     THE EVIDENCE (This may be a review of the statute and case law in

           the area, generally linked in with your literature review. The focus is on marshalling evidence in support of your central hypothesis, thesis or theme).

      

 

4.     DOES THE EVIDENCE FIT THE THEORY? (You can and should change this 

           heading to make it sound better, but this is essentially what it means. It

           generally includes a discussion of your findings and their implications – example, here you may wish to assess the pros and cons of the current law, from a practical and more ethical perspective, and across a range of different relevant stakeholders.)

 

 

5.    CONCLUSIONS  (This should contain a brief summary of your main conclusions. For example, is the current law out of step with current community attitudes?  Is the current law meeting its objectives?  Are those objectives still relevant today?  If law reform is required, specify precisely what types of reform you propose. What would be the legal and social impacts – positive and negative – of those reforms?)

 

         List of References

 

7.      Apply principles of Critical Thinking in your paper. What is critical thinking? Look up “critical thinking” in www.wikipedia.org for a quick discussion of relevant principles. (This is purely for convenience, in order to get a quick overview — you should note that www.wikipedia.org is not accepted as an authoritative source for assignments).  The term “critical thinking” comes from the Greek kritikos, which implies the ability to discern, assess, evaluate, and judge or decide.

 

8.      Among other things, good assignments typically:

 

·         identify the vital questions and problems in a topic;

·         articulate those questions and problems clearly and precisely;

·         explicitly state any necessary assumptions; 

·         carefully and critically survey the relevant law and literature, with a view to bringing sufficient credible evidence to bear on the questions or problems at hand;

·         identify controversies in the law or literature, and assess those controversies in an open-minded and informed way;

·         identify and carefully explain solutions to complex problems – generally a range of solutions is identified, and the most appropriate solution in specified circumstances is discerned; and

·         communicate effectively throughout the paper in a scholarly way.

 

9.      Common reasons why assignments received lower marks include failing to:

 

·         include sufficient relevant information;

·         explain –

                                                  i.      clearly;

                                                ii.      accurately;

                                              iii.      logically;

                                              iv.      precisely;

                                                v.      in sufficient analytical depth  (eg. explanations are too shallow or too basic;

·         keep to the point (ie. the paper contains discussion that is irrelevant to resolving the question or problem at hand);

·         limit conclusions or implications to those which are supported by the evidence;

·         comment on important implications.

 

In short, papers which receive lower marks typically display an intellectual laziness that is not evident in papers which receive high marks.

 

 

10.  Use any type of referencing system you like (eg. Harvard, Oxford, API), provided you use it consistently.  Also make sure that you include page references in all papers and works cited.

 

11.  Try to ensure that your paper addresses all of the marking criteria (see unit website).

 

 

 

Topics for assignments

 

Evaluate the current law of corporate insolvency, including receivership, schemes of arrangement, voluntary administration, and liquidation.  What incentives and disincentives does each main stakeholder group have for being involved in each of these insolvency scenarios? Provide detailed evidence of your conclusions, and where possible, specific examples supporting your argument from relevant statutory provisions and cases.  What reforms, if any, would you suggest, both for the law and insolvency practice? Why?

 

 

 

Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com