UNIT GUIDE 2017/18

SOCI10009 Introduction to the Sociology of Culture

Teaching Block: 1 Weeks: 1 - 12

Unit Owner: Dr D-M Withers Level: C/4

Phone: (0117) 928 8040 Credit points: 20
Email: DM.Withers@bristol.ac.uk Prerequisites: None
Office: Room 2.03, 10 Priory Road Curriculum area: N/A
Unit Owner Office hours will be available to view on the SPAIS UG Admin Blackboard site.
Office Hours: (Scheduled office hours do not run during reading weeks, though you can still contact tutors for
advice by email and to arrange individual appointments)
Timetabled classes:
Lectures:
Mondays 12-1pm in LT1, Arts Complex AND Tuesdays 2-3pm in LT3, Arts Complex

You are also expected to attend ONE seminar each week. Your online personal timetable will inform you to which
group you have been allocated. Seminar groups are fixed: you are not allowed to change seminar groups without
permission from the office.

Weeks 6, 12, 18 and 24 are Reading Weeks; there is NO regular teaching in these weeks.

In addition to timetabled sessions there is a requirement for private study, reading, revision and assessments. Reading
the required readings in advance of each seminar is the minimum expectation. The University Guidelines state that one
credit point is broadly equivalent to 10 hours of total student input.

Learning Outcomes
By the end of the unit, students should be able to:
o Show an understanding of the socially constructed nature of culture
o Evaluate different sociological approaches to culture
o Critically discuss the relationship between cultural production and consumption
o Apply sociological insights to contemporary issues in culture

Requirements for passing the unit:

• Satisfactory attendance at seminars
• Completion of all formative work to an acceptable standard
• Attainment of a composite mark of all summative work to a passing standard (40 or above)

Details of coursework and deadlines

Assessment: Word count: Weighting: Deadline: Day: Week:

Formative: Essay 1,200 words 0% 9.30am on 8th Wednesday 7
November 2017
Summative: Essay 2,000 words 100% 9.30am on 15th January Monday January
2018 Assessment
Period
• Summative essay questions will be made available on the individual Blackboard unit sites under ‘assignments’.
• Instructions for the submission of coursework can be found in Appendix A
• Assessment in the school is subject to strict penalties regarding late submission, plagiarism and maximum word
count. A summary of key regulations is in Appendix B.
• Marking criteria can be found in Appendix C.

1
Seminar Preparation
Lists of readings are given under each week including essential readings. It is expected that, as a minimum, you will
have read the set 2 or 3 essential readings in advance of the seminar each week and prepared brief notes. You will be
expected to answer questions about the set reading each week, engage in small group discussions or undertake
workshop style tasks in seminars. Therefore, you should come prepared to present an argument concerning each
seminar reading. You may need briefly to summarise the main features of the content in order to engage with other
students.
The further reading section offers suggestions for supplementary reading and should be used in preparation for the
essay. To help you with this, I would recommend that in addition to the required key readings, you try and read
something else from the further reading list each week to give you a head start on your essay preparation and a better
understanding of each of the topics as we proceed through the unit. If you have trouble finding the texts, use your
initiative – do a keyword search in the library to find alternatives, or look for electronic journal articles. Extra readings
are available on Blackboard through the e-reserves folder.
Statement of unit aims
• To explore the importance of culture in modern society
• To compare different theoretical approaches to the study of culture
• To discuss how power relations affect cultural representation
• To provide students with knowledge of a range of contemporary cultural issues
• To encourage critical engagement with media
Other:
Make sure you check your Bristol email account regularly throughout the course as important information will be
communicated to you. Any emails sent to your Bristol address are assumed to have been read. If you wish for emails
to be forwarded to an alternative address then please go to https://support.google.com/mail/answer/10957?hl=en

UNIT DESCRIPTION
Culture is a crucial aspect of contemporary life and has become an increasingly important area of sociological study.
This unit will critically explore some of the key ways that culture has been explained and its significance for
contemporary social and political life. The unit draws on debates in sociology, as well as cultural studies, to consider
why it is important to study culture. It considers a number of theoretical approaches to the meaning and construction
of culture, popular and mass culture, representation and postmodernism, and will explore substantive topics such as
digitisation, social media and music, cultural authenticity, racial stereotyping in film & comedy. By engaging with
contemporary cultural issues this unit will introduce the key aspects and dynamics of culture and the relationship
between culture and other forms of social power.

LECTURES
Week 1: Defining Culture
Week 2: Modernity, Civilisation & Mass Culture
Week 3: Sub-cultures
Week 4: Postmodernism
Week 5: Cultural Taste
Week 6: Reading Week
Week 7: Representation and Stereotypes
Week 8: Commodification, Consumption and Identities
Week 9: Local Culture: Music, Space and Place
Week 10: Global Culture: Popular Music and Authenticity
Week 11: Digital Culture and Popular Music
Week 12: Reading Week

2
LECTURE/SEMINAR SCHEDULE

Please note that topic description covers both weekly lectures.

Readings marked by ** indicate accessible overview of key debates from quality textbooks. I recommend that you
read these if you are finding primary sources tricky.

Readings marked by *** refers to further reading that I have made available in e-reserve for you.

Week 1: Defining Culture

What is culture? What do we mean when we talk about ‘culture’? How has the concept been approached historically
and how is it understood in contemporary society? This week we begin our sociological investigation into culture by
exploring important historical contributions to the definition of culture and how culture became significant within the
discipline of sociology.

Essential Reading:
Jenks, C. (2005) ‘Chapter 1: Origins of the concept of ‘culture’ in the philosophy and the literary tradition’ in Culture
London: Routledge, pp. 6- 12. (e-reserve)

Smith, P. and Riley, A. (2008) ‘Chapter 1: Culture in Classical Social Theory’ in Cultural Theory: An Introduction, pp. 6-
21. (e-reserve)

Further Reading
Bennett, A. (2005) ‘The Cultural Turn’ in Culture and Everyday Life London: Sage Publications.

***Chaney, D. (2011) ‘Starting to Write a History of the Present Day: Culture and Sociology’ in Back, L., Bennett, A.,
Edles, L.D., Gibson, M., Inglis, D., Jacobs, R. and Woodward, I. (eds) Cultural Sociology: An Introduction, pp.3- 18. (e-
reserve)

Eagleton. T. (2000) The Idea of Culture Oxford: Blackwell Books.

Nash. K. (2001) ‘The Cultural Turn in Social Theory: Towards a Theory of Cultural Politics’ Sociology 35 (1): 77- 92.

Storey, J. (2001/2009/2012). ‘Chapter 1: What is Popular Culture?’ in Cultural Theory and Popular Culture, Parson
Education Limited: Essex, pp. 1-16.

Williams, R. (1981) Culture London: Fontana.

Week 2: Modernity, Civilisation & Mass Culture

This week we explore three main traditions of thinking about culture established through modernity. First, we look at
the influential ‘culture and civilisation’ tradition of critical thought based on the work of Matthew Arnold and F. R.
Leavis. Following this, we focus closely on the Marxist tradition of critical thinking about culture through the highly
influential work of Theodor Adorno & Max Horkheimer and in particular their idea of the ‘culture industry’. And
finally, we review Raymond Williams’ contribution understood as ‘culture is ordinary’.

Essential Reading
Adorno, T. and Horkheimer, M. (1997) ‘The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass Deception’ in Dialectic of
Enlightenment pp.120- 140. (e-reserve)

Arnold, M (2006 [1869]) excerpts from Chapter 1 Culture and Anarchy and Other Writings Cambridge University
Press, pp. 32 – 45. (e-reserve)

Leavis, F. R. (1930) excerpt from Mass Civilisation and Minority Culture Cambridge: Minority Press. (9 pages available
from here:
https://is.cuni.cz/studium/predmety/index.php?do=download&did=41298&kod=JJM117

Williams, R. (2002) ‘Chapter 1: Culture is Ordinary’ in A. Gray and J. McGuigan (eds) Studying Culture: an Introductory
Reader London and New York: Edward Arnold. (e-reserve)

3
Further Reading
Adorno, T. (1941) ‘On Popular Music’ Studies in Philosophy and Science, no. 9.

Adorno, T. (1991) ‘Culture Industry Reconsidered’ in Culture Industry: Selected Essays on Mass Culture London:
Routledge. (available as electronic book from UoB)

Benjamin, W. (1936). The Work of Art in the Mechanical Age of Reproduction, available at:
http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/ge/benjamin.htm

Bennett, A. (2005) ‘The Mass Culture Debate’ in Culture and Everyday Life London: Sage Publications. (e-reserve)

Johnson, L. (1979) The Cultural Critics from Matthew Arnold to Raymond Williams London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Gendron, B. (1986) ‘Theodore Adorno Meets The Cadillacs’ in T. Modleski (ed.) Studies in Entertainment: Critical
approaches to Mass Culture University of Wisconsin, pp. 18- 36.

***Leavis, F. R. & Thompson, D. (1933) excerpt from Culture and Environment London: Chatto & Windus, pp. 1-5. (e-
reserve)

McDonald, D. (1957) ‘A Theory of Mass Culture’ in B. Rosenberg and D. White (eds) Mass Culture Glencoe: Free
Press.

Nelson, C. & Grossberg, L. (eds) (1988) Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture Basingstoke: Macmillan (Introduction).

**Storey, J. (2012) ‘The Culture and Civilization tradition’ in Cultural Theory and Popular Culture: An Introduction (fifth
edition) Harlow: Pearson Education Ltd, pp. 17- 36. (available as electronic book)

**Storey, J. (2012) ‘Chapter 4: Marxisms’ Cultural Theory and Popular Culture: An Introduction (fifth edition) Harlow:
Pearson Education Ltd, pp. 62- 70. (available as electronic book)

**Strinati, D. (2004) An Introduction to Theories of Popular Culture (second edition) London: Routledge (Chapters 1 & 2).
(available as electronic book)

Swingewood, A. (1977) ‘Chapter 1: The Theory of Mass Society’ from The Myth of Mass Culture Macmillan.

Williams, R. (1958) Culture and Society, 1780- 1950 London: Chatto & Windus. (esp. Introduction and Part III)

Williams, R. (2005). ‘Culture and Masses’, in R. Guins and O. Cruz. (eds.) Popular Culture: A Reader London: Sage.

Week 3: Subcultures
This week focuses on key concepts of subcultural theory and debate and examines critiques surrounding the notion
of the 'subcultural'. Youth subcultures became a focus of sociological debate and theorising in the latter half of the
twentieth century and were often associated with the moral panics they created within society and related theories
of delinquency and deviance. Subcultures however are significant sites for the negotiation of styles and fashions and
often involve the appropriation and subversion of existing everyday items. This week we will explore contemporary
post-subcultural forms of culture and identity and as subcultures often coalesce around a particular music genre we
will examine the vital role music plays in forming social identities and a sense of belonging.

NB: There will be one hour lecture only this week. We will be examining the documentary The Filth and the Fury: a Sex
Pistols Film (dir. Julian Temple; 2007) which provides a rich, critical perspective on one of the most iconic ‘subcultures’
to date – punks.

Essential reading
Bennett, A. (1999). ‘Subcultures or Neo‐Tribes? Rethinking the Relationship between Youth, Style and Musical Taste’
Sociology 33(3): 599‐617. (UoB electronic journal)

Hebdige, D. (1979) Subculture: the Meaning of Style London, Routledge, Chapter Seven. (e-reserve)

4
McRobbie, A. (1990) ‘Settling Accounts with Subcultures: A Feminist Critique’ in Frith, S. and Goodwin, A. (eds) On
Record: Rock, Pop & The Written Word London: Routledge, pp. 66-80. (UoB electronic book)

Further reading
***Bennett, A. & Kahn-Harris, K. (eds.) (2004) After Subculture: Critical Studies in Contemporary Youth Culture London:
Palgrave Macmillan. Introduction, pp. 1-18. (e-reserve)

Brake, M. (2004) Comparative Youth Culture. The Sociology of Youth Cultures and Youth Subcultures in America, Britain and
Canada London: Routledge.

Chaney, D. (2004) ‘Fragmented Culture and Subcultures’ in Bennett, A. & Kahn-Harris, K. (eds.) After Subculture:
Critical Studies in Contemporary Youth Culture London: Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 36-48.

Clarke, G. (1990) ’Defending ski jumpers: a critique of theories of youth and subcultures’ in S. Frith and A. Goodwin
(eds) On Record: Rock, Pop and the Written Word London: Routledge, pp. 81-96.

Cohen, P. (1972) ‘Subcultural Conflict and Working Class Community’ in Gray, A. and McGuigan, J. (1993) (eds.)
Studying Culture: An Introductory Reader London: Arnold, pp.95-103.

Colosi, R. (2010) ‘A return to the Chicago school? From the “subculture” of taxi dancers to the contemporary lap
dancer’ Journal of Youth Studies 13 (1): 1‐16.

Dedman, T. (2011) ‘Agency in UK hip-hop and grime youth subcultures – peripherals and purists’ Journal of Youth
Studies 14 (5): 507 -22.

***Hall, S. & Jefferson, T. (eds) (1976) Resistance through Rituals: Youth subcultures in postwar Britain London:
HarperCollins, pp. 9-52. (e-reserve)

Hebdige, D. (2012). ‘Contemporizing 'Subculture': 30 Years to Life’ European Journal of Cultural Studies, 15 (3): 399–
424. (UoB electronic journal)

Hesmondhalgh, D. (2005) ‘Subcultures, Scenes or Tribes? None of the Above’ Journal of Youth Studies 8 (1): 21-40.
(UoB electronic journal)

Hodgkinson P (2002) Goth: Identity, Style and subculture Oxford: Berg. (Chapter 2: Reworking subculture)

Hodkinson, P. (2011) Media, Culture and Society: an Introduction, Sage Publications. Chapter 12.

Kruse, H. (1993) ‘Subcultural Identity in Alternative Music Culture’ Popular Music 12 (1): 33-42.

***Jenks, C. (2005) Subculture: The Fragmentation of the Social London: Sage, pp. 129-147. (e-reserve)

Martin, P.J. (2004) ‘Culture, Subculture and Social Organization’ in Bennett, A. & Kahn-Harris, K. (eds.) After
Subculture: Critical Studies in Contemporary Youth Culture London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 21-35.

Muggleton, D. And Weinzierl, R. (eds) (2003) The Post-Subcultures Reader Oxford: Berg.

Stahl, G. (2003) ‘Tastefully Renovating Subcultural Theory: Making Space for a New Model’ in Muggleton, D. and
Weinzierl, R. (eds) (2003) The Post-Subcultures Reader Oxford: Berg, pp.27-40.

***Thornton, S. (1995) ‘Chapter 1: The Distinctions of Cultures without Distinction’ in Club Cultures: Music, Media
and Subcultural Capital Cambridge: Polity Press, Introduction. (e-reserve)

***Thornton, S. (2006) ‘Understanding Hipness: Subcultural Capital as feminist tool’ in A. Bennett, B. Shank and J.
Toynbee (eds) The Popular Music Studies Reader London: Routledge, pp. 99- 105. (e-reserve)

Thornton, S. and Gelder, K. (eds) (1996) The Subcultures Reader London: Routledge.

5
Week 4: Postmodernism

Guy Debord, Jean Baudrillard and Frederic Jameson’s ideas constitute important contributions to postmodern
perspectives on contemporary culture. Postmodern approaches to culture focus on issues of meaning and
representation and the changes to our perception and understanding of social reality with the onset of ‘cultural
spectacles’ in the media. This week we will explore the ideas of Baudrillard, Jameson and Debord and what they have
to say about the social implications of technologically mediated cultural forms and processes.

Essential Reading
Baudrillard, J. (1988) ‘Chapter 7: Simulacra and Simulations’ in M. Poster (ed.) Jean Baudrillard: Selected Writings Polity
Press, pp. 169- 187. (e-reserve)

Debord, G. (1995) ‘Chapter 1’ The Society of the Spectacle Zone Books, pp. 11-24. (e-reserve)
Also available from here: [http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/debord/society.htm]

Jameson, F. (1984) ‘Postmodernism, or, the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism’ New Left Review 146: 53- 92. (UoB
electronic journal)

Further Reading
**Bennett, A. (2005) ‘Postmodernism’ in Culture and Everyday Life London: Sage Publications. (e-reserve)

Boyne, R. & Rattansi, A. (eds) (1990) Postmodernism and Society Basingstoke: Macmillan (Chapters 1, 5 & 8).

Connor, S. (1997) Postmodernist Culture: An Introduction to Theories of the Contemporary 2nd Edition Oxford: Blackwell.

Crary, J. (1999) Suspensions of Perception: Attention, Spectacle, and Modern Culture Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

Goodwin, A. (1991) ‘Popular music and postmodern theory’ Cultural Studies 5 (2): 174-188.

Jameson, F. (1990) Signatures of the Visible London: Routledge.

Jameson, F. (1991) Postmodernism, or the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism London: Verso (Introduction & Chapter 1).

Jenks, C. (1993) Culture London: Routledge. (Chapter 7)

Lyotard, F. (1984) The Postmodern Condition Manchester University Press.

McGuigan, J. (2006) Modernity and Postmodern Culture (second edition) Maidenhead: Open University Press.

Sarup, M. (1996) Identity, Culture and the Postmodern World Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Smart, B. (1993) Postmodernity London: Routledge (Chapters 2 & 5).

**Storey, J. (2012) ‘Chapter 12: Postmodernism’ in Cultural Theory and Popular Culture: An Introduction (5th edition)
Harlow: Pearson Education Ltd. (available as electronic book)

**Strinati. D. (2004) ‘Chapter 6: Postmodernism, contemporary popular culture and recent theoretical developments’
from An Introduction to Theories of Popular Culture (second edition) Routledge. (available as electronic book)

Swingewood, A. (2000) A Short History of Sociological Thought 3rd edition Basingstoke: Macmillan (Chapter 10).

Week 5: Cultural Taste

Aesthetic judgements and cultural tastes are believed to be deeply subjective reflections of class and educational
background according to Pierre Bourdieu. Are these ideas still relevant today? Some argue that the socially advantaged
in society – traditionally assumed to consume high-brow culture (i.e. ‘cultural snobs’) – should instead be viewed as
‘cultural omnivores’. In other words, the socially advantaged are now less averse to consuming middle-brow or popular
culture in addition to high-brow culture. In this session, we will explore the continued relevance of Pierre Bourdieu’s
6
assertions about cultural judgements of value and taste and how his ideas have been empirically engaged in recent
times. In particular, we will explore the theoretical and empirical contribution of Tony Bennett, Mike Savage et al at
and the idea of the cultural omnivore.

Essential Reading
Atkinson, W. (2011) ‘The Context and Genesis of Musical Tastes: Omnivorousness Debunked, Bourdieu Buttressed’
Poetics 39 (3): 169 – 186. (UoB electronic journal)

Peterson, R. A. (1992) ‘Understanding Audience Segmentation: From Elite and Mass to Omnivore and Univore’ Poetics
21: 243- 58. (UoB electronic journal)

Further Reading
Bennett, T. et al (2009) Culture, Class, Distinction London: Routledge.

Bennett, T., Savage, M., Silva, E., Warde, A., Gayo-Cal, M. and D. Wright (2005) ‘Cultural Capital and the Cultural Field
in Contemporary Britain’ CRESC Working Paper Series Working Paper No. 3.

Bourdieu, P. (1986) ‘Forms of Capital’ from J. E. Richardson (ed.) Handbook of Theory of Research for the Sociology of
Education Greenword Press, pp. 241- 58. [Available from:
http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/fr/bourdieu-forms-capital.htm

Bourdieu, P. (1980) ‘The Production of Belief: Contribution to an Economy of Symbolic Goods’ Media, Culture & Society
2 (3): 261- 293.

Bourdieu, P. (1990) Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste London: Routledge (Chapter 5).

Bourdieu, P. (1990) ‘Social Space and Symbolic Power’ in In Other Words: Essays Towards a Reflexive Sociology Cambridge
Polity.

Bourdieu, P. (1993) The Field of Cultural Production: Essays on Art and Literature Cambridge: Polity Press.

Bourdieu, P. (1993) Sociology in Question London: Sage Publications (Chapter 14: The Metamorphosis of Taste).

Calhoun, C., Li Puma, E. & Postone, M. (eds) (1993) Bourdieu: Critical Perspectives Cambridge: Polity Press. (Chapters 1
and 10).

Chan, T. W. and Goldthorpe, J. H. (2007) ‘Social Stratification and Cultural Consumption: Music in England’ European
Sociological Review 23 (1): 1- 19.

Fowler, B. (1997) Pierre Bourdieu and Cultural Theory: Critical Investigations London: Sage.

Fowler, B. (ed.) (2000) Reading Bourdieu on Society and Culture Oxford: Blackwell.

Glevarec, H. and Pinet, M. (2012) ‘Tablatures of Musical Tastes in Contemporary France: Distinction without
Intolerance’ Cultural Trends 21 (1):67– 88.

Jenkins, R. (1992) ‘Culture, Status and Distinction’ from Pierre Bourdieu London: Routledge.

Jenks, C. (1993) Culture (Chapter 6) London: Routledge

Harkar, R., Mahar, C. & Wilkes, C. (eds) (1990) An Introduction to the Work of Pierre Bourdieu: The Practice of Theory
London: Macmillan (Chapters 4 and 6).

Peterson, R. A. (1996) ‘Changing High-Brow Taste: From Snob to Omnivore’ American Sociological Review 61 (5): 900-
909.

Savage, M. (2006) ‘The Musical Field’ Cultural Trends 15 (2/3): 159- 74.

Savage, M. and Gayo-Cal, M. (2009) ‘Against the omnivore: assemblages of contemporary musical taste in the United
Kingdom’ CRESC Working Paper Series Working Paper No. 72.
7
Warde, A., Wright, D. & Gayo-Cal, M. (2007) ‘Understanding Cultural Omnivorousness: Or, the Myth of the
Cultural Omnivore’ Cultural Sociology 1 (2): 143 -64.

Week 6: READING WEEK

Week 7: Representation and Stereotypes

Representation is one of the key processes that is critical to understanding the production of culture. Some argue that
the process of representation within cultural texts (television shows, films, etc.) plays a significant role in the
development of our ideas about the social world and the people in it. How do cultural texts produce meaning? Why
do stereotypical cultural representations persist within popular culture and what role do they play in social relations?
This week we explore the theory of representation and stereotyping by focusing on race, gender and sexuality within
contemporary television drama and film.

Essential Reading
Brooker, W. (2001) ‘Readings of Racism: interpretation, stereotyping and the Phantom Menace’ Continuum: Journal of
Media & Cultural Studies 15 (1): 15- 32. (UoB electronic journal)

Dyer, R. (1993) The Matter of Images: Essays on Representations London: Routledge (Chapter 3). (e-reserve)

Hall, S. (2013 [1997]) ‘Chapter 1: The work of representation’, in S. Hall (ed.) Representation: Cultural Representations
and Signifying Practices. Milton Keynes: Open University Press, pp. 1- 13. (e-reserve)

Further Reading
Bhabha, H. (1983) ‘The “Other” Question’ Screen 24 (6). Download from here:
http://courses.washington.edu/com597j/pdfs/bhabha_the%20other%20question.pdf

Dyer, R. (1993) The Matter of Images: Essays on Representations London: Routledge (Chapter 13).

Fanon, F. (1986) [1952] ‘The Fact of Blackness’ in Black Skin White Masks London: Pluto Press.

Fraley, T. (2009) ‘A man’s gotta have a code: Identity, Racial Codes and HBO’s The Wire’ DarkMatter: In the Ruins of
Imperial Culture. Available to download from:
http://www.darkmatter101.org/site/2009/05/29/a-mans-gotta-have-a-code-identity-racial-codes-and-hbos-the-wire/

Gilman, S. (1985) Difference and Pathology Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Gilroy, P. (2002) ‘Ali G and the Oscars’ Open Democracy http://www.opendemocracy.net/node/459/pdf

***Hall, S. (1992) ‘New Ethnicities’ in J. Donald and A. Rattansi (eds) ‘Race’, Culture & Difference London: Sage, pp. 252-
259. (e-reserve)

***Hall, S. (1996) ‘What is this ‘black’ in black popular culture? In D. Morley and K. Chen (eds) Stuart Hall: Critical
Dialogues in Cultural Studies London: Routledge, pp. 465- 475. (e-reserve)

hooks, b. (1992) Black Looks: race and representation Boston: South End Press (Chapters 2 and 11).

Hunt, D. (2002) ‘Raced Ways of Seeing’ in L. Spillman (ed.) Cultural Sociology Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 120-9.

Kelly, L. W. (2009) ‘Casting The Wire: Complicating Notions of Performance, Authenticity and Otherness’ DarkMatter:
In the Ruins of Imperial Culture http://www.darkmatter101.org/site/2009/05/29/casting-the-wire-complicating-notions-of-
performance-authenticity-and-otherness/

McNeil, D. (2009) ‘White Negroes and The Wire’ DarkMatter: In the Ruins of Imperial Culture
http://www.darkmatter101.org/site/2009/05/29/white-negroes-and-the-wire/

8
Mercer, K. (ed.) (1994) ‘Reading Racial Fetishism’ in Welcome to the Jungle London: Routledge.

***Pickering, M. (2001) ‘The Concept of the Stereotype’ in Stereotyping: The Politics of Representation (e-reserve)

***Ross, K. (1996) ‘Chapter 2: Black Fights Back Part I: Black Film-making and Strategies of Opposition in Britain’ in
Black and White Media: Black Images in Popular Culture Cambridge: Polity Press, pp. 33- 55. (e-reserve)

Week 8: Commodification, Consumption and Identities

This week we will focus on the social significance of the primary production of culture as a commodity for consumption.
We will examine the relationship between the commodification and consumption of culture and how practices of
consumption are key to understanding identities. We will develop these ideas within the contemporary context by
bringing the figure of the ‘hipster’ into focus. The term ‘hipster’ is often used as a term of derision to describe people
that display a particular kind of style and taste, but we will take a more critical and sociological look at what constitutes
hipsterism and therefore what mode of consumption or lifestyle choice the term captures within the contemporary
context.

Essential Readings

Featherstone, M. (1991) ‘Chapter 2: Theories of Consumer Culture’ in Consumer Culture and Postmodernism London:
Sage, pp. 13-27. (e-reserve)

Schiermer, B. (2014) ‘Late-modern hipsters: New tendencies in popular culture’ Acta Sociologica 57 (2): 167- 181.
(UoB electronic journal)

Further Reading
Baudrillard, J. ‘Consumer Society’ in Poster, M. (ed) (2001) Jean Baudrillard: Selected Writings Cambridge: Polity Press.
pp. 32- 59. Available from here: http://www.humanities.uci.edu/mposter/books/Baudrillard,%20Jean%20-
%20Selected%20Writings_ok.pdf

Bocock, R. (1994) ‘The Emergence of the Consumer Society’ in The Polity Reader in Cultural Theory Cambridge: Polity.

Bennett, A. (2005) Culture and Everyday Life. London: Sage Publications, pp. 60-65.

Buckingham, D. (2011) The Material Child: Growing Up in Consumer Culture. Cambridge: Polity.

Chan, T. W. (ed.) (2010) Social Status and Cultural Consumption. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Daunton, M. And Hilton, M. (2001) The Politics of Consumption: material culture and citizenship in Europe and America.
Oxford: Berg.

Edwards, T. (2000) Contradictions of Consumption: concepts, practices, and politics in consumer society. Buckingham: Open
University Press.

Ewen, S. (2001) Captains of Consciousness: advertising and the social roots of consumer culture. New York: Basic Books.

Featherstone, M. (1990) ‘Perspectives on Consumer Culture’, Sociology 24 (1): 5-22. (UoB electronic journal)
Fine, B. (2002) The World of Consumption: the material and cultural revisited London: Routledge.

Frank, T. (1998) The Conquest of Cool: Business Culture, Counterculture, and the Rise of Hip Consumerism University of
Chicago Press. [NB: not in UoB libraries]

Frank. T. and Weiland, M. (eds) (1997) Commodify your Dissent: Salvos from the Baffler W.W. Norton & Company.

Heath, J. (2001), ‘The Structure of Hip Consumerism’ Philosophy & Social Criticism 27 (6): 1–17. (esp. 12- 17)

Heath, J. and Potter, A. ‘(2006) Chapter 7: From Status Seeking to Coolhunting’ in The Rebel Sell: How the
Counterculture became Consumer Culture Capstone.

Jameson, J. (1993) ‘Postmodernism and Consumer Society’ in Gray, A. and McGuigan, J. (1993) (eds.) Studying
Culture: An Introductory Reader London: Arnold.
9
Leiss, W. (1983) ‘The Icons of the Marketplace’ Theory, Culture & Society 1 (3): 10- 21.

Lunt, P. And Livingstone, S. (1992) Mass consumption and personal identity: everyday economic experience. Buckingham:
The Open University Press.

***Lury, C. (1996) ‘Chapter 2: Material Culture and Consumer Culture’ from Consumer Culture Cambridge: Polity
Press, pp. 10- 51. (e-reserve)

McGuigan, J. (2009) Cool Capitalism London: Pluto Press.

Morris, M. (2005) ‘Interpretability and social power, or, why postmodern advertising works’ Media, Culture and
Society 27, pp. 697- 718.
Miller, D. (2012) Consumption and its Consequences. Cambridge: Polity.

Paterson, M. (2006) Consumption and Everyday Life. London: Routledge.

Trentmann, F. (ed.) (2006) The Making of the Consumer: knowledge, power and identity in the modern world. Oxford:
Berg.

Week 9: Local Culture: Popular Music and the City

Local developments of specific musical genres and styles are often regarded as socially and culturally significant.
Emerging in the early 1990s, the ‘Bristol sound’ was presented as not simply a sound but demonstrative of two deeply
significant constitutive facets. It illustrated a musical and creative sensibility and on the other denoted the social and
cultural characteristics of the city that, taken together, conveyed Bristol as an exemplar of urban, multicultural, and
cosmopolitan sophistication. Even if this narrative constitutes a coherent account of the emergence of a local music
scene, its portrait of Bristol as a pluralist multicultural ‘success story’ is open to debate. This week we take a look at
to what extent aspects of ‘the local’ have any ongoing relevance for understanding cultural practices and cultural
identities. We will do this by turning the spotlight on representations of Bristol as a site of popular music production.

Essential Reading
Connell, J. and Gibson, C. (2003) ‘Sounds and Scenes: A Place for Music? In Soundtracks: Popular Music, Identity and
Place London: Routledge, pp. 90- 116. (e-reserve)

Henning, M. and Hyder, R. (2015) ‘Chapter 7: Locating the Bristol Sound: archiving the music as everyday life’ in S.
Cohen et al (eds) Sites of Popular Music Heritage London: Routledge. (UoB electronic book)

Further Reading
Bennett, A. (2000) Popular Music and Youth Culture: Music, Identity and Place London: Macmillan.

Cohen, S. (2007) ‘Chapter 1: Music and the City: Cultural Diversity in a Global Cosmopolis’ in Decline, Renewal and
the City in Popular Music Culture Aldershot: Ashgate, pp. 9-40.

Cohen, S. (1991) Rock Culture in Liverpool: Popular Music in the Making Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Dresser, M. and Fleming, P. (2007) Bristol: Ethnic Minorities and the City 1000- 2001 London: Phillimore and Co. Ltd.

Finnegan, R. (1989) The Hidden Musicians: Music-making in an English Town Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

***Hyder, R. (2014) ‘Chapter 5: Black Music and Cultural Exchange in Bristol’ in J. Stratton and N. Zuberi (eds) Black
Popular Music in Britain Since 1945 Aldershot: Ashgate, pp. 85- 99. (e-reserve)

Johnson, P. (1996) Straight Outa Bristol: Massive Attack, Portishead and Tricky and the Roots of Trip Hop London: Hodder
and Stoughton.

MacKinnon, N. (1993) The British Folk Scene: Musical Performance and Social Identity Buckingham: Open University
Press.

10
Mitchell, T. (1996) Popular Music and Local Identity: Rock, Pop and Rap in Europe and Oceania London: Leicester
University Press.

***Webb, P. (2004) ‘Interrogating the production of sound and place: the Bristol phenomenon, from Lunatic Fringe
to worldwide Massive’ in S. Whiteley, A. Bennett and S. Hawkins (eds) Music, Space and Place: Popular Music and
Cultural Identity Aldershot: Ashgate, pp. 66- 85. (e-reserve)

Week 10: Global Culture: Popular Music and Authenticity

This week we will explore global culture by focusing on world music and hip hop as music forms that exemplify
different features of the transnational formation, production and consumption of culture. The first lecture examines
the rise of hip-hop culture which emerged from deprived urban areas of the US during the 1970s and has since become
a global music culture. The emergence of hip-hop from largely black and Hispanic, working class inner-city communities
will be discussed in relation to discourses of authenticity as a way to frame the genre’s success. It will also explore the
subsequent tensions that arose in the wake of the genre’s global popularity. The second lecture looks at authenticity
by contextualising this within the growth and emergence of world music as a commercial music culture since the
1980s, including its latest manifestation as Afrobeats. The lecture will frame world music first as reflective of the
progressive political and cultural significance of global networks of communication and thus highlighting its
cosmopolitan and syncretic potential and second within critical discourses that emphasise its exploitative and fetishising
capacity. Notions of the ‘exotic’ and the authentic will also be examined in order to assess the appeal of world music
in the contemporary west.

Essential Reading
Barrett, J. (1996) ‘World Music, Nation and Postcolonialism’ Cultural Studies 10 (2): 237–247. (e-reserve)

Rose, T. (1994) ‘A style nobody can deal with: politics, style and the post-industrial in hip-hop from Ross, A. and Rose,
T. (eds) Microphone Fiends: Youth Music and Culture London: Routledge, pp. 71- 88. (e-reserve)

Swedenburg, T. (1992) ‘Homies in the Hood: Rap’s Commodification of Insubordination’ New Formations 18: 53 66.
(UoB electronic journal)

Further Reading
Appadurai, A. (1990) ‘Disjuncture and Difference in the Global Cultural Economy’ Theory, Culture & Society, 7: 295-
310.

Bennett, A. (1999) ‘Hip hop am Main: the localization of rap music and hip hop culture’ Media, Culture and Society 21
(1): 77-91.

Biddle, I. and Knights, V. (2007) ‘Introduction: National Popular Musics: Betwixt and Beyond the Local and Global’ in
I. Biddle and V. Knights (eds) Music, National Identity and the Politics of Belonging: Between the Global and the Local
Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Ltd, pp. 1- 15

Born, G. and Hesmondhalgh (2000) ‘Introduction: On Difference, Representation and Appropriation in Music’ in G.
Born & D. Hesmondhalgh (eds) Western Music and Its Others: Difference, Representation and Appropriation in Music
Berkeley: University of California Press.

Brooks, S. and Conroy, T. (2011) ‘Hip-hop Culture in a Global Context: Interdisciplinary and Cross- Categorical
Investigation’ American Behavioral Scientist 55 (1) 3- 8.

Burke, P. (2009) Cultural Hybridity Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.

Byrne, D. (1999) ‘I Hate World Music’ The New York Times October 3, 1999.

Canclini, N. G. (1995) Hybrid Cultures: Strategies for Entering and Leaving Modernity Minneapolis, MN: University of
Minnesota Press.

Connell, J. And Gibson, C. (2004) ‘World Music: deterritorializing place and identity’ Progress in Human Geography 28
(3): 342- 361.

11
Erlmann, V. (1996) ‘The Aesthetics of the Global Imagination: Reflections on World Music in the 1990s’, Public
Culture 8: 467–87.

***Frith, S. (2000) ‘The Discourse of World Music’ in G. Born and D. Hesmondhalgh (eds) Western Music and its
Others: Difference, Representation and Appropriation in Music Berkeley, CA and London, UK: University of California
Press, pp. 305- 322. (e-reserve)

Garofalo, R. (1994) ‘Culture versus commerce: the marketing of black popular music’ Public Culture 7 (1): 275- 287.

Garofalo, R. (1993) ‘Whose world, what beat: the transnational music industry, identity and cultural imperialism’ World
of Music 35 (2): 16- 32.

Gilroy, P. (1991) ‘Sounds Authentic: Black Music, Ethnicity, and the Challenge of a "Changing" Same’ Black Music
Research Journal 11 (2): 111-136. (UoB electronic journal)

***Gilroy, P. (1993) The Black Atlantic: Modernity and Double Consciousness, pp. 72 - 87 London: Verso Books. (e-reserve)

***Haynes, J. (2013) ‘Music Affinity’ from Music, Difference and the Residue of Race New York: Routledge. (e-reserve)

Haynes, J. (2010) ‘In the Blood: The Racializing Tones of Music Categorization’ Cultural Sociology 4 (1): 81-100.

Haynes, J. (2005) ‘World Music and the Search for Difference’ Ethnicities (3): 365- 385.

Herson, B. (2011) ‘A Historical Analysis of Hip-Hop’s Influence in Dakar from 1984-2000’ American Behavioral Scientist
55 (1): 24- 35. (UoB electronic journal)

***Inglis, D. & Robertson, R. (2005) ‘“World Music” and the Globalisation of Sound’ in D. Inglis and J. Hughson (eds)
The Sociology of Art: Ways of Seeing Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. (e-reserve)

Lipsitz, G. (1994) ‘Chapter 2: Diasporic Noise: History, Hip Hop and the Post-Colonial Politics of Sound’ from
Dangerous Crossroads: Popular Music, Postmodernism and the Poetics of Place London: Verso Books, pp. 23- 48.
https://www.amherst.edu/system/files/media/0105/Lipsitz.%252520Diasporic%252520Noise-
%252520History%25252C%252520Hip%252520Hop%25252C%252520and%252520the%252520Post-
colonial%252520politics%252520of%252520Sound..pdf

Robertson, R. (1992) Globalisation: Social Theory and Global Culture London: Sage.

Rose, T. (1994) Black Noise: Rap Music and Black Culture in Contemporary America Wesleyan University Press.

Taylor, T. D. (1997) Global Pop: World Music, World Markets London: Routledge.

Williams, J. (2013) Rhymin' and stealin': musical borrowing in hip-hop Ann Arbor, Michigan: The University of Michigan
Press.

Week 11: Digital Culture and Popular Music

In our final week of teaching, we will be exploring sociological perspectives of the transformations of social and cultural
life that are linked to digitisation and the internet. To do so, we will look at the significant changes that have occurred
in the production, distribution and consumption of music and whether there are new ways of thinking about the role
and meaning of music in people’s lives, as well as the changing relationships between producers and consumers
(audience/fans) of music.

Essential Reading

Goodwin, A. (1990) ‘Sample and hold: pop music in the digital age of reproduction’ in S. Frith and A. Goodwin (eds)
On record: rock, pop and the written word London: Routledge, pp. 258-273. (UoB electronic book)

Prior, N. (2010) ‘The Rise of the New Amateurs: Popular Music, Digital Technology and the Fate of Cultural
Production', in J. R. Hall, L. Grindstaff and M. Lo (eds) Handbook of Cultural Sociology Routledge. Available from here:
12
http://www.academia.edu/354591/The_Rise_of_the_New_Amateurs_Popular_Music_Digital_Technology_and_the_
Fate_of_Cultural_Production

Sexton, J. (2009) ‘Digital Music: Consumption, Distribution and Production’ in Creeber, G. and Martin, R. (eds) Digital
Cultures: Understanding New Media Open University Press. (UoB electronic book available)

Further Reading

Avdeef, M. (2012) ‘Technological Engagement and Musical Eclecticism: An Examination of Contemporary Listening
Practices’, Participations, 9(2), http://www.participations.org/Volume%209/Issue%202/contents.htm

Banks, J., and Deuze, M. (2009) ‘Co-creative Labour’ International Journal of Cultural Studies 12 (5): 419- 431.

Bartmanski, D. and Woodward, I. (2013) The vinyl: The analogue medium in the age of digital reproduction. Journal of
Consumer Culture. iFirst. http://joc.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/05/30/1469540513488403.abstract
Beer, D. (2008) ‘The iconic interface and the veneer of simplicity: mp3 players and the reconfiguration of music
collecting and reproduction practices in the digital age’ Information, Communication & Society 11(1): 71- 88.

Baym, N. K. (2012) “Fans or Friends?: Seeing Social Media Audiences as Musicians Do” Participations 9 (2): 286–316.
(UoB electronic journal)

Beer, D. (2008) ‘Making friends with Jarvis Cocker: Music Culture in the Context of Web 2.0’ Cultural Sociology 2, pp.
222-241.

Bockstedt, J. (et al.) (2006) ‘The Move to Artist-Led On-Line Music Distribution: A Theory-Based Assessment and
Prospects for Structural Changes in the Digital Music Market’ International Journal of Electronic Commerce 10 (3) (1): 7-
38.

Bull M (2007) Sound Moves. iPod Culture and Urban Experience. London: Routledge.

Choi, H., and Burnes, B. (2013) ‘The Internet and Value Co-creation: The Case of the Popular Music Industry’
Prometheus 31 (1): 35–53.

Edmond, M. (2014) ‘Here We Go Again: Music Videos after YouTube’ Television & New Media 15(4) 305- 320.

Frith S (1986) ‘Art versus technology: The strange case of popular music’ Media Culture & Society 8(3): 263–80.

Hesmondhalgh, D. (2009) ‘The digitalisation of music’ in Pratt, A. C. and Jeffcut, P. (eds) Creativity and Innovation in the
Cultural Economy New York: Routledge, pp. 57–73. OR available from here: CRESC Working Paper No. 30 CRESC
Open University. http://www.cresc.ac.uk/medialibrary/workingpapers/wp30.pdf

Hughes, J., and Lang, K. R. (2003 ‘If I Had a Song: The Culture of Digital Community Networks and Its Impact on the
Music Industry’ International Journal on Media Management 5 (3): 180- 189.

IFPI (2013) ‘FPI Digital Music Report 2013 Engine of a Digital World’ IFPI http://www.ifpi.org/content/library/DMR2013.pdf.

Jones, S, (2002) ‘Music that moves, music that moves: Popular music, distribution and network technologies’ Cultural
Studies 16(2): 213–232.

Leyshon, A., Webb, P. et al. (2005) ‘On the reproduction of the musical economy after the Internet’ Media Culture &
Society 27(2): 177-209.

Lingel, J. and Naaman, M. (2011) ‘You should have been there, man: Live music, DIY content and online communities’
New Media & Society 14(2) 332–349.

McCourt, T. and P. Burkart (2003). ‘When creators, corporations and consumers collide: Napster and the
development of on-line music distribution’ Media Culture & Society 25: 333-350.

Magaudda, P. (2011) ‘When materiality ‘bites back’: Digital music consumption practices in the age of dematerialization’
Journal of Consumer Culture 11(1) 15–36

13
Marshall. L. (2015) ‘‘Let's keep music special. F—Spotify’: on-demand streaming and the controversy over artist
royalties’ Creative Industries 8 (2): 177- 189.

Morris, J.W. (2012) ‘Making music behave: Metadata and the digital music commodity’ New Media & Society,
14(5) 850–866.

Potts, L. (2012) Amanda Palmer and the #LOFNOTC: How online fan participation is rewriting music labels.
Participations, 9(2), pp.360-382. http://www.participations.org/Volume%209/Issue%202/20%20Potts.pdf

Rodman, G.B. and Vanderdonckt, C. (2006) ‘Music for nothing or, I want my mp3: The regulation and recirculation of
affect’ Cultural Studies 20(2–3): 245–61.

Sandywell, B. and Beer, D. (2005) ‘Stylistic Morphing: Notes on the Digitisation of Contemporary Music Culture’
Convergence 11(4): 106–121.

Schradie, J. (2011) ‘The digital production gap: The digital divide and Web 2.0 collide’ Poetics 39: 145- 168.

Serazio, M. (2008) ‘The Apolitical Irony of Generation Mash-Up: A Cultural Case Study in Popular Music’ Popular Music
and Society 31 (1): 79- 94.

Sterne, J. (2012) MP3. The Meaning of a Format. Durham: Duke University Press [electronic version]

Sterne, J. (2006) ‘The mp3 as cultural artefact’ New Media & Society 18(5): 825–842.

Wikström, P. (2010) The Music Industry: Music in the Cloud. Cambridge, MA: Polity.

Week 12: READING WEEK

14
 Appendix A

Instructions on how to submit essays electronically

1. Log in to Blackboard and select the Blackboard course for the unit you are submitting work for. If you cannot see
it, please e-mail spais-ug@bristol.ac.uk with your username and ask to be added.
2. Click on the "Submit Work Here" option at the top on the left hand menu and then find the correct assessment from
the list.
3. Select ‘view/complete’ for the appropriate piece of work. It is your responsibility to ensure that you have selected
both the correct unit and the correct piece of work.
4. The screen will display ‘single file upload’ and your name. Enter your name (for FORMATIVE ASSESSMENTS
ONLY) or candidate number (for SUMMATIVE ASSESSMENTS ONLY) as a submission title, and then select the
file that you wish to upload by clicking the ‘browse’ button. Click on the ‘upload’ button at the bottom.
5. You will then be shown the essay to be submitted. Check that you have selected the correct essay and click the
‘Submit’ button. This step must be completed or the submission is not complete.
6. You will be informed of a successful submission. A digital receipt is displayed on screen and a copy sent to your
email address for your records.

Important notes
• You are only allowed to submit one file to Blackboard (single file upload), so ensure that all parts of your work
– references, bibliography etc. – are included in one single document and that you upload the correct version.
You will not be able to change the file once you have uploaded.
• Blackboard will accept a variety of file formats, but the School can only accept work submitted in .rtf (Rich Text
Format) or .doc/.docx (Word Document) format. If you use another word processing package, please ensure
you save in a compatible format.
• By submitting your essay, you are confirming that you have read the regulations on plagiarism and confirm that
the submission is not plagiarised. You also confirm that the word count stated on the essay is an accurate
statement of essay length.
• If Blackboard is not working email your assessment to spais-ug@bristol.ac.uk with the unit code and title in the
subject line.

How to confirm that your essay has been submitted

• You will have received a digital receipt by email and If you click on the assessment again (steps 1-4), you will
see the title and submission date of the essay you have submitted. If you click on submit, you will not be able
to submit again. This table also displays the date of submission. If you click on the title of the essay, it will open
in a new window and you can also see what time the essay was submitted.

Appendix B

Summary of Relevant School Regulations

(Further information is in the year handbook)

Attendance at classes
SPAIS takes attendance and participation in classes very seriously. Seminars form an essential part
of your learning and you need to make sure you arrive on time, have done the required reading and
participate fully. Attendance at all seminars is monitored, with absence only condoned in cases of
illness or for other exceptional reasons.

If you are unable to attend a seminar you must inform your seminar tutor, as well as email spais-
absence@bristol.ac.uk. You should also provide evidence to explain your absence, such as a self-
certification and/or medical note, counselling letter or other official document. If you are unable to
provide evidence then please still email spais-absence@bristol.ac.uk to explain why you are unable to
attend. If you are ill or are experiencing some other kind of difficulty which is preventing you from
attending seminars for a prolonged period, please inform your personal tutor, the Undergraduate Office
or the Student Administration Manager.

Requirements for credit points

In order to be awarded credit points for the unit, you must achieve:

15
 • Satisfactory attendance in classes, or satisfactory completion of catch up work in lieu of poor
attendance
• Satisfactory formative assessment
• An overall mark of 40 or above in the summative assessment/s. In some circumstances, a mark
of 35 or above can be awarded credit points.

Presentation of written work

Coursework must be word-processed. As a guide, use a clear, easy-to-read font such as Arial or Times
New Roman, in at least 11pt. You may double–space or single–space your essays as you prefer. Your
tutor will let you know if they have a preference.

All pages should be numbered.

Ensure that the essay title appears on the first page.

All pages should include headers containing the following information:

Formative work Summative work

Name: e.g. Joe Bloggs **Candidate Number**: e.g. 12345
Unit e.g. SOCI10004 Unit: e.g. SOCI10004
Seminar Tutor e.g. Dr J. Haynes Seminar Tutor: e.g. Dr J. Haynes
Word Count .e.g. 1500 words Word Count: e.g. 3000 words

Candidate numbers are required on summative work in order to ensure that marking is anonymous.
Note that your candidate number is not the same as your student number.

Assessment Length
Each piece of coursework must not exceed the stipulated maximum length for the assignment (the
‘word count’) listed in the unit guide. Summative work that exceeds the maximum length will be subject
to penalties. The word count is absolute (there is no 10% leeway, as commonly rumoured). Five marks
will be deducted for every 100 words or part thereof over the word limit. Thus, an essay that is 1 word
over the word limit will be penalised 5 marks; an essay that is 101 words over the word limit will be
penalised 10 marks, and so on.

The word count includes all text, numbers, footnotes/endnotes, Harvard referencing in the body of the
text and direct quotes. It excludes, the title, candidate number, bibliography, and appendices.
However, appendices should only be used for reproducing documents, not additional text written by
you.

Referencing and Plagiarism

Where sources are used they must be cited using the Harvard referencing system. Inadequate
referencing is likely to result in penalties being imposed. See the Study Skills Guide for advice on
referencing and how poor referencing/plagiarism are processed. Unless otherwise stated, essays must
contain a bibliography.

Extensions
Extensions to coursework deadlines will only be granted in exceptional circumstances. If you want to
request an extension, complete an extension request form (available at Blackboard/SPAIS_UG
Administration/forms to download and School policies) and submit the form with your evidence (e.g.
self-certification, medical certificate, death certificate, or hospital letter) to Catherine Foster in the
Undergraduate Office.

Extension requests cannot be submitted by email, and will not be considered if there is no supporting
evidence. If you are waiting for evidence then you can submit the form and state that it has been
requested.

All extension requests should be submitted at least 72 hours prior to the assessment deadline. If the
circumstance occurs after this point, then please either telephone or see the Student Administration

16
Manager in person. In their absence you can contact Catherine Foster in the UG Office, again in
person or by telephone.

Extensions can only be granted by the Student Administration Manager. They cannot be granted by
unit convenors or seminar tutors.

You will receive an email to confirm whether your extension request has been granted.

Submitting Essays
Formative essays Summative essays

Unless otherwise stated, all formative essay All summative essay submissions must be
submissions must be submitted electronically submitted electronically via Blackboard.
via Blackboard

Electronic copies enable an efficient system of receipting, providing the student and the School with a
record of exactly when an essay was submitted. It also enables the School to systematically check
the length of submitted essays and to safeguard against plagiarism.

Late Submissions
Penalties are imposed for work submitted late without an approved extension. Any kind of
computer/electronic failure is not accepted as a valid reason for an extension, so make sure you back
up your work on another computer, memory stick or in the cloud (e.g. Google Drive or Dropbox). Also
ensure that the clock on your computer is correct.

The following schema of marks deduction for late/non-submission is applied to both formative work
and summative work:

Up to 24 hours late, or part thereof Penalty of 10 marks

For each additional 24 hours late, or A further 5 marks deduction for each 24 hours,
part thereof or part thereof
Assessment submitted over one week Treated as a non-submission: fail and mark of
late zero recorded. This will be noted on your
transcript.

• The 24 hour period runs from the deadline for submission, and includes Saturdays, Sundays,
bank holidays and university closure days.
• If an essay submitted less than one week late fails solely due to the imposition of a late
penalty, then the mark will be capped at 40.
• If a fail due to non-submission is recorded, you will have the opportunity to submit the essay
as a second attempt for a capped mark of 40 in order to receive credit points for the unit.

Marks and Feedback

In addition to an overall mark, students will receive written feedback on their assessed work.
The process of marking and providing detailed feedback is a labour-intensive one, with most 2-3000
word essays taking at least half an hour to assess and comment upon. Summative work also needs to
be checked for plagiarism and length and moderated by a second member of staff to ensure marking
is fair and consistent. For these reasons, the University regulations are that feedback will be returned
to students within three weeks of the submission deadline.
If work is submitted late, then it may not be possible to return feedback within the three week period.

Fails and Resits

If you fail the unit overall, you will normally be required to resubmit or resit. In units where there are
two pieces of summative assessment, you will normally only have to re-sit/resubmit the highest-
weighted piece of assessment.

17
Exam resits only take place once a year, in late August/early September. If you have to re-sit an exam
then you will need to be available during this period. If you are not available to take a resit examination,
then you will be required to take a supplementary year in order to retake the unit.

18
 Appendix C

Level 4 Marking and Assessment Criteria (First Year)

1st (70+) o Excellent knowledge and understanding of the subject, as well as a recognition of
alternative perspectives and viewpoints
o Uses an argument that is logically structured and supported by evidence
o Engages with the material critically and demonstrates some capacity for intellectual
initiative/ independent thought
o Incorporates one or two sources from beyond the reading list
o High quality organisation and style of presentation (including referencing) with few
grammatical or spelling errors and attention to writing style
2:1 (60–69) o Good knowledge and understanding of subject and some recognition of other
viewpoints and perspectives
o Evidence of an argument that is logically structured, but it may not be consistently
developed
o Some evidence of critical thinking in places
o Some attempt to go beyond or criticise the ‘essential reading’
o Presentation showing promise: effective writing style but some grammatical and spelling
errors; referencing and bibliographic formatting satisfactory on the whole
2:2 (50–59) o Reasonable knowledge and understanding of subject and an ability to answer the
question, but there may be some gaps
o A tendency to assert/state opinion rather than argue on the basis of reason and
evidence; structure may not be entirely clear or logical
o Some attempt at analysis but a tendency to be descriptive rather than critical.
o Little attempt to go beyond or criticise the ‘essential reading’ for the unit; displaying
limited capacity to discern between relevant and non-relevant material
o Satisfactory presentation: writing style conveys meaning but is sometimes clumsy;
some significant grammatical and spelling errors; inconsistent referencing but generally
accurate bibliography
3rd (40–49) o Shows some knowledge and understanding of the subject and some awareness of key
theoretical/ methodological issues but misses the point of the question
o Demonstrates little/no ability to construct an argument and an underdeveloped or
chaotic structure with only minimal attempt to use evidence
o Limited, uncritical and generally confused account of a narrow range of sources
o Poorly presented: writing style unclear with significant grammatical and spelling errors;
limited attempt at providing references (e.g. only referencing direct quotations) and
containing bibliographic omissions
Marginal Fail o Shows limited understanding and knowledge of the subject and omits significant parts of
the question
(35–39)
o Little or no argument and incoherent or illogical structure; evidence used inappropriately
or incorrectly
o Inadequate use of analytical skills and tendency to assert opinion rather than engage in
critique
o Some evidence of reading but little comprehension
o Inadequate presentation e.g. not always easy to follow; frequent grammatical and
spelling errors; some attempt to provide references but inconsistent and containing
bibliographic omissions
Outright Fail o Very limited, and seriously flawed, knowledge and understanding ; little understanding
of the question or fails to address the question entirely
(0–34)
o No attempt to construct an argument and incoherent or illogical structure
o No evidence of analytical skill
o Uncritical and generally confused account of a very narrow range of sources.
o Very poor presentation: poor writing style; significant errors in spelling and grammar
with limited or no attempt at providing references and containing bibliographic
omissions.

19