PH103 – The Big Questions

Summative Assignment 1

2023/2024

Deadline:
3pm on Wednesday, 1st May 2024

Extensions to the deadline cannot be granted except in verifiable exceptional

circumstances. Write to philosophy-dept@lse.ac.uk if an exceptional circumstance
justifying an extension arises.

Follow the submission instructions on the PH103 Moodle page. Read the instructions
carefully because there are penalties (in some cases, severe penalties) for errors.

1
 INSTRUCTIONS

Your assignment must contain the following components:

Part I of the assignment:

Revision of one formative essay

Choose one of your formative essays. Revise or rewrite the essay, taking account of the
feedback you received on the original version.

The original word limit of 1500 words still applies. This is word count excludes the
bibliography but includes all footnotes.

Alternative option: You may, if you prefer, write a new essay on a different question
chosen from among those set for the three formative assignments (the two formative
essays and the essay planning exercise). You may not write an essay that fails to answer
any of the set questions.

The revised or new essay will be marked. The marking criteria are included at the end
of these instructions.

Please remember to properly anonymise the essay. Include a cover-sheet. DO NOT write
your name anywhere on summative coursework. Instead, follow the Philosophy
department guidelines for summative essay submissions by including:

1. Your 5-digit candidate number (NOT your LSE student ID number).

2. The essay question you are answering.
3. The course code and academic year (PH103 2020-2021).
4. Your class teacher's name.
5. An accurate word count.

What to do if you have not written a formative essay:

If you did not produce any formative essays during the year, then you will have to write a
fully new summative essay by answering one of the available formative essay questions.
(The commentary template explains your alternative options regarding the commentary.)

2
 Part II of the assignment:
A self-evaluative commentary using the template provided

You must submit with your essay a self-evaluative commentary of up to 750 words. This
is a strict and enforced word limit.

You must use the template provided on the PH103 Moodle page and follow all the
instructions therein.

Include your completed template at the end of your summative essay in a single Word
document.

3
 Assessment Criteria for the Essay

The scheme given below shows how the grades given on your essays will be determined.
In each of the cases below you are expected to meet nearly all the conditions laid down,
but failure to satisfy one criterion to the requisite degree may be compensated for by an
exceptional performance with respect to another.

90-100. Brilliant work. In addition to satisfying the criteria of both distinction level and
outstanding work, the paper develops a genuinely original position.

80-89. Outstanding work. In addition to satisfying the criteria of distinction level work,
the paper makes suitably original observations or criticisms.

70-79. Excellent work. Topic addressed clearly and with precision. The analysis of
concepts, arguments and positions is rigorous and thorough. The argumentation is well-
presented and cogent, with suitably novel features of presentation and structure. The
student shows considerable mastery of the relevant literature and background readings.

60-69. Good work. Relevant literature consulted and understood. Essay or answer is well
organised. Important concepts and positions presented clearly and analysed sufficiently.
Arguments are cogent and properly supported by evidence and reasons. Some attempt at
critical reflection.

50-59. Satisfactory work. Topic adequately formulated and understood, but not
necessarily with great clarity or depth. Most relevant literature consulted and understood
to a large degree. Important concepts and positions presented. Fails to meet the criteria
for 60+ because of inadequate organisation, errors of understanding, lack of analysis and
critical reflection, or failure to support arguments with reasons.

40-49. Barely adequate work. Some familiarity with the relevant literature but poor grasp
of essential concepts. Presentation of material shows basic understanding. But
understanding and formulation of topic and/or understanding of the literature and relevant
concepts and positions is only just adequate.

0-39/ Fail. Work is totally unsatisfactory. Issues completely misunderstood or

understanding of them is very poor. Fails to show even basic understanding of essential
concepts and positions.

Assessment Criteria for the Commentary

4
Each part will receive a mark between 0 and 3, resulting in a maximum mark of 9.

Assessment criteria for the standard questions:

3: An answer demonstrating sustained and serious reflection on teacher feedback

and substantial improvement to the essay, at the high level one would expect from a
full-time student at the LSE.
2: An answer demonstrating some reflection on teacher feedback and some
improvement to the essay, but where either or both elements leave some room for
improvement relative to the expected level.
1: An answer demonstrating some reflection on teacher feedback and some
improvement to the essay, but where either or both elements leave significant room
for improvement relative to the expected level.
0: An answer that fails to demonstrate any reflection on teacher feedback and/or
any improvement to the essay.

Assessment criteria for the alternative questions:

3: An answer demonstrating sustained and serious reflection on the issue raised by

the question, showing that despite missing the relevant feedback opportunity the
candidate nonetheless has a deep understanding of the elements of a good
philosophy essay.
2: An answer demonstrating some reflection on the issue raised by the question, but
in a way that leaves some room for doubt about whether the candidate has a deep
understanding of the elements of a good philosophy essay.
1: An answer demonstrating some reflection on the issue raised by the question, but
in a way that creates significant doubts about whether the candidate has a deep
understanding of the elements of a good philosophy essay.
0: An answer that fails to demonstrate any reflection on the issue raised by the
question.