最新糖心Vlog

Course Staff
Professor Dale Stephens (Course Coordinator)
Location: Room 2.17, Ligertwood Building
Telephone: 8313 5937
Email: dale.stephens@adelaide.edu.au
Consultation: By Appointment via email.

Please check your student email as course-related announcements are communicated via email. Course Website: www.myuni.adelaide.edu.au

On successful completion of this course, students will be able to:

1. Undertake legal research at a high level of complexity.
2. Effectively structure and articulate written legal arguments.
3. Deploy advanced skills in statutory interpretation to resolve complex legal problems.
4. Analyse a complex factual scenario and identify the relevant legal issues.
5. Articulate complex legal arguments orally.
6. Identify and evaluate relevant ethical and moral issues in legal situations.

Advocacy problems and associated materials will be posted on MyUni.

J Snape & G Watt, How to Moot: A Student’s Guide to Mooting (2nd ed, Oxford 2010)

Christopher Kee, The Art of Argumentation: A Guide to Mooting (Cambridge 2006)

Supplementary materials and resources will be available on MyUni. Students are expected to access MyUni during semester for regular updates. https://myuni.adelaide.edu.au/webapps/login/

Seminars will be conducted on a weekly basis and additional oral mooting presentations will be arranged as required. Seminars will involve the analysis of the legal issues arising in moot problems and the preparation of written and oral submissions.

All Students are eligible to enrol in this course, although the Advocacy/Moot aspect of the course will comprise up to 24 students by selection. Hence after week 6, the course will comprise two streams – a general stream and an advocacy stream. Participants in the advocacy stream will participate as members of a moot team(s) of 2 students. Participation in both the general stream and the advocacy stream will enable students to acquire and develop skills in the research and presentation of legal arguments relating to the Law of Armed Conflict. Whereas the students in the Advocacy stream will focus upon oral skills, students in the general stream will undertake a more critical examination of the law and its underlying methodologies and assumptions.

It is expected that full-time students (i.e. those taking 12 units per semester) will devote a total of 48 hours per week to their studies during term time; therefore, this course will require students to devote 12 hours of contact and non-contact study per week. There will be 3 seminar contact hours per week. Students are expected to attend all seminars throughout the semester unless an absence is excused due to illness or compassionate reasons are provided.

The first half of the course will be a common course for both the research and advocacy streams. The topics covered will include characterization of conflict, principles of targeting, protections afforded to civilians, PW status, International Criminal Law, Rules of Engagement and Self Defence, Weapons systems and legal compliance, Article 36 reviews, Cultural Property and Human Rights and IHL.  

The second half of the course will see the advocacy students undertaking group mooting activities based upon a previous Red Cross IHL Moot problem.  The research stream will then undertake exploration of applied issues of IHL relating to naval and air warfare, warfare in space, critical approaches to IHL, and issues of Law and Ethics relevant to decision making in a time of armed conflict.            

Students are encouraged to attend each seminar. There will be no recording of seminars.

5.1  Assessment Summary – Advocacy Stream

Assessment Task	Weighting	Due	Task Details (Group or Individual)	Redeemable (Yes/No)	Length	Learning Outcome
Memorial (Averaged)	30%	Ongoing	Group (Individual can opt out)	No	4 to 5 page submission excluding citations and bibliography	1-4
Quiz 1 (online)	5%	Friday of Week 3, 5.00pm	Individual	No	10 Questions	1,3
Quiz 2 (online)	5%	Thursday of Week 5, 5.00pm	Individual	No	10 Questions	1,3
Oral Moot Presentations (Averaged)	60%	Weeks 8 and 9	Individual	No	30 mins each	5,6

5.2  ASSESSMENT SUMMARY – GENERAL STREAM

Assessment Task	Weighting	Due	Task Details (Group or Individual)	Redeemable YES/NO	Length	Learning Outcome
Written Opinion/Judgment	30%	Beginning of Week 10, Monday 5,00pm	Individual	No	1500 words	1,2,3,4
Quiz 1 (online)	5%	Fridayof Week 3, 5.00pm	Individual	No	10 Questions	1,3
Quiz 2 (online)	5%	Thursday of Week 5, 5.00pm	Individual	No	10 Questions	1,3
Essay	60%	Friday of Week 12, 5.00pm	Individual	No	4000 words	1,2,3,4,5

The course is a common one for the first 6 weeks.  All students will undertake the same quiz assessment.  At the half way mark, students will split into a general research stream and an advocacy stream.

The General Research stream will attend one of the Moots that the advocacy stream is undertaking and will write a 1500 word judgment having regard to the arguments they hear in relation to the moot problem.  They will then undertake a more intensive anlaysis of an issue or issues that have arisen in this course to construct their research paper. This paper may take a practical or theoretical approach to a topic of IHL.

Advocacy students will undertake a series of moot trials and will be judged principally on their advocacy skills during the conduct of those moot trials. No team will have the same judge twice during the premilnary rounds.  The assessment will be broadly based on the scoring that will apply as if they were representing Adelaide Uni at the ALSA IHL moot competition (which the winning team will actually do).     Their final mark will also draw on the average of their written memorials submitted during the course of the moot trials.

 

All written work in the Law School is required to comply with the approved Law School style guide, The 最新糖心Vlogn Guide to Legal Citation (3rd ed).

Unless otherwise required by moot competition rules all written assignments must be printed single-sided on A4 size paper, double spaced and with a margin of at least 2.5cm. Assessment work that is not submitted in this form either may not be accepted or be required to be resubmitted in appropriate form.

Penalty for Late Submission
When an assessment is submitted after the due date, without an extension, 5% of the total mark possible will be deducted for every 24 hours or part thereof that it is late, including each day on a weekend and public holidays. For example, an essay that is submitted after the due date and time but within the first 24 hour period, and that has been graded at 63%, will have 5% deducted, for a final grade of 58%. An essay that is more than 24 hours late will lose 10%, etc.

Penalty for Exceeding Stipulated Word Length
5% of the total mark possible for a written assessment will be deducted for every 100 words (or part thereof) by which it exceeds a stipulated word limit. For example, a 3000 word essay graded at 63% will have 5% deducted if it is between 3001 and 3100 words long for a final mark of 58%. If the essay is between 3101 and 3200 words long, 10% will be deducted for a final mark of 53%, etc. Word limits include all words in the text, in headings, in quotations, but exclude citations in footnotes. Any separate cover page, table of contents, bibliography or list of sources is excluded from the word limit. If the word limit is misstated, this may be regarded as academic dishonesty.

Finality of Assessment Grades

Students are advised that Course Coordinators will not enter into negotiations of any kind with any student regarding changes to their grades. It is irrelevant, in any given circumstance, that only a minimal number of additional marks are required to inflate a student’s grade for any individual assessment item or course as a whole. Pursuant to the 最新糖心Vlog’s Assessment for Coursework Programs Policyand the Adelaide Law School Assessment Policies and Procedures, grades may only be varied through the appropriate channels for academic review (such as an official re-mark).

Moderation

In accordance with the 最新糖心Vlog’s Assessment for Coursework Programs Policy, course coordinators ‘ensure that appropriate marking guidelines and cross-marking moderation processes across markers are in place’ in each course. Procedures adopted by Adelaide Law School to ensure consistency of marking in courses with multiple markers include:

• assurance of the qualifications of markers, and their knowledge of the content covered in each course;
• detailed marking guidelines and assessment rubrics to assist in the marking of items of assessment;
• sharing of example marked assessments at various grade bands across markers;
• reviewing of selected marked assessments from each marker by the course coordinator;
• comparison of the marks and their distribution across markers;
• automatic double-marking of all interim assessment receiving a fail grade, and of final assessments where a student’s overall result is a fail grade;
• the availability of re-marking of assessments in accordance with Adelaide Law School’s Assessment Policies and Procedures.

Approval of Results by Board of Examiners

Students are reminded that all assessment results are subject to approval (and possible moderation/change) by the Law School’s Board of Examiners. Assessment results at the 最新糖心Vlog are not scaled. Under the Assessment for Coursework Programs Policy, students are assessed ‘by reference to their performance against pre-determined criteria and standards … and not by ranking against the performance of the student cohort in the course’. However, under that same policy, the Board of Examiners (as the relevant Assessment Review Committee for courses at Adelaide Law School) is required to ‘ensure comparability of standards and consistency’ in assessment. On occasions, the Board of Examiners will form the view that some moderation is required to ensure the comparability of standards and consistency across courses and years, and accordingly provide fairness to all law students. All assessment results are therefore subject to approval (and possible change) until confirmed by the Board of Examiners and posted on Access Adelaide at the end of each semester.

The provides academic learning and language development services and resources for local, international, undergraduate and postgraduate coursework students enrolled at the 最新糖心Vlog of Adelaide.

The centre offers practical advice and strategies for students to master reading, writing, note-taking, time management, oral presentation skills, referencing techniques and exam preparation for success at university through seminars, workshops and individual consultations.

Lex Salus Program

Lex Salus (law and wellbeing) is an initiative of the Adelaide Law School aimed at destigmatising mental health issues; promoting physical, mental and emotional wellness; building a strong community of staff and students; and celebrating diversity within the school. It also seeks to promote wellness within the legal profession, through the involvement of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of South 最新糖心Vlog, the Honourable Chris Kourakis, as the official Patron of the program.

Students can participate in the Lex Salus program by attending barbecue lunches, pancake breakfasts, knitting and crochet circles, seminars, guest speakers, conferences and other activities. Our , and regular all-student emails promote upcoming events, and have tips and information on wellness.

Our Lex Salus YouTube channel also includes videos on topics like managing stress, and interviews with LGBTQ lawyers and their supporters which celebrate diversity and individuality. Students who commit to 10 hours of volunteering with Lex Salus in one year can have their service recognised on their academic transcript and through a thank you morning tea with the Chief Justice and law school staff.

Student Life Counselling Support

The 最新糖心Vlog’s service provides free and confidential service to all enrolled students. We encourage you to contact the Student Life Counselling Support service on 8313 5663 to make an appointment to deal with any issues that may be affecting your study and life.

Academic Integrity

All students must be familiar with the 最新糖心Vlog’s Academic Integrity Policy. Academic Misconduct is a serious matter and is treated as such by the Law School and the 最新糖心Vlog. Academic Misconduct (which goes beyond plagiarism) can be a ground for a refusal by the Supreme Court of South 最新糖心Vlog to admit a person to practice as a legal practitioner in South 最新糖心Vlog. Academic Integrity is an essential aspect of ethical and honest behaviour, which is central to the practice of the law and an understanding of what it is to be a lawyer.