Justice and international affairs

The exam structure is different for 1. attendant and 2. non-attendant students.

1. Attendant students
Attendant students are expected, not just to attend classes, but also to actively participate in the discussions of the topics and texts under investigation. Students' participation is evaluated by taking into account students' contribution to class discussion. In this manner, students are encouraged to develop and exercise their argumentative capacities and to actively analyse and discuss the arguments relevant for the topics under consideration, providing reasons and justifications for their claims and evaluations.

Students are also evaluated on the basis of their presentations. Students are required to summarize and discuss the central arguments advanced within texts that are selected in advanced by the responsible. In this way, students are encouraged to advance and expand not only their communicative and organizational skills, but also their capacities to understand, evaluate and critically examine the validity of philosophical and normative arguments in an autonomous and independent manner.

Finally, students are required to deliver a paper (3.000 words) on one of the topics discussed during the course and in agreement with the responsible of the course. Papers should represent a piece of independent research, be it a positive argument of one's own, or a critical argument meant to challenge the position of an author discussed during the course. Papers should provide clear and coherent claims apt to defend a position, through the evaluation of its problems and merits.

Final grades will be awarded by weighting participation, presentation and final paper as follow:
· 25% Participation
· 35% Presentations
· 40% Final paper

Criteria of assessment:
First Class (27-30 cum laude)
Participation: The student consistently contributes with insightful, well-articulated points that reflect a deep understanding of the readings and issues discussed. Contributions are analytically rigorous, well-supported with reasons, and often help advance or clarify class discussions.

Presentation: The presentation is clearly structured, focused, and demonstrates an excellent grasp of the text and its arguments. The student not only explains the author's position accurately but also offers thoughtful critical reflections, showing an ability to assess arguments independently. The presentation is engaging and shows strong communicative and organizational skills.
Final Paper: The paper addresses a clearly defined research question or problem, shows originality of thought, and is structured around a coherent argumentative line. The student engages critically and autonomously with the relevant literature, offering well-developed, well-supported arguments. Writing is clear, precise, and stylistically mature.

Upper Second Class (25-26)
Participation: The student participates regularly with relevant and coherent contributions that show a solid understanding of the material. There is some engagement with argumentation and independent thought, though not consistently at an advanced level.
Presentation: The presentation covers the main points of the text accurately and clearly. Some effort is made to evaluate arguments and engage critically with the material. The structure is generally clear and delivery is competent, if occasionally lacking in depth or originality.
Final Paper: The paper is well-organized and demonstrates a clear understanding of the topic. The student engages with the relevant literature and presents a solid argument. There is some degree of critical analysis, though the argumentation may lack depth or sophistication in places.

Lower Second Class (22-24)
Participation: The student participates occasionally and shows a basic understanding of the material. Contributions are generally accurate but may lack depth, clarity, or a critical dimension. Engagement tends to be more reactive than proactive.
Presentation: The presentation conveys the main ideas of the assigned text but lacks analytical depth. The structure may be unclear at times, and critical reflection is limited. The student demonstrates some understanding, but argumentation is underdeveloped.
Final Paper: The paper meets the basic requirements of the assignment and shows a fair grasp of the topic. The structure is present but may be inconsistent or unclear in places. Critical engagement is minimal, and arguments may be vague or insufficiently supported by reasons or references.

Third Class (18-21)
Participation: Participation is minimal and reflects only a basic or superficial understanding of the course material. Comments may be unclear, off-topic, or merely paraphrase class discussions without further contribution.
Presentation: The presentation is poorly structured or lacks coherence. The student struggles to convey the main arguments of the text or does so inaccurately. Little to no critical engagement is present, and communication may be unclear or hesitant.
Final Paper: The paper shows some effort, but understanding of the topic is limited. Arguments are often unclear or unsupported. The use of literature is minimal or incorrect. The paper may lack structure and demonstrate significant difficulties in critical reasoning and argumentative writing.

Fail (0-17)
Participation: No meaningful participation.
Presentation: The presentation is missing or so incomplete that it fails to demonstrate any meaningful understanding of the assigned text. Major misunderstandings are evident, and there is no critical engagement.
Final Paper: The paper fails to address the topic adequately. It shows no understanding of key concepts or texts, lacks argumentation, and contains serious factual or interpretative errors. It may be incoherent, poorly written, or incomplete.

2. Non-attendant students
Non-attendant students are required to take a written exam constituted by two parts. In the first part, students are asked to answer five open questions regarding the major problems and basic notions of just war theory. This part of the written exam is meant to ascertain the acquisition of appropriate knowledge and understanding of the topics addressed in the general readings assigned.

In the second part of the written test, students are required to answer one essay question of their choice, among a group. This part of the test is concerned with the specific readings suggested. Indeed, students need to choose one topic of their interest among "jus ad bellum"; "humanitarian intervention"; "combatants and non-combatants"; "remote warfare"; "just post bellum"; "pacifism" in order to write one short essay apt to demonstrate their capacity to tackle and discuss controversial topics concerning the debates about the ethics of war, by assessing and evaluating different and competing arguments.
Important: If a student fails three or more answers in Part 1, the essay in Part 2 will not be evaluated, and the overall exam will be considered a fail.

Criteria of assessment:
First Class (27-30 cum laude)
Part 1
Responses show a clear, precise, and thorough understanding of the key problems and basic notions of the debates covered by the course. Answers demonstrate knowledge, conceptual clarity, and the ability to explain relationships between ideas. Terminology is used accurately, and responses are well-structured, accurate, and appropriate.
Part 2
The essay is clearly structured, conceptually sophisticated, and critically engaged. The student accurately reconstructs relevant arguments from the readings and engages in a thoughtful and well-supported assessment of competing views. The writing reflects independence of thought, logical clarity, and an ability to evaluate complex ethical questions. The essay goes beyond description to offer critical insights and cogent reasoning, supported by relevant sources.

Upper Second Class (25-26)
Part 1
Answers are mostly accurate and show a good understanding of the major concepts and problems. Responses are clear and organized, with relevant use of terminology. There may be some inaccuracies or slight gaps in explanation, but overall, the student shows solid knowledge and understanding.
Part 2
The essay is well-structured and demonstrates a good grasp of the topic. Relevant positions are explained clearly and compared appropriately. There is some level of critical engagement and independent reasoning, though it may lack depth or originality. Arguments are generally well-supported, with correct references to the readings.

Lower Second Class (22-24)
Part 1
Answers show a basic but uneven understanding of the key ideas. Essential concepts are mentioned but may be presented with vagueness, limited clarity, or occasional confusion. Use of terminology may be inconsistent. Some responses may lack completeness or depth.
Part 2
The essay addresses the question but remains largely descriptive. The student identifies relevant arguments or positions but struggles to evaluate them critically. The structure may be uneven, and the argument underdeveloped. There may be limited engagement with the readings or insufficient support for claims.

Third Class (18-21)
Part 1
Answers indicate limited familiarity with core ideas and concepts. There may be several inaccuracies, unclear formulations, or failure to fully address the question. Some key terms may be misused or left undefined.
Part 2
The essay shows little critical engagement and lacks clear structure. Arguments are vague or poorly supported. There may be misunderstanding of key positions or significant errors. The writing may be disorganized and show minimal engagement with the readings.

Fail (0-17)
Part 1
Answers are missing, incorrect, or show serious misunderstandings. The student demonstrates little to no knowledge of the material. Responses may be confused, off-topic, or incoherent.
Part 2
The essay is either missing or fails to address the question. It may contain substantial factual or conceptual errors and show no critical engagement. The argument is incoherent or entirely absent. Use of readings is minimal, incorrect, or nonexistent.