代做IDSA01H3、代写c/c++，Java编程
IDSA01H3 Y 2025
Introduction to International Development Studies
General Guidelines for Short Critical-Reflection Essay
Due date: June 17th.
Worth: 15% of the final grade
This assignment asks you to critically reflect on international/transnational/global development.
First, you must watch the Council on Foreign Relations’ video on Global Development again, with
a critical eye:
You will identify and critically analyze the main points raised in the video and connect
them with key course concepts drawing from the required reading material covered in class up
to June 11th. Reflecting on these issues will deepen your understanding of development and its
relation to historical and global events. Use your class notes and tutorial discussions for this
analysis too. We expect you to draw from all the relevant required readings from Modules One
and Two, with proper in-text citations and including the full references in the bibliography.
Your essay should emphasize critical thinking, demonstrating your ability to question
assumptions and engage with the complexities of development, both as a field and a set of
practices. You must explicitly and clearly demonstrate engagement with the content from the
video, the course discussions during class and tutorials, as well as with the assigned readings,
ensuring your arguments are cohesive and well-supported. Be sure to explore not only the
strengths of the perspectives presented but also their limitations and the broader implications
for international/transnational/global development practices.
Even though it is not mandatory, we advise everyone to guide your reflections by
considering or having in mind a specific country and/or region, which you might be interested in
exploring in more detail in the future, so that this exercise serves as the conceptual framework
for your Major Written Assignment (A Research Proposal due in early July).
Please, note that there is no mid-term test or exam, so that this short reflection essay
should be approached as the equivalent of an assessment of your understanding of the course
conceptual and historical content (Modules One and Two), which will also help you prepare for
the final exam. You will have eleven (11) full days to complete it (It will also help you in catching
up with all the readings, in case you have not completed them on a weekly basis).
Formatting and Submission:
Your paper must be typed, double-spaced, using a 12-point font, with 1-inch margins, and
numbered pages. Please adhere to the APA citation style for any references to specific course
materials or if you decide to draw from any external sources. The required length of the paper is
between 1,000 and 1,200 words (four to five double-spaced pages, excluding references). It must
include all basic information: such as course title, your full name and student number, date of
submission, name of your TA.
Save your document either as a PDF or a Word file. Submit your assignment on Quercus
(a special entry will be created for that purpose before the due date), ensuring that the file name
includes your first and last name (given name and family name).
To avoid any last-minute technical issues, please do no submit your assignment just a few
minutes before the deadline. Keep the different versions of your paper and a record of your
revisions; however, only the definitive version must be submitted for grading.
Please, be aware that we will be using Turnitin for text/content similarity checks. If
you object to its use, you must let us know in advance and we will find an alternative
mechanism for that same purpose. No late assignments will be accepted – except for
extraordinary (documented) circumstances (See section on late submissions and appeals on the
course syllabus). Keep an electronic copy or a hard copy of the original until it has been graded.
Your reflection paper will be evaluated based on the following criteria:
? Ability to connect some of the video's propositions with the course material.
? Depth of understanding of the selected course concepts or themes.
? Clarity and coherence of reflections.
? Overall critical analysis and integration of relevant authors, ideas, themes, and sources.
? Thoughtful consideration of implications of development for human well-being.
All assignments will also be graded using this scale:
? A grade in the 90-100 range is reserved for outstanding work that reflects careful
reading of and reflection on the course material. It is a piece of work that closely follows
the specific guidelines, and that goes the extra mile in its analysis and reflections. Any
work within this grade range must be factually accurate, very well written and must
offer an original and persuasive argument.
? A grade in the 76-89 range is for very good work that reflects a sound understanding
of the course material, and specific guidelines. It is factually accurate, well-written, with
only a modest number of grammatical errors, and persuasively argued.
? A grade in the 65-75 range is for good work that reflects competent, if superficial,
reading of and reflection on the course material and specific guidelines, and/or is
readable (understandable) but lacks in clarity, or makes a weak argument.
? A grade in the 56-64 range is for work that reflects a minimal effort put into the
reading of course material and/or in the writing of the assignment itself.
? A grade of 55 or less is for work that fails completely to meet any of the above criteria
or is egregiously late.
Important notes on so-called Artificial “Intelligence,” tools
We are fully aware and critical of the widely spread use and abuse of Digitalized Data Processors
(DDPs or Digital Language Processors/Digitalized Information Processors) (e.g. ChatGPT,
DeepSeek, Google Gemini, Claude, etc.), which from a critical perspective are wrongly referred
to as Artificial “Intelligence;” we will be discussing some of these issues and challenges at the
end of the course. Thus, the following are just some key facts we want you to keep in mind about
DDPs:
1. All DDPs tend to draw from a large set of content materials to answer questions
and prompts without the proper credit (i.e., not all sources are properly cited).
2. Sometimes the content or information given by DDPs is either incorrect or
clearly biased, responding to and limited by the inputs they have been fed.?
3. DDPs have their own specific limitations and can only be specific to a certain
extent or context.
4. Our lived experiences and views, as human beings, cannot be mimicked by
any DDP, and that they are irreplaceable when it comes to this course’s
expectations and the work you produce (as individuals with concrete and
unique backgrounds).
5. When writing an academic text, it is important to develop your own skills and
find your own individual and unique “written voice.” As instructors and
teaching assistants, we can identify discrepancies between the author and
their submitted work.
If you still intend to use and draw from any of the DDPs available to you, you must
cite the content you use and treat it as developed by a third party, e.g.:
1. Reference list: OpenAI. (2023). ChatGPT (version) [Large language
model]
2. In text citation: (OpenAI, 2023).
3. Failure to do so will be treated as plagiarism.
Plagiarism is a serious academic offence with a severe penalty. For further
clarification and information, make sure you read the University of Toronto’s
policy on plagiarism at: