Feminist Philosophy (PHIL2190)

Course overview

This course sets out to critically analyse the relations between feminism and the tradition of Western philosophy and situate feminist thought from the 'second wave' onward as both a form and critique of philosophical inquiry. This involves critical engagement with concepts such as reason, desire, sexuality, identity, Self and Other, language and expression, normative 'masculinity' and 'femininity', and the category of 'woman' itself. This course interrogates the situation of patriarchal oppression from a feminist-philosophical standpoint but also critically examines Western feminist thought itself from Black, South-East Asian, Australian and American First Nations', and Queer perspectives to develop a broadly intersectional approach to feminist philosophy. In taking up this trajectory, this course explores questions like: How have women been historically excluded from philosophy? How has early feminist thought developed in a Western context - and how has this tradition been critiqued by Black and Postcolonial feminists? What does it mean to say that woman is 'Other' in patriarchal culture? How are femininity and maternity repressed and devalued in patriarchal culture? How do we 'become' gendered? And what kind of critical relationship should an intersectional feminism adopt in relation to gender categories?

The questions and concerns of feminist philosophy are approached through engagement with the work of various feminist activists, writers, and theorists including: Michèle Le Dœuff, Susan Brownmiller, Simone de Beauvoir, Shulamith Firestone, Andrea Dworkin, Angela Y. Davis, bell hooks, Jackie Huggins, Audre Lorde, Julia Kristeva, Kate Manne, Margrit Shildrik, Fadwa Tuqan, Luce Irigaray, Irene Watson, Hélène Cixous, Nawal el Saadaw, Gloria Anzaldúa, Trinh Minh-ha, Monique Wittig, María Lugones, Sara Ahmed, Judith Butler, Emi Koyama, and Sandy Stone.

The course consists of three interconnected sections that trace the historical and contemporary developments of feminist philosophies and through politics, writing, psychoanalysis, sexuality, race, colonialism, and identity.

Part One situates the historical relationship between feminism and philosophy, outlines the development feminist thought in American and European contexts, and establishes some prominent critiques of second wave Western white feminisms from women of colour and Indigenous women.

Part Two focuses on the work of French feminists, Julia Kristeva and Luce Irigaray, to explore their analyses of phallocentrism, the abject, and the maternal. These ideas develop into broader critiques of psychoanalysis and philosophy as patriarchal discourses, and are also brought into conversation with concerns of race, disability, fatphobia, and colonialism.

Part Three returns to the intersectional concerns raised in Part One to develop a ‘talking back’ to white, hetero-normative Western feminism. Black and postcolonial thought is further explored in this section to examine the ways race and coloniality are necessary considerations in developing a feminist philosophy and praxis. This section also engages with queer theory to critically consider how hetero- and cis-normativity play out in both patriarchal culture and some Western feminist accounts.

The course aims to present alternative philosophical modes of expression through feminist thought; explore constructions of subjectivity in patriarchal, white, and heterosexual Western culture; and pose philosophical questions concerning contemporary, everyday gender experiences in a variety of contexts.

Course requirements

Assumed background

Background in the field is not assumed.

Incompatible

You can't enrol in this course if you've already completed the following:

PHIL7219

Course contact

Course staff

Timetable

The timetable for this course is available on the UQ Public Timetable.

Additional timetable information

An overview of the course schedule is available on Blackboard.

Aims and outcomes

This course aims to introduce students to a philosophical exploration of contemporary French Feminist philosophy. In addition, it provides students with research expertise, critical skills, and abilities in verbal and written communication.

Learning outcomes

After successfully completing this course you should be able to:

Assessment

Assessment summary

Assessment details

Weekly Tutorial Participation

• Identity Verified
• In-person

Mode

Activity/ Performance

Category

Participation/ Student contribution

Weight

10%

Due date

4/08/2025 - 15/09/2025

6/10/2025 - 20/10/2025

Learning outcomes

L01, L02, L04, L07, L08

Task description

Submission guidelines

Deferral or extension

You cannot defer or apply for an extension for this assessment.

Please contact the course coordinator and relevant tutor if you are unable to attend a tutorial.

WE CALL YOU! Sisters! Mothers! Workers! (UQ Art Museum) - Critical Reflection

• Identity Verified
• In-person

Mode

Written

Category

Notebook/ Logbook, Reflection

Weight

20% 800 words

Due date

8/09/2025 2:00 pm

Learning outcomes

L01, L02, L03, L04, L05, L06

Task description

Submission guidelines

Students must submit both their 'field notes' worksheet (produced in-person during the Week 5 trip to the Art Museum) and their written reflection piece. Critical reflections submitted without 'field notes' will be considered incomplete assessment.

Deferral or extension

You may be able to apply for an extension.

Apply for extensions through my.UQ. Please contact the course coordinator and/or the School office if assistance is required.

Late submission

A penalty of 10% of the maximum possible mark will be deducted per 24 hours from time submission is due for up to 7 days. After 7 days, you will receive a mark of 0.

Research Essay

Mode

Written

Category

Essay/ Critique

Weight

40% 2200 words

Due date

13/10/2025 2:00 pm

Learning outcomes

L01, L02, L03, L04, L05, L06

Task description

Submission guidelines

The essay must be submitted electronically via Turnitin on Blackboard by 2:00 PM on the due date.

Deferral or extension

You may be able to apply for an extension.

Apply for extensions through my.UQ. Please contact the course coordinator and/or the School office if assistance is required.

Late submission

A penalty of 10% of the maximum possible mark will be deducted per 24 hours from time submission is due for up to 7 days. After 7 days, you will receive a mark of 0.

Feminism in Practice (Conversation Piece)

Mode

Written

Category

Essay/ Critique, Project

Weight

30% 1000 words

Due date

17/11/2025 2:00 pm

Learning outcomes

L01, L02, L03, L04, L05, L06

Task description

Submission guidelines

The op-ed must be submitted electronically via Turnitin on Blackboard by 2:00 PM on the due date.

Deferral or extension

You may be able to apply for an extension.

Late submission

A penalty of 10% of the maximum possible mark will be deducted per 24 hours from time submission is due for up to 7 days. After 7 days, you will receive a mark of 0.

Course grading

Full criteria for each grade is available in the Assessment Procedure.

Additional course grading information

Tutorial Participation Assessment Criteria

Your tutorial participation will be assessed according to the following criteria: 

1.     Evidence of participation in discussions.

2.     Evidence of preparation for the tutorial, most notably through completing the set readings.

3.     Quality of contributions to discussions.

4.     Fostering of group discussions, through courteous and respectful interactions with staff and     students.

5.     Attendance is necessary to fulfill the above criteria, as per the course requirements, but marks cannot be awarded for attendance alone.

To achieve a grade of 7 (High Distinction, 85-100%), your attendance will be flawless and your participation exceptional. This grade reflects exceptional levels of preparation, mastery of course materials, and very high quality contributions to, and fostering of, group discussions. You should be able to engage with your peers very effectively.

To achieve a grade of 6 (Distinction, 75-84) your attendance will be excellent and your participation very substantial. This grade reflects excellent levels of preparation, knowledge of course materials, and high quality contributions to, and fostering of, group discussions. You should be able to engage with your peers effectively.

To achieve a grade of 5 (Credit, 65 – 74%), your attendance and participation will be good. This grade reflects proficient levels of preparation, good knowledge of course materials, and good quality contributions to, and fostering of, group discussions.

To achieve a grade of 4 (Pass, 50 – 64%) your attendance and participation will be satisfactory. This grade reflects adequate levels of preparation and knowledge of course materials, and an acceptable quality of contributions to, and fostering of, group discussions.

To achieve a grade of 3 (Marginal Fail, 45 – 49%) your attendance and participation will be unsatisfactory. This grade reflects irregular attendance and/or participation and superficial knowledge of course materials and basic levels of preparation. However, when in attendance, there is evidence of your ability to demonstrate developing achievement in contributions to, and fostering of, group discussions.

To achieve a grade of 2 (Fail, 25-44%), your attendance and participation will be very unsatisfactory. This grade reflects irregular attendance and/or participation, minimal knowledge of course materials, little evidence of preparation, and mixed to low quality of contributions to, and fostering of, group discussions.

To achieve a grade of 1 (Low Fail, 0-24%), your attendance and participation will be unsatisfactory. This grade reflects irregular attendance and/or participation, an no evidence of preparation, and little or no evidence of quality of contributions to, and fostering of, group discussions.

WE CALL YOU! Sisters! Mothers! Workers! (UQ Art Museum) - Critical Reflection Assessment Criteria

Your critical review and reflection will be assessed according to the following criteria:  

1.        Evidence of comprehension of the work or works under review.

2.        Contextualization of the works, locating them in the relevant field(s) of literature.

3.        Critique of the work or works.

4.        Insight and creativity.

5.        Clear and concise written expression, well presented.

To achieve a grade of 7 (High Distinction, 85-100%), your critical review of and reflection on readings should demonstrate exceptional comprehension of the works under review; it should locate them precisely and comprehensively in the relevant field or fields of literature; it should be highly persuasive and clear in its critique and should demonstrate exceptional levels of insight and creativity. Your writing will be very clear and concise, pay strict attention to discipline conventions and have minimal, if any errors in referencing, expression, grammar, spelling and punctuation.

To achieve a grade of  6 (Distinction, 75-84%), your critical review of and reflection on readings should demonstrate an advanced comprehension of the works under review; it should locate them perceptively and comprehensively in the relevant field or fields of literature; it should be very persuasive and clear in its critique, and should demonstrate advanced levels of insight and creativity. Your writing will be clear and concise, pay strict attention to discipline conventions and have minimal, if any errors in referencing, expression, grammar, spelling and punctuation.

To achieve a grade of 5 (Credit, 65 – 74%), your critical review of and reflection on readings should demonstrate a proficient comprehension of the works under review; it should locate them broadly in the relevant field or fields of literature; it should be effective and clear in its critique, and should demonstrate proficient levels of insight and creativity. The presentation and referencing of your review will follow/largely follow discipline conventions, have few/some errors in grammar, spelling and punctuation, and demonstrate your ability to communicate effectively.

To achieve a grade of 4 (Pass, 50 – 64%), your critical review of and reflection on readings should demonstrate a functional comprehension of the works under review; it should at least be able to identify them broadly in the relevant field or fields of literature; it should offer a coherent critique, and should demonstrate basic levels of insight and creativity. Your organisation, writing, referencing, spelling and grammar will be adequate and use some of the discipline conventions to communicate appropriately.

To achieve a grade of 3 (Marginal Fail, 45 – 49%), your critical review of and reflection on readings should demonstrate developing levels of achievement and a very basic level of research, but it falls short of meeting all the requirements for a passing grade. It should attempt to demonstrate a basic comprehension of the works under review; attempt to identify them broadly in the relevant field or fields of literature and attempt to offer a coherent critique. Your organisation, writing, spelling and grammar will be adequate/poor and your referencing and use of discipline conventions poor/and or inconsistent.

To achieve a grade of 2 (Fail, 25-44%), your critical review of and reflection on readings will reflect inadequate comprehension of the works under review; a minimal if any attempt to identify them broadly in the relevant field or fields of literature; an inability to offer a coherent critique or identify insights. Your organisation and writing will be poor and/or inappropriate and referencing and use of discipline conventions poor/and or inconsistent.

To achieve a grade of 1 (Low Fail, 0-24%), your critical review of and reflection on readings will not show evidence of understanding and comprehension of the works under review. It will fail to demonstrate a satisfactory understanding of the work’s relation to surrounding literature and will not provide a coherent critique or insight and creativity. Your organisation and writing will be poor and/or inappropriate and referencing and use of discipline conventions poor/and or inconsistent.

Failing Criteria and Academic Misconduct

Fabrication or misrepresentation of sources will result in an automatic maximum grade of 2 for this assessment, regardless of performance in other criteria. This includes but is not limited to: citing non-existent sources or attributing false quotes to real sources. Such issues demonstrate failure to meet the core learning outcomes for the course and may also be referred for academic misconduct.

Research Essay - Essay Assessment Criteria (Philosophy)

Your essay will be assessed according to the following criteria: 

1.  Ability to define the topic or philosophical issue under debate. (Topic definition.)

2.  Ability to construct a well-reasoned argument for a certain point of view. (Argument and Structure.)

3.  Depth and breadth of understanding of the various positions in a philosophical debate. (Scope and Depth of Treatment)

4.  Insight and/or originality in interpreting texts or constructing a point of view or argument. (Originality)

5.  Capacity to produce a polished, well-written and appropriately referenced essay. (Presentation)

To achieve a grade of 7 (High Distinction, 85-100%), your essay should reflect an exceptional level of achievement. It should demonstrate that you have undertaken extensive, high-level research, that you are able to form a very rigorous, sustained (multi-layered) and well-organised argument, and that your discussion is original and creative. It should also demonstrate that you are able to evaluate and organise data and/or evidence in a critical manner and that you have a sophisticated and insightful understanding of problems and issues. Your essay will be very well written, clear and concise, pay strict attention to discipline conventions and have minimal, if any errors in referencing and expression: This grade is assigned for a total (sum of all the assessment components) in the range 85-100%. See assessment components for specific grading criteria.

To achieve a grade of 6 (Distinction, 75-84%), your essay should reflect an advanced level of achievement. It should demonstrate that you have undertaken wide research, that you are able to form a rigorous, sustained (multi-layered) and well-organised argument, and that your discussion is coherent and convincing. It should also demonstrate that you are able to evaluate data and/or evidence in a perceptive manner, and that your understanding of problems and issues is perceptive and insightful. Your essay will be well written, clear and concise, follow discipline conventions and have few errors in referencing and expression: This grade is assigned for a total (sum of all the assessment components) in the range 75-84%. See assessment components for specific grading criteria.

To achieve a grade of 5 (Credit, 65 – 74%) your essay should reflect a proficient level of achievement. It should demonstrate that you have undertaken the expected level of research, that you are able to develop or adapt convincing, sustained (multi-layered) arguments and justify them adequately, that you are able to evaluate data and/or evidence in a proficient manner, and that you have a good understanding of problems and issues. The presentation and referencing of your essay will largely follow discipline conventions, perhaps have some errors in referencing and expression, and demonstrate your ability to communicate effectively: This grade is assigned for a total (sum of all the assessment components) in the range 65-74%. See assessment components for specific grading criteria.

To achieve a grade of 4 (Pass, 50 – 64%) your essay should reflect functional achievement. It should demonstrate that you are able to apply, in a non-stereotypical way, fundamental concepts and skills, that you have undertaken a basic level of research and have the basic ability to evaluate data and/or evidence, to identify problems and issues, to offer insights and to develop routine arguments. Your organisation, writing and referencing will be adequate, not stereotypical, and use some of the discipline conventions to communicate appropriately: This grade is assigned for a total (sum of all the assessment components) in the range 50-64%. See assessment components for specific grading criteria.

To achieve a grade of 3 (Marginal Fail, 45 – 49%), your essay should reflect developing levels of achievement. It should demonstrate that you have a superficial knowledge of fundamental concepts and skills, that you have undertaken a basic level of research, made some attempt to evaluate data and/or evidence, to identify problems and issues, and to offer insights. Your arguments, while underdeveloped, show your emerging ability to apply knowledge and skills. Your organisation and writing will be adequate, perhaps poor, and your referencing and use of discipline conventions poor/and or inconsistent. Alternatively, your essay may, in part, be well written and suggest engagement and achievement but will (a) mostly exhibit stereotypical and superficial understanding and (b) mostly fail to develop a sustained (multi-layered) argument: This grade is assigned for a total (sum of all the assessment components) in the range 45-49%. See assessment components for specific grading criteria.

To achieve a grade of 2 (Fail, 25-44%) your essay will reflect deficiencies in skill acquisition and in your understanding of the fundamental concepts of the course. It will demonstrate that you have not undertaken adequate research, that you are unable to evaluate data and/or evidence, to identify problems and issues, or to offer insights adequately. Your arguments will be unsupported and/or inappropriate, your organisation and writing will be poor and/or inappropriate and referencing and use of discipline conventions poor/and or inconsistent. Alternatively, your essay may suggest developing or higher achievement but will (a) exhibit stereotypical and superficial understanding and (b) fail to develop a sustained (multi-layered) argument: This grade is assigned for a total (sum of all the assessment components) in the range 25-44%. See assessment components for specific grading criteria.

To achieve a grade of 1 (Low Fail, 0-24%), your essay will reflect minimal evidence of achievement, and exhibit deficiencies in skill acquisition and in your understanding of the fundamental concepts of the course. It will demonstrate that you have not undertaken adequate research, that you are unable to evaluate data and/or evidence, to identify problems and issues, and/or to offer insights adequately. Your arguments will be unsupported and/or inappropriate, your organisation and writing will be poor and/or inappropriate, and referencing and use of discipline conventions poor/and or inconsistent: This grade is assigned for a total (sum of all the assessment components) in the range 1-24%. See assessment components for specific grading criteria.

Grade X: No assessable work received. 

Failing Criteria and Academic Misconduct

Fabrication or misrepresentation of sources will result in an automatic maximum grade of 2 for this assessment, regardless of performance in other criteria. This includes but is not limited to: citing non-existent sources or attributing false quotes to real sources. Such issues demonstrate failure to meet the core learning outcomes for the course and may also be referred for academic misconduct.

Feminism in Practice (Conversation Piece) - Op-Ed Assessment Criteria

Your op-ed will be assessed according to the following criteria:

1.     Ability to construct a well-defined, well-reasoned, and persuasive argument.

2.     Depth and breadth of knowledge and understanding of central issues.

3.     Critical engagement with academic sources and evidence.

4.     Clear and concise written expression, ability to communicate an argument effectively and in the form of an opinion piece, well presented.

5.     Provision of a bibliography using discipline conventions.

To achieve a grade of 7 (High Distinction, 85–100%), your op-ed will demonstrate that you have an exceptional and nuanced knowledge and understanding of the subject in question. Your argument will be clearly defined, sophisticated, and highly persuasive, demonstrating an exceptional level of critical engagement with primary and secondary source materials. Your writing will be very clear and concise and there will be minimal, if any, errors of referencing, expression, grammar, spelling, and punctuation. Your writing style and tone will be highly appropriate for an opinion piece. Your work must demonstrate your own analysis, argumentation, and use of evidence through thoroughly verified sources. You must demonstrate close engagement with sources in their disciplinary context.

To achieve a grade of 6 (Distinction, 75–84%), your op-ed will demonstrate that you have an advanced knowledge and understanding of the subject in question. Your argument will be clearly defined and persuasive, demonstrating an advanced level of critical engagement with primary and secondary source materials. Your writing will be clear and concise and have few errors of referencing, expression, grammar, spelling, and punctuation. Your writing style and tone will be appropriate for an op-ed piece. Your work must demonstrate your own analysis, argumentation, and use of evidence through thoroughly verified sources. You must demonstrate close engagement with sources in their disciplinary context.

To achieve a grade of 5 (Credit, 65–74%), your op-ed will demonstrate that you have a proficient knowledge and understanding of the subject in question. Your argument should be largely well-defined, demonstrating some critical engagement with primary and secondary source materials. Your writing will be largely clear and concise with few/some errors of referencing, expression, grammar, spelling, and punctuation. Your writing style and tone will be largely appropriate for an op-ed piece. Your work must demonstrate your own analysis, argumentation, and use of evidence through verified sources. You must demonstrate engagement with sources in their disciplinary context.

To achieve a grade of 4 (Pass, 50–64%), your op-ed will demonstrate that you have a functional knowledge and understanding of the subject in question. Your argument will be reasonably well-defined, demonstrating a basic level of engagement with primary and secondary source materials. Your writing will be adequate with some errors of referencing, expression, grammar, spelling, and punctuation. Your writing style and tone will be adequate for an op-ed piece. Your work must demonstrate your own analysis, argumentation, and use of evidence through verified sources. You must demonstrate engagement with sources in their disciplinary context.

To achieve a grade of 3 (Marginal Fail, 45–49%), your op-ed will reflect a developing knowledge and understanding of the subject in question. Your argument, while underdeveloped, will have some definition, and demonstrate a superficial level of engagement with primary and secondary source materials. Your writing will be adequate, perhaps poor, with several errors of referencing, expression, grammar, spelling, and punctuation. Your writing style and tone will be poor and/or inappropriate for an op-ed piece. Your work will fail to adequately demonstrate independent analysis and argumentation that arises from your own engagement with and synthesis of source materials or assessment stimuli. You will demonstrate a mostly stereotypical and/or superficial understanding of concepts, ideas, and source materials/stimuli, failing to demonstrate engagement with sources in their disciplinary context. The overall response will not adequately address the task.

To achieve a grade of 2 (Fail, 25-44%), your op-ed will reflect an inadequate knowledge and understanding of concepts fundamental to the subject in question. Your argument will be unsupported and/or inappropriate and lacking in coherency. It will demonstrate that you have not undertaken adequate research, that you are unable to evaluate evidence, to identify problems and issues, or to offer insights adequately. You writing will be poor with frequent errors of referencing, expression, grammar, spelling, and punctuation. Your writing style and tone will be inappropriate for an op-ed piece. Your work will fail to adequately demonstrate independent analysis and argumentation that arises from your own engagement with and synthesis of source materials or assessment stimuli. You will demonstrate a mostly stereotypical and/or superficial understanding of concepts, ideas, and source materials/stimuli, failing to demonstrate engagement with sources in their disciplinary context. The overall response will not adequately address the task and will have overt inconsistencies and contradictions.

To achieve a grade of 1 (Low Fail, 0–24%), your op-ed will reflect that you have failed to meet the minimum learning requirements and skill acquisition for this course. Your op-ed will demonstrate an absence of research, evaluation of evidence, and lack of argumentation. Written expression and style will be poor or inappropriate. Your work will show no original analysis or evidence of independent thought, with factual errors and misrepresentation of source material and no meaningful correspondence to the assignment prompt.

Failing Criteria and Academic Misconduct

Fabrication or misrepresentation of sources will result in an automatic maximum grade of 2 for this assessment, regardless of performance in other criteria. This includes but is not limited to: citing non-existent sources or attributing false quotes to real sources. Such issues demonstrate failure to meet the core learning outcomes for the course and may also be referred for academic misconduct.

Supplementary assessment

Supplementary assessment is available for this course.

Additional assessment information

Failure to submit all major assessment items (those worth 15% and above) will result in a maximum grade of 2 (Fail).

• By submitting work through Turnitin you are deemed to have accepted the following declaration: ‘I certify that this assignment is my own work and has not been submitted, either previously or concurrently, in whole or in part, to this University or any other educational institution, for marking or assessment’.
• All students must ensure that they receive their Turnitin receipt on every submission of assessment items. YOU MUST CHECK THAT THE RECEIPT CONFIRMS THAT SUBMISSION HAS BEEN SUCCESSFUL.
• A valid Turnitin receipt will be the only evidence accepted if assessments are missing.

Without evidence, the assessment will receive the standard late penalty, or after 7 calendar days, will receive zero. In the case of a Blackboard outage, please contact the Course Coordinator as soon as possible so that they can confirm the outage with ITS.

• It is the responsibility of the student to ensure that they are submitting assessment items on a device that is capable of the task, and that appropriate internet bandwidth and speed is available. If you cannot be sure that your device or internet will enable you to complete or submit an assessment task, you must come onto campus and use one of the University Computers in the Library or Computer Labs.
• Plagiarism, and asking or paying someone else to do your work is cheating and constitutes academic misconduct. See ECP Section 6.1
• Feedback against the assessment criteria in the form of comments on your script will be provided through Turnitin or on your script directly.
• For information on assessment remarks see: https://my.uq.edu.au/information-and-services/manage-my-program/exams-and-assessment/querying-resultﾠ ﾠ

HINTS for AVOIDING UNINTENTIONAL PLAGIARISM:

Remember that it is essential to acknowledge all your sources. Use quotation marks for any wording which is not your own. If you do paraphrase someone else’s ideas (including lecture material) you need to acknowledge the source. Try to summarize ideas and arguments in your own words – don’t just rearrange words. Check that you have correctly paraphrased the original ideas. Check your summary against the original text.

ﾠ

Supplementary Assessment

Supplementary assessment is an additional opportunity to demonstrate that the learning requirements for an eligible course have been satisfied and that the graduate attributes for the course have been attained.

Supplementary assessment may only be granted where PPL 3.10.09 Supplementary Assessment – procedures allow. A grade of 4 (or P) is the highest grade that can be awarded in a course where supplementary assessment has been granted. For further information on supplementary assessment please see my.UQ https://my.uq.edu.au/

If you receive a grade of 3 for this course, you may be eligible for supplementary assessment depending on the reason that you have failed.

If there is no practical assessment that can be offered to allow you to meet the minimum passing requirements then you will not be offered a supplementary. These circumstances may include failure based on: team-based assessment pieces; your peer assessment factor, or attendance or class participation requirements.

If the course coordinator determines that there is no practical supplementary assessment that can be offered to allow you to improve your grade, then you will not be offered supplementary assessment and your grade will remain unchanged.

Learning resources

You'll need the following resources to successfully complete the course. We've indicated below if you need a personal copy of the reading materials or your own item.

Library resources

Library resources are available on the UQ Library website.

Additional learning resources information

UQ Library ﾠPhilosophy Subject Guide

UQ Library ﾠ"How To"ﾠ Guides

Learning activities

The learning activities for this course are outlined below. Learn more about the learning outcomes that apply to this course.

Policies and procedures

University policies and procedures apply to all aspects of student life. As a UQ student, you must comply with University-wide and program-specific requirements, including the:

• Student Code of Conduct Policy
• Student Integrity and Misconduct Policy and Procedure
• Assessment Procedure
• Examinations Procedure
• Reasonable Adjustments for Students Policy and Procedure

Learn more about UQ policies on my.UQ and the Policy and Procedure Library.