ASSESSMENT BRIEF
Subject Code and Title STAT6001: Public Health Informatics
Assessment Assessment 4: Report - Future of Public Health Informatics
Individual/Group Individual
Length 500 words
Learning Outcomes This assessment addresses the following learning outcome:
8. Assess the role of healthcare information and communication technology (ICT) firms
Submission Due Sunday following the end of Module 6 at 11:55pm AEST/AEDT*
Weighting 10%
Total Marks 100 marks
*Please Note: This time is Sydney time (AEST or AEDT). Please convert to your own time zone (eg. Adelaide = 11:25pm).
STAT6001_Assessment Brief 4 Page 1 of 6
Instructions:
Increasingly, the development of ICTs and continued failures in health ICT initiatives are leading to outsourcing of information provision to commercial companies. This also leads to big data being shared with these organisations outside of the Australian boundaries.
Consider Healthdirect: Australia (2015), located in Week 2’s Learning Resources. Evaluate its role in Australia in terms of population health. What are the implications of this provider (and potential commercial providers online) in terms of public health management within Australia? Evaluate this organisation with a focus on public health information provision, and make suggestions for best strategies for Australia to follow in the future. Support your evaluation with rationale.
Assignment Criteria:
Submit a 500-word report that:
• Assesses the role of Healthdirect and similar organisations and demonstrates an understanding of the issues surrounding the use of Healthdirect in Australia. (25%)
• Critiques the benefits and pitfalls in using Healthdirect from a public health perspective, taking into account the ethical issues discussed throughout the course. (25%)
• Analysis and application with synthesis of new knowledge. (30%)
• Uses academic conventions including appropriate resources and referencing
STAT6001_Assessment Brief 4 Page 2 of 6
Marking Rubric:
Assessment
Attributes
0-34
(Fail 2 – F2)
Unacceptable 35-49
(Fail 1 – F1)
Poor 50-64
(Pass -P)
Functional 65-74
(Credit - CR)
Proficient 75-84
(Distinction – DN)
Advanced 85-100
(High Distinction – HD)
Exceptional
Grade Description (Grading Scheme)
Evidence of unsatisfactory achievement of one or more of the learning objectives of the subject, insufficient understanding of the subject content and/or unsatisfactory level of skill development. Evidence of satisfactory achievement of subject learning objectives, the development of
relevant skills to a competent level, and adequate interpretation and critical analysis skills. Evidence of a good level of understanding, knowledge and skill development in relation to the content of the subject or work of a superior quality on the majority of the learning objectives of the subject. Demonstration of a high level of interpretation and critical analysis skills. Evidence of a high level of
achievement of the learning objectives of the subject demonstrated in such areas as interpretation and
critical analysis, logical argument, use of methodology and communication skills. Evidence of an exceptional level of achievement of learning objectives across the entire content of the course demonstrated in such areas as interpretation and critical analysis, logical argument, creativity, originality, use of methodology and communication skills.
Knowledge and understanding Assesses the role of Healthdirect and similar organisations
Demonstrates an understanding of the issues surrounding the use of
Healthdirect in Australia
25% Limited understanding of required concepts and knowledge
Key components of the assignment are not addressed.
Knowledge/understand
ing of the field or discipline.
Resembles a recall or summary of key ideas.
Thorough knowledge/understandi ng of the field or discipline/s. Supports personal opinion and information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials. Highly developed understanding of the field or discipline/s.
Discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information A sophisticated understanding of the field or discipline/s.
Systematically and critically discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and
Often conflates/confuses assertion of personal opinion with information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials.
Demonstrates a capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts.
substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading.
Well demonstrated capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts. information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading.
Mastery of concepts and application to new
situations/further learning.
Critical reasoning, presentation and defence of an argument
and/or position
Critiques the benefits and pitfalls in using Healthdirect from a public health perspective, taking into account the ethical issues discussed throughout the course
25% Specific position (perspective or argument) fails to take into account the complexities of the issue(s) or scope of the assignment.
Makes assertions that are not justified.
Specific position (perspective or argument) begins to take into account the issue(s) or scope of the assignment.
Justifies any conclusions reached with arguments not merely assertion. Specific position (perspective or argument) takes into account the complexities of the issue(s) or scope of the assignment. Others’ points of view are acknowledged.
Justifies any conclusions reached with wellformed arguments not merely assertion.
Specific position (perspective or argument) is expertly presented and accurately takes into account the complexities of the issue(s) and scope of the assignment.
Justifies any conclusions reached with welldeveloped arguments. Specific position (perspective or argument) is presented expertly, authoritatively and imaginatively, accurately taking into account the complexities of the issue(s) and scope of the assignment. Limits of position are acknowledged.
Justifies any conclusions reached with sophisticated arguments.
Analysis and application with synthesis of new knowledge
30% Limited synthesis and analysis.
Limited application/recommendations based upon analysis. Demonstrated analysis and synthesis of new knowledge with application.
Shows the ability to interpret relevant information and literature.
Well-developed analysis and synthesis with application of recommendations linked to analysis/synthesis. Thoroughly developed and creative analysis and synthesis with application of pretested models and / or independently developed models and justified
recommendations
linked to analysis/synthesis. Highly sophisticated and creative analysis, synthesis of new with existing knowledge.
Strong application by way of pretested models and / or independently developed models. Recommendations are clearly justified based on the analysis/synthesis. Applying knowledge to new situations/other cases.
Use of academic and discipline conventions and sources of evidence
Use of academic conventions including appropriate resources and referencing (20%) *General assessment criteria shown below
Poorly written with errors in spelling, grammar.
Demonstrates inconsistent use of good quality, credible and relevant research sources to support and develop ideas.
There are mistakes in using Is written according to academic genre (e.g. with introduction, conclusion or summary) and has accurate spelling, grammar, sentence and paragraph construction.
Demonstrates consistent use of credible and relevant Is well-written and adheres to the academic genre (e.g. with introduction, conclusion or summary).
Demonstrates consistent use of high quality, credible and relevant research sources to support and develop Is very well-written and adheres to the academic genre.
Consistently demonstrates expert use of good quality, credible and relevant research sources to support and develop appropriate Expertly written and adheres to the academic genre.
Demonstrates expert use of high-quality, credible and relevant research sources to support and develop arguments and position statements.
Shows extensive
the APA style. research sources to support and develop ideas, but these are not always explicit or well developed.
There are no mistakes in using the APA style. ideas.
There are no mistakes in using the APA style. arguments and statements. Shows evidence of reading beyond the key reading
There are no mistakes in using the APA style. evidence of reading beyond the key reading
There are no mistakes in using the APA Style.
*General Assessment Criteria:
• Provides a lucid introduction
• Shows a sophisticated understanding of the key issues
• Shows the ability to interpret relevant information and literature in relation to your chosen topic
• Demonstrates a capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts
• Shows evidence of reading beyond the key reading
• Justifies any conclusions reached with well-formed arguments not merely assertion
• Provides a conclusion or summary
• Use of academic writing and presentation and grammar:
• Complies with normal academic standards of legibility, referencing and bibliographical details (including reference list).
• Is written clearly with accurate spelling, grammar and sentence and paragraph construction
• Appropriate citation and referencing used (using APA style)