Recent Question/Assignment

ASSESSMENT BRIEF
Subject Code and Title PUBH6004: Leadership and Effecting Change in Public Health
Assessment Assessment 1: Report – Public Health Professionals
Individual/Group Individual
Length 2,000 words
Learning Outcomes This assessment addresses the following learning outcomes:
1. Critique theories, styles, approaches and strategies of leadership in public health
2. Analyse the influence of diversity on leadership (gender, culture, professional discipline and community)
3. Evaluate personal leadership strengths and areas for improvement through analysis of public health leadership frameworks
Submission Due Sunday following the end of Module 3 at 11:55pm AEST/AEDT*
Weighting 30%
Total Marks 100 marks
*Please Note: This time is Sydney time (AEST or AEDT). Please convert to your own time zone (e.g. Adelaide = 11:25pm).
Instructions:
Terms such as leadership and management are commonly used interchangeably in business. Yet scholars have long debated the differences between management and leadership. Each role has its own responsibilities and leaders and managers must work together. To be an effective leader, it is important to understand and articulate these nuances as well as understand the critical role of power in leadership.
Over the next three modules, you will be completing a multi-part assignment.
To prepare for this assignment:
- Analyse the roles of leadership and management, specifically with regard to the Public Health industry.
- Using the Rowitz’s Interview Guide for Public Health Leaders (Table 26-4), interview two leaders in the Public Health industry.
- Complete the Leadership Skills Inventory in Northouse. - Review Rowitz’s Public Health Leadership Principles.
Write a 2000-word paper that addresses the following:
Part 1: Leaders versus Managers (Module 1)
- Compare the role and responsibility of a leader to that of a manager.
- Analyse how the role and responsibility of a leader and a manager might differ in the Public Health industry from any other industry.
Part 2: Leaders in the Public Health Industry (Module 2)
- Describe the two leaders you interviewed from the Public Health industry. Explain their roles and responsibilities.
- Summarise the responses you received in your two interviews.
- Critique the responses of the two interviews by applying what you have learned so far about Leadership theories.
Part 3: Self-Assessment of Leadership Style (Module 3)
- Analyse your results of the Leadership Skills Inventory in Northouse.
- Analyse your assessment results against Rowitz’s Public Health Leadership Principles.
- Identify your strengths, based on your analysis.
- Identify areas you would like to improve, based on your analysis.
Complete Part 1: Leaders versus Managers in Module 1. You will complete Part 2: Leaders in the Public Health Industry in Module 2, and Part 3: Self-Assessment of Leadership Style in Module 3. At the end of Module 3, you will submit the completed Assignment (including Parts 1, 2 and 3).
Assessment Criteria:
Your graded assignment will be assessed against the following specific criteria:
• Demonstrated the ability to differentiate between leadership and management and support with explanations, examples and reference to the literature. (25%)
• Demonstrated capacity to apply relevant leadership theory to critique of interviews with leaders (30%)
• Demonstrated ability to reflect on results of own self-assessment of leadership style and critique using relevant theories and principles. (25%) • General assessment criteria (20%):
o Provides a lucid introduction
o Shows a sophisticated understanding of the key issues
o Shows ability to interpret relevant information and literature in relation to chosen topic
o Demonstrates a capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts o Shows evidence of reading beyond the required readings
o Justifies any conclusions reached with well-formed arguments and not merely assertions
o Provides a conclusion or summary o Correctly uses academic writing, presentation and grammar:
? Complies with academic standards of legibility, referencing and bibliographical details (including reference list)
? Writes clearly, with accurate spelling and grammar as well as proper sentence and paragraph construction
? Uses appropriate APA style for citing and referencing research

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
Demonstrated the ability to differentiate between leadership and management and support with explanations, examples and reference to the literature. (25%) Limited understanding of required concepts and knowledge.
Key components of the assignment are not addressed.
Knowledge/understa nding of the field or discipline.
Resembles a recall or summary of key ideas.
Often conflates/confuses assertion of personal opinion with Thorough knowledge/understandi ng of the field or discipline/s. Supports personal opinion and information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials.
Demonstrates a capacity Highly developed understanding of the field or discipline/s.
Discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the A sophisticated understanding of the field or discipline/s.
Systematically and critically discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from
information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials. to explain and apply relevant concepts.
research/course materials and extended reading.
Well demonstrated capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts. the research/course materials and extended reading.
Mastery of concepts and application to new
situations/further learning.
Analysis and application with synthesis of new knowledge
Demonstrated ability to reflect on results of own self-assessment of leadership style and critique using relevant theories and principles
(25%) 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.
Critical reasoning, presentation and defence of an argument and/or position
Demonstrated capacity to apply relevant leadership theory to critique of leaders interviews (30%)
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.
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 the APA style. 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 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 ideas.
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 evidence of reading
credible and relevant 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. 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. 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)