ASSESSMENT 3 BRIEF
Subject Code and Title HWEL2002 Understanding Health
Assessment Written assignment - exploration of a health initiative.
Individual/Group Individual
Length 1000 words (+/- 10%)
Learning Outcomes SLO2.Discuss the principles of Public Health and its role in improving health status of communities and populations from a local and global perspective.
SLO3.Describe the social determinants of health, identify patterns of vulnerability and inequality within communities as they relate to health outcomes.
SLO4. Describe the social determinants of health, identify patterns of vulnerability and inequality within communities as they relate to health outcomes.
Submission By 11:55pm AEST/AEDT Sunday of Module 6/Week 11
Weighting 50%
Total Marks 100 marks
Context:
This assessment is aimed at developing the students understanding of the purpose and impact of public health/health promotion initiatives. By prescribing this assessment, students are able to build on their understanding of the importance of addressing the social determinants of health to improve health in disadvantaged and marginalised population groups. This assessment allows students to expand their knowledge of the social determinants of health. Students are able to develop their academic writing skills, as they are expected to express their ideas in a coherent and logical manner, while also enhancing their skills of investigation, through searching for reliable and credible information.
Instructions:
? Students are provided with the health promotion initiative ‘Strong Fathers, Strong Families’ (SFSF). This program was an Australian Government initiative that aimed to promote the role of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander fathers, partners, grandfathers and uncles, and encourage them to actively participate in their children’s and families’ lives, particularly in the antenatal period and early childhood development years.
? Students will explore the aims and objectives of this program to identify the ‘social determinants of health’ (SDoH) that the program is targeting. Students will provide a detailed account that describes how targeting these SDoH will improve the health of this population group.
? It is expected that students will read the project thoroughly to identify at least three areas from the social, cultural, political, economic and environmental areas (SDoH) of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander life that is being targeted.
? Students will then search through the document provided and complete their own research for further information and write a 1000 word (+/- 10%) report that clearly and concisely explains how participants in the project will see improved health in themselves, their families and their community.
An example of information required:
1. Identify three specific social determinants; ie. housing, education, employment, sense of identity
2. Identify the target population group (the participants) of this particular part of the project; older men, young adults, fathers
3. List some of the activities that participants were involved in as part of this program;
i.e. cooking classes, music and dance activities including didgeridoo playing
4. Then explain how working on this social determinant will impact on the health of this group and the community. This section will require further research to provide evidential support and strength to the student’s opinion.
For example, when young Aboriginal men participate in cooking classes they learn about nutrition and healthy eating. This, in turn leads to improved nutrition and diet for his family. By improving the nutritional status of his children they will have less absent days from school, improving their literacy and numeracy skills. The greater impact is addressing the issue of low literacy levels in this population group.
Specific resource for this assessment:
‘The Lowitja Institute’ – Australia’s National Institute for Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander Health Research, http://www.lowitja.org.au/beyond-bandaids
For your written work, it is recommended that you follow these steps:
1. Analyse the question and identify the aims of the work;
2. Brainstorm and draft a first plan;
3. Conduct the necessary reading/research;
4. Further plan the essay or report structure;
5. Write a first draft;
6. Reflect on and get feedback on the first draft;
7. Revise the first draft;
8. Check the final draft for both content and referencing;
9. Submit the assignment.
All work must be substantiated, this means acknowledging the sources of your information to avoid plagiarism. Laureate International Universities uses the APA 6th edition referencing style. For details please refer to the Academic Writing Guide section and The Quick Academic Referencing Guide APA 6th Ed.
As a report there is no need to write an exclusive introduction or conclusion. Your assignment should:
? Be formatted using size 12 font
? Use Times New Roman, Arial, Calibri fonts
? Spaced at 1.5 size
? Include a footer with student name and student number and page numbers
? Include a ‘title page’ with student name, number, title of assessment, lecturer name and word count (not including referencing)
Please refer to the marking rubric for distribution of marks.
Submission Details:
Submit your 1000 word report under Assessments Assessment 3 link in the main navigation menu of the Blackboard subject site. The Learning Facilitator will provide feedback and marks will be viewed via My Grades.
Learning rubric for Assessment 3
Assessment Attributes Fail
(Unacceptable) Pass (Functional) Credit (Proficient) Distinction (Advanced) High Distinction (Exceptional)
Identification of relevant socioecological determinants.
40 marks
Does not demonstrate adequate knowledge or understanding. Key components of the assignment are not addressed.
Fails to identify major determinants. Lacks sufficient detail.
0 - 19
Some major determinants are identified but explanation is tenuous and undefined.
Demonstrates an adequate level of understanding of learning outcomes for this assessment. More depth and detail needed.
20 - 25
Major determinants are identified. Some further definition would have benefited.
Demonstrates a good understanding of the learning outcomes of the assessment.
26 - 29
Clearly demonstrates understanding of the learning outcomes for this assessment.
Clear links explaining major determinants and health outcomes.
30 - 33
Demonstrates an in-depth understanding of the learning outcomes of this assessment.
Clearly and concisely identifies major determinants.
34 - 40
Discussion of the impact of these social-ecological factors on health.
40 marks Unsatisfactory or needs significant development.
Considers few relevant aspects. Does not demonstrate clear understanding of the links.
0 - 19
Satisfactory. Level of exploration is adequate.
Demonstrates an acceptable level of understanding of the links between the SDoH and health outcomes.
20 - 25
Shows a solid level of understanding between the SDoH and health outcomes.
Further depth and detail would be beneficial.
26 - 29
Good level of discussion explaining the links between the SDoH and health outcomes for this specific population group.
Demonstrates a very good level of understanding.
30 - 33
High-level discussion. Comprehensively links SDoH with health outcomes.
Demonstrating an in-depth understanding.
34 - 40
Presentation and academic writing skills; grammar, spelling, language, flow. Unsatisfactory level academic writing including vocabulary, writing style.
Satisfactory level of academic writing.
Good, solid level of academic writing style. Work flows and presents well.
Good level academic writing including vocabulary, writing style.
High-level academic writing including vocabulary, writing style.
HWEL2002_Assessment 3 Brief Version2 09102019.Docx Version 1
31/05/2019
Page 4 of 5
10 marks Work lacks logical flow and is unclear to read.
0 – 4.5
Work lacks some flow; needs development on use of subheadings, presentation and flow.
5 – 6.4
Continue to develop skills in presentation, flow and concise.
6.5 – 7.4
Impartial language mostly used.
Document mostly flows
logically and is clear to read. Information is mostly relevant and succinct.
7.5 – 8.4
Impartial language used.
Document flows logically and is clear to read. Information is always relevant and succinct.
8.4 - 10
Referencing &
substantiation
10 marks Unsatisfactory use of the APA referencing system.
In-text citations are used inappropriately most of the time. Many references missing and/or inappropriately used.
A high amount of mistakes in the in-text references and/or bibliography.
0 – 4.5 Satisfactory correct use of the APA referencing system.
In-text citations are used appropriately some of the time, although some references missing and/or inappropriately used.
A moderate amount of mistakes in the in-text references and/or bibliography.
5 – 6.4 Generally correct use of the APA referencing system.
In-text citations are used appropriately, although some references missing or inappropriately used.
A moderate amount of mistakes in the in-text references and/or bibliography.
6.5 – 7.4 Mostly Correct use of the APA referencing system.
In-text citations are used appropriately most of the time.
A few small mistakes in the intext references and/or bibliography.
7.5 – 8.4 Correct use of the APA referencing system.
In-text citations are used appropriately.
No mistakes in the in-text references or bibliography.
8.4 - 10
Total: / 100
Comments:
HWEL2002_Assessment 3 Brief Version2 09102019.Docx Version 1
31/05/2019
Page 5 of 5