Promoting Health in Individuals and Populations

Promoting Health in Individuals and Populations Assignment 1: Literature review

Promoting Health in Individuals and Populations Assignment 1: Marking criteria

Facets of Inquiry Fail If you were ticked here, this facet of research needs work

Pass If you were ticked here, this facet of research was OK but could be improved

Credit If you were ticked here, this facet of research is good

Distinction If you were ticked here, this facet of research is well done

High Distinction If you were ticked here, this facet of research is excellent

Weighting

A. Embark on inquiry & clarify the knowledge that is needed

□ The description of the public health issue is very poor. The size and scale of the issue are poorly described and there is limited discussion of the population group most affected.

□ The public health issue is partly described. The size and scale of the issue are briefly described and there is some discussion of the population group most affected.

□ The description of the public health issue is good with some details included. The size and scale of the issue are well described and there is good discussion of the population group most affected.

□ The public health issue is described in detail. The size and scale of the issue are very well described and there is very good discussion of the population group most affected.

□ The description of the public health issue is excellent with lots of detail. The description of the size and scale of there is also excellent and there in as in- depth discussion of the population group most affected.

20%

B. Find needed information & generate needed data

□ There was very limited evidence presented about the health issue and the origins, determinants and cost to society were very poorly described.

□ There was some evidence presented about the health issue, and a superficial discussion of the origins, determinants and cost to society of the health issue.

□ There was good evidence presented about the health issue, and a considered discussion of the origins, determinants and cost to society of the health issue.

□ There was excellent evidence presented about the health issue, and an in- depth discussion of the origins, determinants and cost to society of the health issue.

□ The evidence presented about the health issue was extremely well researched and described and there was an excellent and detailed discussion of the origins, determinants and cost to society of the health issue.

30%

C. Evaluate information/ critical appraisal

□ The health promotion program identified was very poorly described and there was little evidence of critical appraisal for evidence-base, efficacy and/or effectiveness.

□ The health promotion program identified was described in some detail and there was some superficial evidence of critical appraisal for evidence-base, efficacy and/or effectiveness.

□ The health promotion program identified was described in detail and there was evidence of critical appraisal for evidence-base, efficacy and/or effectiveness.

□ There was a very good description of the health promotion program identified and evidence of a thorough critical appraisal for evidence-base, efficacy and/or effectiveness.

□ There was an excellent description of the health promotion program identified and considerable evidence of a thorough critical appraisal for evidence-base, efficacy and/or effectiveness.

30%

D. Organise information and communicate and apply knowledge, understanding and the process used to generate it.

□ The assignment lacks coherence between and within paragraphs. □ The assignment has exceeded the word count by more than 10%, and/or a word count is not provided but it appears to exceed the word count by more than 10%.

□ The analysis is mostly written coherently within and between paragraphs, but with several points of confusion. □ The assignment appears to be within the word count, but a word count is not provided.

□ The analysis is mostly written coherently within and between paragraphs but with some points of confusion.

□ The analysis is well written, coherent within and between paragraphs.

□ The analysis is exceptionally well written, coherent within and between paragraphs. □ The assignment is within 10% of the word count.

10%

E. Analyse & synthesise new knowledge

□ The assignment poorly combines and integrates a range of sources of evidence and poorly or incorrectly interprets the findings.

□ The assignment attempts to combine and integrate a range of sources of evidence and there is some interpretation of the findings.

□ The assignment has combined and integrated a range of sources of evidence and there is mostly accurate interpretation of the findings.

□ The assignment has combined and integrated a range of sources of evidence well and there is an accurate interpretation of the findings.

□ The assignment has combined and integrated a range of sources of evidence extremely well and there is an accurate and detailed interpretation of the findings.

5%

F. Apply discipline conventions and “publication” requirements

□ Sources within the assignment are not acknowledged. □ The assignment does not include a reference list.

□ Most of the sources within the assignment are acknowledged partially and/or incorrectly. □ The reference list is provided but with many mistakes or is incomplete.

□ All sources within the assignment are acknowledged partially and/or incorrectly. □ The reference list provided has some mistakes.

□ The assignment acknowledges all sources fully and correctly □ The assignment includes a reference list, including all sources and mostly consistently following an established referencing style.

□ The assignment acknowledges all sources fully and correctly, differentiating between quotations and paraphrasing. □ The assignment includes a reference list, including all sources and consistently following an established referencing style.

5%

Total out of 100