| ASSESSMENT 1 BRIEF | |
| Subject Code and Title | PUBH6003 Health Systems and Economics |
| Assessment | Case Study Report Application of systems thinking and building blocks in a country context/setting to public health issues and problems |
| Individual/Group | Individual |
| Length | 1,500 words (+/–10%) |
| Learning Outcomes | The Subject Learning Outcomes demonstrated by the successful completion of the task below include: Critically examine the key characteristics of health systems and apply this knowledge to local and global contexts;Investigate and inquire into the building blocks of health systems and interpret how they are translated globally; andEvaluate the principles of systems thinking and promote multi-sectoral collaboration for the successful implementation of public health programmes. |
| Submission | Due by 11.55 pm AEST/AEDT on the Sunday at the end of Module 5 |
| Weighting | 35% |
| Total Marks | 100 marks |
Context
Systems thinking helps us to understand the elements and relationships/interconnectedness of parts to a system. Currently, the use of systems thinking is being advocated in public health as a new paradigm shift. It aids in the solving of complex and intractable public health problems and the identification of risk factors for the achievement of health systems goals/good population health outcomes.
You are required to thoroughly research and write a critical individual report on systems thinking and its application to strengthening the six building blocks of health systems for the reduction/prevention of a chosen public health problem/issue for a selected country.
Instructions
You are required to:
- Identify a country (e.g., Australia or any other country) and a public health issue. Public health problems/issues include excessive alcohol consumption, food safety, heart disease and stroke, road traffic accidents, nutrition, physical activity and obesity, tobacco use, water, sanitation and hygiene, HIV, drug abuse and mental health;
- Provide a critical analysis of the concept of systems thinking and how it can be applied to public health;
- Discuss the six health systems building blocks as proposed by the World Health Organisation (WHO);
- Discuss why the chosen public health issue is complex in the context of the chosen country based on the building blocks and thus requires systems thinking; and
- Apply and analyse how systems thinking can be used to reduce/mitigate the selected public health issue along with the building blocks of the health systems of the chosen country.
Structure of the Report
Introduction
- Provide an overview of the key characteristics of the chosen country, including its population, health status indicators (e.g., disease prevalence/incidence, morbidity, mortality and life expectancy at birth) and health system indicators (e.g., service utilisation/health service access, hospital bed density, availability of essential medicines and commodities, health worker density and distribution) (use any three of the stated indicators).
- Describe the selected public health issue and why it is an issue for the chosen country (use data/statistics to support your claim).
- Provide an overview of the whole assessment to serve as a guide for the reader, explaining that the assessment will use the concept of systems thinking to help prevent/reduce the chosen public health problem of the chosen country and will offer solutions based on the health system building blocks.
Main body
- Critically discuss the concept of systems thinking and its application to public health issues.
- Discuss in detail the health system building blocks as proposed by the WHO.
- Critically examine why the current organisation and functioning of the building blocks pose a challenge to solving the identified public health problem for the chosen country (examine the barriers to the use of systems thinking to solve the problem given the current organisation and functioning of the building blocks).
- Discuss ANY other barriers outside the building blocks (if any).
- Apply systems thinking to strengthen the health system building blocks for reduction/mitigation (suggest solutions based on systems thinking along the building blocks of the health systems).
- Propose ANY other solutions outside the building blocks of the health systems (if any).
Conclusion
Provide a concise summary of all the ideas discussed in the assessment. New ideas should not be introduced at this stage.
Note: All sections of the report must be backed by relevant literature from credible sources, such as text books, journal articles and reports. These should be cited using the APA 7th style.
Referencing
It is essential that you use appropriate APA style for citing and referencing research. For more information on referencing, visit https://library.torrens.edu.au/academicskills/apa/tool.
Follow the guidelines below to format the final documents:
- Include a title page with:
- The assignment title;
- Your first and last name;
- Your student Identification number;
- The word count (excluding headings, in-text citations and tables);
- The unit for which the assignment is being submitted;
- The name of your lecturer/facilitator; and
- An academic integrity statement.
- Include page numbers.
- Use double spacing.
- Font size: 12 minimum.
- Include a reference list.
- The word count is 1,500 words (+/–10%).
- All references must be in APA format.
Submission Instructions
Submit this task via the Assessment 1—Case Study Report link in the main navigation menu for PUBH6003 Health systems and economics.
The learning facilitator will provide feedback via the Grade Centre in the LMS portal. Feedback can be viewed in My Grades.
Academic Integrity Declaration
I declare that except where referenced, the work I am submitting for this assessment task is my own. I have read and am aware of the Torrens University Australia Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure, viewable online at http://www.torrens.edu.au/policies-and-forms.
I am also aware that I need to keep a copy of all submitted material and their drafts, and I agree to do so.
Assessment Rubric
| Assessment Attributes | Fail (Yet to achieve minimum standard) 0–49% | Pass (Functional) 50–64% | Credit (Proficient) 65–74% | Distinction (Advanced) 75–84% | High Distinction (Exceptional) 85–100% |
| Knowledge and understanding of systems thinking and its application to the strengthening of the six building blocks of health systems. -Identify a country and a public health problem/issue. -Discuss systems thinking. -Discuss the six building blocks of health systems as proposed by the WHO. Apply systems thinking to the organisation and functioning of the building blocks of the health system of your chosen country. 30% | Demonstrates limited knowledge and understanding of systems thinking and its application to the strengthening of the six building blocks of health systems. | Demonstrates functional knowledge of systems thinking and its application to the strengthening of the six building blocks of health systems. | Demonstrates proficient knowledge of systems thinking and its application to the strengthening of the six building blocks of health systems. | Demonstrates advanced knowledge of systems thinking and its application to the strengthening of the six building blocks of health systems. | Demonstrates exceptional knowledge of systems thinking and its application to the strengthening of the six building blocks of health systems. |
| Assessment Attributes | Fail (Yet to achieve minimum standard) 0–49% | Pass (Functional) 50–64% | Credit (Proficient) 65–74% | Distinction (Advanced) 75–84% | High Distinction (Exceptional) 85–100% |
| Analysis and application of systems thinking to the strengthening of the building blocks of health systems with synthesis of new knowledge. 25% | Demonstrates limited analysis and application. Limited application/recommendat ions based upon analysis. | Good analysis and synthesis of new knowledge and its application. Shows an 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 and synthesis of new and existing knowledge. Strong application by way of pretested models and/or independently developed models. Recommendations are clearly justified based on the analysis/synthesis. Applies knowledge to new situations/other cases. |
| Evaluation of information selected to support the case study. 20% | Limited understanding of key concepts required to support the case study. | Resembles a recall or summary of key ideas. | Demonstrates a capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts. | Well-demonstrated capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts. | Information is taken from sources with a high level of interpretation/evaluation to develop a comprehensive critical analysis or synthesis. |
| Assessment Attributes | Fail (Yet to achieve minimum standard) 0–49% | Pass (Functional) 50–64% | Credit (Proficient) 65–74% | Distinction (Advanced) 75–84% | High Distinction (Exceptional) 85–100% |
| Viewpoints of experts are taken as fact and subject to little questioning. Confuses logic and emotion. Information taken from reliable sources but without coherent analysis or synthesis. | Often conflates/confuses the assertion of personal opinion with information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials. Analysis and evaluation do not reflect expert judgement, intellectual independence, rigor and adaptability. | Supports personal opinion; information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials. Questions viewpoints of experts. Identifies logical flaws. Analysis and evaluation reflect expert judgement, intellectual independence, rigor and adaptability. | Discriminates between the assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading. Viewpoints of experts are subject to questioning. Analysis and evaluation reflect growing judgement, intellectual independence, rigor and adaptability. | Systematically and critically discriminates between the assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading. Identifies gaps in knowledge. Exhibits intellectual independence, rigor, good judgement and adaptability. | |
| Effective communication (written) 15% | Merely presents information. | Incoherent communication, but somewhat adheres to the given format. | Communicates in a coherent and readable manner that adheres to the given format. | Communicates coherently and concisely in a manner that adheres to the given format. | Communicates eloquently. Expresses meaning coherently, concisely and creatively within the given format. |
| Specialised language and terminology are not used or are inaccurately employed. | Generally employs specialised language and terminology with accuracy. | Accurately employs specialised language and terminology. Occasional minor errors present in spelling, | Accurately employs a wide range of specialised language and terminology. Spelling, grammar and punctuation are free of errors. | Discerningly selects and precisely employs a wide range of specialised language and terminology. |
| Assessment Attributes | Fail (Yet to achieve minimum standard) 0–49% | Pass (Functional) 50–64% | Credit (Proficient) 65–74% | Distinction (Advanced) 75–84% | High Distinction (Exceptional) 85–100% |
| Incorrect spelling, grammar, punctuation and/or the acknowledgment of sources. | Some errors are evident in spelling, grammar and/or punctuation. | grammar and/or punctuation. | Spelling, grammar and punctuation are free of errors. | ||
| Meaning is repeatedly obscured by errors in the communication of ideas, including errors in structure and sequence. | Meaning is sometimes difficult to follow. Information, arguments and evidence are structured and sequenced in a way that is not always clear and logical. | Meaning is easy to follow. Information, arguments and evidence are structured and sequenced in a way that is clear and logical. | Engages audience interest. Information, arguments and evidence are structured and sequenced in a way that is clear and persuasive. | Engages and sustains audience interest. Information, arguments and evidence are insightful, persuasive and expertly presented. | |
| Correct citation of key resources and evidence 10% | Fails to use good quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas. | Limited use of credible and relevant resources to support and develop discussions or ideas. | Uses credible resources to support and develop ideas. | Uses good quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop arguments and statements. Shows evidence of wide scope within the organisation for sourcing evidence. | Uses high-quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop arguments and position statements. Shows evidence of wide scope within and without the organisation for sourcing evidence. |
| Referencing is omitted or does not resemble APA. | Referencing resembles APA but contains frequent or repeated errors. | Referencing resembles APA but contains occasional errors. | APA referencing is free of errors. | APA referencing is free of errors. |
| The following Subject Learning Outcomes are addressed in this assessment | |
| SLO a) | Critically examine the key characteristics of health systems and apply this knowledge to local and global contexts. |
| SLO b) | Investigate and inquire into the building blocks of health systems and interpret how they are translated globally. |
| SLO c) | Evaluate the principles of systems thinking and promote multi-sectoral collaboration for the successful implementation of public health programmes. |
