ASSESSMENT TASK 2 – Critical Analysis Presentation Type: Oral Group presentation (electronic)
Learning outcomes assessed: 1 & 2
Due date: Wednesday 7th September, 2022 by 11:59pm
Weight: 30% (Marked out of 100)
Length: 10 – 12 minutes (no scripts needs to be submitted)
Task Aim: To enable you to critically analyse the impact of history on contemporary First Peoples’ health outcomes and how this influences trustful and respectful relationships with
Australia’s First Peoples and the healthcare system.
Task Rationale:
Group projects can help you to develop a host of skills that are increasingly important in the professional world (Caruso & Woolley, 2008; Mannix & Neale, 2005). Being able to communicate within a diverse multidisciplinary group, resolve conflicts and to contribute in a meaningful way to a team, are all attributes that will be expected of you as a health professional. It is expected graduates will not only have these skills, but that they are highly developed and practiced.
| Task Description: As a group, select one policy era (from the 10 discussed within the Respect capability) and one contemporary health outcome that is prevalent with First Peoples today. Develop a PowerPoint presentation that: 1. Describes the key themes within your chosen policy. 2. Describes the prevalence of the contemporary health outcome you have chosen. 3. Critically analyses how the chosen policy influences the prevalence of your chosen health outcome. 4. Discusses how and why these political and/or historical determinants of health affect building trustful and respectful relationships in the healthcare setting. |
Task Details
- Access the how to enroll yourself into a group document in the Assessment 2 folder to enroll yourself in a group and start planning this assessment.
- As a group, plan, research and discuss how you will present your findings via PowerPoint presentation. There is an assessment planner to assist groups with planning, setting tasks and remaining on time. A presentation layout guide is also available to assist with the layout of your presentation (guide only). These documents are located in the Assessment 2 folder.
- The presentation is recorded and uploaded to learning@griffith. You do not present in front of your peers. More information about this is in the Assessment 2 mini-lecture and will be discussed in workshops.
- Each individual is to submit a group participation feedback form via TurnItin by the due date. The submission point for this is in the Assessment 2 folder and will appear once the electronic coversheet is completed.
- One member of your group will upload a video recording of your presentations by the due date. Scripts do not need to be submitted. For further support to upload presentations, please refer to the “Video
Uploading Tips Sheet” located in supporting documentation
Students will be marked on two levels
- By the marker using the marking criteria/rubricbelow (90%)
- By their group using the group participation feedback sheet located within your assessment folder on Learning@Griffith (10%)
For tips to writing a critical analysis, please see the ‘Research and Writing tips’ and the Griffith Health Writing and Referencing Guide. Both are located on the left hand side navigation panel on learning@griffith.
| Criteria – /100 | Outstanding | High Achievement | Exceeds expectation | Satisfactory | Unsatisfactory | |
| 1 10% | Description of policy that shows an understanding of the impact of different policy eras on Australia’s First Peoples. | Insightful description of one policy era that includes a broad range of relevant details (who, what, when, how) supported by reputable evidence found in scholarly literature. 9 – 10 marks | In depth description of one policy era that includes a range of relevant details (who, what, when, how) supported mostly by reputable evidence found in scholarly literature. 8 marks | Detailed description of one policy era with some support from relevant literature. Detailed description of the chosen health outcome using some support from literature. 7 marks | Basic description of one policy eras with basic details supported by literature. 5 – 6 marks | Poor description of one policy era. Little to no support from relevant literature. 0- 4marks |
| 2 5% | Description of health outcome that shows an understanding of the prevalence of the health outcome. | Insightful description of the prevalence of chosen health outcome using high quality and current literature/statistics. 5 marks | In depth description of the prevalence of chosen health outcome using mostly high quality and current literature/statistics. 4 marks | Detailed description of the prevalence of chosen health outcome using some support from current literature/statistics. 3 marks | Basic description of chosen health outcome, literature may not be current. 2.5 marks | Poor description of the prevalence of chosen health outcome. Little to no support from high quality and current literature. 0-2 marks |
| 2 30% | Critically analyses how the policies have impacted on the selected health outcome of Australia’s First Peoples. | Critically analyses the impact of the policy on the chosen contemporary health outcome with exemplary evidence of objective evaluation of scholarly literature; shows explicit connections between policy implementation and contemporary health outcomes for Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander people. 26 – 30 marks | Critically analyses the impact of the chosen policy on the chosen contemporary health outcome with detailed evidence of objective evaluation of scholarly literature; shows strong connections between policy implementation and contemporary health outcomes for Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander people. 23 – 25 marks | Critically analyses the impact of the chosen policy on the chosen health outcomes with evidence of evaluation of scholarly literature; shows some connections between policy implementation and contemporary health outcomes for Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander people. 20 – 22 marks | Critically analyses the impact of the policy on the chosen contemporary health outcomes with reference to literature. 15 – 19 marks | Minimal discussion of the impact of policy on the chosen contemporary health outcome with minimal evidence or objective evaluation. 0 – 14 marks |
| 3 30% | Discuss the influence this has on Australia’s First Peoples building trustful and respectful relationships with health professionals | Insightful discussion with highly detailed exploration of the complexities of how history has impacted building trustful and respectful relationships within healthcare at multiple levels e.g. institutional, community and individual; supported by reputable evidence found in scholarly literature 26 – 30 marks | In depth discussion with thorough exploration of the complexities of how history has impacted building trustful and respectful relationships within healthcare at some levels e.g. community and individual; supported mostly by reputable evidence found in scholarly literature | General discussion with sound exploration of how history has impacted building trustful and respectful relationships within healthcare at some levels e.g. community and individual; supported with some relevant literature 20 – 22 marks | Basic discussion with limited exploration of how history has impacted building trustful and respectful relationships within the healthcare system. 15 – 19 marks | Limited discussion of the literature and little supporting evidence demonstrating how history has impacted on Australia’s First Peoples’ ability to build trustful and respectful relationships within the healthcare system. |
| 23 – 25 marks | ||||||
| 0 – 14 marks | ||||||
| 4 10% | Presentation layout and presentation skills | Consistent and correct use of rules of grammar, punctuation, and spelling. Language is clear, precise and culturally appropriate. Privileges First Peoples voices. Presentation is engaging and interesting. Presentation is organised in a logical sequence. Delivery is well timed. 9 – 10 marks | Consistent and correct use of rules of grammar, punctuation, and spelling. Language is clear, with minor structural errors and culturally appropriate. Privileges First Peoples voices. Presentation is engaging and interesting. Presentation is organised in a logical sequence. Delivery is well timed. 8 marks | Consistent and correct use of rules of grammar, punctuation, and spelling, with a few minor errors. Culturally appropriate terminology used. Privileges First Peoples voices. Presentation is engaging and interesting. Presentation has some structural errors. Delivery of presentation has some timing oversights. 7 marks | A few grammatical, punctuation and spelling errors. Language lacks clarity and may be confusing to the audience. Inconsistent use of culturally appropriate terminology. Presentation does not flow logically and delivery has significant timing oversights. 5- 6 marks marks | Numerous grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors. Poor use of language with inappropriate cultural terminology. Presentation does not flow logically and delivery has significant timing oversights. 0-4 marks |
| 5 5% | Referencing | References are cited using APA 7th in-text and end-text with no errors and 10 or more peer reviewed articles used as references. 5 marks | References are cited using APA 7th in-text and end-text and is mainly consistent with few errors and a minimum of 8 peer reviewed articles used as references. 4 marks | References are cited using APA 7th in-text and end-text with some errors and minimum of 6 peer reviewed articles used as references. 3 marks | References are cited using APA 7th in-text and end-text with some consistent errors and minimum of 4 peer reviewed articles used as references. 2.5 marks | References are not cited using APA 7th in-text and end-text with a number of consistent errors. Minimal peer reviewed articles used. 0-2 marks |
| 6 10% | Group participation feedback | 9 – 10 marks | 8 marks | 7 marks | 5 – 6 marks | 0 – 4 marks |
Get expert help for Critical Analysis Presentation and many more. 24X7 help, plag free solution. Order online now!
