Assessment Brief
PBHL1003
FOUNDATIONS OF HEALTH AND HEALTH CARE SYSTEMS
Title
Assessment 2 Type
Essay Due Date
Week 6 Monday 14 April 2025, 11:59pm AEST Length
1000 words Weighting
60% Academic Integrity
NO AI Submission
Use Word Document – submit to Blackboard / Assessments Tasks & Submission / Assessment 2 Unit Learning Outcomes
This assessment task maps to the following Unit Learning Outcomes (ULO):
ULO1: Identify the structures, funding, and models of care within the Australian healthcare system and within the broader context of international healthcare.
ULO2: Describe the role of social determinants and health literacy in the health of Australians
ULO3: Cooperatively communicate the impact of various health policies, priorities and frameworks on health promotion and health service delivery in Australia.
ULO4: Examine the current and future directions of healthcare within the context of health technologies and global health issues.
Rationale
This assessment provides an opportunity to explore the critical impact of climate emergencies on health and healthcare delivery. By examining recent global events—such as floods, droughts, heatwaves, and bushfires—it considers the role of healthcare systems in addressing these challenges and the importance of health policy and promotion in mitigating their effects. Environmental experts have linked these events to broader planetary changes, underscoring the need for responsive, resilient healthcare frameworks.
The purpose of this assessment is to synthesize and apply knowledge gained across the unit. It involves identifying healthcare structures and models of care, describing social determinants and health literacy to understand health impacts, and analysing the role of communication in how health policies shape health promotion and service delivery. Additionally, it includes examining the future of healthcare in relation to health technologies and global health challenges.
This task reinforces unit content and prepares for the complexities of healthcare in a rapidly changing world. By engaging with real-world issues, it provides insights into the role of
2
Assessment Brief
healthcare professionals in policy, health promotion, and global health—critical skills that align with current and future industry expectations.
As health practitioners, it is important to acknowledge both published research and patient lived experience.
Task Description
Research and write a 1000-word essay that explores the relationship of climate emergencies and health inequity. From the perspective of the health discipline you are enrolled in, explain the role of health practitioners in health service delivery or health promotion during or after the emergency event.
Your essay should:
Identify and define planetary health including discussion of climate emergencies. Provide an example of a climate emergency in Australia since 2011.
Define social determinants of health (SDH) and health disparities, and describe how these relate to climate emergencies. Make reference to a vulnerable group in Australia eg children/ elderly / people living with disability / low socio-economic status / pregnant women, etc. Include an example of lived experience.
State the health discipline you are enrolled in using third person language eg ‘Nurses are in an ideal position to provide health care in a climate emergency’. Explain the role of these health professionals in a climate emergency and how they may impact health behaviours and outcomes. Examine factors that may support or challenge this role such as structures, funding, or models of care within the Australian healthcare systems. Provide an example. This information needs to relate to what is presented earlier.
Ensure your presentation is professional: coherent and clear, with correct grammar, spelling, and adherence to APA 7 referencing standards.
Task Instructions
The following steps will guide you through what you need to do to complete this assessment.
- Topic selection by finding quality references
– You may select any social determinant of health if it can be supported by relevant, current and valid literature.
Research and select a vulnerable population group affected by a recent Australian climate emergency.
Use a minimum of 10 references. Note: generally, a greater number of high quality & relevant references used = more marks.
3
Assessment Brief
Quality references= a range of scholarly, credible resources, including peer-reviewed journal articles to support the information and discussion presented, ideally past 5 years, maximum 10 years old (unless seminal text).
- Draft your presentation
Introduction – approx. 100 words Introduce the reader to the chosen climate emergency and its impact upon the population. Make it clear why this topic is important! (100 words).
Body paragraphs. approx. 800 words, each paragraph approx. 150-200 words. Write each paragraph using peel format
Students are encouraged to use headings to assist structure of essay eg
o
Planetary Health; approx. 170 words;
o
Social Determinants of Health and Climate Emergencies; approx. 250 words;
o
The role of health professionals in a climate emergency, approx. 380 words.
Conclusion – approx. 100 words. Write a conclusion for this discussion by succinctly summarising why climate disasters unequally impact some population groups more than others and how health professionals may work to support patients following the event (100 words).
- Review essay
- Refer to marking rubric to guide content and structure and ensure each sentence / paragraph answers the topic.
- Reference List (begin on new page). Alpha-numerical order.
5. Notes
Number of words is a guide. +/- 10% word count is acceptable range. Intext references are included in word count; Reference List is not included in word count. Markers will stop marking at 1100 words. Less than 900 words will not satisfy assessment criteria.
Academic language is formal, objective & factual (not emotive), written in third person, does not have abbreviations eg can’t / can not; and write out acronyms in full before using eg World Health Organisation [WHO].
This essay needs to formatted to APA 7
o
Header or footer containing student number and page number
o
11 point font size; ‘Arial’ or ‘Calibri’ or ‘Georgia’
o
Double line spacing
o
2.5 cm margins
o
Left align text and indent first line of each paragraph using tab key
Cover sheet not necessary.
You may submit your assessment to the ‘Assessment 2’ portal as a draft to see the Turnitin similarity score. You may resubmit updated versions to the same place. Up to 3 submissions will receive immediate feedback, after 3 it takes 24 hours to receive
4
Assessment Brief
the similarity score. The Marker will mark the most recent submission prior to due
date.
Resources
The weekly online Workshop Monday 2pm NSW / 1pm QLD will guide students through assessment requirements. Recordings will be available and accessible via Blackboard / Collaborate Ultra / Menu (top left 3 horizontal lines) / Recordings.
You should complete the ‘research readymodules on finding and locating information from the library. Even if you have used them before, it can be useful to review them as you prepare for a new task.
Referencing style
All referencing should be in APA 7th format.
Academic Integrity Academic integrity means behaving with the values of honesty, fairness, trustworthiness, courage, responsibility, and respect in relation to academic work. The Academic Integrity Framework aims to develop a holistic, systematic, and consistent approach to addressing academic integrity across the entire University. For more information see the NOTE: Academic Integrity breaches include unacceptable use of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools, the use of GenAI has not been appropriately acknowledged or is beyond the acceptable limit as defined in the Assessment, poor referencing, not identifying direct quotations correctly, close paraphrasing, plagiarism, recycling, misrepresentation, collusion, cheating, contract cheating, fabricating information. Please ensure you have completed the Academic Integrity Module which will help you to understand referencing, academic integrity, and how to avoid plagiarism. There are penalties for plagiarism (even if it is accidental).
5
Assessment Brief
Marking Criteria and % allocation High Distinction + 100% High Distinction (85–99%) Distinction (75–84%) Credit (65–74%) Pass (50–64%) Marginal Fail (35-49%) Fail (1-34%) Not Addressed (0%) 1. Definition and discussion of Planetary Health and Climate Emergencies (ULOs 4) 20%
Provides a comprehensive, insightful definition of planetary health with a critical discussion of climate emergencies, using an exemplary recent Australian example & supported by highly relevant and varied evidence. Provides a strong definition and discussion of planetary health and climate emergencies, with a clear Australian example. Minor gaps in depth. Evidence is well-chosen & highly relevant, with minor omissions that do not detract from overall understanding. Provides a well-defined concept of planetary health, with a relevant Australian example; some discussion may lack depth. Evidence is relevant, though there may be minor areas where depth or elaboration is lacking. Provides an adequate definition and discussion of planetary health and climate emergencies, with a basic example provided. Evidence is sufficiently relevant though limited in detail or specificity on some aspects of Climate Emergencies. Provides a basic definition of planetary health and climate emergencies; example is present but lacks detail. Evidence is generally relevant but lacks depth or specificity, with key areas underdeveloped, showing an emerging understanding rather than comprehensive knowledge. Provides a limited definition and discussion; example is present but lacks relevance or clarity. Evidence is minimally relevant. Lacks a clear understanding of Climate Emergencies. Provides a poor or superficial definition with an unclear or missing example. Evidence is either irrelevant or missing, with a fundamental lack of understanding of both Climate Emergencies and substantial errors in information or interpretation.
Absent. 2. Definition and Discussion of Social Determinants of Health (SDH) and Health Disparities in Climate Context (ULOs 2 & 4) 30%
Provides an insightful, nuanced discussion of SDH and health disparities with critical analysis of their link to climate emergencies. In depth examination of a vulnerable group, with an example of lived experience. All information supported
by high- quality
references. Strong discussion of SDH and health disparities, with a clear link to climate impact on a vulnerable group. Strong example of lived experience. All information supported by good quality references. Good discussion of SDH and disparities related to climate; reference to a vulnerable group with a relevant example. Evidence is relevant, though there may be minor areas where depth or elaboration is lacking. Fair understanding of SDH and health disparities in climate context, with some reference to a vulnerable group and example. Evidence is sufficiently relevant though limited in detail or specificity on some aspects. Limited understanding of SDH and disparities. Minimal discussion of vulnerable group and example provided. Evidence is generally relevant but lacks depth or specificity, with key areas underdeveloped, showing an emerging understanding rather than comprehensive knowledge. Weak understanding of SDH and disparities. Link to vulnerable group is unclear or superficial. Evidence is minimally relevant. Insufficient or unclear discussion of SDH and health disparities. Example is missing or irrelevant. Evidence is poor, with a fundamental lack of understanding & substantial errors in information or interpretation.
Absent discussion of SDH or health disparities.
6
Assessment Brief
- Role of Health Professionals in Climate Emergencies (ULO 1, 3, 4) 40%
Provides a critical, insightful explanation of the role of health professionals in climate emergencies, analysing their impact on health behaviours, outcomes and health system. Health discipline stated. Excellent example given, clearly linked to prior discussion. All information supported by high-
quality references. Strong explanation of health professionals’ role, with analysis of health impact on health behaviours, outcomes and health system. Includes a relevant example that links to earlier discussion. Health discipline stated. All information supported by relevant and good quality references. Good description of health professionals’ role, with a clear example but limited analytical depth. Links to earlier points. Health discipline stated. Evidence is relevant, though there may be minor areas where depth or elaboration is lacking. Fair description of role, with some reference to health impacts. Example is provided but may lack clarity or depth. Health discipline stated. Evidence is sufficiently relevant though limited in detail or specificity on some aspects. Limited explanation of the role of health professionals. Example provided but lacks depth or relevance to prior points. Health discipline stated. Evidence is generally relevant but lacks depth or specificity, with key areas underdeveloped, showing an emerging understanding rather than comprehensive knowledge. Weak explanation of role with superficial example; minimal connection to earlier discussion. Health discipline not stated. Evidence is minimally relevant. Insufficient or unclear role of health professionals. Example is missing or irrelevant. Health discipline not stated. Evidence is poor, with a fundamental lack of understanding & substantial errors in information or interpretation.
No explanation of health professionals’ role in climate context. 4. Format, Coherency, Clarity, Grammar, Spelling, and APA 7 Referencing 10%
Format is exceptionally coherent and clear, with flawless grammar and spelling. Adheres perfectly to APA 7 referencing standards, demonstrating excellent attention to detail. Format is highly coherent and clear, with minor errors in grammar or spelling that do not impact readability. Consistently follows APA 7 referencing standards with very few minor inaccuracies. Format is clear and mostly coherent, with some minor errors in grammar, spelling, or referencing. Generally follows APA 7 standards, though occasional inaccuracies are present. Format is adequately coherent, though minor issues with clarity, grammar, or spelling are present. APA 7 referencing is mostly accurate but may have multiple minor errors or a significant error. Format demonstrates basic coherence and clarity, though grammar, spelling, or referencing errors affect readability. Shows limited adherence to APA 7 standards, with multiple errors. Format lacks coherence or clarity, with frequent grammar, spelling, or referencing errors that disrupt readability. APA 7 referencing is inconsistently applied, with significant errors throughout. Format is incoherent or unclear, with pervasive grammar, spelling, and referencing errors that severely hinder readability. Little to no adherence to APA 7 referencing standards.
Absent.
7
Assessment Brief
Description of Grades
High Distinction:
The student’s performance, in addition to satisfying all of the basic learning requirements, demonstrates distinctive insight and ability in researching, analysing and applying relevant skills and concepts, and shows exceptional ability to synthesise, integrate and evaluate knowledge. The student’s performance could be described as outstanding in relation to the learning requirements specified.
Distinction:
The student’s performance, in addition to satisfying all of the basic learning requirements, demonstrates distinctive insight and ability in researching, analysing and applying relevant skills and concepts, and shows a well-developed ability to synthesise, integrate and evaluate knowledge. The student’s performance could be described as distinguished in relation to the learning requirements specified.
Credit:
The student’s performance, in addition to satisfying all of the basic learning requirements specified, demonstrates insight and ability in researching, analysing and applying relevant skills and concepts. The student’s performance could be described as competent in relation to the learning requirements specified.
Pass:
The student’s performance satisfies all of the basic learning requirements specified and provides a sound basis for proceeding to higher-level studies in the subject area. The student’s performance could be described as satisfactory in relation to the learning requirements specified.
Fail:
The student’s performance fails to satisfy the learning requirements specified.
