Assessment Brief
Module title: International Health and Development Assessment Point: First assessment point Assessment task:
PART A: PowerPoint Presentation: 15 slides
PART B: Word document: 1000-word count limit script for the slides Submission deadline: Please consult the VLE.
Submission procedure: Please submit via the submission link on the VLE. Submission Record
Extenuating circumstances
Ensure you are familiar with the process for submitting a claim for extenuating circumstances. If you experience any extenuating circumstances that may have affected your ability to attempt or submit the present assignment, please follow the relevant instructions on the VLE to submit your claim for extenuating circumstances before your submission deadline.
Academic misconduct including plagiarism
Ensure that you are familiar with the relevant regulations regarding academic misconduct. By submitting the present assignment, you declare that it is your work and that the material and sources of information used, including internet sources, have been fully identified and properly acknowledged. In addition, you confirm that the presented work has not been submitted for any other assessment. You also acknowledge that the faculty reserves the right to investigate allegations of plagiarism and other forms of academic misconduct which, if proven and dependent on the severity level of the offense, will result in a penalty that may affect your progress.
Late submissions
Kindly note that there is no late submission rule – if a student fails to submit the assessment by the stipulated deadline the student will fail unless he/she has extenuating circumstances approved.
Where illness or other verifiable cause prevent timely submission of the summative assessment, you are required to contact the Unicaf Extenuating Circumstances team in the first instance, via extenuating.circumstances@unicaf.org, for further information on how to make an appropriate request for consideration of your circumstances. It is important to note that any request must be made to the mentioned team in advance of the originally stipulated deadlines, otherwise shall be considered as late and will not be reviewed further unless valid independent evidence exists to support that you could not have reasonably gotten in touch any sooner. It is important to keep in mind that if you do not make a claim, or if the claim is not upheld, and you have not submitted by the original deadline, the module shall be failed as a result of no submission of the summative assessment.
By submitting your work you acknowledge that you have read and agree with the above statement
General Guidance
Your assignment should be word-processed (handwritten assignments are not accepted), using Time New Roman size 12 font, double spaced, with numbered pages and your student number printed as a footer on every page.
The word limits stated for this assignment excludes the reference list at the end of the assignment but include all text in the main body of the assignment (including direct quotations, in-text citations, footnotes, tables, diagrams, and graphs).
Please be aware that exceeding the word count limit will affect the academic judgment of the piece of work and may result in the award of a lower mark.
Appendices are not considered a supplement, and thus, will not be assessed as part of the content of the assignment. As such, they will not contribute to the grade awarded, however it may be appropriate to use an Appendices section for any material which is a useful reference for the reader. Please note that appendices are not included in the word count.
The majority of references should come from primary sources (e.g., journal articles, conference papers, reports, etc.) although you can also utilise area-specific textbooks. You must ensure that you use the Liverpool John Moores University’s Harvard style of referencing.
Please indicate the word count length at the end of your assignment.
Marking and assessment
This assignment will be marked out of 100%
This assignment contributes 50% of the total module marks.
Learning outcomes assessed in this assessment
- Critically explore and discuss human and health rights in relation to Sustainable Development Goal 3
Assessment Guidelines Topic
Critically explore and discuss human and health rights in relation to Sustainable Development Goal 3.
ASSIGNMENT 1 GUIDANCE
This written assessment consists of two parts combined count 50% of your overall mark for this module. PART A: 15 PowerPoint slides and PART B: 1000 words script (interpretation of the presentation) on a word document as a description of those slides. For completing it successfully, you must read carefully the assessment brief for Assessment Point 1. Should you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact your module tutor.
PART A: You need to provide PowerPoint slides. There will be approximately 15 slides
The slides should include :
- A title slide
- A slide with your aims and objectives
- 1-3 slides providing definitions of rights
- 1-3 slides identifying SDG 3 and some of the targets
- At least 6 slides that link human/health rights to SDG 3 – for this you could focus on one target area and identify key human/health rights
- A final summary slide
- References using Harvard referencing
PART B: You need to also provide your script as a separate word document. This will be around 1000 words
The document should include:
- Interpretation of the title slide
- Interpretation of your aims and objectives
- Description in your own words of the human/health rights and SDG 3 and its targets
- Interpretation of human/health rights to SDG3
- A conclusion with a summary of the critical discussion points
- References using Harvard referencing
Please upload Assessment 1 to the link under Assessment brief by the end of week 4, Sunday 11:59 pm (23:59 hours) VLE (UTC) time at the latest. Both parts will need to be submitted at the same time on the links available on the VLE platform.
You will need to interpret your slides and not just copy-paste what already exists in your slides otherwise your tutor might consider deducting marks.
Topic:
Critically explore and discuss human and health rights in relation to Sustainable Development Goal 3.
| Your work should include and cover the following sections/aspects and content (as shown and stated in the table below). The specific percentage marks allocated to each section/aspect of your work is stated below. Section/aspect | Content to cover | Marks available |
| Introduction | A title slide (Assignment code and personal details/topic). Based on the SDG3, write about what has been developed in a country so far, what it is not developed, and what we would like to be developed. Write aims and objectives. | 15 Marks |
| Discussion | Providing definitions of the rights. Identify SDG 3 and some of the targets. | 30 Marks |
| Implications | Describe the link human/health rights to SDG 3 – for this you could focus on one target area and identify key human/health rights | 30 Marks |
| Conclusion | A final summary slide | 10 Marks |
| Presentation and Referencing | High quality presentation that conforms to principles of academic writing and contains minimal errors in sentence construction, grammar and punctuation. The assignment followed appropriate academic conventions regarding in- text citations and referencing. | 15 Marks |
| Grade descriptors for Level 7 written work | ||
| Mark range | characteristic | criteria |
| 90-100 | Exceptional Pass | Exemplary attainment of all learning outcomes. Demonstrates an outstanding synthesis of varied theoretical positions in the analysis of key issues in the subject area. Wide-ranging emphasis on knowledge and ideas that are at the forefront of the discipline. Offers an exhaustive exploration of the literature and evidence- base. The material covered is accurate and relevant. The argument is highly sophisticated. There are no spelling errors. Grammar and punctuation appear to be accurate and consistent. It facilitates the reader’s engagement with, and understanding of, the work. No errors in the use of the specified referencing system. Well-presented and organised in an appropriate academic style. |
| 80-89 | Outstanding Pass | Excellent attainment of all learning outcomes, with some met to an exemplary standard. Demonstrates a comprehensive synthesis of varied theoretical positions in the analysis of key issues in the subject area. Wide- ranging emphasis on knowledge and ideas that are at the forefront of the discipline. Extends far beyond expected levels of engagement with the literature and evidence-base. The material covered is accurate and relevant. The argument is generally very astute. There are no spelling errors. Grammar and punctuation appear to be accurate and consistent. It facilitates the reader’s engagement with, and understanding of, the work. No errors in the use of the specified referencing system. Well-presented and organised in an appropriate academic style. |
| 70-79 | Excellent pass | Excellent attainment of all learning outcomes. Demonstrates a thorough synthesis of varied theoretical positions in the analysis of key issues in the subject area. Strong emphasis on knowledge and ideas that are at the forefront of the discipline. Thorough use of the literature and evidence-base. The material covered is accurate and relevant. |
| The argument is persuasive and there are very perceptive elements. There are no spelling errors. Grammar and punctuation appear to be accurate and consistent. It facilitates the reader’s engagement with, and understanding of, the work. No errors in the use of the specified referencing system. Well-presented and organised in an appropriate academic style. | ||
| 60-69 | Good Pass | Good attainment of all learning outcomes Demonstrates detailed synthesis of varied theoretical positions in the analysis of key issues in the subject area. Good emphasis on knowledge and ideas that are at the forefront of the discipline. Good consideration of the literature and evidence-base that develops from recommended readings. The material covered is accurate and relevant. The argument is persuasive. There are no spelling errors. Grammar and punctuation appear to be accurate and consistent. It facilitates the reader’s engagement with, and understanding of, the work. No errors in the use of the specified referencing system. Well-presented and organised in an appropriate academic style. |
| 50-59 | Pass | Adequate attainment of all learning outcomes. Demonstrates a limited, but sufficient, synthesis of varied theoretical positions in the analysis of key issues in the subject area. Some emphasis on knowledge and ideas that are at the forefront of the discipline. Sufficient consideration of the literature and evidence-base, but little consideration beyond recommended readings. The material covered is mostly accurate and relevant. The argument is straightforward and relatively clear. There are no spelling errors. Grammar and punctuation appear to be accurate and consistent. It facilitates the reader’s engagement with, and understanding of, the work. No errors in the use of the specified referencing system. Well-presented and organised in an appropriate academic style. |
| 40-49 | Needs some improvement | Meets most, but not all learning outcomes. Demonstrates limited synthesis of varied theoretical positions in the analysis of key issues in the subject area. |
| Less than expected emphasis on knowledge and ideas that are at the forefront of the discipline. Basic consideration of the literature and evidence-base, but restricted to recommended readings. Some inaccuracies or irrelevant materials that suggest confusion and misunderstanding. The argument is relatively clear, although some elements are difficult to understand. There are few spelling errors. Grammar and punctuation appear to be reasonably accurate and consistent. Errors are minor and do not undermine the reader’s engagement with, and understanding of, the work. Minor errors in the use of the specified referencing system, but meets key principles. Generally well-presented and organised but does not always conform to conventions of academic presentation. | ||
| 30-39 | Needs major improvement | Approximately half the learning outcomes are met. Demonstrates very little synthesis of varied theoretical positions in the analysis of key issues in the subject area. Little emphasis on knowledge and ideas that are at the forefront of the discipline. Minor consideration of the literature and evidence-base, with inadequate use of recommended reading and no exploration outside that. Some materials are accurate, but the amount of inaccurate or irrelevant materials indicates insufficient understanding of key concepts. The argument is poorly defined and defended. There are several spelling errors. Grammar and punctuation appear to be reasonably accurate and consistent. Most errors are minor, but some hinder the reader’s engagement with, and understanding of, the work. Some errors in the use of the specified referencing system. Some errors in the use of the specified referencing system, but meets key principles. Generally well-presented and organised but does not always conform to conventions of academic presentation. |
| 20-29 | Needs significant revision | Most learning outcomes are not met. Demonstrates no synthesis of varied theoretical positions in the analysis of key issues in the subject area. Little or no emphasis on knowledge and ideas that are at the forefront of the discipline. Superficial consideration of the literature and evidence-base. |
| There are major inaccuracies or significant amounts of irrelevant material. The argument is very weak. There are spelling errors. Some of these weaken the argument. Grammar and punctuation are generally acceptable and consistent. Some errors hinder the reader’s engagement with the argument or are confusing and open to misinterpretation. Attempts to use of the specified referencing system. Meets key principles, but there are systematic errors. Acceptable presentation that may include some organisational errors and/or tendency not to conform to conventions of academic presentation. | ||
| 0-19 | Needs substantial work | Does not meet any learning outcomes. Demonstrates misunderstanding of varied theoretical positions in the analysis of key issues in the subject area. No emphasis on knowledge and ideas that are at the forefront of the discipline. No engagement with the literature and evidence-base. The material covered is inaccurate or irrelevant. The argument is incoherent. There are spelling errors. Some of these weaken the argument. Grammar and punctuation are generally acceptable and consistent. Some errors hinder the reader’s engagement with the argument or are confusing and open to misinterpretation. Attempts to use the specified referencing system, but there are significant errors. Weak or untidy presentation that may include some organisational errors and does not conform to conventions of academic presentation. |
Get expert help for International Health and Development and many more. 24X7 help, plag free solution. Order online now!
