| ASSESSMENT BRIEF | |
| Subject Code and Title | PUBH6001: Health Policy and Advocacy |
| Assessment | Assessment 2: Policy Analysis Essay |
| Individual/Group | Individual |
| Length | 2000 words (+/‐) 10%) |
| Learning Outcomes | This assessment addresses the following learning outcomes: Analyse different theories and approaches to policy agenda setting Apply knowledge of policy development to a public health policy issue Analyse issues in contemporary Australian health care policy Develop processes for the evaluation of and accountability for policy Critique the role of networks and coalitions in the policy agenda setting process |
| Submission | Sunday of week 8 at 11.55pm* |
| Weighting | 40% |
| Total Marks | 100 marks |
*Please Note: This time is Sydney time (AEST or AEDT). Please convert to your own time zone (eg. Adelaide = 11:25pm).
Instructions:
In this Assessment, you will engage in policy analysis. Choose a health policy (either current or past),
either at the state or federal level, to analyse in this Assignment (eg, mental health policy, women’s health policy, preventative health policy, men’s health policy, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health policy).
The Assignment should be approximately 2,000 words (+/‐ 10%) and presented in essay form. Address the following questions in your Assessment but please do not answer the questions as a series of short answers:
Firstly, provide a short introduction to your essay. Then proceed to analyse your chosen policy, and in doing so, consider the following issues:
The Problem and Context
•Describe the current and historical policy context of the problem.
•What is the problem which the policy seeks to address? What problems are highlighted?
•What problems have been overlooked?
Frame of Reference/Dominant Discourse
•What is the common frame of reference or dominant discourse evidence within this policy?
•Are certain words and phrases commonly used?
•Are there any underlying assumptions behind these?
Targets, Stakeholders and their Representation
•Who is the target of the policy (the subject of the discourse)?
•Who are the other stakeholders identified in the policy? Describe key institutional structures, agencies and workforce capacity building.
•How are the subjects of the policy being represented?
•How are different social groups portrayed in this policy and what implications does this have?
•Are there any moral judgements expressed in this representation?
Policy process
•Who were the stakeholders involved in the development of the policy? Who was overlooked?
•Whose interests were represented in the development of the policy? Which voices were not heard?
•What were the potential competing interests and power differentials of those involved in the development of the policy?
•What was the motivation for stakeholders in creating this policy?
•Were there any particular windows of opportunity that enabled the development of this policy?
Policy Solutions
•What solutions are put forward to address the problems? What alternative solutions might have been overlooked?
•Are there any social/power/ethical implications of this policy?
Effectiveness
•Consider the implementation of the policy. How effectively do you think the current policy has been implemented?
•What are the accountability processes for the policy?
•Consider evaluation measures (indicators) and any evaluation which has been undertaken.
•How effective has the policy proven to be?
Finally, finish your essay with a conclusion.
Assessment Criteria:
- Knowledge and understanding of the policy issue (30%)
- Critical analysis of the problem, frames of reference used, the policy process
- and policy solutions (30%)
- Application and synthesis of knowledge about policy theories (25%)
- General Assessment Criteria (15%) Assessment fulfills general academic standards, including:
- Provide an introduction and conclusion
- Complies with academic standards of writing, including legibility, clarity, accurate spelling, presentation and grammar.
- Uses appropriate APA 6 style for citing and referencing research
- Upholds standards of academic integrity, as demonstrated by acceptable report from text‐matching software (e.g Safe Assign).
Marking Rubric:
| Assessment attributes | F2 0‐34 | F1 35‐49 | Pass 50‐64 | Credit 65‐74 | Distinction 75‐84 | High Distinction (HD) 85‐100 |
| Grade description | ||||||
| Evidence of | Evidence of a good | Evidence of an | ||||
| satisfactory | level of understanding, | exceptional level of | ||||
| achievement of subject | knowledge and skill | achievement of the | ||||
| learning outcomes and | development in | learning objectives | ||||
| Evidence of | adequate knowledge | relation to the content | across the entire | |||
| unsatisfactory | and critical analysis | of the subject. | Evidence of a high level | content of the course | ||
| achievement of one or | skills. | Demonstration of a | of achievement of the | demonstrated in such | ||
| more of the learning | good level of critical | learning objectives | areas as interpretation | |||
| objectives of the | analysis. | demonstrated in such | and critical analysis, | |||
| subject, insufficient | areas as interpretation | logical argument, | ||||
| understanding of the | and critical analysis, | creativity, originality, | ||||
| subject content and/or | logical argument, use | use of methodology | ||||
| unsatisfactory level of | of methodology and | and communication | ||||
| skill development. | communication skills. | skills. | ||||
| Knowledge and | The assessment | The assessment | The assessment | |||
| understanding of the | demonstrates some | demonstrates a good | demonstrates an | |||
| policy issue (30%) | knowledge and | level of knowledge and | exceptional level of | |||
| understanding of the | understanding of the | knowledge and | ||||
| policy issue, but this is | policy issue. This is | The assessment | understanding about | |||
| limited. Claims | reasonably well linked | demonstrates a high | the policy issue. This | |||
| The assessment does | regarding the policy | to relevant literature. | level of knowledge and | understanding is very | ||
| not demonstrate | are anecdotal and not | understanding about | well supported by | |||
| knowledge or | well linked to relevant | the policy issue. This | relevant literature, | |||
| understanding of the | literature (either grey | understanding is well | which shows extensive | |||
| policy issue. | or peer review). | supported by relevant | research has been | |||
| literature. | conducted. | |||||
| Critical analysis of the | The assessment | The assessment | The assessment | ||
| problem, frames of | demonstrates some | demonstrates a | The assessment | demonstrates a well | |
| reference used, the | attempts at critical | reasonable critical | demonstrates a very | developed and | |
| policy process | analysis, but the | analysis of the policy, | good critical analysis of | comprehensive critical | |
| and policy solutions | discussion of the policy | including the policy | the policy, with an | analysis of the policy, | |
| (30%) | problem, frames, | problem, frames of | analysis of the policy | with an analysis of the | |
| policy process and | reference, policy | problem, frames of | policy problem, frames | ||
| policy solutions is | process and policy | reference, policy | of reference, policy | ||
| mostly descriptive. | solutions. Alternative | process and policy | process and policy | ||
| ways to approach the | solutions that | solutions that | |||
| The assessment does | policy issue are | considers alternative | considers alternative | ||
| not demonstrate any | discussions. | ways to approach this | ways to approach this | ||
| critical analysis. | policy issue. | policy issue. | |||
| Application and | The assessment | ||||
| synthesis of | The assessment | The assessment | The assessment | displays an excellent | |
| knowledge about | displays attempts to | displays a reasonable | displays a very good | application of policy | |
| policy theories (25%) | apply policy theories in | application of policy | application and | theories in the | |
| the discussion of the | theories in the analysis | synthesis of policy | discussion of the policy | ||
| policy issue. The | of the policy issue. | theories in discussion | issue. The discussion | ||
| understanding of policy | There are some minor | the policy issue. This | demonstrates an | ||
| The assessment does | theories is limited. | limitations in | demonstrates a very | excellent and | |
| not demonstrate any | knowledge of policy | good level of | comprehensive | ||
| application of policy | theories. | understanding of policy | knowledge of policy | ||
| theories. | theories. | theories. | |||
| General Assessment | Poorly written with errors in spelling, grammar. The assessment has no introduction or conclusion. Demonstrates | Is written according to academic genre (e.g. with introduction, conclusion or summary) and has accurate spelling, grammar, sentence and | Is well‐written and | Is very well‐written | Expertly written and |
| Criteria (15%) | adheres to the | and adheres to the | adheres to the | ||
| Assessment fulfills | academic genre | academic genre. | academic | ||
| general academic | (e.g. with | genre. | |||
| standards, including: | introduction, | Consistently | |||
| Provide an introduction and conclusion | conclusion or summary). Demonstrates | demonstrates expert use of good quality, credible and relevant research | Demonstrates expert use of high‐ quality, credible and relevant research |
| Complies with academic standards of writing, including legibility, clarity, accurate spelling, presentation and grammar. Uses appropriate APA 6 style for citing and referencing research Upholds standards of academic integrity, as demonstrated by acceptable report from text‐matching software (e.g Safe Assign). | inconsistent use of good quality, credible and relevant research sources to support and develop ideas. There are mistakes in using the APA style. There may be questions regarding the academic integrity of the assessment. | paragraph construction. Demonstrates consistent use of credible and relevant research sources to support and develop ideas, but these are not always explicit or well developed. There are no mistakes in using the APA style. The assessment upholds standards of academic integrity. | consistent use of high quality, credible and relevant research sources to support and develop ideas. There are no mistakes in using the APA style. The assessment upholds standards of academic integrity. | sources to support and develop appropriate arguments and statements. Shows evidence of reading beyond the key reading There are no mistakes in using the APA style. The assessment upholds standards of academic integrity. | sources to support and develop arguments and position statements. Shows extensive evidence of reading beyond the key reading There are no mistakes in using the APA Style. The assessment upholds standards of academic integrity. |
Get expert help for PUBH6001: Health Policy and Advocacy and many more. 24X7 help, plag free solution. Order online now!
