| ASSESSMENT BRIEF | |
| Subject Code and Title | PUBH6003: Health Systems and Economics |
| Assessment | Assessment 2: Case Study |
| Individual/Group | Part A: Group presentation Part B: Individual written submission |
| Length | Part A: 20 minute group presentation and submission of presentation Part B: Case Study Summary 1,000 words (+/- 10%) |
| Learning Outcomes | This assessment addresses the following learning outcomes: Understand the core competencies of public health workers, and how public health competencies can be fosteredUnderstand the rationale for and development of universal health coverage.Analyse public health expenditure estimation strategiesUnderstand the role of government regulation of the healthcare sector |
| Submission | Part A: Group Presentation due Week 11 in class Part B: Due Sunday following the end of Module 6.1 in week 11 at 11:55pm AEST/AEDT. For 6 week intensive class: Part A: Group Presentation due Week 6 in class Part B: Due Sunday following the end of Module 6.1 in week 6 at 11:55pm AEST/AEDT. |
| Weighting | Total – 50% consisting of: Part A: 25% Part B: 25% |
| Total Marks | 100 marks |
Context:
The opportunity to research a particular country’s healthcare system will facilitate understanding of the interdependent relationship between economics, health care and public health. You can begin to get an understanding of the way a country perceives health and well—being by examining the areas to which resources are allocated, how efficiently they are managed, and how effective they are in terms of health care outcomes.
Instructions:
Select a public health system in a country of your choosing (other than your own).
Part A: Group Presentation Assessment Description:
In a small group of 3 to 4 students prepare your presentation, discuss the following issues:
- How the public health system is both organised and funded. As part of this, describe the following:
- The percentage of Gross Domestic Product spent upon health and how this compares with Australia (or another country);
- Where the money to fund this system comes from;
- How expenditures for public health services, including prevention programs, are estimated.
- What the mix of public and private expenditure and services is;
- Whether a proportion of funding comes from development assistance for health or any form of innovative financing;
- The underlying trends (demographic, changes in treatment, or technology) which help to explain expenditure;
- The extent to which health coverage is universal.
- Any economic levers that are used, or could be used, to achieve better health outcomes in your chosen country.
- How your chosen country performs in terms of the key elements or building blocks of the health system (as identified by WHO 2007; 2009) e.g. are there key workforce shortages in a particular profession and how might imbalances be addressed; and is the workforce appropriately trained to develop core competencies?
- Explain what cost—benefit analysis and cost—effectiveness analysis are and how they could be used to assist with resource allocation in relation to analysing the health system (you are not expected to perform the analysis, but you are required to understand these key concepts and say how you might go about the analysis). Additionally, describe a potential health system reform you could implement in your chosen country to improve weaknesses in the system.
Part B: Individual Case Study Summary
In 1000 words (+/- 10%), write a summary of the key points from the three sections of Part A. This should include a concise summary of:
- How the public health system is both organised and funded
- How your chosen country performs in terms of the WHO’s key building blocks of the health system
- A potential health system reform you could implement in your chosen country to improve weaknesses in the system
Note: This is an individual assessment and students must work independently to create their own individual work
Submission Instructions:
Submit via the Assessment 2 – link in Assessment on main navigation menu in Blackboard
Other issues
On Campus students:
How will the groups be set up?
Your lecturer will assign the groups. Groups will be formed in blackboard for each group.
Should we submit our presentation on blackboard?
Yes, the presentation slides should be submitted on blackboard after the presentation has been given in class
What if I can’t make it to class when my group are due to present?
If you have any unforeseen circumstances in week 11 (for example, illness or emergency), your group will have the option to give the presentation in week 12.
If these circumstances still prevent you attending in week 12, your group can present
their sections and you can have the option, for your section, of recording your voice to powerpoint slides and submitting this online.
How do we make sure everyone contributes?
You should all contribute evenly to the preparation and delivery of the presentation.
You will be provided with a peer evaluation form which you will submit with your presentation on blackboard.
This forms asks you to specify the contribution of group members.
If you have any concerns prior to this about group member contribution, in the first instance, you should attempt to resolve this in your group.
If this is not successful, speak to your lecturer.
If a student does not contribute at all towards preparing the presentation and does not show up in week 11 or 12 without an adequate reason, they will not receive a mark for the presentation.
How will the marks be distributed?
If all group members contribute evenly towards preparation and delivery of the presentation, they will all receive the same mark.
Variations to this will depend upon whether there is disagreement about the contribution of group members.
Such disagreements should be documented in the peer review form, and discussed with your lecturer. The lecturer will determine mark distribution depending upon relative contribution of group members.
Online students:
How will the groups be set up?
Your lecturer will assign the groups. Groups will be formed in blackboard for each group.
As online students, it is your responsibility to be in contact with each other and organise how to undertake the task
and divide responsibilities.
How should we submit our presentation?
You should submit your presentation on blackboard by Sunday of week 11.
Your presentation should consist of powerpoint slides with voice recordings for each slide. Your recordings should add up to 15 minutes.
Your lecturer can provide some instructions how to record audio material to slides.
You are welcome to explore other ways to add audio and/or video content (optional) to slides. All group members should contribute towards the preparation and delivery (via voice recording) of the presentation.
How do we make sure everyone contributes?
You should all contribute evenly to the preparation and delivery of the presentation.
You will be provided with a peer evaluation form which you will submit with your presentation on blackboard.
This forms asks you to specify the contribution of group members.
If you have any concerns prior to this about group member contribution, in the first instance, you should attempt to resolve this in your group.
If this is not successful, contact your lecturer.
If a student does not contribute at all towards preparing the presentation
and does not contribute to recording audio content for the presentation, they will not receive a mark.
How will the marks be distributed?
If all group members contribute evenly towards preparation and delivery of the presentation, they will all receive the same mark.
Variations to this will depend upon whether there is disagreement about the contribution of group members.
Such disagreements should be documented in the peer review form, and discussed with your lecturer. The lecturer will determine mark distribution depending upon relative contribution of group members.
Assessment criteria:
Demonstrates the ability to interpret and analyse relevant concepts and literature on universal health coverage, health systems, core competencies in public health and cost— benefit analysis and cost—effectiveness analysis. (30%)
Demonstrates the ability to apply knowledge and understanding of health systems and core competencies in public health to a case example. (15%)
Critical analysis of key health system issues for the selected country. (20%)
Demonstrated knowledge and understanding of the principles of health economics including health expenditure estimation, resource allocation issues, economic levers and equity considerations. (10%)
Understanding and analysis of equity principles in health economics. (10%) Addresses
General assessment criteria: (15%)
- Uses key readings and shows evidence of reading beyond the key reading.
- There is a lucid introduction and clear conclusion or summary
- Complies with normal academic of referencing and bibliographical details (including reference list, use APA style).
- Is written clearly with accurate spelling, grammar and sentence and paragraph construction.
Marking Rubric:
| Assessment Attributes | 0-34 (Fail 2 – F2) Unacceptable | 35-49 (Fail 1 – F1) Poor | 50-64 (Pass -P) Functional | 65-74 (Credit – CR) Proficient | 75-84 (Distinction – DN) Advanced | 85-100 (High Distinction – HD) Exceptional |
| Grade Description (Grading | Evidence of unsatisfactory | Evidence of | Evidence of a good | Evidence of a high | Evidence of an | |
| Scheme) | achievement of one or more | satisfactory | level of understanding, | level of achievement | exceptional level of | |
| of the learning objectives of | achievement of | knowledge and skill | of the learning | achievement of | ||
| the subject, insufficient | subject learning | development in | objectives of the | learning objectives | ||
| understanding of the subject | objectives, the | relation to the content | subject | across the entire | ||
| content and/or unsatisfactory | development of | of the subject or work | demonstrated in | content of the course | ||
| level of skill development. | relevant skills to a | of a superior quality on | such areas as | demonstrated in such | ||
| competent level, and | the majority of the | interpretation and | areas as interpretation | |||
| adequate | learning objectives of | critical analysis, | and critical analysis, | |||
| interpretation and | the subject. | logical argument, use | logical argument, | |||
| critical analysis skills. | Demonstration of a | of methodology and | creativity, originality, | |||
| high level of | communication skills. | use of methodology | ||||
| interpretation and | and communication | |||||
| critical analysis skills. | skills. | |||||
| Knowledge and understanding | Limited understanding of required concepts and knowledge. Key components of the assignment are not addressed. | Knowledge/understa nding of the field or discipline. Resembles a recall or summary of key ideas. Often conflates/confuses assertion of personal opinion with information substantiated by | Thorough knowledge/understand ing of the field or discipline/s. Supports personal opinion and information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials. Demonstrates a capacity to explain and apply relevant | Highly developed understanding of the field or discipline/s. Discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading. | A sophisticated understanding of the field or discipline/s. Systematically and critically discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading. | |
| Demonstrated knowledge and | ||||||
| understanding of the principles of | ||||||
| health economics including health | ||||||
| expenditure estimation, resource | ||||||
| allocation issues, economic levers | ||||||
| and equity considerations. (10%) | ||||||
| Understanding and analysis of | ||||||
| equity principles in health | ||||||
| economics. (10%) | evidence from the research/course materials. | concepts. | Well demonstrated capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts. | Mastery of concepts and application to new situations/further learning. | |
| Critical reasoning, presentation and defence of an argument and/or position Critical analysis of key health system issues for the selected country. (20%) | Specific position (perspective or argument) fails to take into account the complexities of the issue(s) or scope of the assignment. Makes assertions that are not justified. | Specific position (perspective or argument) begins to take into account the issue(s) or scope of the assignment. Justifies any conclusions reached with arguments not merely assertion. | Specific position (perspective or argument) takes into account the complexities of the issue(s) or scope of the assignment. Others’ points of view are acknowledged. Justifies any conclusions reached with well-formed arguments not merely assertion. | Specific position (perspective or argument) is expertly presented and accurately takes into account the complexities of the issue(s) and scope of the assignment. Justifies any conclusions reached with well-developed arguments. | Specific position (perspective or argument) is presented expertly, authoritatively and imaginatively, accurately taking into account the complexities of the issue(s) and scope of the assignment. Limits of position are acknowledged. Justifies any conclusions reached with sophisticated arguments. |
| Analysis and application with | Limited synthesis and analysis. | Demonstrated | Well-developed | Thoroughly | Highly sophisticated |
| synthesis of new knowledge | analysis and synthesis | analysis and synthesis | developed and | and creative analysis, | |
| Limited | of new knowledge | with application of | creative analysis and | synthesis of new with | |
| application/recommendations | with application. | recommendations | synthesis with | existing knowledge. | |
| Demonstrates the ability to apply knowledge and understanding of | based upon analysis. | Shows the ability to | linked to analysis/synthesis. | application of pretested models | Strong application by |
| health systems and core | interpret relevant | and / or | way of pretested | ||
| competencies in public health to a | information and | independently | models and / or | ||
| case example. (15%) | literature. | developed models | independently | ||
| and justified | developed models. | ||||
| recommendations linked to | Recommendations are clearly justified based |
| Demonstrates the ability to interpret and analyse relevant concepts and literature on universal health coverage, health systems and core competencies in public health. (20%) Shows the ability to interpret and analyse relevant information and literature on economic considerations. (10%) | analysis/synthesis. | on the analysis/synthesis. Applying knowledge to new situations/other cases. | |||
| Use of academic and discipline | Poorly written with errors in | Is written according to academic genre (e.g. with introduction, conclusion or summary) and has accurate spelling, grammar, sentence and 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. | Is well-written and adheres to the academic genre (e.g. with introduction, conclusion or summary). Demonstrates consistent use of high quality, credible and relevant research sources to support and develop ideas. There are no mistakes in using the APA style. | Is very well-written and adheres to the academic genre. Consistently demonstrates expert use of good quality, credible and relevant research 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. | Expertly written and adheres to the academic genre. Demonstrates expert use of high-quality, credible and relevant research 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. |
| conventions and sources of | spelling, grammar. | ||||
| evidence | Demonstrates inconsistent | ||||
| Addresses General assessment | use of good quality, credible | ||||
| criteria: (15%) | and relevant research sources | ||||
| a. Uses key readings and shows | to support and develop ideas. | ||||
| evidence of reading beyond the key reading b. There is a lucid introduction and | There are mistakes in using the APA style. | ||||
| clear conclusion or summary | |||||
| c. Complies with normal academic | |||||
| of referencing and | |||||
| bibliographical details (including | |||||
| reference list, use APA style). | |||||
| d. Is written clearly with accurate | |||||
| spelling, grammar and sentence and paragraph construction. |
Get expert help for Health Systems and Economics and many more. 24X7 help, plag free solution. Order online now!
