LBR7686 Health Assessment

Assessment(s)

Category

Type

Scope

1

In-Person

Observed Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE)

40 minutes

Marking Criteria

Marking Rubric

Criterion 1

0-19%

Fail

20-39%

Fail

40-49%

Fail

50-59%

60-69%

70-79%

80-100%

Does not address the assignment brief.

Addresses the Assignment Brief.

Structure, Organisation, and

Communication of Ideas.

Very poor structure, organisation, and communication of ideas.

Poor structure, organisation, and communication of ideas.

Unsatisfactory structure, organisation, and

communication of ideas.

Good structure, organisation, and communication of ideas.

Very good structure, organisation, and communication of ideas.

Excellent structure, organisation, and communication of ideas.

Outstanding structure, organisation, and communication of ideas.

For example:

For example:

For example:

For example:

For example:

For example:

For example:

An insufficient

An insufficient

A convincing

A commanding

A sophisticated

An authoritative

interaction that does

interaction that does

An inadequate

interaction with

interaction with

interaction with

interaction with

not communicate

not appropriately

interaction with weak

adequate

credible

persuasive

persuasive

ideas.

communicate ideas.

communication of

communication of

communication of

communication of

communication of

ideas.

ideas.

ideas.

ideas.

ideas.

Discussions and topics

Discussions and topics

are not relevant or are

are incomplete, and

Discussion and topics

Discussions and topics

Discussions and topics

Discussions and topics

Discussions and topics

incomplete.

most of the points

are complete and

are complete, relevant,

are complete, relevant

are complete, relevant,

are complete, relevant,

communicated are

mostly relevant, but

and points are clearly

and points are

and points are

and points are

No conclusions

difficult to follow.

points are not always

communicated.

communicated with

communicated in a

communicated in a

communicated.

clearly communicated.

some logical order.

logical order.

logical order which

No appropriate

Connections are made

aligns to the main

conclusions communicated.

The conclusions drawn communicates ideas that inadequately represents an understanding of the subject matter and is not always representative of the Interaction.

to the taught elements of the module and beyond with connections made to professional practice.

The conclusions drawn communicate a synthesis of ideas that adequately represents an understanding of the subject matter and is representative of the Interaction.

Connections are made

to the taught elements of the module and beyond with connections made to professional practice.

The conclusions drawn communicate a synthesis of ideas that represents a significant understanding of the subject matter and is representative of the Interaction.

Connections are made

to the taught elements of the module and beyond with connections made to professional practice.

The conclusions drawn communicate a synthesis of ideas that represents a commanding understanding of the subject matter and is fully representative of the interaction

argument.

Connections are made to the taught elements of the module and beyond with connections made to professional practice. The conclusions drawn communicate a synthesis of ideas that represents a mastery of understanding of the subject matter and is fully representative of

the interaction.

Marking Criteria

Marking Rubric

Criterion 2

0-19%

Fail

20-39%

Fail

40-49%

Fail

50-59%

60-69%

70-79%

80-100%

Does not address the assignment brief.

Addresses the Assignment Brief.

Knowledge and Understanding.

Very poor demonstration of

knowledge and understanding.

Poor demonstration of knowledge and understanding.

Unsatisfactory demonstration of

knowledge and understanding.

Good demonstration of knowledge and understanding.

For example:

Demonstrates depth of a theoretically informed knowledge base, with at times appreciation of the provisional nature of knowledge.

Demonstrates an adequate understanding of key theories and philosophies relevant to the subject field and beyond that of the subject field.

*Demonstrates minimal accurate knowledge of methodological approaches and how these affect the way the knowledge base is interpreted and applied within the context of the

assignment task.

Very good demonstration of knowledge and understanding.

For example:

Demonstrates a breadth and depth of a theoretically informed knowledge base, at times shows appreciation of the provisional nature of knowledge.

Demonstrates significant understanding of key theories/ philosophies relevant to the subject field and beyond that of the subject field.

*Demonstrates some accurate knowledge of methodological approaches and how these affect the way the knowledge base is interpreted and applied within the context of the

assignment task.

Excellent demonstration of

knowledge and understanding.

Outstanding demonstration of knowledge and understanding.

For example:

Demonstrates extensive breadth and depth of a theoretically informed knowledge base, with a full appreciation of the provisional nature of knowledge.

Demonstrates mastery of understanding key theories/ philosophies relevant to the subject field and beyond that of the subject field.

*Demonstrates accurate knowledge of methodological approaches and how these affect the way the knowledge base is interpreted and applied within the context of the assignment task.

For example:

For example:

For example:

For example:

Does not demonstrate an any understanding of the subject area.

Demonstrates

inaccurate knowledge base, with no appreciation of the provisional nature of knowledge.

Work is lacking in

Demonstrates minimal depth of a theoretically informed knowledge base, with little appreciation of the provisional nature of knowledge.

Demonstrates a breadth and depth of a theoretically informed knowledge base, with some appreciation of the provisional nature of knowledge.

knowledge and

understanding of key

Work shows an

Demonstrates a

concepts and ideas.

inadequate knowledge

commanding

and understanding of

understanding of key

Work contains

key concepts and

theories/ philosophies

misunderstandings and

ideas.

relevant to the subject

factual errors.

field and beyond that

Work contains some

misunderstandings and few factual errors.

of the subject field.

*Demonstrates accurate knowledge of methodological approaches and how these affect the way the knowledge base is interpreted and applied within the context of the assignment task.

Marking Criteria

Marking Rubric

Criterion 3

0-19%

Fail

20-39%

Fail

40-49%

Fail

50-59%

60-69%

70-79%

80-100%

Does not address the assignment brief.

Addresses the Assignment Brief.

Application of Critical Thinking.

Very Poor application of critical thinking.

Poor application of critical thinking.

Unsatisfactory application of critical

thinking.

Good application of critical thinking.

For example:

Consistent critical thinking.

The literature utilised is interpreted, analysed, and evaluated to develop weak arguments.

Viewpoints of authors are interconnected and explored with appropriate conclusions drawn.

Very good application of critical thinking.

For example:

Consistent critical thinking.

The literature utilised is interpreted, analysed, and evaluated to develop persuasive, arguments.

Viewpoints of authors are interconnected and explored with informed conclusions drawn.

Excellent application of critical thinking.

For example:

Constant critical thinking.

The literature utilised is interpreted, analysed, and evaluated with authority to develop persuasive, arguments.

Viewpoints of authors are interconnected and explored with robust informed conclusions drawn.

Outstanding application of critical thinking.

For example:

Constant critical thinking.

The literature utilised is interpreted, analysed, and evaluated with agency to develop persuasive, authoritative arguments.

Viewpoints of authors are interconnected and interrogated with significant informed conclusions drawn.

For example:

For example:

For example:

Presents ideas as bullet

Very descriptive.

points.

Little critical thinking

Inadequate evidence of

evident.

No evidence of

reading.

reading.

Evidence of reading.

Content is reduced to

Content is reduced to

mainly student

Content of sources are

student viewpoints and

viewpoints and

described, but no

opinions only.

opinions only.

attempt to explain.

No attempt at

Inadequate attempt at

An attempt at analysis

identifying strengths

analysis.

that is reduced to

and weaknesses.

strengths and

Inadequate attempt to

weaknesses.

No attempt to draw

draw conclusions.

conclusions.

An attempt to draw

conclusions.

Marking Criteria

Marking Rubric

Criterion 4

0-19%

Fail

20-39%

Fail

40-49%

Fail

50-59%

60-69%

70-79%

80-100%

Referencing and Citing of Sources to Support Work.

Very Poor referencing and citing of sources to support work.

Poor referencing and citing of sources to support work.

Unsatisfactory referencing and citing of sources to support work.

Good referencing and citing of sources to support work.

Very good referencing and citing of sources to support work.

Excellent referencing and citing of sources to support work.

Outstanding referencing and citing of sources to support work.

For example:

For example:

For example:

For example:

For example:

For example:

For example:

No sources are cited.

A limited reference list provided.

Sources are cited.

Sources are cited.

Sources are cited.

Sources are cited.

Sources are cited.

No reference list

provided.

Quotations used out of context.

No paraphrasing.

No key authors cited or referenced.

No engagement with module reading list.

Use of inappropriate sources – all websites.

Many sources are missing a citation or a reference list item.

Inaccurate use of the BCU Harvard referencing system.

Reference list provided.

Work relies heavily on using quotations superficially.

Attempts at paraphrasing.

Few key authors cited or referenced.

Little engagement with module reading list.

Moderate use of inappropriate sources.

Little variety in sources used.

Some sources are missing a citation or a reference list item.

Few inaccuracies when using the BCU Harvard referencing system.

Reference list provided.

Paraphrasing demonstrates understanding of reading.

Quotations used appropriately.

Key authors cited and referenced.

Engages with module reading list.

Some variety in sources used.

Majority sources have a citation and a reference list item.

Few inaccuracies when using the BCU Harvard referencing system.

*Demonstrates independent, systematic research skills, with convincing critical thinking applied to the searching and use of information.

Reference list provided.

Paraphrasing demonstrates accuracy of understanding the reading.

Quotations used and explained.

Key authors cited and referenced.

Engages with the module reading list with some wider reading.

All sources have a citation and a reference list item.

Few inaccuracies when using the BCU Harvard referencing system.

*Demonstrates independent, systematic research skills, with compelling critical thinking applied to the searching and use of information.

Reference list provided.

Paraphrasing demonstrates accuracy of understanding the reading.

Quotations used and explored.

Engages both key authors and some of the module reading list to develop and construct academic discussion.

Wider reading beyond the module reading list is evident.

All sources have a citation and a reference list item.

Few inaccuracies when using the BCU Harvard referencing system.

*Demonstrates extensive independent, systematic research skills, with sophisticated critical thinking applied to the searching and use of

information.

Reference list provided.

Paraphrasing demonstrates accuracy of understanding the reading and integrated within the discussion.

Quotations used effectively and in an insightful way.

Engages both the key authors and the specific sources from the module reading list to develop and construct persuasive academic discussion.

Wider and deeper reading is evident.

All sources have a citation, a reference list item, and is fully accurate using the BCU Harvard referencing system.

*Demonstrates extensive independent, systematic research skills, with authoritative critical thinking applied to the searching and use of information.

Conditions of Progression

To be successful within this assessment the student must achieve the required pass rate for the level of study at which they are undertaking. For level 7 the pass rate is 50%.

In accordance with BCU policy the student will be allowed 2 attempts at this assessment. Upon being unsuccessful at both attempts the student will be marked as a fail and withdrawn from the module.

Late or Non-Submission/ Attendance

Assessments must be submitted in the format specified in the assessment task, by the deadline and to the submission point published on Moodle. Failure to submit by the published deadline will result in penalties which are set out in Section 6 of the Academic Regulations, available at:

late-submission-of-assessment-policy-version-10-approved-june-2022- 133082470192470694.pdf (windows.net)

Please be aware that the penalties are different for re-submissions and ‘in-year retrievals’.

For in-person assessments, you should arrive 15 minutes before your allocated time slot. Failure to present at your allocated time, will result in you being unable to sit the assessment and you will be recorded as a

non-submission, resulting in a grade of 0.

Word Count

The word count for this module assessment is shown under the assessment task. A +10% margin of tolerance is applied, beyond which nothing further will be marked. Marks cannot be awarded for any learning outcomes addressed outside the word count.

The word count refers to everything in the main body of the text (including headings, tables, citations, quotes, lists etc.). Everything before (i.e. abstract, acknowledgements, contents, executive summaries etc.) and after the main text (i.e. references, appendices) is not included in the word count limit.

For in-person assessments time limits will be applied.

Academic Integrity Guidance

Academic integrity is the attitude of approaching your academic work honestly, by completing your own original work, attributing, and acknowledging your sources when necessary. Understanding good academic practice in written and oral work is a key element of academic integrity. It is a positive aspect of joining an academic community, showing familiarity with, and acknowledging sources of evidence. The skills you require at higher education may differ from those learned elsewhere such as school or college.

You will be required to follow specific academic conventions which include acknowledging the work of others through appropriate referencing and citation as explicitly as possible. If you include ideas or quotations which have not been appropriately acknowledged, this may be seen as plagiarism which is a form of academic misconduct. If you require support around referencing, please contact the Faculty’s Academic Development Department or the University wide Centre for Academic Success.

It is important to recognise that seeking out learning around academic integrity will help reduce the risk of misconduct in your work. Skills such as paraphrasing, referencing and citation are integral to acting with integrity and you can develop and advance these key academic skills through the Faculty’s Academic Development Department.

Academic Misconduct

Academic misconduct is conduct which has or may have the effect of providing you with an unfair advantage by relying on dishonest means to gain advantage and which therefore compromises your academic integrity.

The procedure sets out the process we will follow, and the penalties we may apply, in cases where we believe you may have compromised your academic integrity by committing academic misconduct. The Academic Misconduct Procedure and information about academic support is available at:

https://icity.bcu.ac.uk/Student-Affairs/Appeals-and-

Resolutions/Academic-Misconduct-Procedure

Turnitin

To obtain a Turnitin scan before submitting your work to your department please visit the University`s ‘Turnitin at BCU’ Moodle site. Work that is submitted and scanned through this service is not stored on the main Turnitin system and this is NOT your submitted work.