Order this Assignment Now: £40 VALID THRU: 24-Dec-2024
Examine contemporary issues to identify and compare factors that result in systematic variations to the health and wellbeing across populations, locally, nationally and globally
ASSESSMENT BRIEF
Module Name: Inequalities and Social JusticeAcademic Year: 2024-2025
Assessment Period: Trimester 1
Module Code
Level
Credit Value
Module Leader
UNL3006
6
30
Assessment code and title:
OR1
Assessed Learning Outcomes:
C. Examine contemporary issues to identify and compare factors that result in systematic variations to the health and wellbeing across populations, locally, nationally and globally
D. Critically appraise approaches to social activism intended to challenge inequalities within UK populations
F. Perform and function productively and co-operatively within a group in meeting objectives required from a complex situation
Weighting:
50%
Duration:
10 minutes per student
Assessment date and time:
You must check the module VLE page for the exact date and time of your presentation. (WEEK 8)
Other key information:
This is a group debate that is individually assessed.
Debate will take place on campus in your allocated classroom.
Arrive 10 minutes early, prior to your scheduled debate slot. A
schedule with team’s allocated debate time will be posted to the VLE. Submit 500 words report of your debate via Dropbox. This should include an analysis of the key points of your arguments/notes (for or against).
Use relevant literature to support your points and reference PLEASE READ THE ASSESSMENT BRIEF IN ITS ENTIRETY BEFORE STARTING ON THE ASSESSMENT TASK.
Please read this assessment brief in its entirety before starting work on the assessment task
The Assessment Task: Your debate will focus on a case study of a defined contemporary issue. You will be responding to a case study of Jack Monroe, a prominent food writer and anti-poverty campaigner in the UK. Each team will consist of 3 members (up to 4 maximum). All team members should read the case study. Your group will argue for or against the following motion:
“This house believes that addressing poverty and nutritional inequality is the best approach to achieving health equality in the UK.”
Assessment Guidance: The debate is based on a case study of Jack Monroe, her activism focuses on issues of poverty, nutritional inequality, and the challenges faced by low-income households in accessing healthy food.
https://smk.org.uk/awards_nominations/jack-monroe/
https://inews.co.uk/opinion/ten-years-of-bad-policy-have-destroyed-britains-health-yet-were-still-arguing- among-ourselves-1228594
Debate rules
Groups are responsible for the distribution of roles for their members
If a group member does not turn up, the debate goes on
The group members are all responsible for keeping in touch with each other throughout the preparation and research stages until the debate assessment is concluded.
Avoid reading your note
Speeches must be limited to the allocated time, if you go over, your tutor could stop you.
You will be individually assessed on your ability to perform and function productively and co- operatively within a group in meeting objectives.
In your presentation, ensure you address structure, timing, depth and understanding of topic, relevance of key arguments, originality of contents, referencing/ supporting evidence/ case study examples/quotations.
In your delivery ensure you pay attention to your confidence, body language and answering questions that may arise.
Debate presentation
Debate format and roles:
Opening statement of the affirmative team – Speaker 1 – 10 mins Opening statement of the opposing team – Speaker 1 – 10 mins Presentation of arguments of the affirmative team – Speaker 2 – 10 mins Presentation of arguments of the opposing team – Speaker 2– 10 mins Further arguments of the affirmative team - Speaker 3 - 10 mins
Further arguments of the opposing- team Speaker 3 - 10 mins Questions from the lecturer – 5-10 mins (if any)
Learning Outcomes
On successful completion of this assessment, you will be able to:
C. Examine contemporary issues to identify and compare factors that result in systematic variations to the health and wellbeing across populations, locally, nationally and globally
D. Critically appraise approaches to social activism intended to challenge inequalities within UK populations
F. Perform and function productively and co-operatively within a group in meeting objectives required from a complex situation
Academic Integrity and Misconduct
Unless this is a group assessment, the work you produce must be your own, with work taken from any other source properly referenced and attributed. For the avoidance of doubt this means that it is an infringement of academic integrity and, therefore, academic misconduct to ask someone else to carry out all or some of the work for you, whether paid or unpaid, or to use the work of another student whether current or previously submitted.
For further guidance on what constitutes plagiarism, contract cheating or collusion, or any other infringement of academic integrity, please read the University’s Academic Integrity and Misconduct Policy. You will also find useful resources on the VLE: Referencing and Academic Integrity page.
N.B. The penalties for academic misconduct are severe and can include failing the assessment, failing the module and expulsion from the university.
Extensions
No extensions are available for this assessment.
For full details please refer to the Extensions Policy. Extensions are only available for first sits – they are not available for resits.
Mitigating Circumstances
For guidance on mitigating circumstances please go to Mitigating Circumstances where you will find detailed guidance on the policy as well as guidance and the form for making an application.
Please note, however, that an application to defer an assessment on the grounds of mitigating circumstances should normally be made in advance of the submission deadline or examination date.
Marking Rubric
This is what you will be marked against. You need to check it regularly against your work to ensure you are on the right track.
Learning Outcome
(LO)
Distinction
(A)
Merit
(B)
Commended
(C)
Pass
(D)
Fail
(F)
UONL Learning Outcomes – Level 6
Work that is distinguished is of very high quality, with a broad knowledge base and demonstrates a sustained ability to analyse key aspects of the assessment tasks.
Work of commendable quality demonstrating a strong conceptual grasp of assessment tasks in relation to learning outcomes.
Work that is of sound quality, demonstrating a good understanding of learning outcomes which is sufficient and appropriate to the task or activity.
Work of a broadly satisfactory quality demonstrates evidence of achieving the requirements of the learning outcomes.
Work falls short of the threshold standards. Work addresses the assessment task to some extent but overall is limited in its approach and is outweighed by major deficiencies in the work.
C. Examine contemporary issues to identify and compare factors that result in systematic variations to the health and wellbeing across populations, locally, nationally and globally
A broad knowledge of factors resulting in health variations and wellbeing across population, accurately and effectively communicated, wider supporting materials used and applied with rigor appropriate to the subject
A very good understanding/account of the factors resulting in health variations and wellbeing across population. Consistent use of relevant supporting literature to illustrate points
A good understanding demonstrated of the factors resulting in health variations and wellbeing across population. Relevant examples used to support points/good use of wide relevant literature.
Some aspects of the learning outcomes have been met but discussion is descriptive and basic. Some aspects of the work may also include irrelevant/inaccurate information pertaining to the chosen activism.
Description of the factors resulting in health variations and wellbeing across population has key details missing and is limited. Overall falls short in relation to the quality of examples that only partially illustrate points/not relevant to the case study.
D. Critically appraise approaches to social activism intended to challenge inequalities within UK populations
An excellent quality critical appraisal. A well- constructed appraisal that presents a cohesive justification of approaches to social activism. Excellent examples and robust academic evidence are well utilised to support justifications.
A very good and commendable demonstration of a critical evaluation of approaches to social activism.
Commendable justification of approaches to activism. Examples and use of academic evidence to support justifications
Work demonstrates a good and sound understanding/evaluation of social activism.
Contribution demonstrates wider reading/evidence/relevant examples to support points.
Evaluation of approaches to social activism is satisfactory. Discussion achieves the learning outcomes. Contribution is descriptive.
Evaluation of approaches to activism has key details missing and is limited, basic and descriptive. Overall, falls short of the quality standards and contains irrelevancies.
F. Perform and function productively and co-operatively within a group in meeting objectives required from a complex situation
Excellent performance in working collaboratively to achieve goals. Evidence of engaging well in debate which demonstrates a high level of confidence in speaking without notes.
Analysis and argument are impressive in their depth and complexity with a high level of critical thinking required from a complex situation
Very good performance in working collaboratively to achieve team goals.
Evidence of very good and engaging debate which demonstrates the confidence to speak with minimal reliance on notes. Analysis and argument show good depth and complexity with a high level of critical thinking required from a complex situation
Good performance in working collaboratively to achieve team goals.
Evidence of generally good ability to speak without notes. There is good depth of analysis as well as use of critical thinking to create effective argument required from a complex situation.
Satisfactory performance in working collaboratively to achieve team goals.
Evidence of satisfactory debate with some over- reliance on notes. There is some evidence of analysis and the ability to argue in a manner which displays critical thinking required from a complex situation
Limited performance in working collaboratively to achieve team goals. Debate lacked the required level of engagement and may have relied solely on notes. There is little or no evidence of critical thinking required from a complex situation
Order this Assignment Now:£40
100% Plagiarism Free & Custom Written, Tailored to your instructions
