Microsoft Word - PUBH6001_Assessment 2
ief.docx
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 cu
ent 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 To
es 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 cu
ent 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/powe
ethical implications of this policy?
Effectiveness
•Consider the implementation of the policy. How effectively do you think the cu
ent 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 Ru
ic:
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
unsatisfactory
achievement of one or
more of the learning
objectives of the
subject, insufficient
understanding of the
subject content and/or
unsatisfactory level of
skill development.
Evidence of
satisfactory
achievement of subject
learning outcomes and
adequate knowledge
and critical analysis
skills.
Evidence of a good
level of understanding,
knowledge and skill
development in
elation to the content
of the subject.
Demonstration of a
good level of critical
analysis.
Evidence of a high level
of achievement of the
learning objectives
demonstrated in such
areas as interpretation
and critical analysis,
logical argument, use
of methodology and
communication skills.
Evidence of an
exceptional level of
achievement of the
learning objectives
across the entire
content of the course
demonstrated in such
areas as interpretation
and critical analysis,
logical argument,
creativity, originality,
use of methodology
and communication
skills.
Knowledge and
understanding of the
policy issue (30%)
The assessment does
not demonstrate
knowledge or
understanding of the
policy issue.
The assessment
demonstrates some
knowledge and
understanding of the
policy issue, but this is
limited. Claims
egarding the policy
are anecdotal and not
well linked to relevant
literature (either grey
or peer review).
The assessment
demonstrates a good
level of knowledge and
understanding of the
policy issue. This is
easonably well linked
to relevant literature.
The assessment
demonstrates a high
level of knowledge and
understanding about
the policy issue. This
understanding is well
supported by relevant
literature.
The assessment
demonstrates an
exceptional level of
knowledge and
understanding about
the policy issue. This
understanding is very
well supported by
elevant literature,
which shows extensive
esearch has been
conducted.
Critical analysis of the
problem, frames of
eference used, the
policy process
and policy solutions
(30%)
The assessment does
not demonstrate any
critical analysis.
The assessment
demonstrates some
attempts at critical
analysis, but the
discussion of the policy
problem, frames,
policy process and
policy solutions is
mostly descriptive.
The assessment
demonstrates a
easonable critical
analysis of the policy,
including the policy
problem, frames of
eference, policy
process and policy
solutions. Alternative
ways to approach the
policy issue are
discussions.
The assessment
demonstrates a very
good critical analysis of
the policy, with an
analysis of the policy
problem, frames of
eference, policy
process and policy
solutions that
considers alternative
ways to approach this
policy issue.
The assessment
demonstrates a well
developed and
comprehensive critical
analysis of the policy,
with an analysis of the
policy problem, frames
of reference, policy
process and policy
solutions that
considers alternative
ways to approach this
policy issue.
Application and
synthesis of
knowledge about
policy theories (25%)
The assessment does
not demonstrate any
application of policy
theories.
The assessment
displays attempts to
apply policy theories in
the discussion of the
policy issue. The
understanding of policy
theories is limited.
The assessment
displays a reasonable
application of policy
theories in the analysis
of the policy issue.
There are some minor
limitations in
knowledge of policy
theories.
The assessment
displays a very good
application and
synthesis of policy
theories in discussion
the policy issue. This
demonstrates a very
good level of
understanding of policy
theories.
The assessment
displays an excellent
application of policy
theories in the
discussion of the policy
issue. The discussion
demonstrates an
excellent and
comprehensive
knowledge of policy
theories.
General Assessment
Criteria (15%)
Assessment fulfills
general academic
standards, including:
Provide an
introduction and
conclusion
Poorly written with
e
ors 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
adheres to the
academic genre
(e.g. with
introduction,
conclusion or
summary).
Demonstrates
Is very well‐written
and adheres to the
academic genre.
Consistently
demonstrates expert
use of good quality,
credible and
elevant research
Expertly written and
adheres to the
academic
genre.
Demonstrates
expert use of high‐
quality, credible and
elevant research
Complies with
academic standards of
writing, including
legibility, clarity,
accurate spelling,
presentation and
grammar.
Uses appropriate APA
6 style for citing and
eferencing 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
esearch sources to
support and develop
ideas.
There are mistakes in
using the APA style.
There may be questions
egarding the academic
integrity of the
assessment.
paragraph
construction.
Demonstrates
consistent use of
credible and relevant
esearch 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
esearch 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
eyond the key
eading
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
eyond the key
eading
There are no mistakes
in using the APA
Style.
The assessment
upholds standards of
academic integrity.