Download 5414407 2019600389 HSE111AT2Rubric202001100000002 (1)

HSE111 AT2: Rubric
0 points
3 points
(Not yet achieved)
6 points
(Consolidating)
9 points
(Developing)
Client Summary
Section is missing from plan
Client data has been incorrectly
interpreted and has not been
compared to ABS data.
Health Risks
Section is missing from plan
A health risk has been
identified, but it is either not
relevant to the client or not
associated with physical
activity.
Physical Activity
Correlates
Section is missing from plan
Identified barriers and
facilitators are not correct.
Client data has been compared
to ABS data, but there is more
than one mistake in the data
comparison and
interpretation.
Client data has been
summarised accurately, but
there is one mistake in the
comparison, interpretation
or graph.
A health risk has been
identified and it is relevant to
the client, however there is no
interpretation of the literature
to identify the amount of
physical activity required to
positively impact the health
issue.
Clear explanation of health
risks relevant to the client.
Some use of evidence to
identify the amount of
physical activity required to
positively impact the health
issue.
Barriers and facilitators are
mostly correct, but EITHER
there is no comparison against
the relevant literature OR the
correlates have not been
organised according to the
socio-ecological model.
Barriers and facilitators are
relevant to the client and
have been organised
according to the socioecological model. There has
also been a brief
comparison to other
Australians.
Strategy 1
Section of report is missing
Deakin College, T3 2019
The first PA strategy suggested
is not evidence-based AND not
appropriate for the client
The first PA strategy is relevant
to the client's correlates, but it
is not supported by peerreviewed evidence.
The first PA strategy
suggested is evidence-based
AND appropriate for the
client.
12 points
(Excelling)
Client data has been
summarised clearly and
concisely. Client data
interpretation and
comparison to ABS data is
correct and a graph has
been used effectively.
Thoughtful, clear
explanation of a health risk
relevant to the client. Use of
appropriate, high quality
evidence to identify the
physical activity dosage
required to positively impact
the health issue.
Thoughtful, clear
explanations of barriers and
facilitators according to the
socio-ecological model. Use
of appropriate, high quality
evidence to compare
correlates against other
Australians.
The evidence for the first PA
strategy has been applied
and adapted appropriately
to suit the client's individual
correlates. A theory of
behaviour change has been
discussed as part of the
rationale for the strategies.
Strategy 2
Section of report is missing
The second PA strategy
suggested is not evidencebased AND not appropriate for
the client
The second PA strategy is
relevant to the client's
correlates, but it is not
supported by peer-reviewed
evidence.
No inclusion of peer-reviewed
evidence
Most information and advice
provided to the client is based
on evidence that has not been
peer-reviewed.
Peer-reviewed evidence has
been used to support 2-3
sections of the report.
Research
0 points
Written
Communication
& Referencing
Section of report is missing
Appropriate evidence has
been used to support all
sections of this report.
Unclear evaluation of the
primary studies used in the
report. Strengths/limitations of
individual studies have not
been identified.
Some attempt has been made
to evaluate the
strengths/limitations of the
study designs OR data
collection methods, but there
are some mistakes in this
evaluation.
Descriptions of the
strengths/limitations of the
study designs and data
collection methods are
mostly correct.
2 points
(Not yet achieved)
4 points
(Consolidating)
6 points
(Developing)
8 points
(Excelling)
Logical structure, with
appropriate headings and
clear writing style. Between
3 and 5 spelling, grammar
and referencing errors.
Logical structure, with
appropriate headings and
clear writing style. Less than
3 spelling, grammar and
referencing errors.
Clear and detailed
discussion of how the
feedback from AT1 was used
to enhance the AT2 report.
Reflection demonstrates
self-awareness of the
learning process and/or links
AT1/AT2 with HSE111 unit
content knowledge.
Writing is very unclear, with
many spelling and grammar
mistakes. No headings or
structure. There is no reference
list.
Reflection
Evidence has been used to
support all sections of the
report, but 1-2 articles may
not be relevant.
Complete and correct
evaluation of the studies
cited, including descriptions
of the strengths/limitations
of the study designs, data
collection methods and
explanation of how the
participant characteristics
were/weren't relevant to
the client.
Critique of
Evidence
Section of report is missing
The second PA strategy
suggested is evidence-based
AND appropriate for the
client.
The evidence for the second
PA strategy has been
applied and adapted
appropriately to suit the
client's individual correlates.
A theory of behaviour
change has been discussed
as part of the rationale for
the strategies.
Brief discussion of the feedback
provided in AT1, however it is
not clear how the feedback was
used to help develop/enhance
AT2.
The plan has some structure,
but there are many spelling
and grammar mistakes.
Reference list and in-text
citations contain multiple
errors.
Brief discussion of the
feedback provided in AT1, with
some clarity as to how the
feedback was used to help
develop/enhance AT2.
TOTAL
*AT2 is worth 40% of your final unit score
Deakin College, T3 2019
/100*