ASSESSMENT BRIEF
Subject Code and Title PUBH6003: Health systems and Economics
Assessment Assessment 1: Report
Applying Systems Thinking in Public health
Individual/Group Individual
Length Up to 1,000 words
Learning Outcomes This assessment addresses the following learning outcomes:
1. Apply systems thinking and an intersectoral approach to public health issues.
Week 5
Submission Due Sunday following the end of Module 2 at 11:55pm AEST/AEDT*
Weighting 20% 35%

Total Marks 100 marks
*Please Note: This time is Sydney time (AEST or AEDT). Please convert to your own time zone (e.g. Adelaide = 11:25pm).
PUBH6003_Assessment Brief 1 Page 1 of 5
Assessment Description:
Public health professionals must work across various sectors and with key stakeholders such as other professionals and community groups in order to improve health outcomes. Often, these stakeholders have competing interests and conflicting ideas about health, and about what would be the most effective ways to meet public health needs and outcomes. Stakeholders may not even share the same values related to improving public health. In some cases, using a systems thinking or intersectoral approach may pose many challenges for implementation.
To prepare for this assessment, choose one public health issue (e.g. obesity, a chronic disease) in your country of any country origin for which it is obvious that a systems thinking approach has not been, or is not being, applied. Then in approximately 1000 words:
• Describe the public health issue.
• Explain the roles of stakeholders, both within the health system and in other sectors in addressing this issue.
• Drawing on research evidence, explain the obstacles that are preventing the application of a systems thinking approach to this issue.
• Based on the literature, offer suggestions (e.g. new governance arrangements) for how a systems thinking approach could be applied to this issue.
Assessment Criteria
• Demonstrated knowledge and understanding of systems thinking and an intersectoral approach (20%)
• Shows the ability to interpret and analyse relevant information and literature on systems thinking and an intersectoral approach (30%)
• Demonstrates the ability to apply knowledge and understanding of systems thinking and an intersectoral approach to a public health problem (30%)
• Use of academic conventions including appropriate resources and referencing (20%) o Uses key readings and shows evidence of reading beyond the key reading o There is a lucid introduction and clear conclusion or summary
o Complies with normal academic of referencing and bibliographical details
(including reference list, use APA style) o Is written clearly with accurate spelling, grammar and sentence and paragraph construction
PUBH6003_Assessment Brief 1 Page 2 of 5
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 Scheme)
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 objectives, the development of
relevant skills to a competent level, and adequate interpretation and critical analysis skills. Evidence of a good level of understanding, knowledge and skill development in relation to the content of the subject or work of a superior quality on the majority of the learning objectives of the subject. Demonstration of a high level of interpretation and critical analysis skills. Evidence of a high level of achievement of the learning objectives of the subject 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 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
Demonstrated knowledge and understanding of systems thinking and an intersectoral approach.
(20%) 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.
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
Shows the ability to interpret and analyse relevant information and literature on systems thinking and
an intersectoral approach. (30%)
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
synthesis of new knowledge
Demonstrates the ability to apply knowledge and understanding of systems thinking and an intersectoral approach to a public health problem. (30%)
Limited synthesis and analysis.
Limited application/recommendations based upon analysis. Demonstrated analysis and synthesis of new knowledge with application.
Shows the ability to interpret relevant information and literature.
Well-developed analysis and synthesis
with application of
recommendations
linked to analysis/synthesis. Thoroughly developed and creative analysis and synthesis with application of pretested models and / or independently
developed models and justified
recommendations
linked to Highly sophisticated and creative analysis, synthesis of new with existing knowledge.
Strong application by way of pretested models and / or independently developed models. Recommendations are clearly justified based
analysis/synthesis. on the analysis/synthesis. Applying knowledge to new situations/other cases.
Use of academic and discipline conventions and sources of evidence
Use of academic conventions including appropriate resources and referencing (20%)
Poorly written with errors in spelling, grammar.
Demonstrates inconsistent use of good quality, credible and relevant research sources to support and develop ideas.
There are mistakes in using the APA style. 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.