AT2 Marking Guide & Rubric 2020
Risk Assessment Plan
DUE 8PM MONDAY SEPTEMBER 21
Overview
Brief description of assessment task
Formulate a risk assessment plan to define and characterise the potential influence of environmental factors.
Detail of student output
A written document (2000 words +/- 10%) plus references (at least 6 and these as well as the intext citations are not included in the word count).
Grading and Weight (% total mark for unit)
45%
Unit Learning Outcomes
ULO1: Identify key national and international environmental health agencies, as well as regulatory programs, guidelines and authorities that control environmental health issues; this will be achieved by you demonstrating your understanding of core health protection principles.
ULO2: Explain environmental health safety standards and related management procedures; this will be achieved by you demonstrating your knowledge or appropriate responses to risks.
ULO3: Review and interpret environmental health data, including toxicology and ecology; this will be achieved by you providing actions and priorities relevant to the risks.
ULO5: Critique plans and strategies that define and characterise the environmental factors that influence health; this will be achieved by you providing context to risks and the consequence steps in management of the risks.
Graduate Learning Outcomes
GLO1: Discipline-specific knowledge and capabilities: appropriate to the level of study related to a discipline or profession; this will be achieved by you analysing and discussing material relevant to the unit content.
GLO2: Communication: using oral, written and interpersonal communication to inform, motivate and effect change; this will be achieved by you effectively communicating information on health protection issues in written form.
GLO3: Digital literacy: using technologies to find, use and disseminate information; this will be achieved by using a wide range of sources online to inform your risk management plan.
GLO4: Critical thinking: evaluating information using critical and analytical thinking and judgment; this will be achieved by you analysing and interpreting health information relevant to health protection risks.
GLO5: Problem solving: creating solutions to authentic (real world and ill-defined) problems; this will be achieved by you providing recommendations and solutions to the risks that you have researched.
1 AT2 Marking Guide & Rubric 2020
Details Note that point 1 is covered in Part A, while points 2-6 are covered in Part B. Part B can be Consists of two parts: completed in table form and is a 1000 word
equivalent component of the assignment.
A. 1000 (+/- 10%) word report on the context
of the risk, with a choice of: You must refer to the AT2 Risk Rating Criteria pdf to determine the likelihood and
1. Music festival in rural setting consequences of the risks you identify.
2. Community/farmers' market
3. Local sporting event for children at You then must complete the AT2 Risk suburban park Assessment Plan Template doc and submit that
4. Fund-raising event at the beach as your Part A and Part B assessment.
You will need to follow this procedure for the entire assignment (this is in accordance with the Australian/New Zealand Standard on Risk Management AS/NZS ISO 31000:2018):
1. establishing context - identifying the basic parameters in which risk must be managed (e.g. of the choices provided above). This will address part A.
2. avoiding risk - establishing whether there is a risk and whether potential risk can be averted (e.g. by questioning whether a procedure is necessary).
3. identifying risks - a systematic and comprehensive process that ensures that no potential risk is excluded from further analysis and treatment (e.g. using root cause analysis).
4. analysing risks - considering the sources of risk, their consequences, the likelihood that those consequences may occur, and factors that affect consequences and likelihood (e.g. existing controls).
5. evaluating risks - comparing the level of risk found during the analysis process with previously established risk criteria and assessing available options for ease of implementation and impact, resulting in a prioritised list of risks for further action.
6. treating risks - implementing appropriate management options for dealing with identified risk (e.g. modifying procedures, protocols or work practices; providing education; and monitoring compliance with infection prevention and control procedures). one file needs to be submitted.
Please note that this assessment is in alignment with the Council of Academic Public
Health Institutions Public Health competencies. Australasia's (CAPHIA)
Graduate foundation
B. Completion of risk management plan Parts A and B are in the same template, so only
2
AT2 Marking Guide & Rubric 2020
Assessment Criterion Exemplar Accomplished Competent Developing Beginning
Context (approx. 1000 words):
Points to consider:
Defining scope of event/situation
Organisations involved
Identification of stakeholders & objectives
Determining levels of acceptable risk Identified topic clearly. Described context related to that topic with extensive and informed discussion.
= 16 – 20 marks Identified topic clearly.
Described context related to that topic with significant informed discussion.
= 14 – 15 marks Identified topic. Described context but not clearly related to that topic with some informed discussion.
= 12 – 13 marks Partially Identified topic.
Limited discussion on context.
= 10 – 11 marks Context discussion absent or unclear.
= 0 – 9 marks
Risk descriptions & controls:
Points to consider:
Sources
Descriptions
Controls Risk procedures cover all points extensively. At least 6 different risks covered.
= 24 – 30 marks Risk procedures cover all points significantly. 4-5 different risks covered
= 21 – 23.5 marks
Risk procedures cover all points reasonably. 2-3 different risks
covered
= 18 – 20.5 marks
Risk procedures cover some points in limited detail.
1 risk covered
= 15 – 17.5 marks
Risk procedures are not covered or are unclear.
0-1 risk covered
= 0 – 14.5 marks
Risk analysis & evaluation:
Points to consider:
Risk Ratings
Avoiding risks
Identifying risks
Risk analysis
Evaluating risks
Treating risks Perceptive planning on the event/situation.
= 24 – 30 marks Clear planning on the event/situation.
= 21 – 23.5 marks Some planning on the event/situation.
= 18 – 20.5 marks Unclear planning on the event/situation.
= 15 – 17.5 marks Planning absent, unclear or not related to the event/situation.
= 0 – 14.5 marks
3
AT2 Marking Guide & Rubric 2020
Assessment Criterion Exemplar Accomplished Competent Developing Beginning
Expression:
The plan is well written, grammatically correct, and contains no spelling or typing mistakes.
Writing is of a consistently very high standard with no
errors in spelling/ punctuation/grammar.
= 4 – 5 marks Writing is of a consistently high standard with minimal errors in spelling/ punctuation/grammar.
= 3.5 marks Writing is mostly of a good standard with some errors in spelling/ punctuation/grammar.
= 3 marks Writing needs improving. A number of errors evident with regard to spelling/punctuation/ grammar. A final edit to eliminate all errors would enhance the professionalism of this strategy proposal.
= 2.5 marks Writing is of an unsatisfactory standard with frequent errors in spelling/punctuation/ grammar. This strategy proposal requires careful
editing to lift it to an acceptable academic standard.
= 0 – 2 marks
Formatting requirements:
Black font, size 12, Arial or Calibri, margins approx. 2cm, 1.5 line spacing, pages numbered with student’s name on each page. Paragraphs used. Word count included at end of report. No formatting errors.
Overall excellent standard of report presentation.
= 4 – 5 marks One formatting error.
= 3.5 marks Two formatting errors.
= 3 marks Three formatting errors. A final edit to eliminate all errors would enhance the professionalism of this assignment.
= 2.5 marks More than three formatting errors.
= 0 – 2 marks
References:
The plan is well referenced.
References must be within a date range of 2010-2020.
HARVARD Style maintained throughout Referencing is exceptional, mainly high-quality sources (i.e. peer-reviewed journals and gov/NGO reports), all references correct and more than 6 references used.
= 4 – 5 marks Referencing is of a high standard, some highquality sources (i.e. mix of peer-reviewed journals and gov/NGO reports), all references correct, and 6 references used.
= 3.5 marks Referencing is mostly of a good standard, a few quality sources, and 6 references used.
= 3 marks Referencing needs improving, a number of errors evident and less than 6 references used.
= 2.5 marks Referencing is of an unsatisfactory standard, with frequent errors and less than 6 references used OR no references used.
This plan requires
attention to detail to lift it
to an acceptable academic standard.
= 0 – 2 marks
TOTAL /95
ADJUSTED TOTAL MARK /45
4