Assessment Assessment 1: Report – Summarising Public Health Informatics (Including Evaluation)
Subject Code and Title STAT6001: Public Health Informatics
Assessment Assessment 1: Report – Summarising Public Health Informatics (including evaluation)
Length 2,500 words
Learning Outcomes This assessment addresses the following learning outcomes:
• Synthesise knowledge of public health informatics
• Analyse the role of ICT in public health management and healthcare access and service delivery
• Examine global and national legislation and strategies for ICT applications in health
• Apply critical reasoning skills to assess and report onthe effectiveness of an ICT project
• Evaluate the innovative use of ICT, including mHealth, eHealth and social media strategies for health promotion, disease outbreak and risk communication, emergencies and disaster response
• Evaluate the ways that systems, infrastructure and resources can constrain the effective applications of ICT
Submission Due Sunday following the end of Module 3 at 11:55pm AEST/AEDT*
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).
In this assessment, you will follow two parts:
1. Twitter Review:
Follow three public health-related Twitter accounts and summarise what you have learned from following these feeds for 5 weeks (from Week 1 to week 5 of the trimester). Critique on how Twitter as a social media tool, can be utilised for informed public health informatics field. Note that you will need to create a Twitter account. You may pick up accounts from the following list (1500 words)
2. Telemedicine in Australia (1000 words)
Summarise the barriers to the uptake of telemedicine in Australia based on articles provided in the learning resources and wider literature (last 5 years). Classify them into ICT issues and management issues and evaluate current methods.
In your opinion, what are the key barriers and how can these be addressed? Provide suggestions and practical recommendations based on evidence.
Assessment Attributes 0-34 (Fail 2 – F2)
Unacceptable 35-49 (Fail 1 – F1)
(Credit – CR)
(Distinction – DN)
(High Distinction – HD)
Grade Description (Grading
Evidence of unsatisfactory Evidence of satisfactory Evidence of a good level Evidence of a high Evidence of an
achievement of one or more achievement of subject of understanding, level of exceptional level of
of the learning objectives of learning objectives, the knowledge and skill achievement of the achievement of
the subject, insufficient development of development in relation learning objectives learning objectives
understanding of the subject relevant skills to a to the content of the of the subject across the entire
content and/or unsatisfactory competent level, and subject or work of a demonstrated in content of the course
level of skill development. adequate superior quality on the such areas as demonstrated in such
interpretation and majority of the learning interpretation and areas as
critical analysis skills. objectives of the subject. critical analysis, interpretation and
Demonstration of a high logical argument, critical analysis,
level of interpretation use of methodology logical argument,
and critical analysis and communication creativity, originality,
skills. skills. use of methodology
Knowledge and understanding
Reports on what was learnt from following the Twitter accounts Demonstrates learning on public health informatics
Demonstrates an understanding of Telemedicine as it is applied in Australian context
(20%) Limited understanding of required concepts and knowledge
Key components of the assignment are not addressed. Knowledge/understand ing of the field or discipline.
Resembles a recall or summary of key ideas. Thorough knowledge/
understandi ng of the field or discipline/s. Supports personal opinion and information substantiated by evidence from the research/course
materials. Highly developed understanding of the field or discipline
A sophisticated understanding of the field or discipline/s.
Systematically and critically discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information
robust evidence from
Often confuses assertion of personal opinion with information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials. Demonstrates a capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts. Well demonstrated capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts. the research/course materials and extended reading.
Mastery of concepts and application to new situations/further learning.
Critical reasoning, presentation and defence of an argument and/or position Specific position (perspective or argument) fails to take into
account the complexities of Specific position (perspective or
argument) begins to Specific position (perspective or
argument) takes into Specific position (perspective or
argument) is Specific position (perspective or
Critiques the accounts in terms of adding value in the domain of public health informatics
(30%) the issue(s) or scope of the assignment. take into account the issue(s) or scope of the assignment. account the complexities of the issue(s) or scope of the assignment.
Others’ points of view expertly presented and accurately takes into account
the complexities of presented expertly, authoritatively and imaginatively,
accurately taking into
Makes assertions that are not justified.
Justifies any conclusions reached with arguments not merely assertion. are acknowledged.
Justifies any conclusions reached with well- formed arguments not the issue(s) and
scope of the assignment.
conclusions reached with well- account the
complexities of the issue(s) and scope of the assignment.
Limits of position are acknowledged.
merely assertion. developed Justifies any
arguments. conclusions reached
Analysis and application with synthesis of new knowledge
Recommends strategies for addressing the challenges identified from wider research
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 and justified recommendations linked to analysis/synthesis. Highly sophisticated and creative analysis, synthesis of new with existing knowledge.
Recommendations are clearly justified based 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%)
*General assessment criteria shown below Poorly written with errors in spelling, grammar.
Demonstrates inconsistent use of good quality, credible and relevant research sources to support and develop ideas. Is written according to academic genre (e.g. with introduction, conclusion or summary) and has accurate spelling, grammar, sentence and paragraph construction. 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 Is very well-written and adheres to the academic genre.
Consistently demonstrates expert use of good quality, credible and relevant research sources to 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
There are mistakes in using the APA style. 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. support and develop ideas.
There are no mistakes in using the APA style. support and develop appropriate arguments and statements. Shows evidence of reading beyond the key reading
There are no mistakes in using the APA style. position statements. Shows extensive evidence of reading beyond the key reading
There are no mistakes in using the APA Style.
*General Assessment Criteria:
• Provides a lucid introduction
• Shows a sophisticated understanding of the key issues
• Shows the ability to interpret relevant information and literature
• Demonstrates a capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts
• Shows evidence of reading beyond the key reading
• Justifies any conclusions reached with well-formed arguments not merely assertion
• Provides a conclusion or summary
• Use of academic writing and presentation and grammar:
• Complies with normal academic standards of legibility, referencing and bibliographical details (including reference list).
• Is written clearly with accurate spelling, grammar and sentence and paragraph construction
• Appropriate citation and referencing used (using APA style)