DigitalHealthandInformatics DHI401
- Subject Code :
DHI401
ASSESSMENT3ABRIEF |
|
|
SubjectCodeandTitle |
DHI401DigitalHealthandInformatics |
|
Assessment |
Presentation |
|
Individual/Group |
Group |
|
Length |
15-18minutes |
|
LearningOutcomes |
TheSubjectLearningOutcomesdemonstratedbysuccessful completion of the task below include: e)Criticallyanalysetheroleofpublicandprivatepartnershipsin digital health and informatics f)Demonstrateinter-andintra-professionalcollaborationand communicationtoreflectonAustraliandigitalhealthpractices |
|
Submission |
DueonWeek12duringclass |
|
Weighting |
30% |
|
TotalMarks |
100marks |
TaskSummary
Yourgroupwillbe assigneda casescenario and youwillallneed to present a 15-18-minute role-play ofa stakeholder meeting wherein you will identify the problems from the scenario, recommend potential applications of digital health and informatics, evaluate strategies, discuss perspectives of each stakeholder, and demonstrate inter- and intra-professional relationships in the context of public-private partnerships.
ThescenariowillbeprovidedtoyourgroupinWeek6.
Context
The scenarios provided are based on current developments in the Australian context. Limited background information is provided. Your group can make reasonable assumptions based on current evidence. However, you must also build on the given context of the scenarios so that efficient digital health solutions can be recommended.This assessment evaluates your understanding of inter- and intra-personal relationships and public- private partnerships as they relate to digital health. It provides you with the ability to work in a collegial environment and learn from each other as a cohesive group. It aims to develop your understanding on how to transfer relevant knowledge and skills in Australian digital health environments.
TaskInstructions:
Yourgroupwillpresentarole-playofastakeholdermeetingtodiscussthecontext,applicability,current strategies and gaps in digital health and informatics within the given case scenario.
- Review the scenario assigned to yourThe following areas need to be covered during the group presentation:
- Overview of the scenario
- Challenges and gaps within the scenario context
- Needs and/or contributions of each stakeholder (roles)
- Current strategies and recommendations to address the gaps
- Risks associated with the proposed strategies
- Informed summary and actionable next steps to resolve the challenges
- Organise your group by assigning each member to a role provided in the scenario. You also need to assign a Chair who will facilitate the meeting (during the presentation) in addition to their assigned role from the scenario.
- Conduct a group meeting (minimum of one per week) starting from WeekAssign a different Facilitator (or co-Facilitator) for each meeting to ensure that the responsibility for organising the group is shared across members. The Chair who will facilitate the meeting during the presentation on Week 12 will not need to facilitate a meeting in the earlier weeks.
- Provide regular updates to your Learning Facilitator by summarising your weekly group Please refer to the Milestones and Activities document for details of what is expected each week. The Group Facilitator for the week is in charge of submitting these updates (including minutes of meetings) in the Group Discussions. These entries will be labelled Week # Facilitator Update & Minutes of Meeting.
- Assume your respective roles and present your roles perspectives and contributions to the scenario during the in-class presentation on Week 12.
- Prepare a PowerPoint presentation using the following structure:
- Introductory slide Chairperson will introduce the group
- Subsequent slides Each role will prepare 1 to 2 slides (maximum) based on their
- Concluding slide Chairperson will offer a summary, and actionable next
- Reference list A set of relevant resources must be included on the last slide (not to be presented) that informed your discussions. These resources must follow the correct APA 7thedition referencing style.
Pleaserefertotherubricattheendofthisdocumentfortheassessmentcriteria.
Note: Please ensure that everyone in the group promotes an inclusive behaviour when dealing with yourpeers.Inclusivebehaviourreferstoactions,language,andattitudesthatcreateawelcomingand accepting environment for all individuals, regardless of their race, gender, age, religion, sexual orientation, physical ability, or any other characteristic. If any conflict has occurred, please let your Learning Facilitators know as soon as possible.
PresentationInstructions
- Students enrolled in face-to-face and HyFlex classes will present during the class on Week 12. The presentation may be recorded live using a mobile phone or videoThe recording file will be provided to the group for submission via the LMS along with the PowerPoint presentation.
- Students enrolled in online classes need to record your group presentation using MS Teams function. The recording will be played by your Learning Facilitator.
Referencing
ItisessentialthatyouuseappropriateAPAstyleforcitingandreferencingresearchorimagesused.All referencingmustbe in accordancewith the universitys APAReferencing and AcademicWriting Guide. For more informationon referencing, go tohttps://library.torrens.edu.au/academicskills/apa/tool
SubmissionInstructions
Submit your Digital Presentation via theAssessment 3link in the main navigation menu of the Learning Management System (LMS)forDHI401:DigitalHealthandInformatics.Thereisonly ONEgroupsubmission and only one person will submit it on behalf of the group.
YourLearningFacilitatorwillprovidefeedbackviatheLMSportal.FeedbackcanbeviewedinMyMarks.
AcademicIntegrityDeclaration
We declare that, except where we have referenced, the work we are submitting for this assessment task isourownwork.WehavereadandareawareofTorrensUniversityAustraliaAcademicIntegrityPolicyand Procedure viewable online athttp://www.torrens.edu.au/policies-and-forms
We are aware that we need to keep a copy of all submitted material and their drafts, and we will do so accordingly.
AssessmentRubric
|
AssessmentAttributes |
Fail (Yettoachieve minimumstandard) 0-49% |
Pass (Functional)50-64% |
Credit(Proficient)65-74% |
Distinction(Advanced)75-84% |
HighDistinction (Exceptional) 85-100% |
|
Knowledge and understandingofdigital health based on thescenario Percentageforthis criterion = 25% |
10% |
||||
|
Insufficient knowledge and understanding of digital healthandinformaticsbased on the scenario. No attempt to discuss the digital health andinformaticsconcepts.No examples were provided. |
Basicbutfragmentedknowledge and understanding of digital healthandinformaticsthrougha theoretical, non-contextualised description of the scenario. Presentedtheoreticalconcepts which are non-specific to the Australian context. |
Proficient knowledge and understandingofdigitalhealth andinformaticsthoughlimited details of the scenario context and stakeholder roles. Presentedtheoreticalconcepts which are appropriate in the Australian context. |
Comprehensiveknowledgeand understanding of digital health and informaticsthrough a thorough identification of the scenario context and stakeholder roles. Identified actual, real-world examples which are appropriate in the Australian context. |
Extensive and sophisticated knowledge and understanding ofdigitalhealthandinformatics throughanelaboratediscussion of the scenario context and stakeholder roles. Able to discuss actual, real-world examples which are relevant in the Australian and global context. |
|
|
15% |
|||||
|
Didnotidentifyarangeof gapsandneedswithinthe case scenario. |
Identifiedpotentialgapsand needs with no attempt to analysethemwithinthecase scenario. |
Demonstratedlackofdetailin thegapsandneedswithsome attempts to analyse them within the case scenario. |
Identified a wide range of gapsandneeds,andprovided minimal analysis within the case scenario. |
Demonstratedarobustanalysis of the gaps and needs within the case scenario. |
|
|
AssessmentAttributes |
Fail (Yettoachieve minimumstandard) 0-49% |
Pass (Functional)50-64% |
Credit(Proficient)65-74% |
Distinction(Advanced)75-84% |
HighDistinction (Exceptional) 85-100% |
|
Applicationwithsynthesis of new knowledge Percentageforthis criterion = 30% |
10% |
||||
|
Recommendations/strategy demonstrated a limited understanding of the healthcare context.
Demonstrated little initiative in finding appropriate digital solutions for the gaps identifiedinthecasescenario context and capabilities. |
Simplifiedrecommendations /strategy that demonstrated a functionalunderstandingofthe healthcare context. Proposedsimpledigitalsolutions that are not congruent with the gaps identified in the case scenariocontextandcapabilities. |
Well-developed recommendations / strategy that demonstrated a proficient understandingofthehealthcare context. Proposed relevant digital solutions that indirectly addressedthegapsidentifiedin the case scenario context and capabilities. |
Creatively formulated recommendations / strategy that demonstrated a thorough understandingofthehealthcare context. Proposed innovative digital solutionsthataddressedmost gaps identified in the case scenario context and capabilities. |
Expertly formulated recommendations / strategy that demonstrated a sophisticatedunderstandingof the healthcare context. Proposed innovative and effectivedigitalsolutionsthat clearly addressed gaps identifiedinthecasescenario context and capabilities. |
|
|
10% |
|||||
|
Potential risks and limitations intheproposedplanwerenot identified. |
Limitedidentificationofpotential risks and limitations in the proposed plan, with lack of details on risk management and mitigation strategies. |
Identification of potential risks andlimitationsintheproposed plan, with non-specific details on risk management and mitigation strategies. |
Identificationofawide-rangeof potential risks in the proposed plan, with specific but limited detailsonriskmanagementand mitigation strategies. |
Robust discussion of potential risksintheproposedplan,that clearly details specific risk management and mitigation strategies. |
|
|
10% |
|||||
|
Norolloutandevaluationplan presented. Noconclusionsprovided. |
Asimpleenumerationofthe rollout and evaluation plan. Conclusions supported by acceptableassertionsandnot proper arguments. |
Anoutlineoftherolloutand evaluation plan. Conclusions justified using appropriateargumentsandnot mere assertions. |
Adetailedrolloutand evaluation plan. Conclusionsjustifiedwithwell- developed arguments. |
Aclearanddetailedrolloutand evaluation plan. Conclusionsjustifiedwith sophisticatedarguments. |
|
|
AssessmentAttributes |
Fail (Yettoachieve minimumstandard) 0-49% |
Pass (Functional)50-64% |
Credit(Proficient)65-74% |
Distinction(Advanced)75-84% |
HighDistinction (Exceptional) 85-100% |
|
Effective GroupCommunication (Presentation/Oral)
Assumes the representativeroleeffectively Clear,accurate,concise presentation of facts Conversationsareevident in the presentation
Percentageforthis criterion = 20% |
5% |
||||
|
Presentation did not followthe context of the task. No logical/clear structure, poor flowofideas,argumentlacked supporting evidence; the presentation was difficult to understand. |
Presentationattemptedtoalign with the context of the task. Information, arguments and evidence were presented in a way that was not always clear andlogical;thepresentationwas sometimes difficult to follow; reporting most of the times. |
Presentation aligned with the contextofthetaskafewtimes. Information, arguments and evidence were well presented, with a mostly clear flow of ideas and arguments;thepresentation was easy to follow and understand. |
Presentation aligned with the context of the task most of the time. Information, arguments and evidence were very well presented; the presentation waslogical,clear,engaging,and confidently delivered. |
Presentation aligned strongly with the context of the task consistently. Information, argumentsandevidencewere expertly presented; the presentation was logical, clear, engaging, confidently delivered, and persuasive. |
|
|
5% |
|||||
|
Group members and their roles were not introduced. Members did not assume their roles nor presented informationassociatedwith any of the roles. |
All members of the group were introduced and their roles identified. Most members assumed their respective roles and presented key information associatedwiththeirrespective roles. |
All members of the group were introduced and their roles identified. All members assumed their respective roles and presented key information associatedwiththeirrespective roles. |
All members of the group were introduced and their roles identified. All members confidently assumed their respective roles and presented relevantinformationassociated with their respective roles. |
Allmembersofthegroupwere introduced and their roles identified. All members confidentlyassumedtheirroles and presented in-depth information associated with their respective roles. |
|
|
5% |
|||||
|
Limited use of engaging presentationtechniques.(e.g. posture; eye contact; gestures; volume, pitch and pace of voice) |
Sometimes used engaging presentation techniques (e.g. posture; eye contact; gestures; volume,pitchandpaceofvoice) Used some specialisedlanguage and terminology withaccuracy. |
Used engaging presentation techniques (e.g.posture; eye contact;gestures;volume,pitch and pace of voice). Accurately used specialised language and terminology. |
Confidently and consistently used a range of engaging presentation techniques (e.g. posture; eye contact, expression; gestures; volume, pitchandpaceofvoice;stance; movement). Accurately used a wide range of specialised language and terminology. |
Professionally used dynamic, integrated and wide range of engaging presentation techniques(e.g. posture; eye contact,expression;gestures; volume, pitch and pace of voice; stance; movement). Discerninglyselectedand precisely used a wide range of specialised languageandterminology. |
|
|
AssessmentAttributes |
Fail (Yettoachieve minimumstandard) 0-49% |
Pass (Functional)50-64% |
Credit(Proficient)65-74% |
Distinction(Advanced)75-84% |
HighDistinction (Exceptional) 85-100% |
|
5% |
|||||
|
Presentation did not demonstrateinteractions among group members; individual members just reported content. |
Presentation attempted to demonstrate a few interactions/conversations(e.g., questions & answers) among group members but individual members tend to do straight reporting most of the times. |
Presentation attempted to demonstrate some interactions/conversations(e.g., questions & answers) among group members with few individual members employing straight reporting. |
Presentationdemonstrateda several interactive conversations(e.g.,questions & answers, follow-up questions) among group members. |
Presentation demonstrated dynamic conversations (e.g., questions&answers,rebuttals, follow-up questions) among groupmembersthroughoutthe meeting. |
|
|
IndividualContributionto the Group Assessment
Percentageforthis criterion = 20% |
10% |
||||
|
Didnotfacilitateateam meeting. Attended only two weekly meetingsandlessthan40%of all team meetings organised. |
Facilitatedatleastoneteam meeting. Attended at least two weekly meetingsandatleast40%ofall the team meetings organised. |
Facilitatedatleastoneteam meeting. Attendedatleastthreeweekly meetingsandatleast60%ofall the team meetings organised. |
Facilitatedatleastoneteam meeting. Attended at least four weekly meetingsandatleast80%ofall the team meetings organised. |
Facilitatedatleastoneteam meeting. Attended all the weekly meetingsand100%ofallthe team meetings organised. |
|
|
10% |
|||||
|
Limitedornoevidenceof participationintheteam. NoentriesmadeintheGroup Discussions (Facilitator Update, Role Discussion Points, Comments to other roles). |
Participatedeffectivelyinthe team. Limited entries made in theGroupDiscussionsforatleasttwo of the following: Facilitator Update, Role Discussion Points, Comments to other roles. |
Contributes to small group discussionstoreachagreement on issues.
BasicentriesmadeintheGroup Discussions of at least two of the following: Facilitator Update, Role Discussion Points, Commentstootherroles. |
Understandsgroupdynamics and team roles. Detailed entries made in the GroupDiscussionsforallofthe following: Facilitator Update, Role Discussion Points, Comments to other roles. |
Buildsteamsidentityand commitment. Completeandcomprehensive entries made in the Group Discussions for all of the following: Facilitator Update, Role Discussion Points, Commentstootherroles. |
|
|
AssessmentAttributes |
Fail (Yettoachieve minimumstandard) 0-49% |
Pass (Functional)50-64% |
Credit(Proficient)65-74% |
Distinction(Advanced)75-84% |
HighDistinction (Exceptional) 85-100% |
|
Correct citation of key resourcesandevidence
Percentageforthis criterion = 5% |
5% |
||||
|
Demonstrated inconsistent useofgoodquality,credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas.
Referencingwasomittedor does not resemble APA. |
Demonstrateduseofcredibleand relevantresourcestosupportand develop ideas, but these are not always explicit or well developed.
ReferencingresembledAPA,with frequent or repeated errors. |
Demonstrateduseofcredible resources to support and develop ideas.
ReferencingresembledAPA, with occasional errors. |
Demonstrated use of good quality,credibleandrelevant resources to support and develop arguments and statements.
APAreferencingwasfreefrom errors. Showedevidenceofwidescope within the organisation for sourcing evidence. |
Demonstrated use of high- quality,credibleandrelevant resources to support and develop arguments and position statements.
APAreferencingwasfreefrom errors. Showedevidenceofwidescope within and outside the organisation for sourcing evidence. |
|
