HCM802 Contemporary Healthcare Leadership and Management
Assessment 3
Assessment Details
Weighting: 50%
Due date: See Moodle
Method of submission: Moodle Dropbox
Report Length: 3000Words +/- 10%
Learning outcomes covered:
LO 1: Reflect an advanced understanding of a range of contemporary issues in health service management, including management and leadership strategies currently used in healthcare management.
LO 2: Critically appraise the essential determinants for managing efficiency and effectiveness in the New Zealand health service from a human resource management perspective.
LO 3: Critically assess opportunities and challenges which will impact on management and leadership of the healthcare sector in the future.
Assessment Task
Choose an area of healthcare in New Zealand that interests you. Examples might include mental health, primary health, aged care, surgical services, chronic conditions management, emergency services or oncology to name a few.
Describe your chosen health care context, reflect on your reasons for choosing this context.
Describe at least 2 contemporary issues in your chosen healthcare area. Describe at least 2 management and leadership strategies used to deal with the issues in your chosen healthcare context. Reference your sources and give real world examples to support your answer.
Evaluate at least two essential factors for managing efficiency and effectiveness of those management and leadership strategies from a human resources management perspective in your chosen healthcare area.
Discuss the management and leadership opportunities and challenges which may be presented to your chosen area of healthcare in the future. Provide evidence to support your reasoning.
Referencing and layout for this assessment must follow the APA 7 format in a word document.
This assignment is to be written in the style of an academic essay with introduction (250 wds), section headings, and conclusion (250 wds).
How to get support with this assessment
Talk to your tutor for technical aspects. See the Library Learning Centre for help with referencing and academic writing.
Marking Rubric
HCM802Assessment 3Student Name:
Levels of Achievement Performance Criteria Excellent (A+) Very Good/Good (A,A-) Satisfactory (B+,B,B-) Needs Improvement (C+,C) Unsatisfactory Mark
Selection of health care area Description of chosen area is clear and concise.
Contextual information is clear and concise.
Reasoning is concise and critical. Description of chosen area is clear.
Contextual information given.
Reasoning clear with little error, minimal criticality. Description of chosen area is mostly concise.
Most contextual information given.
Reasoning clear but with some errors. Description of chosen area is variable or flawed in places.
Variable or flawed contextual information given.
Reasoning contains omissions and errors. Content missing.
Sources not cited.
Reasoning negligible.
Difficult to understand /5
4.5 - 5 4 3 3.5 2.5 <2.5 Identification of strategies with critical analysis of issues Identification is clear and concise.
Analysis is clear and concise.
Reasoning concise and critical. Identification is clear.
Analysis is clear.
Reasoning clear with little error, minimal criticality. Identification is mostly clear.
Analysis is mostly clear.
Reasoning clear but with some errors. Identification is variable or flawed in places.
Analysis is variable or flawed in places.
Reasoning contains omissions and errors. Content missing.
Sources not cited.
Reasoning negligible.
Difficult to understand
/10
8.5 - 10 7.5 - 8 6 - 7 5 5.5 <5 Evaluation of essential factors Evaluation of factors for efficiency is clear and concise.
Evidence is clear, concise and expertly used.
Explanation for effectiveness is concise and critical. Evaluation of factors for efficiency is clear.
Evidence is convincing and well considered.
Explanation for effectiveness is clear with little error, minimal criticality. Evaluation of factors for efficiency is mostly clear.
Evidence is mostly convincing but could be improved.
Explanation for effectiveness is clear but with some errors. Evaluation of factors for efficiency is variable or flawed in places.
Evidence is variable, there are gaps in the analysis.
Explanation for effectiveness contains omissions and errors. Content missing.
Sources not cited.
Reasoning negligible.
Difficult to understand
No evidence used. /15
13 - 15 11.5 12.5 9 - 11 7.5 8.5 <7.5 Discussion of opportunities, challenges and their impact Identification of opportunities and challenges is clear and concise.
Discussion of impact is clear and concise.
Critical thinking is clear and concise.
No gaps in understanding/accuracy.
Reasoning is concise and critical. Identification of opportunities and challenges is clear.
Discussion of impact is clear.
Critical thinking is clear.
Few errors in understanding/accuracy.
Reasoning clear with little error, minimal criticality. Identification of opportunities and challenges is mostly clear.
Discussion of impact is mostly clear.
Critical thinking is mostly clear.
Some gaps in understanding/accuracy.
Reasoning clear but with some errors. Identification of opportunities and challenges is variable or flawed in places.
Discussion of impact is variable or flawed in places.
Critical thinking is variable or flawed in places.
Several gaps in understanding and accuracy.
Reasoning contains omissions and errors.
Content missing.
Sources not cited.
Reasoning negligible.
Difficult to understand
/15
13 - 15 11.5 12.5 9 - 11 7.5 8.5 <7.5 Academic rigor (written expression and referencing) APA 7 convention is followed without error.
Formatting and written expression is clear and concise. APA 7 convention is followed with minor errors.
Formatting and written expression is mostly clear. APA 7 convention is followed with some errors.
Formatting and written expression is clear but with room for improvement. APA 7 convention is followed with several errors.
Formatting and written expression is understandable but difficult to follow. Poor use of APA 7 convention.
Formatting not appropriate to the task.
Expression difficult to understand /5
4.5 - 5 4 3 3.5 2.5 <2.5 Total / 50
Percentage %
Grade
