Understanding Health Disparities Among Indigenous Australians
Understanding Health Disparities Among Indigenous Australians
Introduction
Indigenous Australians have health disparities based on historic injustices and continuing systemic inequalities. This article investigates the numerous effects of social factors on Indigenous health outcomes. Knowing the correlations between socioeconomic status, cultural barriers, historical trauma and cultural exclusion might result in much more specific measures for overall health inequality for policymakers. Indigenous Australians have greater rates of heart illness, mental health issues and shorter lifespan than non-Indigenous Australians (Ketheesan et al., 2020). Limited access to healthcare, financial disadvantage and cultural disconnection compounds these problems even more. The simultaneous intersectional consequences of social factors should be acknowledged for health equity and Indigenous health issues.
The health status of Indigenous Australians
Health condition of Indigenous Australians reflects severe disparities and difficulties. Health outcomes for indigenous Australians are considerably even worse than for non-indigenous individuals. This discrepancy is mirrored throughout many health outcome measures, for instance greater prevalence of chronic diseases like diabetes, cardiovascular disease and respiratory conditions. Additional substantial increases in mental health issues, drug abuse and suicide rates also happen among Indigenous peoples. Indigenous Australians live a lot less than non-Indigenous Australians, by around 8-10 years as native infant mortality can be considerably higher (Bayliss et al., 2021). These health inequalities are further pronounced in remote and rural Indigenous people where access to healthcare is restricted and infrastructure deficiencies promote health complications. Colonisation, land grabs, discriminatory policies and child removal have had long lasting effects on Indigenous health and health.
Generational trauma, cultural identity damage and social disadvantage due to these historic injustices have contributed to the complicated health profile of Indigenous Australians. Cultural effects on overall health behaviours and results among Indigenous people are important. Indigenous wellness and health are founded on traditional healing methods, family structures and attachment to land (Ahmed, Zuk & Tsuji, 2021). However, these cultural assets are oftentimes degraded by cultural disconnection and deterioration. Addressing Indigenous Australian health demands an understanding of the multiple drivers - historical, economic and cultural determinants. Interventions have to apply culturally sensitive tactics and allow Indigenous peoples to meet their very own medical requirements.
Social determinants and their influence on the health outcomes of Indigenous Australians
Social variables matter considerably in Indigenous Australians 'health outcomes and health disparity experiences. These factors vary from family background, housing, healthcare, work and cultural and social interactions. Figuring out their interaction is important to understanding health disparities between Indigenous peoples.
Socioeconomic status: Social disadvantage is a tremendous impact on Indigenous health outcomes. Indigenous Australians are also usually much wealthier (in terms of unemployment and poverty) and educated (than non-Indigenous Australians). These distinctions restrict access to essentials such as for instance nourishing food, decent healthcare, and housing (Hendriks et al. 2023). Economic obstacles might also influence health behaviours since people might be unable to obtain preventive health measures or even timely medical care. Additionally, low financial prospects promote emotional anxiety and mental health issues which perpetuate health issues among Indigenous peoples.
Access to health care: A further crucial cultural element influencing Indigenous health outcomes is inadequate access to healthcare. Indigenous Australians are geographically separated, lack infrastructure or even culturally challenged in getting regular and culturally appropriate healthcare. Disposal of healthcare providers and ability to access crucial medical facilities might be restricted in remote Indigenous areas and result in diagnostic and treatment delays (Baazeem, Kruger & Tennant, 2024). Barriers to language and cultural understanding of healthcare settings can also result in health outcome inequality because of Indigenous Australians possibly feeling excluded or even marginalised with general healthcare.
Cultural and social determinants: Cultural and social variables are significant in Indigenous overall health outcomes. Indigenous Australians 'attachment to culture, community and land is key to wellness and tenacity. However, these relations are shattered through historic damage, land eviction, and also forced emigration policies leading to societal loss and dislocation of cultural identity (Cardona-Fox, 2020). Discrimination and racism even more marginalised Indigenous peoples leading to feelings of social isolation & decreased use of resources and opportunities. These social determinants influence mental health and describe high rates of psychological distress and suicide among Indigenous Australians.
Intersectionality: These social determinants connect to form complex disadvantage webs which disproportionately impact Indigenous Australian health outcomes. For example, socioeconomic factors might intersect with societal barriers to care and worsen overall health inequality. Similarly, discrimination and social exclusion could intensify the consequences of financial privation on psychological health and wellbeing. Fixing health inequality among Indigenous Australians calls for integrated strategies which take into account, and control, interactions among social factors of health (Butler et al., 2022).
How these social determinants interact with each other to impact health outcomes of Indigenous Australians
Complex interactions among social factors affect Indigenous Australians 'health outcomes and also cause a cascade of disadvantage which pushes overall health inequality within these communities. These social variables interlink and strengthen one another enhancing effects on Indigenous overall health outcomes.
Socioeconomic background and healthcare Access: Among the biggest interactions would be socioeconomic status and healthcare accessibility. Indigenous Australians might be denied access to healthcare because of socioeconomic disadvantage including low schooling and low income. In many instances, economic hurdles might prevent individuals from affording transport to private healthcare or doctors (Kaye et al., 2021). Furthermore, limited income might allow it to be hard to get health insurance or huge out of pocket medical care. Consequently, socioeconomic background is able to increase barriers to timely and high-quality care resulting in health outcome variations between Indigenous Australians.
Cultural barriers and social exclusion: Additional cultural and social elements also affect Indigenous health outcomes. Other cultural obstacles including language variations, or an absence of culturally skilled providers might also boost social exclusion within the general healthcare settings. Indigenous Australians might be excluded and manipulated by doctors and might be interviewed or even questioned before looking for medical help (Walker et al., 2021). Additional societal segregation produces stress wherein Indigenous people might be denied services because of health system prejudice or race problems. This cultural social balancing act drives health outcomes and disadvantages among Indigenous peoples.
Historical trauma and mental health: An additional substantial effect on Indigenous health outcomes will be the psychological health connection with historic trauma. Colonialisation, forced kidnapping & cultural genocidal induced generational damage throughout Indigenous peoples. This trauma might explain higher rates of depression, suicide and addiction in Indigenous Australians (Smallwood et al., 2021). Poverty and unemployment are socioeconomic factors that could worsen mental health issues by incorporating stressors and additionally by restricting mental healthcare services. Background trauma, socioeconomic disadvantage and insufficient mental well-being contribute to a mental illness burden which is considerably higher amongst Indigenous populations.
Conclusion
Health inequalities among Indigenous Australians demand a multifaceted strategy which examines the several community influences on health. In case governments had an awareness of just how socioeconomic status impacts social exclusion, historic trauma and cultural barriers interreges, health equity might be better dealt with by Indigenous peoples. Enhanced indigenous health solutions must be culturally sensitive and draw on Indigenous strengths. This involves extending access to culturally appropriate medical care, fiscal inclusion and community based cultural healing and resilience projects. Tackling systemic inequality and historic injustices are fundamental to addressing fundamental causes of health inequality among Indigenous peoples. Social justice and reconciliation might help leaders develop spaces which are supportive of Indigenous Australians 'health and wellbeing long term. Strive for health equity for Indigenous Australians calls for an, collaboration, and commitment openness to think about the complicated interplay of social factors influencing overall health outcomes. We can get closer to attaining the right to health for all Australians with coordinated relationships and initiatives with Indigenous peoples.
References
Ahmed, F., Zuk, A. M., & Tsuji, L. J. (2021). The impact of land-based physical activity interventions on self-reported health and well-being of Indigenous adults: A systematic review. International journal of environmental research and public health, 18(13), 7099.https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/13/7099.
Baazeem, M., Kruger, E., & Tennant, M. (2024). Current Status of Tertiary Healthcare Services and Its Accessibility in Rural and Remote Australia: A Systematic Review. Health Sciences Review, 100158.https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772632024000114.
Bayliss, J., Nissen, M., Prakash, D., Richmond, P., Oh, K. B., & Nolan, T. (2021). Control of vaccine preventable diseases in Australian infants: reviewing a decade of experience with DTPa-HBV-IPV/Hib vaccine. Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics, 17(1), 176-190.https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/21645515.2020.1764826.
Butler, T., Gall, A., Garvey, G., Ngampromwongse, K., Hector, D., Turnbull, S., ... & Anderson, K. (2022). A comprehensive review of optimal approaches to co-design in health with First Nations Australians. International journal of environmental research and public health, 19(23), 16166.https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/23/16166.
Cardona-Fox, G. (2020). Internal displacement in Europe and Central Asia: A review of the literature.http://sas-space.sas.ac.uk/9360/.
Hendriks, S., Soussana, J. F., Cole, M., Kambugu, A., & Zilberman, D. (2023). Ensuring access to safe and nutritious food for all through the transformation of food systems. Science and innovations for food systems transformation, 31. https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.12657/60810/978-3-031-15703-5.pdf?sequence=1#page=48.
Kaye, A. D., Okeagu, C. N., Pham, A. D., Silva, R. A., Hurley, J. J., Arron, B. L., ... & Cornett, E. M. (2021). Economic impact of COVID-19 pandemic on healthcare facilities and systems: International perspectives. Best Practice & Research Clinical Anaesthesiology, 35(3), 293-306.https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1521689620301142.
Ketheesan, S., Rinaudo, M., Berger, M., Wenitong, M., Juster, R. P., McEwen, B. S., & Sarnyai, Z. (2020). Stress, allostatic load and mental health in Indigenous Australians. Stress, 23(5), 509-518.https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10253890.2020.1732346.
Smallwood, R., Woods, C., Power, T., & Usher, K. (2021). Understanding the impact of historical trauma due to colonization on the health and well-being of indigenous young peoples: a systematic scoping review. Journal of Transcultural Nursing, 32(1), 59-68.https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1043659620935955.
Walker, R., Usher, K., Jackson, D., Reid, C., Hopkins, K., Shepherd, C., ... & Marriott, R. (2021). Connection to... addressing digital inequities in supporting the well-being of young Indigenous Australians in the wake of COVID-19. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(4), 2141.https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/4/2141.
Policy BriefWeight: 35%
Type of Collaboration: Individual
Due: 10th May 2024 @11.59pm
Submission: Microsoft Word Document submitted TurnitIn on vUWS
Format: Students may wish to use the following structure in preparing their policy brief:
Assessment 2: Policy Brief (600 words limit)
Policy options and implications (approximately 250 words)
Recommendations for action (approximately 100 words)
How the recommendations will address the issues identified (approximately 250 words)
Academic Integrity and Honesty
References (APA Style) [A minimum of 7 References are required]
Assessments need to be submitted in Microsoft Word Format.
In-text citation is included in the word count
Academic Honesty and Integrity is not included in the word count.
Reference list or Bibliography is not included in the word count
Length: 600 words
Use of Artificial Intelligence: Use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) is not permitted in this assessment task without appropriate acknowledgement. See advice on acknowledging the use of generative AI on the Library web page.
Working with another person or technology in order to gain an unfair advantage in assessment or improperly obtaining answers from a third party including generative AI to questions in an examination or other form of assessment may lead to sanctions under the Student Misconduct Rule. Use of generative AI tools may be detected. More information is available on the Library web page.
Instructions:
Based on your Literature Review, the Minister is convinced that the social determinants you identified are significantly contributing to health inequities and require urgent attention. The Federal Budget is currently being arranged and the Minister requires support in ensuring these issues are on the agenda and that there is a strategy to address them. The Minister has requested a Policy Brief on addressing the two social determinants you have identified in the specific population group from Assessment 1.
What is a policy brief?
A policy brief is a concise summary of a particular issue, the options in terms of policy to deal with it, and some recommendations on the best option. It is typically presented in a one-page word document. Guidance on writing the policy brief will be discussed in further detail in tutorials and more information on how to write a Policy Brief can be found here: http://www.fao.org/3/i2195e/i2195e03.pdf What should a policy brief do?
A policy brief should:
Provide enough background for the reader to understand the problem. (You will have done this in Assessment 1.
You will include your revised Literature Review with tracked changes at the beginning of your submission)
Convince the reader that the problem must be addressed urgently.
Provide information about alternatives.
Provide evidence to support one alternative.
Stimulate the reader to make a decision.What should a policy brief contain?
To achieve its objectives, a policy brief should:
Be short and to the point. It should focus on a particular problem or issue. Do not go into all the details. Instead, provide enough information for the reader to understand the issue and come to a decision.
Be based on firm evidence, not just one or two experiments or a single years experience. It should draw evidence from various sources - preferably from several different areas or organisations.
Focus on meanings, not methods. Readers are interested in what you found and what you recommend. They do not need to know the details of your methodology.
Relate to the big picture. The policy brief may build on context-specific findings, but it should draw conclusions that are more generally applicable.
How to do Assessment 2?
The Policy Brief should be specific to the two determinants you had chosen in Assignment 1 (e.g., social exclusion and restricted finances) and the population group (e.g., homeless people). The Policy Brief will include the following:
Policy options and implications: This section should include at least 3 policy options (2 need to be specific existing policies or legislatures and 1 may be plans or programs) relatable to your population group and social determinants. A critical discussion of the existing policies (including strengths and limitations) is required to build a foundation for your recommendations.
Recommendations for action: Based on the critical discussion of the existing policies, you should provide your own recommendations (supported by evidence). This section should include specific and comprehensive recommendations addressing the limitations of existing policies.
How the recommendations will address the issues identified: This section should include the justification of the effectiveness of the recommendations provided in the above section by relating the recommendations to the two determinants and your population group using supportive evidence.
Academic Honesty: You are required to attach to your Policy Brief an overview of how you have ensured that your assessment complies with the Universitys Academic Honesty Policy. Note that the assignment will not be marked unless this is attached. Please provide specific examples of what you did in your Assessment 2 to ensure your Turnitin similarity is low.
Assessments need to be submitted via Turnitin. Email submissions will be scored a 0. Assessments need to be submitted in Microsoft Word Format.
The word count/limit (600 words +/- 10%) includes all text including tables, figures, and in-text citation. Academic Honesty section and Bibliography/Reference list are not included in word count.
Marking Criteria:
Criteria High Distinction Distinction Credit Pass Unsatisfactory
Class and AI
Participation
(Weeks 3, 4, 5, 6,
7) (5%) Student interacts
and engages actively, respectfully, appropriately and constructively with peers and the tutor. Is attentive to others, shows interest, and acknowledges their contributionAND
Contributions are informed by extensive reading and critical reflection.
Contributions advance the discussion. Student interacts
and engagesactively, respectfully, appropriately and constructively with peers and the tutor. Is attentive to others
and shows interestAND
Contributions are thoughtful, informed by significant reading and reflection. Contributions extend the discussion. Interacts and engagesactively, respectfully, appropriately and constructively with peers and the tutor.
AND
Contributions are informed by reading and reflection and not only personal opinion. Engages with others views and contributes to the discussion in a constructive way. Interacts appropriately, respectfully and constructively with peers and the tutor.
AND
Contributions make some relevant points, although they are anecdotal with little use of literature/readings. Is disruptive, disrespectful or rude.
Easily distracted.
AND
Limited focus on the
task. Comments are generally not scholarly or relevant to the discussion.
Policy options and implications (20%) Policy options are clearly and concisely articulated,
AND with an assessment of local and international
policy responses
AND
implications are all relevant and significant Policy options are well articulated, with some evidence from local and international
settings
AND
implications are all relevant and significant Policy options are well presented, although some details are
irrelevant,
AND
implications are relevant but their significance might not be as high Attempts to provide some policy options, although some information is superficial or
irrelevant,
AND
attempts to present some implications, but some of them are of very marginal significance or irrelevant No or limited attempt to provide policy options and implications
Realistic recommendations for action based on
firm evidence
(30%) Provides recommendations that are well developed, achievable and significant to the health issue and the
target population,
AND
recommendations are all supported up by sound evidence Provides recommendations that are well developed, and significant to the health issue and the
target population,
AND
recommendations are all supported by sound evidence Provides recommendations that are relevant to the health issue and the target population, although some links
might not be clear,
AND
recommendations are all supported by sound evidence Provides recommendations but they are basic
or some may be irrelevant,
AND
limited use of evidence to support recommendations No or limited attempt to provide
recommendations
OR
recommendations are not relevant and not supported by evidence
Compelling argument (30%) Argument is both compelling and insightful with a persuasive call to
action Argument is compelling but not
always insightful,
OR
argument is insightful but not always compelling Argument is strong, although not always compelling Provides an adequate argument but with flaws that impact on stakeholders being fully convinced of the urgency for action Argument is flawed
Criteria High Distinction Distinction Credit Pass Unsatisfactory
Structure and writing (10%) Assignment is consistently well constructed with clear and concise
paragraphs,
AND
conventional UK spelling, grammar and punctuation
with no errors,
AND
advanced use of vocabulary and
expressions,
AND
professional presentation Assignment is consistently well
constructed,
AND
conventional UK spelling, grammar and punctuation
with no errors,
AND
advanced use of vocabulary and
expressions,
AND
professional presentation Assignment is mostly well
constructed,
AND
conventional UK spelling, grammar and punctuation
with some errors,
AND
good use of vocabulary and
expressions,
AND
professional presentation Assignment is mostly well
constructed
AND
conventional UK spelling, grammar and punctuation
with some errors,
AND
professional presentation Assignment is
poorly constructed,
OR
poor use conventional UK spelling, grammar and punctuation
Referencing (2.5%) Referencing consistently follows APA style, with no errors Referencing follows APA style with three or less minor individual errors Referencing follows APA style with more than three minor individual errors Referencing follows APA style with more than five minor errors Did not use APA style guide
Academic Honesty and Integrity from
Assessment 2
(2.5%) Academic Honesty and Integrity is discussed comprehensively and with clear examples Academic Honesty and Integrity is discussed with clear examples Academic Honesty and Integrity is discussed Academic Honesty and Integrity is minimally addressed Academic Honesty and Integrity is missing entirely
Assessment2:Policy Brief35%
Due: 10th May 2024 at 11.59pm
Students may wish to choose the following structure in preparing their policy briefAssessment 2: Policy Brief (600 words +/- 10%)
- Policy options and implications (approximately 250 words)
- Recommendations for action (approximately 100 words)
- How the recommendations will address the issues identified (approximately 250 words)
AND
Academic Integrity and Honesty
AND
References (APA Style) [A minimum of 7 References are required]
Notes:
Assessments need to be submitted in Microsoft Word Format.
In-text citation is included in the word count
Academic Honesty and Integrity is not included in the word count.
Reference list or Bibliography is not included in the word countBased on your Literature Review, the Minister is convinced that the social determinants you identified are significantly contributing to health inequities and require urgent attention. The Federal Budget is currently being arranged and the Minister requires support in ensuring these issues are on the agenda and that there is a strategy to address them. The Minister has requested aPolicy Briefon addressing the two social determinants you have identified in the specific population group from Assessment 1.
To complete this assessment you will need to take into account of the feedback you received from Assessment 1.
What is a policy brief?
A policy brief is a concise summary of a particular issue, the options in terms of policy to deal with it, and some recommendations on the best option. It is typically presented in a one-page word document. Guidance on writing the policy brief will be discussed in further detail in tutorials and more information on how to write a Policy Brief can be found here:http://www.fao.org/3/i2195e/i2195e03.pdfAnother supporting resource on writing policy briefs can be accessed here:https://files.osf.io/v1/resources/m25qp/providers/osfstorage/615f56e6fd5b2300e898811c?action=download&direct&version=2What should a policy brief do?
A policy brief should:
- Provide enough background for the reader to understand the problem.
- Convince the reader that the problem must be addressed urgently.
- Provide information about alternatives.
- Provide evidence to support one alternative.
- Stimulate the reader to make a decision.
What should a policy brief contain?
To achieve its objectives, a policy brief should:
- Be short and to the point. It should focus on a particular problem or issue. Do not go into all the details. Instead, provide enough information for the reader to understand the issue and come to a decision.
- Be based on firm evidence, not just one or two experiments or a single years experience. It should draw evidence from various sources preferably from several different areas or organizations.
- Focus on meanings, not methods. Readers are interested in what you found and what you recommend. They do not need to know the details of your methodology.
- Relate to the big picture. The policy brief may build on context-specific findings, but it should draw conclusions that are more generally applicable.
How to do Assessment 2?
The Policy Brief should be specific to the two determinants you had chosen in Assignment 1 (e.g., social exclusion and restricted finances) and the population group (e.g., homeless people). The Policy Brief will include the following:
- Policy options and implications: This section should include at least 3 policy options(2 need to be specific existing policies or legislatures and 1 may be plans or programs) relatable to your population group and/or social determinants. A critical discussion of the existing policies (including strengths and limitations) is required to build a foundation for your recommendations. If you have words, you can choose 3 policies as well.
- Recommendations for action: Based on the critical discussion of the existing policies, you should provide your own recommendations (supported by evidence). This section should include specific and comprehensive recommendations addressing the limitations of existing policies.
- How the recommendations will address the issues identified: This section should include the justification of the effectiveness of the recommendations provided in the above section by relating the recommendations to the two determinants and your population group using supportive evidence. This section will guide your Assessment 3 (Project Outline).
Academic Honesty and Integrity:You are required to attach to your Policy Brief an overview of how you have ensured that your assessment complies with the Universitys Academic Honesty Policy. Note that the assignment will not be marked unless this is attached. Please provide specific examples of what you did in your Assessment 2 to ensure your Turnitin similarity is low.
Assessments need to be submitted via Turnitin. Email submissions will be scored a 0.
Assessments need to be submitted in Microsoft Word Format.
The word count/limit (600 words +/- 10%) includes all text including tables, figures, and in-text citation. AcademicHonesty section and Bibliography/Reference list are not included in word count.
Assessment 1: Artificial Intelligence
AI is DIFFERENT from Similarity. Turnitin detects both.Similarityreports (and can prove) text matching to other sources such as other assignments, internet sites and journal articles. AI suspects, by the characteristics of the writing, that it was written by artificial intelligence, such as ChatGPT.
Turnitin reports a very high accuracy rate for AI detection but acknowledges there might be false positives (incorrectly states was written by AI when it actually wasn't). There can also be false negatives (incorrectly states was NOT written by AI when actually it was).
Some students have acknowledged they used AI tools in producing their first assignment, some not knowing this would be detected or was inappropriate. Some students have denied using AI tools completely.
Turnitin states that Grammarly is not detected by this AI tool, however some students have stated they only used grammar-checking software. I have forwarded these concerns.
Research suggests students for whom English is a first, and those for whom it is a second language have the same likelihood of AI detection. That is,it is stated there is not a bias toward higher AI detection for international students.
I am informing the program and School of our experiences in this assignment.
Assessment 2:ExtensionCurrently your Assessment 2 is due this Friday on the 10thMay. I have reassured some students who received their marks later, or who were confused or concerned about AI, that I would allow an extension to submit the next assessment. However, to more easily manage this situation, I have decided toextend submission date of Assessment 2 for all students. The new due date is Friday 17thMay.I will adjust this on the website (the learning guide cant be altered).
I encourage you to only use all or part of the extension if you need it. You currently have 4 weeks until the next assignment is due. If you use the full week extension then you will only have only 3 weeks to prepare this and other end-semester assessments. Also, staff need 3 weeks to mark assignments (and will commence when early ones arrive) and aim for you to see the feedback of Assessment 2 before the next submission. Please note, we cant extend the due date of the final assignment (Assessment 3) without the risk of not having your subject results prepared for in time for release.
Assessment 2 and 3: Rubric
There has been an amendment to the rubrics of Assessments 2 and 3. There was to be a research project using an AI activity and Participation but this did not commence as expected. This item has been removed from the rubric of the next two assessments. These marks were only worth 5% and have been transferred to the referencing criterion.
Policy BriefWeight: 35%
Type of Collaboration: Individual
Due: 10th May 2024 @11.59pm
Submission: Microsoft Word Document submitted TurnitIn on vUWS
Format: Students may wish to use the following structure in preparing their policy brief:
Assessment 2: Policy Brief (600 words limit)
Policy options and implications (approximately 250 words)
Recommendations for action (approximately 100 words)
How the recommendations will address the issues identified (approximately 250 words)
Academic Integrity and Honesty
References (APA Style) [A minimum of 7 References are required]
Assessments need to be submitted in Microsoft Word Format.
In-text citation is included in the word count
Academic Honesty and Integrity is not included in the word count.
Reference list or Bibliography is not included in the word count
Length: 600 words
Use of Artificial Intelligence: Use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) is not permitted in this assessment task without appropriate acknowledgement. See advice on acknowledging the use of generative AI on the Library web page.
Working with another person or technology in order to gain an unfair advantage in assessment or improperly obtaining answers from a third party including generative AI to questions in an examination or other form of assessment may lead to sanctions under the Student Misconduct Rule. Use of generative AI tools may be detected. More information is available on the Library web page.
Instructions:
Based on your Literature Review, the Minister is convinced that the social determinants you identified are significantly contributing to health inequities and require urgent attention. The Federal Budget is currently being arranged and the Minister requires support in ensuring these issues are on the agenda and that there is a strategy to address them. The Minister has requested a Policy Brief on addressing the two social determinants you have identified in the specific population group from Assessment 1.
What is a policy brief?
A policy brief is a concise summary of a particular issue, the options in terms of policy to deal with it, and some recommendations on the best option. It is typically presented in a one-page word document. Guidance on writing the policy brief will be discussed in further detail in tutorials and more information on how to write a Policy Brief can be found here: http://www.fao.org/3/i2195e/i2195e03.pdf What should a policy brief do?
A policy brief should:
Provide enough background for the reader to understand the problem. (You will have done this in Assessment 1.
You will include your revised Literature Review with tracked changes at the beginning of your submission)
Convince the reader that the problem must be addressed urgently.
Provide information about alternatives.
Provide evidence to support one alternative.
Stimulate the reader to make a decision.What should a policy brief contain?
To achieve its objectives, a policy brief should:
Be short and to the point. It should focus on a particular problem or issue. Do not go into all the details. Instead, provide enough information for the reader to understand the issue and come to a decision.
Be based on firm evidence, not just one or two experiments or a single years experience. It should draw evidence from various sources - preferably from several different areas or organisations.
Focus on meanings, not methods. Readers are interested in what you found and what you recommend. They do not need to know the details of your methodology.
Relate to the big picture. The policy brief may build on context-specific findings, but it should draw conclusions that are more generally applicable.
How to do Assessment 2?
The Policy Brief should be specific to the two determinants you had chosen in Assignment 1 (e.g., social exclusion and restricted finances) and the population group (e.g., homeless people). The Policy Brief will include the following:
Policy options and implications: This section should include at least 3 policy options (2 need to be specific existing policies or legislatures and 1 may be plans or programs) relatable to your population group and social determinants. A critical discussion of the existing policies (including strengths and limitations) is required to build a foundation for your recommendations.
Recommendations for action: Based on the critical discussion of the existing policies, you should provide your own recommendations (supported by evidence). This section should include specific and comprehensive recommendations addressing the limitations of existing policies.
How the recommendations will address the issues identified: This section should include the justification of the effectiveness of the recommendations provided in the above section by relating the recommendations to the two determinants and your population group using supportive evidence.
Academic Honesty: You are required to attach to your Policy Brief an overview of how you have ensured that your assessment complies with the Universitys Academic Honesty Policy. Note that the assignment will not be marked unless this is attached. Please provide specific examples of what you did in your Assessment 2 to ensure your Turnitin similarity is low.
Assessments need to be submitted via Turnitin. Email submissions will be scored a 0. Assessments need to be submitted in Microsoft Word Format.
The word count/limit (600 words +/- 10%) includes all text including tables, figures, and in-text citation. Academic Honesty section and Bibliography/Reference list are not included in word count.
Marking Criteria:
Criteria High Distinction Distinction Credit Pass Unsatisfactory
Class and AI
Participation
(Weeks 3, 4, 5, 6,
7) (5%) Student interacts
and engages actively, respectfully, appropriately and constructively with peers and the tutor. Is attentive to others, shows interest, and acknowledges their contributionAND
Contributions are informed by extensive reading and critical reflection.
Contributions advance the discussion. Student interacts
and engagesactively, respectfully, appropriately and constructively with peers and the tutor. Is attentive to others
and shows interestAND
Contributions are thoughtful, informed by significant reading and reflection. Contributions extend the discussion. Interacts and engagesactively, respectfully, appropriately and constructively with peers and the tutor.
AND
Contributions are informed by reading and reflection and not only personal opinion. Engages with others views and contributes to the discussion in a constructive way. Interacts appropriately, respectfully and constructively with peers and the tutor.
AND
Contributions make some relevant points, although they are anecdotal with little use of literature/readings. Is disruptive, disrespectful or rude.
Easily distracted.
AND
Limited focus on the
task. Comments are generally not scholarly or relevant to the discussion.
Policy options and implications (20%) Policy options are clearly and concisely articulated,
AND with an assessment of local and international
policy responses
AND
implications are all relevant and significant Policy options are well articulated, with some evidence from local and international
settings
AND
implications are all relevant and significant Policy options are well presented, although some details are
irrelevant,
AND
implications are relevant but their significance might not be as high Attempts to provide some policy options, although some information is superficial or
irrelevant,
AND
attempts to present some implications, but some of them are of very marginal significance or irrelevant No or limited attempt to provide policy options and implications
Realistic recommendations for action based on
firm evidence
(30%) Provides recommendations that are well developed, achievable and significant to the health issue and the
target population,
AND
recommendations are all supported up by sound evidence Provides recommendations that are well developed, and significant to the health issue and the
target population,
AND
recommendations are all supported by sound evidence Provides recommendations that are relevant to the health issue and the target population, although some links
might not be clear,
AND
recommendations are all supported by sound evidence Provides recommendations but they are basic
or some may be irrelevant,
AND
limited use of evidence to support recommendations No or limited attempt to provide
recommendations
OR
recommendations are not relevant and not supported by evidence
Compelling argument (30%) Argument is both compelling and insightful with a persuasive call to
action Argument is compelling but not
always insightful,
OR
argument is insightful but not always compelling Argument is strong, although not always compelling Provides an adequate argument but with flaws that impact on stakeholders being fully convinced of the urgency for action Argument is flawed
Criteria High Distinction Distinction Credit Pass Unsatisfactory
Structure and writing (10%) Assignment is consistently well constructed with clear and concise
paragraphs,
AND
conventional UK spelling, grammar and punctuation
with no errors,
AND
advanced use of vocabulary and
expressions,
AND
professional presentation Assignment is consistently well
constructed,
AND
conventional UK spelling, grammar and punctuation
with no errors,
AND
advanced use of vocabulary and
expressions,
AND
professional presentation Assignment is mostly well
constructed,
AND
conventional UK spelling, grammar and punctuation
with some errors,
AND
good use of vocabulary and
expressions,
AND
professional presentation Assignment is mostly well
constructed
AND
conventional UK spelling, grammar and punctuation
with some errors,
AND
professional presentation Assignment is
poorly constructed,
OR
poor use conventional UK spelling, grammar and punctuation
Referencing (2.5%) Referencing consistently follows APA style, with no errors Referencing follows APA style with three or less minor individual errors Referencing follows APA style with more than three minor individual errors Referencing follows APA style with more than five minor errors Did not use APA style guide
Academic Honesty and Integrity from
Assessment 2
(2.5%) Academic Honesty and Integrity is discussed comprehensively and with clear examples Academic Honesty and Integrity is discussed with clear examples Academic Honesty and Integrity is discussed Academic Honesty and Integrity is minimally addressed Academic Honesty and Integrity is missing entirely
