social capital in rural community or social capital in high density community
getyourgameon
markingguide.docx
BRD 251: ASSESSMENT TASK 2a: Group Task
Group power point presentation in ONE of the topics below
Group No. Choose an item.
|
Student Names |
Student Number |
SLIDES: number in order presented |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fail (N) 0-49% |
Pass (P 50-59% |
Credit (C) (60-69%) |
Distinction (D) (70-79%) |
High Distinction HD (80-100%) |
|
Assessment Total (20 marks) |
0 - 9.5 |
10 - 11.5 |
12 - 13.5 |
14 - 15.5 |
16 - 20 |
|
Part A: Content (15 marks) |
0 - 7.25 |
7.5 - 8.75 |
9 - 10.25 |
10.50 - 11.75 |
12 - 15 |
|
The presentation clearly introduces and defines topic and specific issues that may arise (Evidence both in slides and in oral presentation) |
Poor ☐ |
Satisfactory☐ |
Good ☐ |
Very Good ☐ |
Outstanding ☐ |
|
Case presented illustrates the key dimensions of wellbeing such as social, cultural, environmental and community to illustrate /promote conditions that underpin the frameworks of wellbeing and health promotion. |
Poor ☐ |
Satisfactory☐ |
Good ☐ |
Very Good ☐ |
Outstanding ☐ |
|
Considered the indicators of social capital that may inform policy or contribute to improved outcomes in a range of areas of wellbeing specific to their chosen community. |
Poor ☐ |
Satisfactory☐ |
Good ☐ |
Very Good ☐ |
Outstanding ☐ |
|
The presentation and supporting notes raise awareness of social capital in relation to enhancing wellbeing. |
Poor ☐ |
Satisfactory☐ |
Good ☐ |
Very Good ☐ |
Outstanding ☐ |
|
Group has given examples (related to case study) of how community and health professions can encourage behaviour change, help seeking and action. |
Poor ☐ |
Satisfactory☐ |
Good ☐ |
Very Good ☐ |
Outstanding ☐ |
|
The group have information adapted to local needs and considered differing social, cultural and economic systems. |
Poor ☐ |
Satisfactory☐ |
Good ☐ |
Very Good ☐ |
Outstanding ☐ |
|
The group shown synthesis evident across perspectives of wellbeing. |
Poor ☐ |
Satisfactory☐ |
Good ☐ |
Very Good ☐ |
Outstanding ☐ |
|
Written submission supports materials presented and shows evidence of research. |
Poor ☐ |
Satisfactory☐ |
Good ☐ |
Very Good ☐ |
Outstanding ☐ |
|
Presentation (5 marks) |
Fail (N) 0-49% |
Pass (P) 50-59% |
Credit (C) 60-69% |
D 70-79% |
HD 80-100% |
|
|
0-2 |
2.5 |
3 |
3.5 |
4-5 |
|
Group PowerPoint is cohesive clear and engaging |
Poor ☐ |
Satisfactory☐ |
Good ☐ |
Very Good ☐ |
Outstanding ☐ |
|
Presentation is visually appealing and students are well rehearsed and confident in delivery. |
Poor ☐ |
Satisfactory☐ |
Good ☐ |
Very Good ☐ |
Outstanding ☐ |
|
Familiarity with topic e.g. reliance on notes//text heavy) presentation well-rehearsed and delivered confidently |
Poor ☐ |
Satisfactory☐ |
Good ☐ |
Very Good ☐ |
Outstanding ☐ |
|
Referencing (APA) · References cited/hyperlinked (in-text) · Images attributed (on slide) · Reference slide included. |
Poor ☐ |
Satisfactory☐ |
Good ☐ |
Very Good ☐ |
Outstanding ☐ |
|
Grammar, sentence structure and time limit observed |
Poor ☐ |
Satisfactory☐ |
Good ☐ |
Very Good ☐ |
Outstanding ☐ |
Tutor use:
Marked by: ____________________________ Date:_________________
|
Content (15 marks) |
/15 |
|
Presentation (5 marks) |
/5 |
|
Final Group Mark (20 marks) |
/20 |
Comments:
<Positives – what the group did well>
<Learning Opportunities – specific areas for improvement, why and how>
