Write My Paper Button

WhatsApp Widget

You are a final year MPH student and you have won a 3-minute thesis competition to present at the annual ‘Systems Thinking for Public Health Symposium’. You have to: 1) Define and describe systems thinking

Uncategorized

Home » Uncategorized » You are a final year MPH student and you have won a 3-minute thesis competition to present at the annual ‘Systems Thinking for Public Health Symposium’. You have to: 1) Define and describe systems thinking

Principles of Planning and Evaluation in Public Health PUBH 6032/6033/MPH607 Assessment 1 |2024 – 20%
Three-minute thesis
Assessment 1 the Oral presentation (3 minutes maximum) will refine your oral presentation and technical skills. You can use a maximum of three (3) slides to present
(plus one title and one reference slide, total 5 slides).
Assessment Description
You are a final year MPH student and you have won a 3-minute thesis competition to present at the annual ‘Systems Thinking for Public Health Symposium’. You have to: 1) Define and describe systems thinking and how a systems approach applies to public health. 2) Using the GenR8 Case Study (Bolton et al. 2022) demonstrate how systems thinking tools were used to plan and evaluate a public health program. You must refer to and apply the Systems Change Framework, 2018 (see reference below) and the Iterative inquiry process to guide your presentation content. When presenting, please include the following: define the situation, including initial boundaries; describe key stakeholders, including their perspectives; outline the systems tools used to plan and evaluate the public health program. Identify any leverage points. You
must demonstrate a systems approach to planning and evaluation in your presentation and not over-rely on traditional planning and evaluation tools. You need both of these references to complete the assessment:
1. Systems Change Framework citation: Davidson S and Morgan M. Systems Change Framework. Sax Institute, September 2018.
2. Bolton, K. A., Fraser, P., Lowe, J., Moodie, M., Bell, C., Strugnell, C., … & Allender, S. (2022). Generating change through collective impact and systems science for childhood obesity prevention: the GenR8 change case study. Plos one, 17(5), e0266654.
You will need to:
• Define and describe systems thinking and how a systems approach applies to public health. • Present the GenR8 case study and apply the Systems Framework (2018) where appropriate.
• Not all components of the Systems Framework need to be applied however purposeful engagement and the iterative inquiry process need to be evident. You MUST include: the situation and identify boundaries, key stakeholders and perspectives, outline systems tools used for planning and measuring, and leverage points in the system.
• You must demonstrate a systems approach to planning and evaluation in your presentation and not over-rely on traditional planning and evaluation tools.
• Cite appropriate in-text references. Please use APA 7th reference style. References should be up-to-date (2015-2023 preferred) and peer-reviewed.
• Presentation (3 minutes only) it must be clearly organised, logical and coherent. The PowerPoint presentation must be uploaded to Turnitin by the due date for marking and feedback.
Marking rubric and criteria |Total mark: /20 – See over
Criteria Fail: skills undemonstrated Fail: some skills evident Pass Credit Distinction Total
Introduction: Evidenceinformed systems argument 0 1 2 3 4 5 5
• No attempt to
integrate the evidence to inform the introduction •
An incomplete review of the evidence to justify a systems approach to plan/evaluate a PH program •
Developing an evidence informed approach to justify a systems approach to plan/evaluate a PH program •
Displays an informed and critical justification of a systems approach to plan/evaluate a PH program • An evidence-informed, critical justification of a systems approach to plan/evaluate a PH program. This extends to all aspects of the presentation.
Systems Framework: applying an example 0 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 10
• No clear issue or obesity focus
• No boundaries
presented
• Perspectives vague and not linked to the stakeholder(s)
• No systems tools
for planning and eval outlined
• No leverage points • •


• Issue presented but noT clear Boundaries or context quite general Perspectives presented some link with stakeholders but not always clear Systems tools outlined for either planning or evaluating but not both
Leverage points identified not always correct •
• •


• Issue presented obesity focus and critical discussion emerging Boundaries or context described adequately Perspectives presented mostly link with stakeholders Systems tools outlined for both planning & evaluating Leverage points identified Iterative inquiry emerging in the presentation •




• Issue presented clearly obesity focus and links with the evidence Boundaries or context described and presented clearly Perspectives presented link with stakeholders – clear and relevant Clear systems tools outlined for both planning & evaluating Leverage points clearly and correctly identified Iterative inquiry evident in the presentation •
• •

• •
• Issue presented clearly & succinctly obesity focus contextual and synthesized evidence
Excellent, clear boundaries described with context Excellent, relevant perspectives presented link with stakeholders
Well-articulated systems tools outlined for both planning/evaluating Leverage points correctly identified – insightful Iterative inquiry process evident in the presentation and well developed
Uses other parts of the Systems Change Framework to highlight strengths of systems approach
Presentation 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2
• Time: too
long/short (60 seconds)
• Poor slide(s) lay •
• Over time or under time by 30 secs Unsatisfactory slide lay out ( 3 slides) •

• 3 minutes (10 seconds either side) Mostly clear slide(s)
Oral presentation •
• 3 minutes (5 seconds
+/-) Clear slide(s) Engaging oral presentation •

• 3 minutes exactly
Clear slide(s), excellent text and graphics
Engaging oral presentation
• out, graphics Oral presentation skills poor, lack logical flow and clarity • Oral presentation skills poor, lack logical flow and clarity
mostly flows, clarity of expression (orally)

Logical and mostly clear
Academic
Integrity 0 1 1.5 2 3 3

• No or very few citations when required No or few cited references listed •
• References mostly secondary sources &/or poorly synthesized Major errors in citation & referencing techniques •

Appropriate references, content synthesis developing Minor inconsistent errors in citations & referencing technique • •
• Current mix of references, synthesis of ideas is evident Information from cited sources integrated into the student’s presentation Good citation & referencing – no errors •

• Insightful and current references. Consistent with APA 7th
Information from cited sources integrated seamlessly into the student’s presentation Excellent & fully correct reference list

Trustworthy Platform for Your Nursing Assignments

X
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!