Assessment 1: Essay (E-tivities) & Annotated Bibliography
Task Overview
Course NUR8340: The Law and Health Care Practice
Assessment name Essay (E-tivities) & Annotated Bibliography
Brief task description The first part of this assessment requires you to participate in a minimum of four (4) Etivities. These will form Part A – essay. You will then locate four (4) recent journal articles on one of your chosen E-tivity topics, relevant to your workplace, and provide an annotated bibliography of these articles.
Rationale for assessment task This assessment will enable you to link a relevant legal and/or ethical issue in your workplace to the literature and make sense of how current research can be put into practice. Evidence based practice at work.
Due Date Tuesday 19th April 2022 by 2355 AEST.
Length 1500 words for the Essay (E-tivities).
1500-1800 words for the Annotated Bibliography. The reference for each chosen article is not included in the word count.
Marks out of: Weighting: Total marks /100
50% of final grade.
Course
Objectives
2. Critically review contemporary law and health literatures to inform legal, ethical, and professional health care practice.
5. Employ a realistic application of theories and principles of law and ethics to the design of reasoned responses to critical incidents in health care practice.
Task Details For this assessment you will apply and contextualise advanced knowledge and understanding of Australian healthcare law and/or ethics that impacts on your workplace, through contributing to E-tivities and an annotated bibliography.
PART A – Essay – E-tivities:
Format: You will submit evidence of participation in the E-tivities by copying and pasting your chosen contributions from the Study Desk E-tivity Forums onto a Word document file for submission. Please use a heading for each E-tivity indicating the week it came from.
Guidelines for E-tivities
• Each week, an E-tivity will be assigned as part of your weekly activities. Read what the activity is asking you to do and post your response on that week’s Etivity Forum.
• Complete a minimum of four (4) E-tivities on four (4) different weeks (there is no maximum to the number of contributions you can make),
• You are to support at least two (2) of your E-tivity contributions with a minimum of one (1) contemporary literature source and provide a reference for
that source using APA 7th edition referencing style at the end of your E-tivity post.
• Choose a minimum of four (4) of your E-tivity responses and copy and paste them onto a word document. These form Part A of this assessment.
NOTE: The four (4) E-tivities chosen must equal 1500 words (+/-10%). If you choose to use more than four (4) contributions, please do not exceed 1500 words (+/-10%).
Intext referencing is included in the word count, but the reference source at the end is not.
Part B – Annotated Bibliography:
1. Choose one of the topics from Part A, your E-tivity participation, and locate four (4) contemporary journal articles relevant to your chosen topic (one article can be the one you used in your discussion). For example: each week’s E-tivity matches the content of that week. If you submit the Week 5 E-tivity in Part A, then you may choose Negligence as your topic for Part B and you will locate four (4) journal articles on Negligence.
Write an annotated bibliography on each article using the following format:
• One introduction for the whole annotated bibliography section – introduce your chosen topic and the articles you will discuss. (100-150 words)
• Full citation for each article directly above its annotated bibliography – APA
7th referencing must be used. (not included in the word count)
• Annotation Bibliography (one for each article):
o a summary of the article in your own words (one paragraph).
(100-150 words) o a critique of the article, which is a brief statement about the article’s calibre ie:
? is the article easy to understand and current?
? is the article easy to set out well – headings/subheadings?
? Is the author(s) credible?
? Are the interpretation of findings correct?
? what type of audience would benefit from reading this article?
(100-150 words)
o a reflection on the articles value ie:
? how relevant is the information in the article to your own practice as a health care professional? (100-150 words)
NB: the word count in red beside each section is a guide only.
Resources available to assist with task The StudyDesk Assessment Tab contains the following resources to help you with this assessment:
– Information on how to write an Annotated Bibliography.
– Information on how to do APA 7th edition referencing style.
– Link to the library APA 7th edition referencing guide.
Support for academic writing (and referencing) is available from the Learning Advisor and Liaison Librarian, you can find information and contact them via their site: Study and Research Support for Health & Community students
Writing & formatting requirements Case study and discussion on the legal and ethical issues will be in academic writing style ie third person.
Reflection, section (4), may be in first person.
Assignments should be presented using:
• Double-line spacing
• Times New Roman, 12 point font
• APA formatting (7th Edition as per APA guide)
• Footer with name, student number & page number
Referencing/ citations • For this assessment you will use APA 7th referencing style.
• Sources: your reference list must include at least 8 scholarly sources with the majority no older than 6 years old (four of them will be your chosen articles for the Annotated Bibliography).
In text citations: You must include intext citations in the body of your work. Each new point or piece of evidence must be attributed (via in-text citation) to the source.
Submission What you need to submit:
One Microsoft Word document to the submission link on the course StudyDesk that contains the following items:
• The Essay and Annotated Bibliography as one document,
• No coversheet but footer must include: course code, semester and year, student name, student number, page number
• Do NOT include the marking criteria sheet
• Save your document with the following naming convention:
surname_initial_NUR8340_A1.doc
E.g: Jones_J_NUR8340_A1.doc
Please upload the four journal articles, or a clear link to them (eg. URL), on a separate page to the second submission link – Save your document with the following naming convention: surname_initial_NUR8340_A1articles.doc
E.g: Jones_J_NUR8340_A1articles.doc
Marking and moderating • This task will be marked against a marking rubric available on StudyDesk.
• All staff who are assessing your work meet to discuss and compare their judgements before marks or grades are finalised.
Academic integrity & Misconduct Students should be familiar with, and abide by, USQ’s policy on Academic Integrity and the definition of Academic Misconduct . Penalties apply to student’s found to have breached these policies & procedures.
Assessment policy &
procedure
Information and links regarding USQ’s assessment policy/ procedure; extensions and late submissions; academic integrity & misconduct and marking are found on your course StudyDesk Assessment page.
Note on Late submission & extensions: Applications for an extension of time will only be considered if received in accordance with the USQ Assessment procedure and the Assessment of Compassionate and Compelling Circumstances Procedure. Refer to the links on StudyDesk for copies of these procedures.
NUR8340: The Law and Health Care Practice. Semester 1, 2022
Assessment 1: Annotated Bibliography and Essay – Marking Rubric
E-tivity 20 – 17 16.9 – 15 14.9 – 13 12.9 – 10 9.9 – 0
Contributions to E-tivities
(20 marks) Evidence of 4 or more Etivity contributions to 4 different weeks, which are highly articulate and relevant to the week’s topic.
Evidence of 4 E-tivity contributions to 3-4 different weeks, which are relevant to the week’s topic. Evidence of 3-4 E-tivity contributions to 3-4 different weeks, which are mostly relevant to the week’s topic. Evidence of 2-3 E-tivity contributions to 2-3 different weeks which attempt to be relevant to the week’s topic. Evidence of one (1) or more contributions to E-tivities which are not relevant to the week’s topic.
No evidence of contributing to an E-tivity.
6 – 5.1 4.6 – 5 4.5 – 4
3.9 – 3 2.9 – 0
Referencing
in E-tivities
APA7th ed referencing
style used
(6 marks) A minimum of two (2) reference sources have been used to support a minimum of two (2) E-tivity discussions.
APA7 is used correctly to cited sources both within text and at the end of the Etivity with no errors.
Two (2) reference sources have been used to support two (2) E-tivity discussions.
APA7 is used correctly to cite sources both within text and at the end of the E-tivity with some minor errors. Two (2) reference sources have been used to support one (1) E-tivity discussion.
APA7 is mostly used correctly to cite source(s) within text and at the end of the E-tivity with numerous minor errors.
One (1) reference source has been used to support one (1) E-tivity discussion.
APA7 is mostly used correctly to cite the source within text and/or at the end of the E-tivity with major errors.
An attempt to provide one (1) reference source has been made intext only/no reference sources have been used to support the E-tivity discussion.
APA7 has not been correctly used intext/no referencing.
Annotated Bibliography
4
3
2
1
0.9 – 0
Bibliographic (reference) details APA
7th ed
(4 marks) All four (4) annotated bibliography journal articles are cited in correct APA7 referencing format with no errors. All four (4) annotated bibliography journal articles are cited in correct APA7 referencing format with one error. All four (4) annotated bibliography journal articles are cited in correct APA7 referencing format with twothree errors. All four (4) annotated bibliography journal articles are cited with an attempt at APA7 referencing format with more than four errors. There are omitted or no citations for the annotated bibliography journal articles/
APA7 referencing format has not been used.
5
4
3
2
1 – 0
Introduction to Annotated Bibliography
(5 marks) Highly relevant comprehensive introduction. Defines topic at an advanced level and includes a comprehensive introduction to the annotated bibliography articles. Well-developed introduction. Defines the topic and includes an introduction to the annotated bibliography articles.
Effective attempt at writing an introduction. Defines the topic and attempts to introduce the annotated bibliography articles. An attempt made to provide an introduction,
The topic chosen is not clear. Some/vague evidence of introducing the annotated bibliography articles. Inadequate and/or poor introduction.
Minimal/no evidence of an overview of the annotated bibliography.
20 – 17 16.9 – 15 14.9 – 13 12.9 – 10 9.9 – 0
Summary of
article
(20 marks – 5 marks for each article) A sophisticated choice of all articles which are relevant to the topic.
A comprehensive summary, demonstrating a thorough understanding of each article has been provided.
There is no repetitiveness in the summaries. All articles have been well chosen and are relevant to the topic.
A comprehensive summary, demonstrating a considerable understanding of each article has been provided.
There is no repetitiveness in the summaries. All articles chosen are relevant to the topic. A clear summary, demonstrating a broad understanding of each article has been provided. There is some repetitiveness in the summaries. All articles chosen are somewhat relevant to the topic.
A summary, demonstrating a beginning understanding of each article has been provided but is unclear at times.
There are a number of repetitive statements in the summaries. Articles chosen are not relevant to the topic/ there are
less than five articles chosen/ no summary has been provided.
20 – 17 16.9 – 15 14.9 – 13 12.9 – 10 9.9 – 0
Critique of each article (20 marks – 5 marks for each article) A comprehensive critique of each article is provided which is highly articulate and clearly describes how the article is set out and who would benefit from reading it.
Highly relevant rationales are used to support the critique. There is a high level of synthesis of the material. A substantial critique of each article is provided which is articulate and clearly describes how the article is set out and who would benefit from reading it.
Relevant rationales are used to support the critique. Material is well synthesised. A sound critique of each article is provided which describes how the article is set out and who would benefit from reading it.
Sound rationales are used to support the critique however greater synthesis is needed. A broad critique of each article is provided which attempts to describes how the article is set out and who would benefit from reading it.
An attempt has been made to provide rationales to support the critique, however more detail and relevance is required. A limited/no critique of each article is provided. It is not clear how the article is set out and who would benefit from reading it, or there is no information provided.
Limited/no attempt to provide rationales to support the critique.
20 – 17 16.9 – 15 14.9 – 13 12.9 – 10 9.9 – 0
Reflection for each article (20 marks – 5 marks for each article) A highly articulated and comprehensive reflection on each article is presented.
A highly articulated reflection
on relevance to own professional practice is presented.
A relevant and concise reflection on each article is presented.
A well-articulated reflection on relevance to own professional practice is presented. A sound reflection on each
article is presented however some generalisations used rather than personal reflection.
Relevance to own professional practice is presented. A generic reflection is provided with an attempt at a personal reflection.
It is unclear what the relevance is to own professional practice.
The reflection is vague and generic with no attempt at personal reflection/ No reflection is provided.
No attempt at providing information on relevance to own professional practice.
5 4 3 2 1 – 0
Academic
writing/ expression/ grammar (5 marks) Word limit has been adhered to.
High standard of academic presentation with formatting style adhered to.
Good standard of academic presentation with formatting style mostly adhered to.
Sound standard of academic presentation with some errors in formatting style.
Basic/beginner standard of academic presentation with a number of errors in formatting style.
Word limit has not been adhered to.
Assessment is poorly presented demonstrating poor understanding of academic presentation. Numerous errors in formatting style.
Writing is clear, concise & fluent with few/no spelling or
grammatical errors
Structure:
Well-constructed with excellent paragraph and sentence structure. Writing style conforming to assessment instructions. Writing is clear & fluent with some spelling and/or
grammatical errors
Structure:
Well-constructed with good paragraph and sentence structure. Writing style mostly conforming to assessment instructions. Writing is mostly clear but lacks fluency in places with a number of spelling and/or grammatical errors
Structure:
Some paragraph and/or sentence structure errors. Writing style mostly conforming to assessment instructions. Writing is unclear and lacks fluency in places with many spelling and/or grammatical
errors
Structure:
There are paragraph and/or sentence structure errors. Writing style partially conforms to assessment instructions. Writing is difficult to follow with
major spelling and grammatical errors.
Structure:
Poor paragraph and sentence structure. Writing style does not conform to assessment instructions.
All marking is completed in Turnitin. You will find your feedback and marks there. This rubric is for your reference only.
Please note that a LATE PENALTY of 5% of the total marks available for the assessment will be deducted for each day the assessment is late.