CQUniversity Unit Profile
HLTH13031 Population Health Epidemiology
Population Health Epidemiology
All details in this unit profile for HLTH13031 have been officially approved by CQUniversity and represent a learning partnership between the University and you (our student).
The information will not be changed unless absolutely necessary and any change will be clearly indicated by an approved correction included in the profile.
General Information

Overview

This unit explores the importance and role of epidemiology as an approach to both public health and clinical practice. You will be able to use evidence from epidemiological investigations, to understand the distribution of health outcomes in populations and understand the influence of factors that determine this distribution. The critical function of epidemiology will be reviewed including areas of anticipated needs, identified risk conditions, definition of priorities and the use of available resources for planning and administering health care services.

Details

Career Level: Undergraduate
Unit Level: Level 3
Credit Points: 6
Student Contribution Band: 8
Fraction of Full-Time Student Load: 0.125

Pre-requisites or Co-requisites

Prereq: 72 credit points (any tertiary level units)

Important note: Students enrolled in a subsequent unit who failed their pre-requisite unit, should drop the subsequent unit before the census date or within 10 working days of Fail grade notification. Students who do not drop the unit in this timeframe cannot later drop the unit without academic and financial liability. See details in the Assessment Policy and Procedure (Higher Education Coursework).

Offerings For Term 1 - 2024

Online

Attendance Requirements

All on-campus students are expected to attend scheduled classes – in some units, these classes are identified as a mandatory (pass/fail) component and attendance is compulsory. International students, on a student visa, must maintain a full time study load and meet both attendance and academic progress requirements in each study period (satisfactory attendance for International students is defined as maintaining at least an 80% attendance record).

Class and Assessment Overview

Recommended Student Time Commitment

Each 6-credit Undergraduate unit at CQUniversity requires an overall time commitment of an average of 12.5 hours of study per week, making a total of 150 hours for the unit.

Class Timetable

Bundaberg, Cairns, Emerald, Gladstone, Mackay, Rockhampton, Townsville
Adelaide, Brisbane, Melbourne, Perth, Sydney

Assessment Overview

1. Poster Sessions
Weighting: 25%
2. Online Quiz(zes)
Weighting: 25%
3. Written Assessment
Weighting: 50%

Assessment Grading

This is a graded unit: your overall grade will be calculated from the marks or grades for each assessment task, based on the relative weightings shown in the table above. You must obtain an overall mark for the unit of at least 50%, or an overall grade of ‘pass’ in order to pass the unit. If any ‘pass/fail’ tasks are shown in the table above they must also be completed successfully (‘pass’ grade). You must also meet any minimum mark requirements specified for a particular assessment task, as detailed in the ‘assessment task’ section (note that in some instances, the minimum mark for a task may be greater than 50%). Consult the University’s Grades and Results Policy for more details of interim results and final grades.

Previous Student Feedback

Feedback, Recommendations and Responses

Every unit is reviewed for enhancement each year. At the most recent review, the following staff and student feedback items were identified and recommendations were made.

Feedback from Personal reflection

Feedback

Tutorial

Recommendation

While tutorials are indeed scheduled, many students choose not to attend them. It could prove beneficial to introduce drop-in tutorial sessions, thereby channelling additional resources toward assisting students online through Moodle and providing one-on-one support as required.

Unit Learning Outcomes
On successful completion of this unit, you will be able to:
  1. Calculate and communicate epidemiological statistics relating to the measurement of health, wellness and disease.
  2. Interpret epidemiological data within theories and frameworks of social justice and cultural diversity for effective knowledge transfer and exchange.
  3. Evaluate epidemiological investigations and sources of epidemiological data to identify inequities, enable change and advocate for health.
  4. Argue for a population health outcome using relevant research methods and approaches.
  5. Explain principles of data confidentiality and disclosure, and apply the ethical use of data.
Alignment of Learning Outcomes, Assessment and Graduate Attributes
N/A Level
Introductory Level
Intermediate Level
Graduate Level
Professional Level
Advanced Level

Alignment of Assessment Tasks to Learning Outcomes

Assessment Tasks Learning Outcomes
1 2 3 4 5
1 - Poster Sessions - 25%
2 - Online Quiz(zes) - 25%
3 - Written Assessment - 50%

Alignment of Graduate Attributes to Learning Outcomes

Graduate Attributes Learning Outcomes
1 2 3 4 5
1 - Communication
2 - Problem Solving
3 - Critical Thinking
4 - Information Literacy
5 - Team Work
6 - Information Technology Competence
7 - Cross Cultural Competence
8 - Ethical practice
9 - Social Innovation
10 - Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cultures
Textbooks and Resources

Textbooks

Prescribed

Essential Epidemiology: An introduction for students and health professionals

Edition: 4 (2020)
Authors: Penelope Webb, Chris Bain, & Andrew Page
Cambridge University Press
Binding: Paperback

IT Resources

You will need access to the following IT resources:
  • CQUniversity Student Email
  • Internet
  • Unit Website (Moodle)
  • Zoom Capacity (microphone required; webcam optional)
Referencing Style

All submissions for this unit must use the referencing style: Harvard (author-date)

For further information, see the Assessment Tasks.

Teaching Contacts
Jane Fischer Unit Coordinator
j.fischer@cqu.edu.au
Schedule
Week 1: Introduction to Population Health & Epidemiology Begin Date: 04 Mar 2024

Module/Topic

Selected readings

Chapter

See eReading list on the Moodle site

Events and Submissions/Topic

Week 2: Measuring the health of the population Begin Date: 11 Mar 2024

Module/Topic

Selected readings

Chapter

See eReading list on the Moodle site

Events and Submissions/Topic

Assessment 2, week 2: Quizzes on week 1 learning material. Due on Monday, 11/03/2024, at 11:59 PM AEST (Weighting: 5%)

Week 3: Descriptive Epidemiology Part 1 Begin Date: 18 Mar 2024

Module/Topic

Selected readings

Chapter

See eReading list on the Moodle site

Events and Submissions/Topic

Assessment 2, week 3: Quizzes on week 2 learning material. Due on Monday, 18/03/2024, at 11:59 PM AEST (Weighting: 5%)

Week 4: Descriptive Epidemiology Part 2 Begin Date: 25 Mar 2024

Module/Topic

Selected readings

Chapter

See eReading list on the Moodle site

Events and Submissions/Topic

Assessment 2, week 4: Quizzes on week 3 learning material. Due on Monday, 25/03/2024, at 11:59 PM AEST (Weighting: 5%)

Week 5: Measures and interpretation of association and causality Begin Date: 01 Apr 2024

Module/Topic

Selected readings

Chapter

See eReading list on the Moodle site

Events and Submissions/Topic

Assessment 2, week 5: Quizzes on week 4 learning material. Due on Monday, 01/04/2024, at 11:59 PM AEST (Weighting: 5%)

Vacation Week Begin Date: 08 Apr 2024

Module/Topic

Selected readings

Chapter

Events and Submissions/Topic

Week 6: Analytic Epidemiology Part 1 Begin Date: 15 Apr 2024

Module/Topic

Selected readings

Chapter

See eReading list on the Moodle site

Events and Submissions/Topic

Assessment 2, week 6: Quizzes on week 5 learning material. Due on Monday, 15/04/2024, at 11:59 PM AEST (Weighting: 5%)

Week 7: Analytic Epidemiology Part 2 Begin Date: 22 Apr 2024

Module/Topic

Selected readings

Chapter

See eReading list on the Moodle site

Events and Submissions/Topic

Week 8: Experimental Studies Begin Date: 29 Apr 2024

Module/Topic

Selected readings

Chapter

See eReading list on the Moodle site

Events and Submissions/Topic

Assessment 1: Poster Due: Week 8 Monday (29 Apr 2024) 11:59 pm AEST
Week 9: Critical Appraisal of Epidemiological Studies Begin Date: 06 May 2024

Module/Topic

Selected readings

Chapter

See eReading list on the Moodle site

Events and Submissions/Topic

Week 10: Epidemiology of Social Determinants of Health Begin Date: 13 May 2024

Module/Topic

Selected readings

Chapter

See eReading list on the Moodle site

Events and Submissions/Topic

Week 11: Population Health Interventions Begin Date: 20 May 2024

Module/Topic

Selected readings

Chapter

See eReading list on the Moodle site

Events and Submissions/Topic

 

 

 

Week 12: Epidemiology in Practice Begin Date: 27 May 2024

Module/Topic

Selected readings

Chapter

See eReading list on the Moodle site

Events and Submissions/Topic

Assessment 3: Funding Application Due: Week 12 Friday (31 May 2024) 11:59 pm AEST
Review/Exam Week Begin Date: 03 Jun 2024

Module/Topic

Chapter

Events and Submissions/Topic

Exam Week Begin Date: 10 Jun 2024

Module/Topic

Chapter

Events and Submissions/Topic

Assessment Tasks

1 Poster Sessions

Assessment Title
Assessment 1: Poster

Task Description

In your professional life, you will apply your knowledge of epidemiology to describe the impact of health outcomes, the patterns of disease, or the risks of a particular outcome in your work with clients, collaborators, or the general public. This assessment is a practical application of that.

In this assessment, you are asked to research, create, and develop a poster that describes the population health impact of one of the following health issues for the Australian population. Using appropriate measures, you must source, interpret and communicate the current epidemiological evidence. The audience of your presentation will be health policymakers, health planners from the Department of Health, academics and researchers, and other health professionals. Therefore, your poster must be presented in an academic style poster. 

Your poster needs to include:

  • A clear introduction to the health issue that provides a clear definition and justification of why it is important.
  • The use of a range of appropriate epidemiological measures to critically demonstrate the impact this health issue has on:
    • The Australian population as a whole and
    • Within or between different population groups of relevance (differential impact). For example, age, gender, geographic location, occupation
  • The use of data visualization that contributes to the effective communication of the issue.
  • A clear and concise conclusion that links to the introduction and the contents of the poster.

The topics you can choose from will be provided in Moodle, or you can choose any topic that interests you, but approval must be sought from the unit coordinator before commencing the work. This is a poster submission assessment only. There is no presentation.


Assessment Due Date

Week 8 Monday (29 Apr 2024) 11:59 pm AEST


Return Date to Students

Week 10 Monday (13 May 2024)

Two weeks after the due date


Weighting
25%

Minimum mark or grade
50%

Assessment Criteria

Criteria

High Distinction (HD) 

85-100%

Distinction (D)

75-84% 

Credit (C) 

65-74%

Pass (P) 

64-50%

Fail (N) 

<50%

Criterion score
C1. Effective communication and use of academic literacies

8.5–10 points

  • Outstanding level of application of knowledge and skills.
  • Highly accurate and appropriate language use.
  • Expertly written and adheres to the academic genre.
  • Minimal, if any, errors in grammar or spelling are evident.
  • Information, arguments and evidence are expertly presented; the presentation is logical, persuasive, and well-supported by evidence, demonstrating a clear flow of ideas and arguments.
  • Justifies all conclusions reached with sophisticated arguments.

7.5-8.4 points

  • Highly effective level of application of knowledge and skills.
  • Accurate and appropriate language use.
  • Very Well written and adheres to the academic genre.
  • Limited instances of errors in grammar or spelling are evident.
  • Information, arguments and evidence are very well presented; the presentation is logical, clear and well supported by evidence.
  • Justifies most conclusions reached with well-developed arguments.

6.5-7.4 points

  • Effective level of application of knowledge and skills.
  • Effective language use.
  • Well written and adheres to the academic genre.
  • Minor errors in grammar or spelling are evident.
  • Information, arguments and evidence are well-presented, mostly with a clear flow of ideas and arguments.
  • Justifies conclusions reached with mostly well-formed arguments and not merely assertions.

5.0-6.4 points

  • Sound level of application of knowledge and skills.
  • Satisfactory language use.
  • Appropriate academic genre and language are often not used.
  • Errors in grammar or spelling are frequent but do not detract from meaning.
  • Information, arguments and evidence are presented in a way that is not always clear and logical.
  • Does not justify all conclusions with arguments or does not justify conclusions with well-formed arguments.

0–4.9 points

  • Poor level of application of knowledge and skills.
  • Poor language use.
  • Poorly written with errors in spelling and grammar.
  • Difficult to understand for an audience, no logical/clear structure, poor flow of ideas, argument lacks supporting evidence.
  • Makes assertions that are not justified.
/10
C2. Summary of the selected health issue with justification on why it is a significant public health issue

12.75–15 points

  • Outstanding summary of the selected health issue with justification on why it is a significant public health issue.

11.25–12.74 points

  • Highly effective summary of the selected health issue with justification on why it is a significant public health issue.

9.75–11.24 points

  • Effective summary of the selected health issue with justification on why it is a significant public health issue.

7.5–9.74 points

  • Sound summary of the selected health issue with justification on why it is a significant public health issue.

0–7.4 points

  • Poor summary of the selected health issue with justification on why it is a significant public health issue.
/15
C3. Identification of the risk and protective factors of the health issue and explanation of determinants contributing to disparities in the population.

12.75–15 points

  • Outstanding identification of the risk and protective factors of the health issue and explanation of determinants contributing to disparities in the population.

11.25–12.74 points

  • Highly effective identification of the risk and protective factors of the health issue and explanation of determinants contributing to disparities in the population.

9.75–12.24 points

  • Effective identification of the risk and protective factors of the health issue and explanation of determinants contributing to disparities in the population.

7.5–9.74 points

  • Sound identification of the risk and protective factors of the health issue and explanation of determinants contributing to disparities in the population.

0–7.4 points

  • Poor identification of the risk and protective factors of the health issue and explanation of determinants contributing to disparities in the population.
/15
C4. Critical review of the contemporary discourse on the impact of the selected health issue on the population of Australia or your home country, use of a range of appropriate epidemiological measures and interpretations, data visualisations and explanation of the extent of the problem in different population groups.

17–20 points

  • Outstanding critical review of the contemporary discourse on the impact of the selected health issue on the population of Australia or your home country, use of a range of appropriate epidemiological measures and interpretations, data visualisations and explanation of the extent of the problem in different population groups.

15-16.9 points

  • Highly effective critical review of the contemporary discourse on the impact of the selected health issue on the population of Australia or your home country, use of a range of appropriate epidemiological measures and interpretations, data visualisations and explanation of the extent of the problem in different population groups.

13-14.9 points

  • Effective critical review of the contemporary discourse on the impact of the selected health issue on the population of Australia or your home country, use of a range of appropriate epidemiological measures and interpretations, data visualisations and explanation of the extent of the problem in different population groups.

10–12.9 points

  • Sound critical review of the contemporary discourse on the impact of the selected health issue on the population of Australia or your home country, use of a range of appropriate epidemiological measures and interpretations, data visualisations and explanation of the extent of the problem in different population groups.

0–9.9 points

  • Poor critical review of the contemporary discourse on the impact of the selected health issue on the population of Australia or your home country, use of a range of appropriate epidemiological measures and interpretations, data visualisations and explanation of the extent of the problem in different population groups.
/20
C5. Identification of one population group disproportionately impacted by the selected health issue and explanation, supported with evidence of what contributes to these disparities in the most affected population group.

17–20 points

  • Outstanding identification of one population group disproportionately impacted by the chosen health issue and explanation, supported with judicious high-quality evidence, of what contributes to these disparities in the most affected population group.

15–16.9 points

  • Highly effective identification of one population group disproportionately impacted by the chosen health issue and explanation, supported with high-quality evidence, of what contributes to these disparities in the most affected population group.

13-14.9 points

  • Effective identification of one population group disproportionately impacted by the chosen health issue and explanation, supported with good quality evidence, of what contributes to these disparities in the most affected population group.

10–12.9 points

  • Sound identification of one population group disproportionately impacted by the chosen health issue and explanation, supported with some evidence, of what contributes to these disparities in the most affected population group.

0–9.9 points

  • Poor identification of one population group disproportionately impacted by the chosen health issue and explanation, not supported with evidence, of what contributes to these disparities in the most affected population group.
/20
C6. Summary justifying why the selected health issue is important and summarising the extent of the problem, its determinants, and factors contributing to disparities in different population groups.

8.5–10 points

  • Outstanding summary justifying why the selected health issue is important and summarising the extent of the problem, its determinants, and factors contributing to disparities in different population groups.

7.5-8.4 points

  • Highly effective summary justifying why the selected health issue is important and summarising the extent of the problem, its determinants, and factors contributing to disparities in different population groups.

6.5–7.4 points

  • Effective summary justifying why the selected health issue is important and summarising the extent of the problem, its determinants, and factors contributing to disparities in different population groups.

5–6.4 points

  • Sound summary justifying why the selected health issue is important and summarising the extent of the problem, its determinants, and factors contributing to disparities in different population groups.

0–4.9 points

  • Poor summary justifying why the selected health issue is important and summarising the extent of the problem, its determinants, and factors contributing to disparities in different population groups.
/10
C7. Uses Havard referencing style consistently and with care to avoid simple errors. Includes a reference list with high-quality academic or professional references.

8.5–10 points

  • Consistent and correct use of in-text referencing and includes a reference list with minimal, if any, errors.
  • The number of relevant, high-quality academic or professional references significantly exceeds expectations (approximately 9 or more) and includes wider readings.

7.5–8.4 points

  • Consistent and correct use of in-text referencing and includes a reference list with limited errors.
  • The number of relevant, high-quality academic or professional references exceeds expectations (7 or more) and includes wider readings.

6.5-7.4 points

  • Consistent and mostly correct use of in-text referencing and includes a reference list with a few errors.
  • The number of relevant, high-quality academic or professional references meets expectations (5 or more).

5–6.4 points

  • Inconsistent use of correct in-text referencing and includes a reference list with several errors.
  • The number of relevant, high-quality academic or professional references does not meet expectations (3 or more).

0–4.9 points

  • Poor and incorrect use of referencing and may not include a reference list.
  • The number of relevant academic or professional references does not meet the minimum requirements (approximately 1 or none).
/10
Total           /100
Overall score

High Distinction (HD)

85 points minimum

Distinction (D)

75 points minimum

Credit (C)

65 points minimum

Pass (P)

50 points minimum

Fail (N)

0 points minimum

 


Referencing Style

Submission

No submission method provided.


Learning Outcomes Assessed
  • Calculate and communicate epidemiological statistics relating to the measurement of health, wellness and disease.
  • Interpret epidemiological data within theories and frameworks of social justice and cultural diversity for effective knowledge transfer and exchange.

2 Online Quiz(zes)

Assessment Title
Assessment 2: Quizzes

Task Description

Assessment 2 is a quiz that you will complete individually. The quiz consists of multiple-choice questions and there are five quizzes in total, each worth 5%. You will complete one quiz every week from week 2 to week 6. Each quiz covers the materials that you learned in the previous week. For example, the week 2 quiz covers the materials that you learned in week 1, the week 3 quiz covers the materials that you learned in week 2, and so on.

Each quiz will have five multiple-choice questions from a question. You must choose the correct answer. You will have 15 minutes to complete each quiz and you cannot pause it. You will only have one attempt to complete each quiz, so it's important to have a reliable internet connection when taking the quiz.

You may use a cheat sheet with formulas and a simple calculator to assist you. The quiz will be available from 00:00 hours on Monday of each week until 23:59 hours on Monday of the following week. For example, the quiz for week 2 will be available from Monday of week 1 and will remain open until Monday of week 2 at 23:59. You will receive your grades after the quiz has closed and all deferred quizzes have been completed. You will be shown which questions you answered correctly or incorrectly, with feedback to help you identify the areas that you need to revise.


Number of Quizzes

5


Frequency of Quizzes

Weekly


Assessment Due Date

Quizzes will be due every Mondays at 11:59 PM AEST in weeks 2, 3, 4, 5, & 6


Return Date to Students

Quizzes will be returned immediately upon completion


Weighting
25%

Minimum mark or grade
50%

Assessment Criteria

No Assessment Criteria


Referencing Style

Submission

No submission method provided.


Learning Outcomes Assessed
  • Evaluate epidemiological investigations and sources of epidemiological data to identify inequities, enable change and advocate for health.
  • Argue for a population health outcome using relevant research methods and approaches.
  • Explain principles of data confidentiality and disclosure, and apply the ethical use of data.

3 Written Assessment

Assessment Title
Assessment 3: Funding Application

Task Description

In your professional life, you may use your knowledge of epidemiology to support applications for funding by your employer, either through grants or budget requests, to address health outcomes within your area. This assessment is a practical application of that scenario. You must get at least 50% in this assessment to pass this unit.

In this assessment, you are required to research and write an application for funding. The funding will support an evidence-based intervention that will improve the health of a population concerning the issue you critically outlined in Assessment 1. The aim is to address the health outcome you examined in Assessment 1. You must complete an application that requests funding to conduct an evidence-based population-level intervention to improve population health concerning your topic.

The application requires you to use an evaluation of relevant literature to propose an appropriate evidence-based, contextually relevant approach that addresses the health issue. You must research and identify evidence-based approaches to address the health outcome of interest that are suitable for the context in which you are implementing it. This is consistent with the goal of public health, which is to ask not just "what works" but to address "what works for whom, under what circumstances, and how".

The funding body has provided a template for the application with prescribed sections and word limits to explain your proposed project. You will need to source, interpret, and communicate the current epidemiological evidence, demonstrating your understanding of the different study types and how they support your claims. Your completed template, along with your references, will need to be uploaded to the Moodle site.

 


Assessment Due Date

Week 12 Friday (31 May 2024) 11:59 pm AEST

Due by 11:59 PM, Friday, 9/2/2024


Return Date to Students

Exam Week Friday (14 June 2024)

Assessments will be returned to students following certification of grades


Weighting
50%

Minimum mark or grade
50%

Assessment Criteria

Criteria

High Distinction (HD)

85 – 100%

  Distinction (D)

75 – 84%

Credit (C)

65 – 74%

 Pass (P)

 50 – 64%

 Fail (F)

< 50%

Criterion score

C 1. Overview of project

8.5-10 points

  • Topic, key points and purpose of the project are introduced in a clear and interesting way which captures the audience's attention.

7.5-8.4 points

  • Topic, key points and purpose of the project are introduced in a clear and interesting way.

6.5-7.4 points

  • Topic, key points and purpose of the project are introduced with clarity.

5.0-6.4 points

  • Topic introduced, but the overview is underdeveloped in terms of key points, links to the body of the application and/or purpose of project.

0-4.9 points

  • No topic, key points and/or purpose is introduced, no links to the body of the application, or it is unclear what the project will achieve.

10

C 2. Communication of ideas

12.75-15 points

  • Communicates ideas clearly and succinctly with no spelling or grammatical errors, using a well-developed academic style and tone.

11.25-12.74 points

  • Conveys ideas logically, may have one or two consistent spelling or grammatical errors, using a clear academic style and tone.

9.75-11.24 points

  • Reasonably conveys ideas, may have one or two consistent spelling or grammatical errors, using mostly clear academic style and tone.

7.5-9.74 points

  • Broadly conveys ideas but clarity would be improved by correcting errors, using appropriate academic style and tone.

0-7.4 points

  • Does not clearly convey ideas, there are several spelling or grammatical errors, uses subjective or emotive descriptors and inappropriate style and tone.

15

C3. Organisation of content

8.5-10 points

  • Uses the template structure and word limit well to present information and ideas in a logical and interesting sequence which the audience can easily follow.

7.5-8.4 points

  • Presents information and ideas in a logical sequence consistent with the template and within the word limit which the audience can follow.

6.5-7.4 points

  • Presents information and ideas at a reasonable level of logical sequence consistent with the template and within the word limit but the audience finds difficult to follow at times.

5.0-6.4 points

  • Presents information and ideas at a basic level of logical sequence consistent with the template and within the word limit but the audience generally finds it difficult to follow

0-4.9 points

  • Presents information in a poorly developed and illogical sequence inconsistent with the template, word limits not adhered to (too short; too long)

10

C4. Understanding and use of epidemiological data to provide background to the issue

21.25-25 points

  • Comprehensive interpretation and representation of epidemiological data to critically examine patterns of health within and between populations.

18.75-21.24 points

  • Appropriate interpretation and representation of epidemiological data to clearly identify patterns of health within and between populations.

16-18.74 points

  • Appropriate interpretation and representation of data to describe the health issue at a population level.

12.5-15.9 points

  • Limited interpretation and representation of epidemiological data. Provides a broad description of the health issue at a population level.

0-12.4 points

  • Poor interpretation or representation of epidemiological data. Just lists population findings, makes poor use of data, or focuses on individual aetiology of the health outcome.

25

C5. Reasoning and support for project

25.5-30 points

  • Claims are reasonable, clearly stated, and thoroughly explained with a combination of appropriate evidence and the student’s own analysis.
  • A variety of appropriate types of supporting materials (explanations, examples, illustrations, statistics, or quotations from relevant authorities) are used to develop ideas.
  • The student establishes their credibility through use of logical reasoning and support.

22.5-25.4 points

  • Claims are reasonable, stated with relative clarity and supported with a variety of appropriate supporting materials (explanations, examples, illustrations, statistics, or quotations from relevant authorities).
  • The student integrates their own analysis into the presentation. The student is seen as credible as a result of logical reasoning.

19.5-22.4 points

  • Claims are reasonable, and mostly supported using appropriate materials (explanations, examples, illustrations, statistics, or quotations from relevant authorities).
  • The student is able to articulate arguments into the presentation. Student generally appears credible as a result of the logical reasoning.

15-19.4 points

  • Claims are generally reasonable with variable levels of supporting materials (explanations, examples, illustrations, statistics, or quotations from relevant authorities).
  • Arguments are under developed due to lack of analysis. Credibility is impacted due to lack of logical reasoning.

0-14.9 points

  • Claims are typically unsupported assertions that lack sufficient supporting materials (explanations, examples, illustrations, statistics, or quotations from relevant authorities).
  • Fails to develop arguments because of a lack of analysis. Credibility is weak due to lack of logical reasoning.

30

C6. Referencing

8.5-10 points

  • Accurate, sufficient, and effective use of references using a consistent format.

7.5-8.4 points

  • Accurate and sufficient use of a consistent format of referencing.

6.5-7.4 points

  • Sufficient and accurate referencing with less than five inconsistencies.

5.0-6.4 points

  • Sufficient referencing with less than five inaccuracies or inconsistencies.

0-4.9 points

  • Insufficient or inaccurate referencing.

10

 Total          

/100

Overall score

High Distinction (HD)

85 points minimum

Distinction (D)

75 points minimum

Credit (C)

65 points minimum

Pass (P)

50 points minimum

Fail (N)

0 points minimum



 


Referencing Style

Submission

No submission method provided.


Learning Outcomes Assessed
  • Calculate and communicate epidemiological statistics relating to the measurement of health, wellness and disease.
  • Interpret epidemiological data within theories and frameworks of social justice and cultural diversity for effective knowledge transfer and exchange.
  • Evaluate epidemiological investigations and sources of epidemiological data to identify inequities, enable change and advocate for health.
  • Argue for a population health outcome using relevant research methods and approaches.
  • Explain principles of data confidentiality and disclosure, and apply the ethical use of data.

Academic Integrity Statement

As a CQUniversity student you are expected to act honestly in all aspects of your academic work.

Any assessable work undertaken or submitted for review or assessment must be your own work. Assessable work is any type of work you do to meet the assessment requirements in the unit, including draft work submitted for review and feedback and final work to be assessed.

When you use the ideas, words or data of others in your assessment, you must thoroughly and clearly acknowledge the source of this information by using the correct referencing style for your unit. Using others’ work without proper acknowledgement may be considered a form of intellectual dishonesty.

Participating honestly, respectfully, responsibly, and fairly in your university study ensures the CQUniversity qualification you earn will be valued as a true indication of your individual academic achievement and will continue to receive the respect and recognition it deserves.

As a student, you are responsible for reading and following CQUniversity’s policies, including the Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure. This policy sets out CQUniversity’s expectations of you to act with integrity, examples of academic integrity breaches to avoid, the processes used to address alleged breaches of academic integrity, and potential penalties.

What is a breach of academic integrity?

A breach of academic integrity includes but is not limited to plagiarism, self-plagiarism, collusion, cheating, contract cheating, and academic misconduct. The Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure defines what these terms mean and gives examples.

Why is academic integrity important?

A breach of academic integrity may result in one or more penalties, including suspension or even expulsion from the University. It can also have negative implications for student visas and future enrolment at CQUniversity or elsewhere. Students who engage in contract cheating also risk being blackmailed by contract cheating services.

Where can I get assistance?

For academic advice and guidance, the Academic Learning Centre (ALC) can support you in becoming confident in completing assessments with integrity and of high standard.

What can you do to act with integrity?