| Category | Assignment | Subject | Sociology |
|---|---|---|---|
| University | Oxford Brookes University | Module Title | HWSC5001 Equality and Social Justice in Health, Illness and Society |
| Word Count | 3000 Words |
|---|---|
| Assessment Type | Oral Assessment |
| Academic Year | 2025 |
| Deadline |
Monday, 11th August 2025 by 11:59 pm |
| Target Feedback time and Date |
Monday 1st September 2025 by 23:59pm |
You are required to prepare and present an in-class oral Group Presentation of 20 minutes, incorporating a 20-slide MS PowerPoint presentation, that must be uploaded through Turnitin and must be the equivalent of 3,000 words. This assignment provides an opportunity to demonstrate your achievement of the module learning outcomes.
The formative tasks, which are outlined in the Module Guide, are essential to the completion of your summative assignment.
This assignment has been designed to provide you with an opportunity to demonstrate your achievement of the following module learning outcomes:
Recommended:
The assessment for this module is an Oral Group Presentation. Presentations will take place in the timetabled class in Week 5 of the teaching and learning schedule. The presentation must be delivered in class at the time scheduled by the Lecturer, the presentation will be recorded, and the slide deck must be uploaded to Turnitin via Moodle before the submission deadline as proof of the Summative Group Presentation.
A Summative Oral Assessment / Group Presentation of a maximum time of 20 minutes, a minimum time of 15 minutes, and a maximum of 20 presentation slides with a minimum of 15 presentation slides.
The groups will be self-formed in week 1 and allocated by your lecturer if, by the end of week 1, this has not occurred. It is expected that every group member should participate equally in the presentation and the creation of the presentation slide deck. Your slides should contribute to the flow of the presentation and relate to the LOs of the assignment. This will be monitored by the academic Lecturer and the Module Leader. The presentation will be recorded in class by the academic Tutor on their GBS laptop and stored on the GBS SharePoint.
The presentation will focus on the case study chosen by the group. Each case study will be associated with health inequalities and discrimination within a specific community. You will use an ecological model of your choice to analyse the case study, exploring the evidence showing the factors contributing to inequality and the impact of community services. In addition, you will be assessed on the critique of one another's content through the 360° peer review feedback contributions to each other.
The group presentation should demonstrate engagement and learning with key areas of study and knowledge within the module. The presentation slide deck must address the learning outcomes and contain an explanation of the following points:
Introduction
Please select your case study from the options below.
South Asian communities in the UK, including individuals of Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, and Sri Lankan heritage, have a shared experience of notable inequalities. These disparities are influenced by a range of factors such as cultural dietary practices, language barriers and limited access to culturally appropriate healthcare genetic predisposition to conditions like type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease, compared to the general population. Additionally, socioeconomic challenges, such as poverty, overcrowded housing, and unemployment, has contributed to poorer health outcomes. In addition, experiences of discrimination and a lack of trust in health services may discourage people from seeking timely care.
Addressing these inequalities requires a comprehensive approach that considers cultural needs, improves healthcare accessibility, and tackles the wider social and economic issues affecting these communities.
Suggested Literature:
Black African and Caribbean communities in the UK experience significant health inequalities, including higher rates of mental illness, hypertension, stroke, sickle cell disease, and maternal health complications compared to the general population. These disparities are shaped by a combination of factors such as limited access to culturally competent healthcare, underdiagnosis or misdiagnosis of certain conditions and a lack of targeted health education. Social economic disadvantages – including higher rates of unemployment, housing insecurity, and discrimination – further impact overall health and wellbeing.
Structural racism and negative experiences within healthcare settings can lead to mistrust and reduced engagement with services. Tackling these inequalities requires a coordinated approach that addresses both the immediate healthcare gaps and the broader systemic and social issues affecting these communities.
Tackling these inequalities requires a coordinated approach that addresses both the immediate healthcare gaps and the broader systemic and social issues affecting these communities.
Suggested Literature:
LGBTQ+ communities in the UK face distinct health inequalities that originate from a combination of social, structural and cultural factors. These include higher rates of mental health issues such as depression, anxiety and self-harm, as well as increased risks of substance misuse and suicide. LGBTQ+ individuals may also experience barriers to accessing healthcare, including discrimination, lack of understanding from healthcare providers, and fear of being judged or misunderstood.
Transgender and non-binary people, in particular, often face long waiting times and limited access to gender-affirming care. Additionally, social isolation, stigma, and past negative experiences with services, targeted mental health support, and wider societal efforts to reduce discrimination and promote acceptance, such as barriers to accessing inclusive care, social stigma and healthcare discrimination.
Suggested Literature:
Submission details
This assessment should be submitted as a complete document
This assessment should be submitted before Monday, 11th August 2025, by 23:59, via Turnitin on Moodle. Turnitin is a web-based tool that supports the development of good academic practice when preparing written work for assessment. This text-matching tool allows academic staff to check assignments for improper use of sources or potential plagiarism by comparing it against continuously updated databases (including web pages and other student work).
You should submit all work for summative assessments by the above deadline. Work not submitted by the deadline will be marked as 0% unless there is a valid reason for the late submission (i.e. having been granted an extension to the deadline or a deferral via the Exceptional Circumstances Procedure). For information on Exceptional Circumstances, additional support and assessment guidance, please refer to your Programme Handbook.
For guidance on breaches of Academic Conduct (AC), including the misuse of AI, please refer to the relevant policy document online at GBS Academic Good Practice and Academic Conduct: Policy and Procedure. It is recognised that the use of AI tools, such as Chat GPT, may be of benefit to several individuals. However, you should use such tools with caution, as there are a number of limitations associated with the use of AI. If you use AI, you must declare that fact and be cautious that you do not overuse it. Undeclared, deceptive use of AI tools is not allowed and may lead to an academic conduct investigation.
The Oxford Brookes University Regulations for Study set out the rules governing your entitlements to resit assessments and retake modules. You can make your resubmission by Sunday, 19th October 2025, before 23:59pm.
Key principles that students should be aware in when making resubmissions:
A reassessment task will normally take the same form as the original assessment.
The mark that you achieve for a resit will be capped at the pass mark - this means 40% for this module. The only exception to this will be where you have made a successful claim for exceptional circumstances, in which case, the mark achieved at resit would not be capped.
| Assessment Sections | A+/A (70-100%) | B+/B (60-69%) | C+/C (50-59%) | D/D+ (40-49%) | Fail |
|
Introduction and definition
10/100 |
There is exceptional insight into the subject. There is clear and concise thinking and understanding of the challenges experienced in terms of health inequalities within the case study. Highly logical organisation no improvement could reasonably be expected at this level. |
There is outstanding insight into the subject. There is clear thinking and understanding of the challenges experienced in terms of health inequalities within the case study. Strong logical organisation, some improvement could be expected at this level. |
There is good insight into the subject. Some sound understanding of key concepts. Good understanding of indicators of equality and social justice in health, illness and society.
Good logical organisation with a grasp to the fulfilment of the assignment objectives and with some creativity |
Satisfactory insight into the subject. Reasonable understanding of key concepts. Vague understanding of indicators of equality and social justice in health, illness and society.
Reasonable logical organisation with a brief grasp to the fulfilment of the assignment objectives and with little creativity
|
No or poor insight into the subject. No or poor understanding of key concepts. Poor understanding of indicators of equality and social justice in health, illness and society.
Poor logical organisation with a grasp to the fulfilment of the assignment objectives and with poor creativity |
|
Content Knowledge and understanding 35/100 |
There is an exceptional understanding of indicators of inequalities in health, illness and society, which are appraised with critical depth, insight and knowledge. Factors contributing to inequality, discrimination, and anti – oppressive practice (e.g. employment, salary, qualification, racism, access to healthcare) are comprehensively evaluated within the context of the case study. Exceptional contextualisation of an ecological model within the analysis of the case study. Exceptional defence of how social systems and the impact of personal responsibility to deliver care in a diverse community. Exceptional structure, with clear format and language. Highly logical development of information. |
There is an outstanding understanding of indicators of inequalities in health, illness and society, which are appraised critically showing excellent insight. Factors contributing to inequality, discrimination, and anti – oppressive practice (e.g. employment, salary, qualification, racism, access to healthcare) are effectively evaluated in the context of the case study. Outstanding contextualisation of an ecological model within the analysis of the case study. Outstanding defence of how social systems and the impact of personal responsibility to deliver care in a diverse community.
Outstanding structure, with clear format and language. Excellent logical development of information. |
There is a good understanding of indicators of inequalities in health, illness and society, which are appraised reasonably showing some insight. Some factors contributing to inequality, discrimination, and anti – oppressive practice (e.g. employment, salary, qualification, racism, access to healthcare) are linked to the case study with some evaluation. Good contextualisation of an ecological model within the analysis of the case study. Good defence of how social systems and the impact of personal responsibility to deliver care in a diverse community.
Good structure, with clear format and language. Clear logical development of information. |
There is a satisfactory understanding of indicators of inequalities in health, illness and society, which are appraised somewhat showing limited insight. Limited factors contributing to inequality, discrimination, and anti – oppressive practice (e.g. employment, salary, qualification, racism, access to healthcare) are vaguely linked to the case study with some limited evaluation. A Satisfactory contextualisation of an ecological model within the analysis of the case study. Satisfactory defence of how social systems and the impact of personal responsibility to deliver care in a diverse community.
Satisfactory structure, with clear format and language. Clear logical development of information. |
There is a poor understanding of indicators of inequalities in health, illness and society, which are not appraised. There is no rationale given for the level of knowledge of factors contributing to inequality, discrimination, and anti – oppressive practice (e.g. employment, salary, qualification, racism, access to healthcare).
No or very limited contextualisation of an ecological model is attempted. Missing a defence of how social systems and the impact of personal responsibility to deliver care in a diverse community.
No structure, format and language is poor and no logical development of information. |
|
Communication and presentation skills
25/100 |
There is exceptional evidence of interpersonal skills, showing exceptional attention to delivery of the presentation through an effectively organised delivery where a comprehensive analysis of the case study has been achieved by the individual contributions to the whole. There is an excellent delivery of the presentation which effectively showcases a deep understanding of complex health and inequality-related concepts. There is evidence of the use of critical language to defend the ability to communicate individual judgement within the health and inequality-related concepts. Exceptional use of body language facilitating the audience’s understanding of the critical evaluation of concepts within the presentation. There is clear demonstration of oral presentation skills such as clarity, tone of voice, confidence and timing. Demonstrated exceptional IT skills through innovative application and demonstrating critical evaluation of their relevance to the case study, enhancing the audience understanding. |
There is outstanding evidence of interpersonal skills supporting some organisation where a detailed analysis has been made by the individual contributions to the whole. There is an Outstanding delivery of the presentation which effectively communicates understanding of the analytical and evaluative processes, underpinning the case study. There is little evidence of the use of critical language to defend the ability to communicate individual judgement within the health and inequality-related concepts. Outstanding use of body language indicating engagement with the audience helping their understanding of critical evaluation of concepts. Oral presentation skills such as clarity, tone of voice, confidence and timing are utilised in a professional manner. IT skills are applied effectively to critically engage and enhance audience comprehension.
|
There is good evidence of interpersonal skills that enables collaboration and support to provide reasonably organised delivery where a reasonable analysis of the case study has been achieved by the individual contributions to the whole. There is Good, logical delivery of the presentation which shows clear understanding of the analytical process of health inequalities but sometimes does not articulate the critical depth effectively. Good use of body language facilitating audience’s understanding of evaluation of concepts within the presentation. Reasonable demonstration of oral presentation skills such as clarity, tone of voice, confidence and timing which may require further development in one of the above areas. Demonstrated good IT skills where the skills are applied adequately, though further enhancement and innovative strategies need to be developed.
|
There is satisfactory l evidence of interpersonal skills showing basic attention to delivery of the presentation that allows limited analysis of being made by individual contributions to the whole. There is Satisfactory delivery of the presentation which demonstrates limited analysis of the content, lacking communication of critical evaluation impacting consistency in clarity and flow of communicating the complex information reasonably. Satisfactory use of body language which occasionally facilitates audience engagement with the content of the presentation. Oral presentation skills need further development in more than 2 areas such as clarity, tone of voice, confidence and timing. Demonstrates decent IT skills with minimal application to visual communication of the critical content.
|
There is no evidence of interpersonal skills with no attention to analysis of the case study been achieved by the individual contributions to the whole. There is Poor, incoherent delivery of the presentation which does not demonstrate critical analysis of the content with no communication of evaluating concepts related to the case study. Poor use of body language hindering effectiveness of the critical thinking within the content. There is poor demonstration of oral presentation skills such as clarity, tone of voice, confidence and timing which do not communicate information effectively. Demonstrated Poor IT skills with limited or no use of any visual aid.
|
|
360 Review 20/100
|
Exceptional analysis of peer content. Exceptional understanding of peer feedback and substantial evidence of significant self-reflection on strengths and weaknesses of personal responsibility. |
Outstanding analysis of peer content. Outstanding understanding of peer feedback and evidence of frequently meaningful self-reflection on strengths and weaknesses of personal responsibility. |
Good analysis of peer content. Good understanding of peer feedback and some evidence of significant self-reflection on strengths and weaknesses of personal responsibility. |
Satisfactory analysis of peer content. Satisfactory understanding of peer feedback and very limited evidence of significant self -reflection on strengths and weaknesses of personal responsibility. |
Poor analysis of peer content. Poor understanding of peer feedback and no evidence of significant self- reflection on strengths and weaknesses of personal responsibility. |
|
Use of information to communicate/ Use of literature / evidence of reading
10/100
|
Exceptional application of relevant sources to the case study and aspects of health inequalities. Sources have been chosen very effectively to facilitate an appraisal of the factors affecting inequality in the case study. Exceptional awareness of up-to-date research in health inequality |
Appropriate application of relevant sources to the case study and aspects of health inequalities. Sources have been chosen effectively to facilitate an appraisal of the factors affecting inequality in the case study. Outstanding awareness of up-to-date research in health inequality |
Some application of relevant sources to the case study and aspects of health inequalities. Sources have been chosen somewhat effectively to facilitate an appraisal of the factors affecting inequality in the case study. Some awareness of up-to-date research in health inequality |
Limited application of relevant sources to the case study and aspects of health inequalities. Sources have been chosen with some attempts to facilitate an appraisal of the factors affecting inequality in the case study. Limited awareness of up-to-date research in health inequality |
There is no application of relevant sources to the case study and aspects of health inequalities. Sources have been chosen which are irrelevant to an appraisal of the factors affecting inequality in the case study No/Poor awareness of up-to-date research in health inequality. |
Submit Your Assignment Questions & Get Plagiarism Free Answers
Order Non-Plagiarized AssignmentGet expert assignment help for HWSC5001 Equality and Social Justice in Health, Illness and Society?We specialise in offering high-quality sociology assignment help, with an option for students to pay our experts to take on their assignment challenges. Need a reference? We also provide a free list of assignment examples to help you get started. With years of experience, our writers deliver 100% plagiarism-free content and offer unlimited revisions to meet your needs. Trust us to help you excel in your studies!
Let's Book Your Work with Our Expert and Get High-Quality Content
