LDG7002M Healthcare Analytics Assessment Brief 2025-26 | YSJU

Is this exempt from Anonymous marking under the policy?

General Characteristics

Pass

(50 – 59)

Merit

(60 – 69)

Distinction

(70 – 84)

Distinction

(85 – 100)

Borderline Fail

(45 - 49)

(Credits may be compensated)

Fail

(30 - 44)

(Credits may not be compensated)

Fail

(0 - 29)

(Credits may not be compensated)

Adjectives

Satisfactory

Good

Excellent

Exemplary

Not Successful

Unsuccessful

Fail

Thinking skills

The work has attempted to apply advanced thinking skills methodically to material from the taught content (core and additional) and to present an evidence-led understanding of the discipline of health economics.

The work has systematically applied advanced critical thinking skills to the (taught and independently researched) material. It has identified problems with, or asked questions about, the source material and proposed appropriate approaches to resolve these.

The work has successfully offered and evidenced new insights into problems or areas of development which are central to research in the discipline of health economics

The work has created new insights or proposed new hypotheses/analysis in response to health economics related problems or areas of development which are at the forefront of research in this discipline. It shows a professional awareness and application of the thinking skills used to process this knowledge.

The work may have applied some thinking skills to part of the existing knowledge from the taught content but not enough of these are advanced thinking skills. More of the core content needs to be addressed or applied in this analytical report.

The work has applied a few thinking skills to the materials from the core content but none of these are advanced thinking skills. Most of the core content has not been addressed or applied. The work is limited by some misunderstandings, misapplications, or gaps in key areas of knowledge from the taught content.

The work has not applied the required thinking skills to the course content (health economics). Little or no core content has been addressed or applied. The work is limited by significant misunderstandings, misapplications, or gaps in key areas of knowledge from the taught content (health economics).

Research skills

The work has attempted to apply appropriate research

methods from the

The work has successfully utilised analytical

methods/concepts/fra

The work is supported by an appropriate / systematic / thoughtful

methodological

The work has successfully developed new knowledge by using

analytical methods/

The work may have partially applied some of the analytical methods/ concepts/frameworks

from the taught content to existing

The work does not apply the required analytical methods/

concepts/frameworks to

The work does not address the required analytical methods/

concepts/frameworks nor

taught content correctly. It has attempted to analyse and solve problems and answer research questions which have been encountered in directed and independent studies.

meworks from the taught content and independent studies. It has carefully selected and applied these analytical methods/ concepts/frameworks to generate data and / or insights to solve complex problems or answer bespoke research questions in the analytical report.

approach and design. The work demonstrates a strong competency and in-depth understanding of the purpose and function of its analytical methods/ concepts/frameworks.

concepts/frameworks effectively. It clearly articulates the

researcher’s position. The design and rigour of the planning and implementation of the research adheres to the professional standards of the field / discipline / industry.

knowledge. It does not yet use these skills and methods to solve problems and / or answer research questions. The work needs to include a more coherent account of how these skills and methods are relevant or applicable to the health economics topic.

existing knowledge. These skills and methods are not used to solve problems and

/ or answer research questions. The work does not articulate how these skills and methods are relevant or applicable to the research topic. There may be some misunderstandings and misapplications.

apply them to existing knowledge. The work does not attempt to solve problems and / or answer research questions. There is misunderstanding and misapplication of these skills and methods to the taught content and to the health economics topic.

Practical skills

The work has attempted to apply the taught techniques in a way which adheres to relevant professional, ethical and / or legal frameworks (including CHEERS checklist). It has explained, critiqued and

/ or adapted established disciplinary practices and / or practical skills where this is relevant. It has demonstrated proactivity in tackling and / or solving problems, planning, and implementing tasks at a professional (or equivalent) level.

The work has successfully applied a range of taught and self-taught techniques in a way which adheres to relevant professional, ethical and / or legal frameworks (including CHEERS checklist).

These have been integrated to form a system of professional practice.

The work has effectively selected and synergised a range of appropriate skills into a system of practice in a way which adheres to disciplinary

/ professional / industry / commercial standards. It has applied these techniques in a way which adheres to relevant professional, ethical and / or legal frameworks (including CHEERS checklist).

The work has systematically, consistently and / or creatively applied professional / disciplinary skills, in a way which adheres to relevant professional, ethical and / or legal frameworks (including CHEERS checklist). It applies these skills as part of a system of practice which would be considered exemplary by disciplinary / professional / industry / commercial colleagues.

The work may have applied some of the core taught techniques but does not fully explain, critique and/ or adapt established disciplinary practices / practical skills in a way which adheres to relevant frameworks / guidelines. There is some evidence of proactivity in problem-solving and / or planning and implementing tasks at a professional or equivalent level but more is needed.

The work applies few of the core taught techniques. It does not clearly explain, critique and /or adapt established disciplinary practices / practical skills in a way which adheres to relevant frameworks / guidelines. There is no clear evidence of proactivity in problem-solving and / or planning and implementing tasks at a professional or equivalent level.

The work does not reference or apply any taught techniques. It does not explain, critique, or adapt established disciplinary practices / practical skills. There is little or no evidence of proactivity in problem- solving and / or planning and implementing tasks at a professional or equivalent level. There is little or no evidence of practising in a way which adheres to relevant frameworks / guidelines.

Professional Learning skills

The work has attempted to reflect on experiences and / or feedback to evaluate

the effectiveness of the

The work critically reflects on the learning processes and applies actions which

can produce

The work shows a systematic, critically reflective approach to developing learning

processes / goal setting.

The work has used critical self-awareness to develop learning without supervision. Its application

of reflective practice has

The work may show some awareness of personal responsibility for development / reflection on individual learning /

disciplinary practice. It needs to

The work shows limited awareness of personal responsibility for development / reflection

on individual learning /

The work has not engaged with personal reflections or feedback / guidance, resulting in little or no clear

learning processes / goal setting. It identifies actions to generate identifiable future improvements. The work attempts to engage with further resources / opportunities for support and growth in response to new challenges, and / or for decision-making in complex and unpredictable situations.

identifiable future improvements. The work recognises gaps and limitations or opportunity to develop. It shows sustained engagement with further resources / opportunities for support and growth in response to new challenges.

It evidences the proactive ownership and management of learning and shows an enterprising / aspirational approach, producing significant developments. The work shows critical engagement with further resources / opportunities for support and growth. Decision-making is confident in complex and unpredictable situations.

resulted in enhanced learning processes and outputs. It identifies aspirational future goals, opportunities, and actions. It shows sustained critical engagement with further resources / opportunities for support and growth in response to new challenges. The work uses considerate and ethical decision making.

use more / other sources of feedback / guidance to achieve satisfactory improvements to work and / or practice.

disciplinary practice. It does not apply sufficient feedback or guidance to improve work / practice.

improvement in work or practice.

Communication

The work is largely clear, coherent and communicates appropriately to an audience. It is aware of relevant technologies and uses an appropriate writing or presentation style

The work communicates using technically proficient language appropriate to the medium and its intended audience. It shows an appreciation of relevant technologies.

The work communicates persuasively. It engages with relevant technologies and communicates complex ideas in ways that are accessible to specialist and non-specialist audiences.

The work communicates with a structure which flows logically. It successfully communicates complex ideas in ways that would be understandable to a range of specialist and non-specialist audiences.

The work engages ethically with relevant technologies and uses them in a socially responsible way.

The mode of communication in this work is comprehensible to some extent and there may be some areas of focus (topic / conclusions

/ intended audience). The work’s language may show some technical proficiency and partially apply an appropriate writing or presentation style but there are gaps, mistakes, or inconsistencies.

The work’s clarity and focus are limited. The language used is not consistent in its coherence or technical proficiency and the works applies few of the features of an appropriate writing or presentation style.

The work has little or no clarity or focus and does not attempt to communicate to an audience. The language used is not clear or technically proficient. Little or no attempt has been made to apply an appropriate writing or presentation style.

Creativity

The work attempts to adapt / combine / transform existing knowledge /concepts to a sufficient extent that it is distinct from these inspirations.

The work is new and valuable by being functional, thought- provoking, and /or informative to an intended audience.

The work and its creative idea / approach is new, surprising, and valuable to a clearly identified audience. It operates at a level of creativity comparable to industry /

The creative idea and style inform (and are integrated consistently into) the work. It is new, valuable, and surprising to an identifiable and well- defined audience and it exceeds this audience’s

expectations. It operates

The work may demonstrate some originality (being new, valuable, or surprising) by adapting / combining

/ transforming some existing knowledge/ concepts. It partially explains its value or engages an audience, but it needs to distinguish itself from existing

The work has evidences limited originality (newness, value, surprisingness). It shows few adaptations / combinations / transformations of existing knowledge / concepts to

explain its purpose or

This work evidences little or no originality (newness, value, surprisingness). It relies too greatly on replicating a very narrow range of existing knowledge / specific concepts. It does not

professional expectations.

as a leading example in the field / discipline / industry.

knowledge / concepts more clearly.

function or to engage an identified audience. It has mostly replicated existing knowledge / concepts.

explain its value nor identify an audience.

Professional Skills (PSRB standards)

Percentage marks are awarded based on the percentage of competency tasks completed in accordance with relevant PSRB requirements, Pass marks remain at 50%. Critical incidences can result in an automatic failure (49-0%).

Professional Competencies (PSRB

standards)

Professional Conventions (PSRB

Standards)

The work adheres to the appropriate rules and/or conventions set by regulators or the industry

The work has not succeeded in adhering to the appropriate rules and / or conventions set by regulators or the industry.