MHSC8.003 Physical Activity for Health Assessment two: Written Assessment Semester 2, 2025 | EIT

Grade description

‘A’ grade (> 80%)

‘B’ grade (65% - 79.9%)

‘C’ grade (50% - 64.9%)

Fail grade (<50%)

Research 
Knowledge base

15%

 Demonstrates a proficient command of the subject matter.

Excels in explaining all major points clearly and concisely.

Demonstrates a consistent ability to seek out reliable information to improve knowledge.

 Demonstrates an adequate level of knowledge of subject matter with only minor gaps in knowledge- base.

 Explains most of the major points clearly and concisely.

 Demonstrates an adequate ability to seek out reliable information to improve knowledge.

 Demonstrates a general, fundamental understanding of the subject matter but with some obvious gaps in the knowledge base.

 Has attempted to explain major points but not always successful at doing so clearly and/or concisely.

 Demonstrates some ability to seek out information to improve knowledge.

 Demonstrates little or no understanding of the subject matter.

 Has not explained the major points clearly or concisely.

  Demonstrates very little or no ability to seek out information to improve knowledge.

Synthesis and 
analysis 
of information

25%

 Demonstrates a clear understanding of the assessment requirements.

Provides a comprehensive analysis and synthesis of details, facts and concepts.

Provides a robust conclusion after presenting a variety of well-supported points for discussion.

Presents a highly structured argument, using information from a variety of robust sources.

 Proficiently explains complex ideas or concepts in simple terms.

 Demonstrates a generally adequate level of understanding of the assessment requirements.

 Provides a moderate level of analysis of details, facts and concepts.

Provides a conclusion after presenting some well- supported points for discussion.

Presents a structured argument, using information from robust sources.

 Adequately explains complex ideas or concepts in simple terms.

 Demonstrates some understanding of the assessment requirements but has not fully understood them.

 Provides some analysis of details, facts and concepts.

Provides a conclusion after presenting a limited number of well-supported points for discussion.

 Presents a structured argument, but supported with limited information from robust sources.

 Explains some complex ideas or concepts in simple terms.

 Demonstrates little or no understanding of the assessment requirements.

 Shows no or little evidence of analysis of details, facts and concepts.

 Presents a weak conclusion with very few or no well-supported points for discussion.

  Demonstrates little or no ability to present a structured argument and support it with information from robust sources.

  Explains few or no complex ideas or concepts in simple terms.

Evidence of 
critical thinking

25%

Highly competent critiquing of information presented.

Proficiently discusses conflicting pieces of information to produce an evidence-based conclusion.

Proficiently supports a conflicting viewpoint when responding to information presented by others.

 Demonstrates a proficient level of clinical / diagnostic reasoning.

Adequate critiquing of information presented.

Adequatelydiscusses conflicting pieces of information to produce an evidence-based conclusion.

Adequately supports a conflicting viewpoint when responding to information presented by others.

 Demonstrates an adequate level of clinical / diagnostic reasoning.

Some critiquing of information presented.

Some discussion of conflicting pieces of information to produce an evidence-based conclusion.

Some support of a conflicting viewpoint when responding to information presented by others.

 Demonstrates some clinical / diagnostic reasoning.

 Poor or no critiquing of information presented.

  Little or no discussion of conflicting pieces of information to produce an evidence-based conclusion.

 Little or no support of a conflicting viewpoint when responding to information presented by others.

  Demonstrates little or no clinical / diagnostic reasoning.

Use of academic literature

15%

Uses a wide variety of relevant and up-to-date sources of information, primarily from peer- reviewed literature.

Presents all sources of information accurately in APA 7th style in the text and reference list.

Consistently integrates the literature as a foundation for well-argued reasoning.

Proficient in paraphrasing academic literature accurately and concisely.

 Uses a range of relevant sources of information but not always the latest and/or peer-reviewed literature.

Presents most sources of information accurately in APA 7th style in the text and reference list, with some errors/omissions.

Generally integrates the literature as a foundation for argument. Adequate in paraphrasing academic literature accurately and concisely.

Uses some relevant literature but little of the latest and/or peer-reviewed literature.

Presents some sources of information accurately in APA 7th style in the text and reference list, with many errors/omissions.

Some integration of the literature.

Demonstrates some ability to paraphrase academic literature accurately and concisely.

 Uses little relevant literature and/or peer- reviewed literature, and/or uses outdated literature.

 Presents sources of information inaccurately and/or not in APA 7th style.

  Very few or no links made between the literature and the assessment topic / subject.

Demonstrates little ability to paraphrase academic literature accurately and concisely.

Academic writing skills

15%

 Consistently presents information in a logical sequence.

Proficient formulation of sentences and use of grammar

 Consistently adheres to the EIT ‘Academic Writing Style’ guidelines.

 Presents most of the information in a logical sequence.

Adequate formulation of sentences and use of grammar.

Generally adheres to the EIT ‘Academic Writing Style’ guidelines.

 Presents some of the information in a logical sequence.

 Writing difficult to follow in places and/or numerous minor grammatical.

 Sometimes adheres to the EIT ‘Academic Writing Style’ guidelines.

 Little or no logical flow to the delivery of information.

Poor formulation throughout and/or numerous grammatical errors.

 Rarely adheres to the EIT ‘Academic Writing Style’ guidelines.

Reflection 5%

Proficient in reflecting on learnings from the course and identifying areas for improvement.

 Proficient in demonstrating how learnings from the course

have been used to improve practice.

Adequate in reflecting on learnings from the course and identifying areas for improvement.

 Adequately demonstrated how learnings from the course have been used to improve practice.

Demonstrates some ability to reflect on learnings from the course and identify areas for improvement.

 Some demonstration of how learnings from the course have been used to improve practice.

 Demonstrates little or no ability to reflect on learnings from the course and identify areas for improvement.

 Demonstrates little or no ability to utilise learnings from the course to improve practice.