| Category | Assignment | Subject | Science |
|---|---|---|---|
| University | University of Birmingham (UoB) | Module Title | PHE7452 Public Health Foundations |
| Word Count | 3000 words |
|---|---|
| Assessment Type | Assignment 1 Coursework |
| Assessment Title | Report |
| Academic Year | 2025 |
| Semester: | 2 |
|
Assessment Date |
1st attempt: Thursday 15th May 2025 |
|
Reassessment Date |
2nd (final) attempt: Thursday 5th September 2025 |
|
Return of Work |
You will receive feedback by these approximate dates: 1st attempt: 12th June 2025 |
|
|
2nd attempt: 2nd October 2025 |
Written assignment, 3000 words (100%)
Submission Date: Thursday 15th May 2025 before 3pm
Assessment Title: Use models, theories and concepts covered in the Module to critically analyse interventions for improving public health in a country of your choice, focusing on a topic from a prescribed list
Imagine that you are working in Public Health. This could be in the UK, another country or for the World Health Organisation. The Director of Public Health (DPH) has asked you to prepare a 3000-word written report to inform future public health practice to address a topic (chosen from the list in the assessment section on Moodle – make sure you choose from the topics highlighted in blue).
The table below provides an overview of what should be covered.
|
Structure and organisation |
Themes & Communication of Ideas |
Critical Analysis (knowledge to be |
Possible Module Sessions to draw See marking rubric regarding use of sources – journal articles |
|
Introduction (5 marks) |
Clearly state your chosen topic (this must be from the blue list) and your focus (e.g. country) |
|
|
|
Background (10 marks) |
Why is your topic a Public Health concern? What would a public health perspective to this topic focus on? |
Use module resources (Moodle and the Use and critique data to support your case |
Sessions 1 – 2 Prevention |
|
Main causal/contributory factors (20 marks) |
What, on balance, appear to be the main causal/contributory factors that need to be addressed to improve the public’s health? |
Include structural factors and the “causes |
Sessions 1 -2 LBR7456 Pathogenics and Salutogenics |
|
Policy Support (20 marks) |
Current or historical policy/political support |
Is there policy/political support for tackling this issue and addressing structural determinants?
Does government or WHO policy fit with the evidence on causes, or is there a mismatch? How far is policy focused on societal change; or supporting a need for the environment to be health enhancing? Has the policy direction changed over time? |
Public Health Policy
Key Public Health Organisations |
|
Public Health Interventions (20 marks) |
You should include a range of interventions (e.g. interventions which aim for policy/societal change; client-centred interventions; community action; behaviour change) giving specific examples where possible (and referencing these) You should relate the interventions/approaches to at least one of the models of Health Promotion/Public Health discussed on the module. |
You should use public health models (at least one) to compare and contrast the different interventions.
Your critique may include the following: · How do the interventions conceptualise health? · How far do they focus on societal change or improving the existing social order (see Caplan and Holland)? · How far are they expert-led or participatory (see Beattie)? · Critically discussing interventions that can or cannot be found (e.g. many interventions labelled as being community based are often not very empowering; why there may be few genuine examples of community development/empowerment You should demonstrate knowledge of the strengths and limitations of any specific theory that might underlie a particular approach (eg behaviour change theory; empowerment theory), though this will vary for different topics & approaches. |
Public Health Models
Modelling of Public Health Work including Session on prevention and a “first model”
Prevention and Screening The Pillars of Public Health Pathogenics and Salutogenics |
|
Ethics (20 marks) |
You should discuss interventions using the Nuffield ladder |
You should demonstrate an understanding of ethics from a public health perspective (e.g. you may want to discuss victim blaming; interests, “choice”) |
Ethics |
|
Conclusion (5 marks for conclusion and references) |
Summarise (briefly) at least one key point from each of the above 4 sections and then draw conclusions. State your actual word count for the full assignment. |
On balance, do the types of interventions/ approaches fit well with the main causal factors mentioned in your background, or is there a mismatch? What actions are indicated? Are the conclusions and recommendations supported by a “persuasive argument” (see marking criteria) in the preceding sections. |
Module Summary (Evaluation) |
|
Reference List |
Ensure all in-text citations are present, and in the Harvard format. Your references list should be complete e.g. journal articles must have either a doi or available from URL and accessed date. |
|
Formative opportunities are designed to help you prepare for the summative assignment; to ensure that you understand you how upload work to Moodle; and to give you early feedback. You are strongly advised to complete formative activities to maximise your chances of success.
We are delighted that on this module you have the CADMUS platform to help you work towards your assignment each week, using materials from the taught sessions. CADMUS is a platform to provide additional support for students that can be found in the submission portal on Moodle. Get into the habit of using the notes section in CADMUS every week to prepare for the session (making notes on the pre-session activity); reflect on the session (making notes on what you have learned each week and how it might link to different sections of your summative assignment); and on post-session activities.
Task 1 (Formative) – Reviewing the marking criteria for the summative assessment – during the session on 6th March 2025
Working in small groups, you will review sample assignments using the marking criteria below. Make sure you read the marking criteria before the session. You will be asked to identify a band grade for the assignment and to be prepared to discuss your decision with the other groups and your tutor. The purpose of the exercise is to help you understand level 7 expectations. You will be expected to write a very short (100 words) reflective piece in CADMUS setting out what you have learned.
Task 2 (Formative – opportunity available for five students per teaching group who will receive an online certificate) - Presentation during session on 20th March 2025
We will ask for 5 volunteers from each teaching group to research one of the following models of health promotion/public health work; and prepare and deliver a presentation on this for the wider group.
Your presentation should focus on explaining the model (using examples of different interventions to do so) and discussing its strengths and weaknesses. You should be prepared to answer questions from the group. You will have 15 minutes for your presentation and questions.
Your module tutors will use Beattie’s model in session 5 to demonstrate one way to approach this task. Your presentations should be ready for 20th March session (week 8).
Task 3 (Formative) – Upload to Moodle before 3pm on 31st March 2025
500 words using one of the models of public health introduced in weeks 5, 8 & 9 to compare and critique two or three interventions for improving health in your chosen topic area. You can chose from the following models of public health:
You should be able to justify where you locate your intervention on the model. You should be able to point out the strengths and weaknesses of specific interventions using key features of the model (e.g. key assumptions about health; assumptions about the nature of society; whether the change is by the individual or at a collective level). You should also draw some comparisons between the interventions. You must use references (e.g. for the model itself; specific features, for the intervention) in the appropriate Harvard style both in text and in a references list.
You will be given some individual feedback on your formative work. You may, if you wish, build on this work for the main, summative task. You are also free to change your topic in the summative task.
Hire Experts to solve PHE7452 Assignment 1 before your Deadline
Pay & Buy Non Plagiarized AssignmentYour grade will be based on how well you meet the assessment brief, using the marking criteria below. You are expected to meet include the key content outlined above. The grade you get will depend on how well you meet the marking criteria below. To pass at the minimum threshold at Level 7:
|
Marking Criteria |
Marking Rubric |
||||||
|
Criterion 1 |
0-19% |
20-39% |
40-49% |
50-59% |
60-69% |
70-79% |
80-100% |
|
|
Fail |
Fail |
Fail |
|
|
|
|
|
Does not address the assignment brief. |
Addresses the Assignment Brief. |
||||||
|
Structure, Organisation, |
Very poor structure, organisation, and communication of ideas. For example: No introduction. Discussions and topics are not No conclusion. |
Poor structure, organisation, and communication of ideas. For example: No appropriate introduction. Discussions and topics are incomplete, and most of the points are difficult to follow. No appropriate conclusion. |
Unsatisfactory structure, organisation, and communication of ideas. For example: introduction is superficial. Discussion and topics are complete and mostly relevant, but points are not always clear to follow. Some paragraphs may include conclusions but do not connect to the next paragraph. The conclusion drawn communicates ideas that inadequately represents an understanding of the subject matter and is not always representative of the discussion presented. |
Good structure, organisation, and communication of ideas. For example: Has an introduction. Discussions and topics are complete, relevant, and points are clear to follow. Some paragraphs conclude, with some attempt at connections made between paragraphs. Connections are made to the taught elements of the module and beyond with connections made to professional practice. The conclusion drawn communicates a synthesis of ideas that adequately represents an understanding of the subject matter and is representative of the discussion presented. |
Very good structure, organisation, and communication of ideas. For example: Introduction connects to the points in the main body. Discussions and topics are complete, relevant and points have some logical order. All paragraphs conclude with some connections made between paragraphs. Connections are made to the taught elements of the module and beyond with connections made to professional practice. The conclusion drawn communicates a synthesis of ideas that represents a significant understanding of the subject matter and is representative of the discussion presented. |
Excellent structure, organisation, and communication of ideas. For example: Introduction provides context to the points in the main body. Discussions and topics are complete, relevant and have a logical order. All paragraphs conclude with connections made between all paragraphs. Connections are made to the taught elements of the module and beyond with connections made to professional practice. The conclusion drawn communicates a synthesis of ideas that represents a commanding understanding of the subject matter and is fully representative of the discussion presented. |
Outstanding structure, organisation, and communication of ideas. For example: Introduction clearly states the main argument and provides context to the points in the main body. Discussions and topics are complete, relevant and have a logical order which aligns to the main argument. All paragraphs flow from one to the next and have conclusions that connect to the main argument. Connections are made to the taught elements of the module and beyond with connections made to professional practice. The conclusion drawn communicates a synthesis of ideas that represents a mastery of understanding of the subject matter and is fully representative of |
|
Marking Criteria |
Marking Rubric |
||||||
|
Criterion 2 |
0-19% Fail |
20-39% Fail |
40-49% Fail |
50-59% |
60-69% |
70-79% |
80-100% |
|
|
Does not address the assignment brief. |
Addresses the Assignment Brief. |
|||||
|
Knowledge and Understanding. |
Very poor demonstration of knowledge and understanding. For example: Does not demonstrate an understanding of the subject area. |
Poor demonstration of knowledge and understanding. For example: Demonstrates inaccurate knowledge base, with no appreciation of the provisional nature of knowledge. Work is lacking in knowledge and understanding of key concepts and ideas. Work contains misunderstandings and factual errors. |
Unsatisfactory demonstration of knowledge and understanding. For example: Demonstrates minimal depth of a theoretically informed knowledge base, with little appreciation of the provisional nature of knowledge. Work shows an inadequate knowledge and understanding of key concepts and ideas. Work contains some misunderstandings and few factual errors. |
Good demonstration of knowledge and understanding. For example: Demonstrates depth of a theoretically informed knowledge base, with at times appreciation of the provisional nature of knowledge. Demonstrates an adequate understanding of key theories and philosophies relevant to the subject field and beyond that of the subject field. *Demonstrates minimal accurate knowledge of methodological approaches and how these affect the way the knowledge base is interpreted and applied within the context of the assignment task. |
Very good demonstration of knowledge and understanding. For example Demonstrates a breadth and depth of a theoretically informed knowledge base, at times shows appreciation of the provisional nature of knowledge. Demonstrates significant understanding of key theories/ philosophies relevant to the subject field and beyond that of the subject field. *Demonstrates some accurate knowledge of methodological approaches and how these affect the way the knowledge base is interpreted and applied within the context of the assignment task. |
Excellent demonstration of knowledge and understanding. For example: Demonstrates a breadth and depth of a theoretically informed knowledge base, with some appreciation of the provisional nature of knowledge. Demonstrates a commanding understanding of key theories/ philosophies relevant to the subject field and beyond that of the subject field. *Demonstrates accurate knowledge of methodological approaches and how these affect the way the knowledge base is interpreted and applied within the context of the assignment task. |
Outstanding demonstration of knowledge and understanding.
For example:
Demonstrates extensive breadth and depth of a theoretically informed knowledge base, with a full appreciation of the provisional nature of knowledge.
Demonstrates mastery of understanding key theories/ philosophies relevant to the subject field and beyond that of the subject field.
*Demonstrates accurate knowledge of methodological approaches and how these affect the way the knowledge base is interpreted and applied within the context of the assignment task. |
|
Marking Criteria |
Marking Rubric |
||||||
|
Criterion 3 |
0-19% Fail |
20-39% Fail |
40-49% Fail |
50-59% |
60-69% |
70-79% |
80-100% |
|
|
Does not address the assignment brief. |
Addresses the Assignment Brief. |
|||||
|
Application of Critical Thinking. |
Very Poor application of critical thinking. For example: Presents ideas as bullet points. No evidence of reading. Content is reduced to student viewpoints and opinions only. No attempt at identifying strengths and weaknesses. No attempt to draw conclusions. |
Poor application of critical thinking. For example: Very descriptive. Inadequate evidence of reading. Content is reduced to mainly student viewpoints and opinions only. Inadequate attempt at analysis. Inadequate attempt to draw conclusions. |
Unsatisfactory application of critical thinking. For example: Little critical thinking evident. Evidence of reading. Content of sources are described, but no attempt to explain. An attempt at analysis that is reduced to strengths and weaknesses. An attempt to draw conclusions. |
Good application of critical thinking. For example: Consistent critical thinking. The literature utilised is interpreted, analysed, and evaluated to develop weak arguments. Viewpoints of authors are interconnected and explored with appropriate conclusions drawn. |
Very good application of critical thinking. for example: Consistent critical thinking. The literature utilised is interpreted, analysed, and evaluated to develop persuasive, arguments. Viewpoints of authors are interconnected and explored with informed conclusions drawn. |
Excellent application of critical thinking. For example: Constant critical thinking. The literature utilised is interpreted, analysed, and evaluated with authority to develop persuasive, arguments. Viewpoints of authors are interconnected and explored with robust informed conclusions drawn. |
Outstanding application of critical thinking. For example: Constant critical thinking. The literature utilised is interpreted, analysed, and evaluated with agency to develop persuasive, authoritative arguments. Viewpoints of authors are interconnected and interrogated with significant informed conclusions drawn. |
|
Marking Criteria |
Marking Rubric |
||||||
|
Criterion 4 |
0-19% Fail |
20-39% Fail |
40-49% Fail |
50-59% |
60-69% |
70-79% |
80-100% |
|
Referencing and Citing of Sources to Support Work. |
Very Poor referencing and citing of sources to support work. For example: No sources are cited. No reference list provided. |
Poor referencing and citing of sources to support work. For example: A limited reference list provided. Quotations used out of context. No paraphrasing. No key authors cited or referenced. No engagement with module reading list. Use of inappropriate sources – all websites. Many sources are missing a citation or a reference list item. Inaccurate use of the BCU Harvard referencing system. |
Unsatisfactory referencing and citing of sources to support work. For example: Sources are cited. Reference list provided. Work relies heavily on using quotations superficially. Attempts at paraphrasing. Few key authors cited or referenced. Little engagement with module reading list. Moderate use of inappropriate sources. Little variety in sources used. Some sources are missing a citation or a reference list item. Few inaccuracies when using the BCU Harvard referencing system. |
Good referencing and citing of sources to support work. For example: Sources are cited. Reference list provided. Paraphrasing demonstrates understanding of reading. Quotations used appropriately. Key authors cited and referenced. Engages with module reading list. Some variety in sources used. ajority sources have a citation and a reference list item. Few inaccuracies when using the BCU Harvard referencing system. *Demonstrates independent, systematic research skills, with convincing |
Very good referencing and citing of sources to support work. For example: Sources are cited. Reference list provided. Paraphrasing demonstrates accuracy of understanding the reading. Quotations used and explained. Key authors cited and referenced. Engages with the module reading list with some wider reading. All sources have a citation and a reference list item. Few inaccuracies when using the BCU Harvard referencing system. *Demonstrates independent, systematic research skills, with compelling critical thinking applied |
Excellent referencing and citing of sources to support work. For example: Sources are cited. Reference list provided. Paraphrasing demonstrates accuracy of understanding the reading. Quotations used and explored. Engages both key authors and some of the module reading list to develop and construct academic discussion. Wider reading beyond the module reading list is evident. All sources have a citation and a reference list item. Few inaccuracies when using the BCU Harvard referencing system. *Demonstrates extensive independent, |
Outstanding referencing and citing of sources to support work. For example: Sources are cited. Reference list provided. Paraphrasing demonstrates accuracy of understanding the reading and integrated within the discussion. Quotations used effectively and in an insightful way. Engages both the key authors and the specific sources from the module reading list to develop and construct persuasive academic discussion. Wider and deeper reading is evident. All sources have a citation, a reference list item, and is fully accurate using the BCU Harvard referencing system. |
|
|
|
|
|
critical thinking applied to the searching and use of information. |
to the searching and use of information. |
systematic research skills, with sophisticated critical thinking applied to the searching and use of information. |
*Demonstrates extensive independent, systematic research skills, with authoritative critical thinking applied to the searching and use of information. |
|
Conditions of Progression |
In order to achieve a pass mark for the module an overall grade of 50% must be achieved and all learning outcomes evidenced. In addition to a first attempt, there will be a second (final) attempt (all dates as above). |
|
Late or Non-Submission/ Attendance |
Assessments must be submitted in the format specified in the assessment task, by the deadline and to the submission point published on Moodle. Failure to submit by the published deadline will result in penalties which are set out in Section 6 of the Academic Regulations, available at: late-submission-of-assessment-policy-version-10-approved-june-2022- 133082470192470694.pdf (windows.net) Please be aware that the penalties are different for re-submissions. |
|
Word Count |
The word count for this module assessment is shown under the assessment task. A +10% margin of tolerance is applied, beyond which nothing further will be marked. Marks cannot be awarded for any learning outcomes addressed outside the word count. The word count refers to everything in the main body of the text (including headings, tables, citations, quotes, lists etc.). Everything before (i.e. abstract, acknowledgements, contents, executive summaries etc.) and after the main text (i.e. references, appendices) is not included in the word count limit. For in-person assessments time limits will be applied. |
|
Academic Integrity Guidance |
Academic integrity is the attitude of approaching your academic work honestly, by completing your own original work, attributing, and acknowledging your sources when necessary. Understanding good |
|
|
academic practice in written and oral work is a key element of academic integrity. It is a positive aspect of joining an academic community, showing familiarity with, and acknowledging sources of evidence. The skills you require at higher education may differ from those learned elsewhere such as school or college. You will be required to follow specific academic conventions which include acknowledging the work of others through appropriate referencing and citation as explicitly as possible. If you include ideas or quotations which have not been appropriately acknowledged, this may be seen as plagiarism which is a form of academic misconduct. If you require support around referencing, please contact the Faculty’s Academic Development Department or the University wide Centre for Academic Success. It is important to recognise that seeking out learning around academic integrity will help reduce the risk of misconduct in your work. Skills such as paraphrasing, referencing and citation are integral to acting with integrity and you can develop and advance these key academic skills through the Faculty’s Academic Development Department. |
|
Academic Misconduct |
Academic misconduct is conduct which has or may have the effect of providing you with an unfair advantage by relying on dishonest means to gain advantage and which therefore compromises your academic integrity. |
|
|
The procedure sets out the process we will follow, and the penalties we may apply, in cases where we believe you may have compromised your academic integrity by committing academic misconduct. The Academic Misconduct Procedure and information about academic support is available at: https://icity.bcu.ac.uk/Student-Affairs/Appeals-and- Resolutions/Academic-Misconduct-Procedure The procedure and supporting information also covers use of A.I. You should make sure read the policies carefully as academic misconduct will result in loss of marks. You may be asked to attend a viva if you are referred for suspected academic misconduct where you will be asked to talk through your search strategy for the assignment and demonstrate understanding of your sources. |
|
Turnitin |
To obtain a Turnitin scan before submitting your work to your department please visit the University's ‘Turnitin at BCU’ Moodle site. Work that is submitted and scanned through this service is not stored on the main Turnitin system and this is NOT your submitted work. |
|
Extenuating Circumstances |
For further details on the Extenuating Circumstances Procedure please see the iCity page below: |
|
Where to get help |
The University has a designated student support service known as the Centre for Academic Success. Here you will find support for a range of academic skills. Likewise, you can arrange a consultation with a member |
|
|
of staff from the Academic Development Department based at City South Campus. You also should also review the wide range of support and help from the library. |
Buy Answer of PHE7452 Assignment 1 & Raise Your Grades
Order Non Plagiarized AssignmentNeed last-minute online assignment help with your PHE7452 Public Health Foundations Assignment 1 Coursework: Report? We’re here for you! Our experienced writers deliver high-quality, AI-free, and plagiarism-free assignments at affordable rates. We know how important your grades are, which is why we guarantee on-time delivery and full academic support. You are assured that our Public Health Assignment Help will make you productive and help you achieve high grades in your academic year. We’ve got you covered. Check out our free assignment example and see the quality for yourself. We’re available 24/7 to help you succeed in your academic journey. Contact us now to get expert help and score better—without any stress!
Let's Book Your Work with Our Expert and Get High-Quality Content
