PUB008-6/STI010-6 Public Health Protection Report Assignment 1 Brief| University of Bedfordshire

Published: 01 Nov, 2025

Category	Report	Subject	Nursing
University	University of Bedfordshire	Module Title	PUB008-6/STI010-6 Public Health Protection Report

Assignment Brief | PG | AY25-26

Assessment deadline:	Marks and feedback
To be submitted Before 10 a.m. on:	20 working days after deadline (L3,4, 5,6 and 7)
	15 working days after deadline (block delivery)

12/12/2025	12/01/2026
Please note, for Exams the date is arranged centrally aligned to the academic calendar. Exams timetables will be released 6 weeks before the exam period.

Key assignment details
Unit title & code	Public Health Protection [PUB008-6/STI010-6]
Assignment number & title	Assignment 1/1: The public health impact of a specified health protection issue, and the prevention and control strategies used to protect public health
Assignment type:	Report
Weighting of assessment:	100%
Length of assessment	3000 words
Use of generative AI	Permitted (see below specific guidance) Students can use generative AI (e.g., ChatGPT) to develop or refine a suitable topic/question, define boundaries, or to develop a strategy to write the assignment. The assignment content should be strictly based on your own thinking and ideas. While generative AI tools may be used in editing your work, you should disclose this information, including the model’s name, version, source, description, and usage. You need to take accountability for the output produced by generative AI. Please note that some AI tools can generate inaccurate, biased, or misleading outputs. Furthermore, using AI tools introduces the risk of plagiarism when text is duplicated from data sources. Please ensure that you keep an audit trail of how you developed your assignment including different versions or drafts that you produced during the process.
Use of self-plagiarism	Not permitted

Understanding the assignment brief
Assignment brief to be discussed during an in-class session with students within the first 2 weeks of the unit.	23/09/2025
Uploaded screen/podcast explaining the assessment, the rubric and marking criteria.	Refer to guidance on the BREO Unit Shell

What am I required to do in this assignment?

You are required to identify a current or recent (last 20 years maximum) health protection related issue and critically evaluate its impact on public health within a geographical area of your choice.

You are then required to identify and critically evaluate the prevention and control strategies that are/were being used by health authorities to manage the issue. You should then include any of your own evidence-based recommendations on how to strengthen and/or improve the protection strategies so to reduce its impact on public health in the future.

What do I need to do to pass? How do I achieve a good grade?

The Unit Information Form states the Threshold Expectations that inform both you and markers what is the minimum needed to be demonstrated to pass the assessment. They should, therefore, answer the question "What do I need to do pass?”. During the assessment introductory session, you should be given the opportunity to check your understanding of the threshold statements and what you need to do to surpass them.

The assessment marking criteria listed below show how your work is assessed. The assessment criteria are informed by the unit’s learning outcomes and the assessment task. Carefully reading the assessment criteria should help you understand the aspects that will be used to judge your progress and achievement of the learning outcomes and offer guidance on “how do I achieve a good grade”.

Identify a current health protection related issue
Use public health surveillance data and relevant literature to evaluate its impact on public health within a specified geographical area.
Critically evaluate the strategies used to control and manage a specified disease or incident.
Propose evidence-based recommendations to reduce the impact of a health protection related issue on public health in the future.

How will my assignment be marked?

Your assignment will be marked according to the threshold expectations (see the Unit Information Form uploaded on BREO) and the specific marking criteria below (marking rubric). Please read carefully as they will help you prepare and evaluate your own work before you submit. They will also help you understand the grade and feedback received once marked.

	70%+ (Distinction)	60-69% (Commendation)	50-59% (Pass)	40-49% (Pass) Threshold Standard	30-39% (Fail)	0-29% (Fail)
1 Written expression and structure	Excellent or outstanding presentation of publication standard. Written expression is concise, accurate and articulate. Excellent, coherent in-depth discussion. Report tightly focuses on and successfully addresses the assessment question. Minor spelling and grammatical errors	Presentation of report, including figures and tables is very good. Report has a clear structure and information is well organized. Very good, detailed and coherent discussion. Demonstrates very good understanding and use key terminology. Focuses on addressing assessment question and avoids inclusion of irrelevant information. Minimal spelling and grammatical errors	Good, well-presented report but figures and/or tables lack informative titles, or are poorly presented. Report has a good, well-organized structure and points are explained coherently Good, correct use of key terminology, but explanations are relatively basic. Attempts to address the assessment question well, but report includes some irrelevant information. Some spelling and grammatical errors.	Overall presentation of the report is satisfactory but lacks informative figures and/or tables. Most points are explained coherently, but structure and organization of the report is very weak. Satisfactory use of key terminology, but explanations are vague and over simplistic. The assessment question is addressed superficially; report includes interesting but irrelevant details throughout. Many spelling and grammatical errors throughout the report.	Overall presentation of the report is poor and/or lacks informative figures and/or tables. Many points are not explained coherently, and the structure and organization of the report is very weak. Poor use of key terminology, and explanations are vague and over simplistic. The assessment question is not adequately addressed; report includes many irrelevant details throughout. Many spelling and grammatical errors throughout the report.	Overall presentation of the report is poor and lacks informative figures and/or tables. The majority points are not explained coherently, and the structure and organization of the report is very weak. Poor use of key terminology, and explanations are vague and over simplistic. The assessment question is not adequately addressed; report includes irrelevant details throughout. Many spelling and grammatical errors throughout the report.
2 Use of literature and referencing	An excellent, comprehensive range of current primary literature is used effectively to support discussion. References and citations are consistently formatted in the UoB Harvard style.	Very good range of evidence cited including current peer-reviewed primary literature. References and citations are consistently formatted, with most in the UoB Harvard style.	Good range of evidence cited including current peer-reviewed primary literature. Most references and citations are formatted in the UoB Harvard style, but some inaccuracies remain.	Has identified essential literature but minimal range of literature is cited. References and citations are included but UoB Harvard style is not used consistently.	Has not identified essential literature and minimal range of literature is cited. References and citations are included but UoB Harvard style is not used consistently	Has not identified essential literature and a very low range of literature is cited. References and citations are not clearly included and do not align to UoB Harvard style consistently
3 Application of knowledge and understanding	Excellent competent use of public health surveillance data and other relevant sources of data to assess the impact on public health within a specified area. Insightful discussion of impact on public health highlighting broad range of impacts. The report also highlights a broad range of strategies and presents excellent detailed description of selected prevention and control strategies implemented within a specified area.	Very good, competent use of public health surveillance data and other relevant sources of data to assess the impact on public health within a specified area. In addition to discussing rates of disease, the report highlights and discusses the broader impacts on health. The report also highlights a broad range of strategies, and presents very good, detailed description of selected prevention and control strategies implemented within a specified area	Good use of use of public health surveillance data and other relevant sources of information to assess the impact on public health within a specified area. In addition to simply describing rates of disease, the report identifies broader ways in which the issue effects the local population but lacks a tight focus on health. The report also identifies a broad range of strategies, and includes good, detailed description of key prevention and control strategies implemented within a specified area.	Satisfactory use of public health surveillance data to describe the impact on public health within a specified area. Report focuses on simply describing rates of disease or case numbers. The report also identifies the key prevention and control strategies implemented within a specified area. Description of the prevention and control measures is simplistic and lacks specific detail.	Unsatisfactory use of public health surveillance data to describe the impact on public health within a specified area. Report focuses on simply describing rates of disease or case numbers. The report also fails to identify the key prevention and control strategies implemented within a specified area. Description of the prevention and control measures is mostly simplistic and lacks specific detail.	Unsatisfactory use of public health surveillance data to describe the impact on public health within a specified area. Report fails to describe rates of disease or case numbers. The report also fails to identify the key prevention and control strategies implemented within a specified area. Description of the prevention and control measures is highly simplistic and substantially lacks specific detail.
4 Reflection on quality of data sources	In-depth insightful discussion demonstrates excellent understanding of specific strengths and weakness of relevant public health surveillance and/or other sources of data.	Discussion demonstrates very good understanding of specific strengths and weakness of relevant public health surveillance system and/or other sources of data.	Describes strengths and weaknesses of public health surveillance and/or other sources of data.	Limited description of strengths and weaknesses of public health surveillance and/or other sources of data.	Very limited description of strengths and weaknesses of public health surveillance and/or other sources of data	Almost or fully absent description of strengths and weaknesses of public health surveillance and/or other sources of data
5 Critical analysis, synthesis and evaluation	Presents excellent, in-depth evidence-based critical evaluation of the impact on public health. Presents excellent, in-depth and insightful evidence-based critical evaluation of the effectiveness of the health protection measures. Demonstrates excellent understanding of strengths and weaknesses of health protection programmes	Very good critical analysis of impact on public health based on synthesis of information from multiple sources of good quality information. Very good, detailed critical analysis of effectiveness of the interventions based on evidence synthesized from multiple sources of good quality information. Demonstrates very good understanding of strengths and weaknesses of health protection programmes.	Attempts to synthesize information from multiple sources. Presents good evidence based analysis of impact chosen issue has had on public health. Attempts to analyse the effectiveness of the interventions using supporting evidence from good quality sources of information. Demonstrates good understanding of strengths and weaknesses of health protection programmes.	Some attempt to analyse the impact on public health but report lacks critical depth. A limited attempt to analyse the effectiveness of the interventions described. Analysis lacks a strong evidence base. Demonstrates satisfactory understanding of strengths and weaknesses of health protection programmes.	Limited attempt to analyse the impact on public health and report is very descriptive.. An unsatisfactory attempt to analyse the effectiveness of the interventions described. Analysis lacks a basic evidence base. Demonstrates unsatisfactory understanding of strengths and weaknesses of health protection programmes.	No clear attempt to analyse the impact on public health and report is very descriptive. Almost no attempt to analyse the effectiveness of the interventions described. Analysis lacks a basic evidence base. Demonstrates unsatisfactory substantively understanding of strengths and weaknesses of health protection programmes.

70%+

(Distinction)

60-69%

(Commendation)

50-59%

(Pass)

40-49% (Pass)

Threshold Standard

30-39% (Fail)

0-29% (Fail)

1 Written expression and structure

Excellent or outstanding presentation of publication standard.

Written expression is concise, accurate and articulate. Excellent, coherent in-depth discussion.

Report tightly focuses on and successfully addresses the assessment question.

Minor spelling and grammatical errors

Presentation of report, including figures and tables is very good.

Report has a clear structure and information is well organized.

Very good, detailed and coherent discussion.

Demonstrates very good understanding and use key terminology.

Focuses on addressing assessment question and avoids inclusion of irrelevant information.

Minimal spelling and grammatical errors

Good, well-presented report but figures and/or tables lack informative titles, or are poorly presented.

Report has a good, well-organized structure and

points are explained coherently

Good, correct use of key terminology, but explanations are relatively basic.

Attempts to address the assessment question well, but report includes some irrelevant information.

Some spelling and grammatical errors.

Overall presentation of the report is satisfactory but lacks informative figures and/or tables.

Most points are explained coherently,

but structure and organization of the report is very weak.

Satisfactory use of key terminology, but explanations are vague and over simplistic.

The assessment question is addressed superficially; report includes interesting but irrelevant details throughout.

Many spelling and grammatical errors throughout the report.

Overall presentation of the report is poor and/or lacks informative figures and/or tables.

Many points are not explained coherently, and the structure and organization of the report is very weak.

Poor use of key terminology, and explanations are vague and over simplistic.

The assessment question is not adequately addressed; report includes many irrelevant details throughout.

Many spelling and grammatical errors throughout the report.

Overall presentation of the report is poor and lacks informative figures and/or tables.

The majority points are not explained coherently, and the structure and organization of the report is very weak.

Poor use of key terminology, and explanations are vague and over simplistic.

The assessment question is not adequately addressed; report includes irrelevant details throughout.

Many spelling and grammatical errors throughout the report.

2 Use of literature and referencing

An excellent, comprehensive range of current primary literature is used effectively to support discussion.

References and citations are consistently formatted in the UoB Harvard style.

Very good range of evidence cited including current peer-reviewed primary literature.

References and citations are consistently formatted, with most in the UoB Harvard style.

Good range of evidence cited including current peer-reviewed primary literature.

Most references and citations are formatted in the UoB Harvard style, but some inaccuracies remain.

Has identified essential literature but minimal range of literature is cited.

References and citations are included but UoB Harvard style is not used consistently.

Has not identified essential literature and minimal range of literature is cited.

References and citations are included but UoB Harvard style is not used consistently

Has not identified essential literature and a very low range of literature is cited.

References and citations are not clearly included and do not align to UoB Harvard style consistently

3 Application of knowledge and understanding

Excellent competent use of public health surveillance data and other relevant sources of data to assess the impact on public health within a specified area.

Insightful discussion of impact on public health highlighting broad range of impacts.

The report also highlights a broad range of strategies and presents excellent detailed description of selected prevention and control strategies implemented within a specified area.

Very good, competent use of public health surveillance data and other relevant sources of data to assess the impact on public health within a specified area.

In addition to discussing rates of disease, the report highlights and discusses the broader impacts on health.

The report also highlights a broad range of strategies, and presents very good, detailed description of selected prevention and control strategies implemented within a specified area

Good use of use of public health surveillance data and other relevant sources of information to assess the impact on public health within a specified area.

In addition to simply describing rates of disease, the report identifies broader ways in which the issue effects the local population but lacks a tight focus on health.

The report also identifies a broad range of strategies, and includes good, detailed description of key prevention and control strategies implemented within a specified area.

Satisfactory use of public health surveillance data to describe the impact on public health within a specified area.

Report focuses on simply describing rates of disease or case numbers.

The report also identifies the key prevention and control strategies implemented within a specified area.

Description of the prevention and control measures is simplistic and lacks specific detail.

Unsatisfactory use of public health surveillance data to describe the impact on public health within a specified area.

Report focuses on simply describing rates of disease or case numbers.

The report also fails to identify the key prevention and control strategies implemented within a specified area.

Description of the prevention and control measures is mostly simplistic and lacks specific detail.

Unsatisfactory use of public health surveillance data to describe the impact on public health within a specified area.

Report fails to describe rates of disease or case numbers.

The report also fails to identify the key prevention and control strategies implemented within a specified area.

Description of the prevention and control measures is highly simplistic and substantially lacks specific detail.

4 Reflection on quality of data sources

In-depth insightful discussion demonstrates excellent understanding of specific strengths and weakness of relevant public health surveillance and/or other sources of data.

Discussion demonstrates very good understanding of specific strengths and weakness of relevant public health surveillance system and/or other sources of data.

Describes strengths and weaknesses of public health surveillance and/or other sources of data.

Limited description of strengths and weaknesses of public health surveillance and/or other sources of data.

Very limited description of strengths and weaknesses of public health surveillance and/or other sources of data

Almost or fully absent description of strengths and weaknesses of public health surveillance and/or other sources of data

5 Critical analysis, synthesis and evaluation

Presents excellent, in-depth evidence-based critical evaluation of the impact on public health.

Presents excellent, in-depth and insightful evidence-based critical evaluation of the effectiveness of the health protection measures.

Demonstrates excellent understanding of strengths and weaknesses of health protection programmes

Very good critical analysis of impact on public health based on synthesis of information from multiple sources of good quality information.

Very good, detailed critical analysis of effectiveness of the interventions based on evidence synthesized from multiple sources of good quality information.

Demonstrates very good understanding of strengths and weaknesses of health protection programmes.

Attempts to synthesize information from multiple sources.

Presents good evidence based analysis of impact chosen issue has had on public health.

Attempts to analyse the effectiveness of the interventions using supporting evidence from good quality sources of information.

Demonstrates good understanding of strengths and weaknesses of health protection programmes.

Some attempt to analyse the impact on public health but report lacks critical depth.

A limited attempt to analyse the effectiveness of the interventions described.

Analysis lacks a strong evidence base.

Demonstrates satisfactory understanding of strengths and weaknesses of health protection programmes.

Limited attempt to analyse the impact on public health and report is very descriptive..

An unsatisfactory attempt to analyse the effectiveness of the interventions described.

Analysis lacks a basic evidence base.

Demonstrates unsatisfactory understanding of strengths and weaknesses of health protection programmes.

No clear attempt to analyse the impact on public health and report is very descriptive.

Almost no attempt to analyse the effectiveness of the interventions described.

Analysis lacks a basic evidence base.

Demonstrates unsatisfactory substantively understanding of strengths and weaknesses of health protection programmes.

Do You Need an Assignment of This Question

Order Non Plagiarized Assignment

Request Answer of this Assignment

Share this with your Friends

Facebook

Instagram

If you are stressed about the PUB008-6/STI010-6 Public Health Protection Report, then there is no need to worry now! With nursing assignment help in the UK, you will get expert guidance and help on assignments that will make your concepts strong. We also provide you free report solutions that will help you in understanding. And the best part? All the content is 100% original, written by PhD expert writers, and well-researched so that you get the best quality. So don't delay now; boost your grades with our help!