This authentic assessment task is from Victoria University's Graduate Certificate in Planetary Health, in a unit called 'Making a healthy planet: Transdisciplinary transformations'

The contributing academics are Dr. Helen Widdop-QuintonAssociate Professor Jeannie Rea.

 

Example case study presentation & reflection

  • Overview: In pairs, explore a planetary health topic and propose a possible policy change and consequent action plan. Write an individual reflection afterwards.
  • Length/duration: Presentation 10 mins + 5 mins Q&A, Reflection 1000 words
  • Weighting: 40%
  • Due: Presentation in session 3, 4, 5 or 6 of 8, Reflection 2 days after presenting
  • AQF level: 8

The purpose of this assessment task is to:

  • Draw upon planetary health and social change theory to analyse positive planetary health change possibilities
  • Learn how to formulate a feasible and defensible policy change
  • Practise proposing an action plan to drive this change

 

It aligns with the following learning outcomes:

LO2: Critically assess theories on the conditions for social change and apply to a contemporary example of community capacity building and resilience

LO3: Articulate and advocate an evidence and value-based explanation of transdisciplinary transformation

LO4: Utilising a planetary health approach, investigate and propose a policy change and action plan for implementation in students’ professional area

The context for this task is a planetary health change that you would be advocating for in your professional area. It must connect with the themes of Sessions 3 to 6.

Working in pairs, you need to develop: 

  • A case study about a planetary health problem/issue – you’ll need to consider inclusion of diversity and difference, and analysis through a transdisciplinary lens informed by post-colonial and Indigenous critical studies
  • A proposal for a policy change (or intervention) to address this problem – this is proposed as a feasible and defensible change; extensive legislative or administrative details are optional
  • An action plan to implement the change, which you will present and advocate to the class – this indicates how the change can be implemented (the how, who and timing of activities to effect the change)

These will form the basis of your presentation. It should go for 10 minutes, plus 5 minutes for Q&A, and include no more than 6 slides. Your presentation should introduce and contextualise your case (including the problem you are focusing on, rationale for this focus, and your proposal for policy change needed), include evidence to support your ideas, and outline the action plan to put the change into practice.

After the presentation, you must individually write a reflective evaluation that takes into account peer feedback and your own evaluation and learning.

  1. Carefully read the assessment requirements, criteria and rubric for this task
  2. Establish your partnership for developing your case study – find a partner who is engaged in a similar professional field and who has similar planetary health change interests to yours
  3. Negotiate your presentation time in the class schedule during Sessions 3 to 6
  4. As a pair, develop your case, policy change and action plan
  5. Together, design a 10-minute presentation of the above items – you might also want to prepare some questions to ask the audience to encourage their feedback and responses
  6. Deliver your case study presentation to the class during Session 3, 4, 5 or 6 according to the negotiated schedule
  7. Manage a 5-minute Q&A session after your presentation
  8. Individually, write an evaluation on your case study presentation based on your reflections and received feedback
  9. Submit your individual reflection to the dropbox along with the slides used in your presentation within 2 days of presenting (you must each do this)

Criterion 1: Contextualisation of case 

Criterion 2: Quality of action plan 

Criterion 3: Communication and presentation skills

Criterion 4: Quality of reflection

Full rubric

CRITERIA HIGH DISTINCTION (80-100%) DISTINCTION (70-80%) CREDIT (60-70%) PASS (50-60%) FAIL (0-50%)

Contextualisation of case

(25%)

Succinctly and comprehensively explains and justifies the case study, context of the professional setting and related planetary health problem being addressed.

Explanations are inclusive of transdisciplinary dimensions.

Proposed policy change or intervention is clearly justified and feasible.

Case well supported by key, relevant literature.

Comprehensively explains and justifies the case study, context of the professional setting and related planetary health problem being addressed.

Explanations make reference to key transdisciplinary dimensions.

Proposed policy change or intervention is justified and mostly feasible.

Case supported by relevant literature.

Describes the case study, professional setting and related planetary health problem being addressed.

Explanations make some reference to transdisciplinary dimensions.

Proposed policy change or intervention is described.

Case supported by literature.

Limited descriptions of the case study, professional setting and/or related planetary health problem being addressed.

Limited reference to transdisciplinary dimensions.

Proposed policy change or intervention is mentioned.

Case occasionally supported by literature.

Minimal or no descriptions of the case study, professional setting and/or related planetary health problem being addressed.

Minimal or no reference to transdisciplinary dimensions.

Minimal or no reference to proposed policy change or intervention.

Case poorly supported by literature.

Quality of action plan

(25%)

Presents a clear, comprehensive and context-aligned action plan, addressing all essential action plan elements.

Explanations are inclusive of diversity and difference, and informed by post-colonial and Indigenous perspectives. 

Presents a clear, actionable and context-appropriate action plan following action planning processes.

Explanations make some reference to inclusion of diversity and difference, and are informed by post-colonial and Indigenous perspectives. 

Explains an actionable step-by-step change process.

Explanations make some reference to inclusion of diversity and difference, and are occasionally informed by post-colonial and Indigenous perspectives. 

Describes a process to support change.

Limited reference to inclusion of diversity and difference and/or post-colonial and Indigenous perspectives.

Change process ambiguous and/or ill defined.

Minimal or no reference to inclusion of diversity and difference and/or post-colonial and Indigenous perspectives.

Communication and presentation skills

(25%)

Speaks with clarity and fluency, appropriately using professional language.

Length of presentation is within the time limit.

Responds accurately to all questions with relevant explanations and contextualisation/elaboration.

Slides/supporting material reinforce message, have a clean and simple layout and enhance communication of ideas.   

Speaks with clarity and uses professional language.

Length of presentation is within the time limit.

Responds accurately to all questions with relevant explanations.

Slides/supporting material are informative and effectively reinforce message.

Slides/supporting material are informative and effectively reinforce message.             

Speaks clearly and generally conveys meaning. Mostly uses professional language.

Length of presentation is within 10% of the time limit. Time allocated to points mostly reflect their relative importance.

Responds accurately to all questions.

Speaking generally conveys ideas and may include some errors.  Inconsistent use of professional language.

Length of presentation is outside the time limit.

Responds to most questions with rudimentary answers (not always clearly or completely) and fails to elaborate.

Slides/supporting material relevant, sometimes difficult to view/engage with (e.g. some graphics or special effects distract).

Speaking sometimes impedes meaning due to errors in usage.

Length of presentation is significantly outside the time limit.

Responds to few questions, some incomplete and/or incorrect answers.

Slides/supporting material are very difficult to view, layout is cluttered and confusing.

Quality of reflection 

(25%)

The reflection is an in-depth and succinct evaluation of the learning experience.

Makes connections between the experience and personal planetary health related learning, unit content and past learning (e.g. previous units, life experiences, future goals).

The reflection explains the learning process and implications for future learning.

Reflection includes insightful responses to feedback. 

The reflection is a good analysis of the learning experience.

Makes connections between the experience, personal planetary health related learning and unit content and/or learning.

The reflection explains the learning process.

The reflection considers feedback.

The reflection is a simple analysis of the learning experience.

Makes simple and direct connections to unit content and/or learning.

The reflection demonstrates some thinking about learning.        

 

The reflection is an underdeveloped analysis of the learning experience.

Makes limited or minimum connections to unit content and/or learning.

The reflection mentions some learning.

 The reflection is a basic description of the learning experience.

Makes superficial or no connection to other learning or experiences.

The reflection does not address any learning.