517HSC An Introduction to Health Development Coursework 2 Assignment Brief | CU

517HSC Assignment Task

You are tasked with writing a 3000-word advisory report for a local school based on the case study provided by your tutor and found here.

The school has worked alongside the police and social services on the case. Following your recommendations within the report, the school can then develop its practice.

At each stage of your report, you should include analysis of the physiological, sociological, and psychological aspects of development, which can be affected by ACEs and safeguarding issues (LO1, LO2, & LO3), and assess the role of multiagency working in keeping children and young people safe (LO5).

Follow a report format in developing your work as follows:

Title page (Your title page should include the title of your report, student number and word count) (not included in word count)
Contents page (not included in word count)
Introduction
The Scenario – Provide a brief description of the safeguarding case

Responding

Analyse how schools respond and the impact

Reporting concerns

Analyse how schools report concerns and the impact

Recording information

Analyse how schools record information and the impact

Consent

Analyse how consent is dealt with in schools and the impact

Support for the child

Analyse how schools can support children and the impact

Conclusion and recommendations

Make recommendations, based on your findings, on how safeguarding could be improved in the school.

References (not included in word count)

Appendices (not included in word count)

517HSC Marking and Feedback

How will my assignment be marked?

Your assignment will be marked and moderated by members of the health team.

How will I receive my grades and feedback?

Provisional marks will be released 10 days after submission.
Feedback will be provided by the module team alongside grades being released, and this can be accessed through Aula.

What will I be marked against?

Details of the marking criteria for this task can be found at the bottom of this assignment brief.

517HSC Assessed Module Learning Outcomes

The Learning Outcomes for this module align with the marking criteria, which can be found at the end of this brief. Ensure you understand the marking criteria to ensure achievement of the assessment task. The following module learning outcomes are assessed in this task:

517HSC Assignment Support and Academic Integrity

If you have any questions about this assignment, please see the Student Guidance on Coursework for more information.

Spelling, Punctuation, and Grammar:

You are expected to use effective, accurate, and appropriate language within this assessment task.

Academic Integrity:

The work you submit must be your own, or in the case of group work, that of your group. All sources of information need to be acknowledged and attributed; therefore, you must provide references for all sources of information and acknowledge any tools used in the production of your work, including Artificial Intelligence (AI). We use detection software and make routine checks for evidence of academic misconduct.

Definitions of academic misconduct, including plagiarism, self-plagiarism, and collusion, can be found on the Student Portal. All cases of suspected academic misconduct are referred for investigation, the outcomes of which can have profound consequences for your studies. For more information on academic integrity, please visit the Academic and Research Integrity section of the Student Portal.

Support for Students with Disabilities or Additional Needs:

If you have a disability, long-term health condition, specific learning difference, mental health diagnosis or symptoms and have discussed your support needs with health and wellbeing, you may be able to access support that will help with your studies.
If you feel you may benefit from additional support, but have not disclosed a disability to the University, or have disclosed but are yet to discuss your support needs, it is important to let us know so we can provide the right support for your circumstances. Visit the Student Portal to find out more.

Unable to Submit on Time?

The University wants you to do your best. However, we know that sometimes events happen which mean that you cannot submit your assessment by the deadline or sit a scheduled exam. If you think this might be the case, guidance on understanding what counts as an extenuating circumstance, and how to apply is available on the Student Portal.

517HSC Assessment Marking Criteria

Mark band

Outcome

Guidelines

80-100%

1st

Meets learning outcomes

1st – Exceptional report that shows a very high degree of understanding about the approaches to safeguarding and the related issues. The report is extremely critical and analytical.

There is evidence of exceptional research well beyond the minimum recommended, using a range of methodologies, that are up to date and relevant. These sources include a wide range of journal articles, government reports, health policy and data. There is clear evidence of research about the impact of ACEs on childhood development and interpretation of this research shows exceptional understanding and synthesis. Referencing is accurate.

There is an exceptional understanding of the complexity of childhood development, safeguarding, the impact of ACEs and appraisal of policy and multiagency working that demonstrates creative flair, a very high degree of originality and autonomy.

The report is written to a very high standard with a high degree of accuracy and proficiency and autonomy. This leads to exceptional communication of the information and significant evidence of a professional skill set. The report is exceptionally well written, showcasing an exceptional proficiency with the English language.

70-79%

1st

1st – Excellent report that shows a very high degree of understanding about the approaches to safeguarding and the related issues. The report is very critical and analytical.

There is evidence of excellent research beyond minimum recommended using a range of methodologies, that are up to date and relevant. These sources include a range of journal articles, government reports, health policy and data. There is clear evidence of research about the impact of ACEs on childhood development and interpretation of this research shows excellent understanding and synthesis. Referencing is accurate.

There is an excellent understanding of the complexity of childhood development, safeguarding, the impact of ACEs and appraisal of policy and multiagency working that demonstrates creative flair, a high degree of originality and autonomy.

The report is written to a high standard with a high degree of accuracy and proficiency and autonomy. This leads to

excellent communication of the information and significant evidence of a professional skill set. The report is very well written, showcasing an excellent proficiency with the English language.

60-69%

2:1

2:1 – A very good report that shows a very good degree of understanding about the approaches to safeguarding and the related issues. The report is critical and analytical.

There is evidence of very good research that may go beyond minimum recommended using a range of methodologies, that are up to date and relevant. These sources may include journal articles, government reports, health policy and data. There is evidence of research about the impact of ACEs on childhood development and interpretation of this research shows a very good understanding and an attempt at synthesis. Referencing is mostly accurate.

There is a very good understanding of the complexity of childhood development, safeguarding, the impact of ACEs and appraisal of policy and multiagency working that demonstrates some creative flair, a degree of originality and autonomy.

The report is written to a very good standard with a very good degree of accuracy and proficiency and autonomy. This leads to very good communication of the information and evidence of a professional skill set. The report is well written, showcasing a very good proficiency with the English language, any errors are minor and do not impact on coherence.

50-59%

2:2

2:2 – A good report that shows a good degree of understanding about the approaches to safeguarding and the related issues. The report has some limited evidence of criticality.

There is evidence of research that may go beyond minimum recommended but does not use a wide range of methodologies, sources may not be up to date and relevant. These sources may include government reports, health policy and data. There is some evidence of research about the impact of ACEs on childhood development and interpretation of this research that shows a limited understanding. Referencing is attempted with some inaccuracy.

There is a good understanding of the complexity of childhood development, safeguarding, the impact of ACEs and appraisal of policy and multiagency working that demonstrates some a limited degree of originality and autonomy. The report is written to a good standard with some degree of accuracy and proficiency and autonomy.

The report is written to a good standard with some evidence of proficiency with the English language, any errors are minor and do not impact on coherence too much.

40-49%

3rd Class

3rd – Meet the learning outcomes with a basic understanding of the topic.

A basic report that shows a limited understanding about safeguarding and the related issues. The report lacks criticality.

There is limited evidence of research that may go beyond minimum recommended. There is a small range of sources used, or they may not be up to date and relevant. These sources may not include government reports, health policy and data. There is some limited evidence of research about the impact of ACEs on childhood development but there is limited interpretation of this research. Referencing is attempted with significant inaccuracy.

There is a basic understanding of the complexity of childhood development, safeguarding, the impact of ACEs and a basic appraisal of policy and multiagency working.

The report is written to a basic standard but may have some errors in structure or academic style. The report is written with a basic level of proficiency in the English language and has several errors which at times may impact on the coherence of the report.

30-39%

Fail

Fails to achieve learning outcomes

Fail – Outcomes not met.

A basic report that shows a limited or inaccurate understanding about safeguarding and the related issues. Sections of the report may be missing or incorrect.

There is very little evidence of research. Sources used lack credibility. Referencing is absent or seriously flawed. The information used has not been paraphrased. The report lacks any use of data. There is little understanding of safeguarding legislation, challenges to children’s development and appraisal of policy and multiagency working.

There are serious issues with the style of the report, and there are serious errors in the use of English language.

0-29%