PUBH2001 Debating The Social Determinants of Health Assessment 4 – Australia.

Course Code and Title : PUBH2001 Debating The Social Determinants of Health
Individual/Group : Group (debate) Individual (Reflection)
Weighting : 40% (Debate – 30%, written reflection – 10%)
Learning Outcomes :
1.Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of key social and political determinants of health
2. Analyse the relationship between the Social Determinants of Health (SDOH) and patterns of health inequities in Australia and globally
3. Apply theories and knowledge of SDOH to real world Public Health contexts
4. Understand the role of cultural competency in facilitating access to health services
5.Demonstrate the ability to critically analyse Public Health research, evidence and activities relating to SDOH
6. Effectively collaborate with peers on group tasks and activities.
PUBH2001 Debating The Social Determinants of Health Assessment 4 – Australia.

Introduction :
This assessment consists of a group exercise and a written assignment that you will produce individually.

Group exercise (30%):
You will be assigned to teams of 3. You will work in your teams (on-campus students: face to face, online students: via email and/or meetings via skype/zoom) to prepare a supporting or opposing case for one of the following statements (your team will be allocated a statement). The debate is due in week 11, with the individual written reflection due in week 12. See further instructions below.

All team members must contribute towards presenting your case. On-campus students will conduct the debate in class, and online students will present their initial case using power point, and will submit a rebuttal to the opposing side via discussion boards on blackboard (see instructions below).

Your team will be assessed both on your presentation of your arguments, your debate in the discussion thread, and the process by which you worked together as a team. All team members will receive the same grade.

(Note: If you feel your team had a ‘free riding’ problem, ie a team member has not made the same contribution as the rest, you will be provided with a form to submit to your lecturer about this and to request the free rider not receive the same grade as the rest of the team)

Possible Statements (Your Learning Facilitator will advise on the statement you will be debating).
Being employed in any kind of paid work is better for health than being unemployed.

Publicly-funded early childhood intervention programs should only be provided to “at risk” children, rather than all children.

Making welfare benefits conditional on positive health behaviours is a good way to reduce health inequities.

Income management of welfare payments for Indigenous Australians is a good approach to çlosing the gap in health outcomes.

Women-specific health services are unnecessary as women’s health needs are adequately met by mainstream health services.

Instructions :

On-Campus students
Groups will be finalised around module 3 (weeks 5-6). You will be assigned to groups of 3. You will hold your debates in class in week 11. Your team’s task for assignment 3 is to:

o Part A: Jointly present an initial case to support/oppose the statement. This presentation must include contributions from each team member.

o This first presentation of your initial case MUST:
o Outline your overall argument
o Identify 3 points to support your case. You need to explain each of these points and refer to supporting evidence (ie. By referring to surnames/organisation and year when talking about relevant research)
o Be approximately 10 minutes long.
o You can choose to use Power point or not. If you do not use power point for your main case, then you can prepare one slide with a list of references that you can put up at the end.

o Part B: Rebut the argument of the opposing team immediately after both initial presentations have concluded. So you provide counter-arguments and evidence to dispute their points. Each team member should contribute towards the rebuttal. You should try and anticipate the arguments of your opposition and prepare some points in advance to counter theirs. You should also take notes during their initial presentation in order to prepare your rebuttal. Your rebuttal should be approximately 5-10 minutes.

NOTE: If you feel that any team member has not made an adequate contribution to your joint efforts, you as an individual can complete the peer evaluation form for group assignments and return directly to Katy.

Online students
You will be assigned to groups of 3. Your team’s task for assignment 3 is to:
o Part A: Jointly prepare a Power point presentation to support your argument. This power point presentation must include recorded audio of each team member.

PUBH2001 Debating The Social Determinants of Health Assessment 4 – Australia.

o This power point presentation MUST:
o Outline your overall argument
o Identify 3 points to support your case. You need to explain these points and provide supporting evidence.
o Contain approximately 9-12 slides (as a guide) and be approximately 10 minutes long.
o Contain 3-5 references. A list of these can be presented on the final slide, and in other slides just refer

o Part B: Rebut the argument of the opposing team in a discussion board thread on Blackboard. So provide counter-arguments and evidence to dispute their points. This should be approximately 500- 750 words.

Part B: How do we rebut the argument of the opposing team ?
o Each team’s presentation will be posted on blackboard in a debate discussion thread.
o You will go to the thread, view the opposing team’s presentation and then, along with your team, jointly prepare a ‘rebuttal’ for each of the opposing team’s points, and post this rebuttal on the discussion board. This should be around 500 words. You should refer to evidence (references) to counter their argument. For example, the opposing team may have provided evidence to support their claim, but can you refer to evidence which might question their claim or provide further support for your own counter claim.

You can introduce new references here you may not have used in your presentation, but you do not need to refer to many references – as a guide, around 3.

o You should email /arrange a zoom with your fellow team members to prepare your rebuttal.
o Your response to the discussion thread should also conclude your teams argument.

NOTE: If you feel that any team member has not made an adequate contribution to your joint efforts, you as an individual can complete the peer evaluation form for group assignments and return directly to
Katy.

On-campus and online: Written assignment
Complete a ‘learning reflection’ which examines your experiences of collaborating with your peers as a team

For the learning reflection, answer the following questions:
1.Identify up to 3 a) high points and b) low points of your personal experience working on the debate assignment.
2. Describe the experience of working in a team. Was your experience a) productive, b) communicative, c) collaborative? If yes, why, if no, why not?
3. How do you think your participation in the debate will contribute to your development as a public health professional?

Assignment criteria :
-Collaborate with peers on group tasks and activities
-Demonstrate effective written and verbal communication skills
-Demonstrate the ability to critically analyse Public Health research, evidence and activities relating to the SDOH
-Apply theories and knowledge of SDOH to real world Public Health contexts

PUBH2001 Debating The Social Determinants of Health Assessment 4 – Australia.

General assessment criteria:
o shows a sophisticated understanding of the key issues 
o Demonstrates a capacity for critical reasoning and analysis
o shows the ability to interpret relevant information and literature in relation to your chosen topic
o demonstrates a capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts
o shows evidence of reading beyond the key reading 
o justifies any conclusions reached with well-formed arguments not merely assertion
o provides a conclusion or summary
o use of academic writing and presentation and grammar: