This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeOutline the stages of changeExplanation of the transtheoretical ‘stages of change’ model |
5to >4.2PtsHigh distinctionExcellent overview of the transtheoretical model that identifies the recognised stages. |
4.2to >3.7PtsDistinctionVery good overview of the transtheoretical model that identifies the recognised stages. |
3.7to >3.2PtsCreditGood overview of the transtheoretical model that identifies the recognised stages with some inaccuracies or omission of information |
3.2to >2.4PtsPassAdequate overview of the transtheoretical model that attempts to identify the recognised stages. There are some inaccuracies or omission of information |
2.4to >0PtsFailMinimal or absent overview of the transtheoretical model that does not identify the recognised stages. There are a number of inaccuracies or omission of information. |
|
5pts
|
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeOverview of health challengeDescription of the interviewee’s health challenge or behaviour and analyses where the interviewee fits in the transtheoretical model in relation to addressing their health challengealthcare challenge behaviour |
5to >4.25PtsHigh distinctionExcellent articulation of the interviewee’s health challenge or behaviour that is presented in a scholarly manner. Clear articulation of the interviewee’s appropriate stage in the transtheoretical model. |
4.25to >3.75PtsDistinctionVery good articulation of the interviewee’s health challenge or behaviour that is presented in a scholarly manner. Identifies the interviewee’s appropriate stage in the transtheoretical model |
3.75to >3.25PtsCreditGood articulation of the interviewee’s health challenge or behaviour that has some aspects of a scholarly approach. Identifies the interviewee’s stage in the transtheoretical model with some inaccuracies or lack of justification. |
3.25to >2.5PtsPassAdequate articulation of the interviewee’s health challenge or behaviour that is has minimal aspects of a scholarly manner. Attempts to identify the interviewee’s stage in the transtheoretical model with some inaccuracies. |
2.5to >0PtsFailThe articulation of the interviewee’s health challenge or behaviour is not addressed or very minimal information provided. Minimal or absent reference to the interviewee’s placement in the transtheoretical model |
|
5pts
|
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeTechniques usedDiscussion of the techniques used to help the person address their health challenge or behaviour, and critical analysis on the efficacy of the techniques utilised |
10to >8.4PtsHigh distinctionExcellent discussion of the motivational techniques and communication skills used in exploring the interviewee’s motivation to change. This discussion is approached in a scholarly manner. With excellent evidence of critical analysis of the efficacy of the techniques utilised. |
8.4to >7.4PtsDistinctionVery good discussion of the motivational techniques and communication skills used in exploring the interviewee’s motivation to change. This discussion is approached in a scholarly manner. With very good evidence of critical analysis of the efficacy of the techniques utilised. |
7.4to >6.4PtsCreditGood discussion of the motivational techniques and communication skills used in exploring the interviewee’s motivation to change. This discussion is approached in a scholarly manner. With good evidence of critical analysis of the efficacy of the techniques utilised. |
6.4to >4.5PtsPassAdequate discussion of the motivational techniques and communication skills used in exploring the interviewee’s motivation to change. This discussion has some aspects of a scholarly approach. With some evidence of critical analysis of the efficacy of the techniques utilised. |
4.5to >0PtsFailMinimal or absent discussion of the motivational techniques and communication skills used in exploring the interviewee’s motivation to change. Minimal or limited aspects of a scholarly approach. Minimal or limited analysis of the techniques used. |
|
10pts
|
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeEvaluationEvaluates the likely outcome related to the impact of the motivational interview on the interviewee’s choices regarding addressing their healthcare challenge behaviour |
5to >4.2PtsHigh distinctionExcellent discussion of the likely outcomes of the conversation, including recognising and outlining any changes in the interviewee’s stage in the transtheoretical model. This is presented in a thoughtful and scholarly manner. |
4.2to >3.7PtsDistinctionVery good discussion of the likely outcomes of the conversation, including recognising and outlining any changes in the interviewee’s stage in the transtheoretical model. This is presented in a thoughtful and scholarly manner. |
3.7to >3.2PtsCreditGood discussion of the likely outcomes of the conversation, including recognising and outlining any changes in the interviewee’s stage in the transtheoretical model. There are some inaccuracies in identifying the appropriate stage and some aspects of a scholarly approach. |
3.2to >2.4PtsPassAdequate discussion of the likely outcomes of the conversation, including recognising and outlining any changes in the interviewee’s stage in the transtheoretical model. There are inaccuracies in identifying the appropriate stage and limited aspects of a scholarly approach. |
2.4to >0PtsFailMinimal or absent discussion of the likely outcomes of the conversation, including recognising and outlining any changes in the interviewee’s stage in the transtheoretical model. Limited evidence of a scholarly approach |
|
5pts
|
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeReflectionProvides an in-depth reflection |
10to >8.4PtsHigh distinctionExcellent evidence of deep and purposeful reflection within the submission, the student shares insights into their learning and development as a result of the Motivational Interview and provides recommendations to develop their interpersonal / communication capabilities for the future |
8.4to >7.4PtsDistinctionVery good evidence of deep and purposeful reflection within the submission, the student shares insights into their learning and development as a result of the Motivational Interview and provides recommendations to develop their interpersonal/communication capabilities for the future |
7.4to >6.4PtsCreditGood evidence of the use of reflection within the submission, the student shares some insights into their learning and development as a result of the Motivational Interview, with some recommendations outlined to develop their interpersonal / communication capabilities for the future |
6.4to >4.5PtsPassAdequate evidence of reflection within the submission, the student shares some insights into their learning and development as a result of the Motivational Interview and provides limited recommendations to develop their interpersonal / communication capabilities for the future |
4.5to >0PtsFailMinimal or absent evidence of reflection within the submission. Limited insights provided into the students learning and development as a result of the Motivational Interview and provides minimal or absent recommendations to develop their interpersonal / communication capabilities for the future |
|
10pts
|
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeScholarly approachFollows conventional academic writing style including grammar, spelling, punctuation and syntax. Appropriate formatting adhered to with the structure including introduction, body and conclusion and word limit is adhered to. |
5to >4.2PtsHigh distinctionExcellent standard of academic writing with correct grammar, writing, spelling and syntax. Excellent structure and articulation of ideas within the assessment that reflects assessment instructions. Final word count is within + or- 10 % of required word count. |
4.2to >3.7PtsDistinctionVery good standard of academic writing with correct grammar, writing, spelling and syntax. Excellent structure and articulation of ideas within the assessment that reflects assessment instructions. Final word count is within + or- 10 % of required word count. |
3.7to >3.2PtsCreditGood standard of academic writing with mostly correct grammar, writing, spelling and syntax. Good structure and articulation of ideas within the assessment that mostly reflects assessment instructions. Final word count is not within + or- 10 % of required word count. |
3.2to >2.4PtsPassAdequate standard of academic writing with a number of errors in grammar, writing, spelling and syntax. Adequate structure and articulation of ideas within the assessment that somewhat reflects assessment instructions. Final word count is not within + or- 10 % of required word count. |
2.4to >0PtsFailMinimal standard of academic writing with a number of errors in grammar, writing, spelling and syntax. Poor structure or articulation of ideas within the assessment that does not reflect assessment instructions. Final word count is not within + or- 10 % of required word count. |
|
5pts
|
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeReferencesUtilised and appropriately referenced at least eight (8) sources using the APA 7th edition referencing style |
5to >4.2PtsHigh distinctionExcellent use of literature to support this assessment. This includes high-quality peer-reviewed sources. References and reference list adheres to APA 7th edition referencing with no errors or unsupported claims in the assessment |
4.2to >3.7PtsDistinctionVery good use of literature to support this assessment. This includes good-quality peer-reviewed sources. References and reference list adheres to APA 7th edition referencing with minimal errors or some unsupported claims in the assessment |
3.7to >3.2PtsCreditGood use of literature to support this assessment. This includes good-quality peer-reviewed sources. References and reference list mostly adheres to APA 7th edition referencing with some errors or unsupported claims in the assessment |
3.2to >2.4PtsPassAdequate use of literature to support this assessment. This includes some use of quality peer-reviewed sources. References and reference list somewhat adheres to APA 7th edition referencing with errors or unsupported claims evident in the assessment |
2.4to >0PtsFailMinimal or absent use of literature to support this assessment. There are minimal or absent sources used to support the assessment. References and reference list minimally adheres to APA 7th edition referencing with a number of errors or unsupported claims in the assessment |
|
5pts
|
Total points:45 |