53 minute read
Appendix Two – Assignment Briefs Semester 2
Submission Deadline
Before 10am on:
18/11/2021 20 working days after deadline (L4, 5 and 7) 15 working days after deadline (L6) 10 working days after deadline (block delivery)
Marks and Feedback
16/12/2021
Unit title & code Key assignment details
Mental Health Care for Paramedics (PAR004-2)
Assignment number and title Assignment One
Assignment type
In-Class Test (IT-PT)
Weighting of assignment 100%
Size or length of assessment 1.5 hours
Unit learning outcomes 1. Demonstrate the following knowledge and understanding • Demonstrate some knowledge and understanding the range of needs that people with mental problems may have, with reference to classifications and explanations of mental health and illness 2. Demonstrate the following skills and abilities • Ability to assess and apply needs of people with mental health conditions, utilising assessment skills and management strategies to provide a safe approach to emergency treatment and care.
What am I required to do in this assignment?
Formative assessment
• A group exercise in which you will research common mental health conditions across the lifespan and their associated treatments.
• Feedback will be provided by a member of the teaching team.
Summative assessment
• Review a filmed simulated scenario appraising the actions taken by the practitioner and recommend further courses of action.
• You will answer staged questions relating to mental health, the needs of people with mental illness and appropriate courses of treatment
Additional Information
• The is an in-class test.
• You will be expected to follow exam conditions whilst completing this test.
What do I need to do to pass? (Threshold Expectations from UIF)
• Define the concepts of mental health and illness with reference to classifications and explanations of mental illness.
• Analyse the needs associated with various mental health problems and identify care priorities
• Examine a range of services that people may need in response to their mental health problems.
How do I produce high quality work that merits a good grade?
• Evaluation of mental health concepts will be to a high standard. • You will demonstrate an ability to interpret and validate mental health concepts. • Demonstrate a focus and sustained critical analysis, showing both rationale and effective care planning. • Focus and handling of information will be to a high standard, considering the information you both critically analyse and present.
How does this assignment relate to what we are doing in scheduled sessions?
• This assignment will allow you to demonstrate your understanding, interpretation, examination in the formalising of a care plan appropriate for a patient who is suffering from a mental health crisis or condition. The support in class and via the assignment are designed to develop your confidence against evidence-based practice, preparatory to practice. • You are encouraged to discuss your experiences from practice, respecting anonymity to discuss whether the care given is supported by the evidence-base.
Assignment Brief
How will my assignment be marked?
Your assignment will be marked according to the threshold expectations and the criteria on the following page.
You can use them to evaluate your own work and consider your grade before you submit.
Grading Domains
Define the concepts of mental health and illness with reference to classifications and explanations of mental illness 25% Weighting
70%+ (1st Class)
The definitions of mental health concepts have been evaluated to a high level. Interpretations are seen which suggest that a strong validation of information has occurred, in all areas.
62-68% (2:1)
Some in-depth analysis is seen which seeks to explore the concepts of mental health. The classifications and explanations are generally accurate.
52-58% (2:2)
Some good detail has been organised that relates and represents the concepts of mental health, its classifications, and explanations. Some errors seen.
42-48% (3rd Class) Threshold Standard
The definitions and classifications are described. Does not offer any higher-level acumen towards linking with mental illness.
35-38% (Fail)
The understanding presented is incomplete and lacks finesse. There are some appreciations for the classifications of mental illness, however, these too are incomplete.
0-32% (Fail)
Has failed to present relevant information that shows an understanding of mental health or the illnesses that are classified within.
Analyse the needs associated with various mental health problems and identify care priorities
25% Weighting
Consistent levels of critical analysis are seen. There is a clear rationale that proposes and convinces for an accurate care plan. Consistent levels of analysis are seen which discuss and integrate the different facets set by this test. Some good analysis is seen which has allowed for both a comparison and investigation into the presented problems and priorities. There are some basic analysis attempts seen which allow for some review of both problem and priorities. Analysis is fragmented and any correlation with either health problems or priorities is vague. No analysis seen. No correlation with problem or priorities.
Examine a range of services that people may need in response to their mental health problems.
25% Weighting
A consistent combination of knowledge and care planning that supports and prioritises the needs of service user. A confident application of knowledge regarding the services available for the scenario provided. A clear plan is seen which is reasonably organised. A generally good level of understanding where information has been interpreted reasonably well. Few errors seen. An adequate understanding of services is observed. Some appreciation for the problem is seen, however, errors are seen. An inconsistent understanding is observed with a poor appreciation for the problem presented. A failure to understand or appreciate the scenario or how to manage it.
Grading Domains
Issue Handling and Depth of Discussion 15% Weighting
Focus on the assessment 10% Weighting
70%+ (1st Class)
The issues addressed are highly relevant and are analysed in a structured and considered manner. The issues addressed are relevant and are generally analysed in a structured and considered manner. Some relevant issues are selected and comprehension of them is demonstrated. Some relevant issues are selected but limited comprehension is demonstrated. The knowledgebase is fragmented and/or disorganised. The depth of discussion is not consistent. The relevance of the selected issues is superficial and limited. Comprehension, where seen, is also limited.
62-68% (2:1) 52-58% (2:2) 42-48% (3rd Class) Threshold Standard 35-38% (Fail) 0-32% (Fail)
Had focused clearly in some depth on all elements of the task set in a carefully structured manner. Had focused on all elements of the task set in a structured manner with some depth at times. Had focused on most Had focused on some elements of the task elements of the task set in a reasonably set in a descriptive structured manner but at times poorly with depth at times. structured way. Not all elements of the task are completed. Inconsistent and a lack of care seen. Poorly completed regards all elements of the task set showing a lack of focus and organisation.
Submission Deadline
Before 10am on:
17/01/2022 20 working days after deadline (L4, 5 and 7) 15 working days after deadline (L6) 10 working days after deadline (block delivery)
Week Commencing
Marks and Feedback
14/02/2022 Week Commencing
Unit title & code Key assignment details
Obstetrics and Neonatal Care for Paramedics (PAR003-2)
Assignment number and title Assignment One
Assignment type
PR-OSCE
Weighting of assignment 100%
Size or length of assessment 30 minutes
Unit learning outcomes 1. Demonstrate the following knowledge and understanding
• Provide a rationale for the paramedic assessment and management of a pregnant service user from the antenatal to the postnatal period.
2. Demonstrate the following skills and abilities
• Assess the needs of mothers and neonates utilising applied anatomy and physiology, assessment skills and management strategies to provide a safe approach to emergency treatment and care.
What am I required to do in this assignment?
Summative assessment
• Undertake a simulated emergency birth and neonatal resuscitation suitable for paramedic practice with feedback from teaching staff.
What do I need to do to pass? (Threshold Expectations from UIF)
• Identify whether key maternal and neonatal observations fall within normal boundaries and determine the significance of observations that fall outside of normal boundaries.
• Analyse when maternal and neonatal problems exist and decide appropriate referral mechanisms.
• Recommend emergency actions that a paramedic would take in response to maternal and neonatal emergency situations.
How do I produce high quality work that merits a good grade?
• Interpreted and evaluate, with confidence, leading to an informed and validated approach to care. • Provide an evidence-based approach to your OSCE performance • Show control, purpose, integration, and justification for your practice. • Ensure that your referrals are accurate and based on fact, not assumption. • Provide convincing and validated responses to the information provided.
How does this assignment relate to what we are doing in scheduled sessions?
• Firstly, to provide you with the knowledge and skills associated with antenatal, intrapartum and postnatal assessment to underpin your practice as a paramedic, identifying the need to refer to a midwife or obstetrician, as appropriate. As more care of mothers is taking place in the community the chance of paramedics being called to assess mothers and their babies is on the increase. • Secondly, the assessment and care of newborn and preterm babies is significantly different to other stages in the lifecycle and requires specialist care. This unit will explore these areas using both midwives and children’s nursing specialists. • This assignment gives the student an opportunity to demonstrate practically the skills learned within the unit.
Assignment Brief
How will my assignment be marked?
Your assignment will be marked according to the threshold expectations and the criteria on the following page.
You can use them to evaluate your own work and consider your grade before you submit.
Grading Domains
Identify whether key maternal and neonatal observations fall within normal boundaries and determine the significance of observations that fall outside of normal boundaries. 25% Weighting
70%+ (1st Class)
The information presented was interpreted and evaluated with confidence, leading to an informed and validated approach to care.
Analyse when maternal and neonatal problems exist and decide appropriate referral mechanisms.
25% Weighting
A sound evidencebased approach was observed where a ‘cause and effect’ determination were both recognised and managed throughout.
62-68% (2:1)
A good understanding of the significance for the presented information. The information was process with a degree of confidence and purpose.
52-58% (2:2)
A reasonably confident understanding of the information presented. While improvements could be made, the significance of the information was understood.
42-48% (3rd Class) Threshold Standard
An understanding of normal and abnormal clinical values was present; however, fluency and confidence require more focus.
35-38% (Fail)
A poor or fragmented understanding of normal or abnormal clinical findings was observed. The practice and management were not sufficiently effective.
0-32% (Fail)
A failure to recognise normal or abnormal clinical findings. The practice was unsafe, demonstrating a very poor understanding for the significance of the information provided.
Interpretation of facts were observed, and effective actions made. Decisions-making was often clear with logical referrals. There was some good analysis of presenting information and appropriate referrals were made. Fluency and decisionmaking could be improved. The problems presented were recognised and managed to an adequate level. The decisions, while laboured, met the needs of the patient. The analysis of the presented facts was fragmented and did not present a safe working pattern. The subsequent care decisions lacked cohesion and/or purpose. There was an absence of appreciation towards the presented case. The management and subsequent referrals were incorrect and did not meet the needs of the patient.
Recommend emergency actions that a paramedic would take in response to maternal and neonatal emergency situations.
25% Weighting
The emergency actions showed purpose and control. Understanding and criticality were clear to discern the information provided. The management was safe. The emergency actions showed clarity and appreciation for the immediate situation. The algorithms were followed with reasonable organisation and priority. The management was safe. The emergency actions were good in most areas, where some improvements can be made. The management was safe. The emergency actions taken were adequate, however, improvements can be made. The management was safe. The emergency actions were disjointed and only met in part. Both recognition of complaint and demonstration/ management need to be clearer. The emergency actions were not met and a lack of understanding for the process or skill were seen.
Grading Domains
Overall Performance 10% Weighting
Communication 15% Weighting
70%+ (1st Class)
Performance is safe, confident, and effective. The skill/s are accurate and fluent at all times. Performance is safe. The majority of skill/s are performed with reasonable confidence and fluency. Performance is safe. The skill/s are performed with reasonable confidence and are beginning to show some fluency. Performance is safe but lacked fluency and confidence in some areas. Most key aspects of the skills required are evident. The performance was unsafe. Aspects of the skill/s required were not demonstrated at the appropriate level.
If a critical fail is triggered a grade of 35% or lower, depending on overall performance, will be applied. The performance was unsafe. The practice displayed lacked the required standard expected of this level.
62-68% (2:1) 52-58% (2:2)
Initiated and developed communication with good use of a range of interpersonal skills. Initiated and developed acceptable communication with satisfactory use of interpersonal skills. Initiated and achieved some effective a communication but limited in some aspects of interpersonal skills. Began to achieve effective communication but this was limited in both scope and the range of interpersonal skills. Communication was fragmented and meaning was not always clear. Some actions lacked clarity regards the skills undertaking. Communication was poor and did not promote a safe working environment. Clarity was not seen over the required skills.
42-48% (3rd Class) Threshold Standard 35-38% (Fail) 0-32% (Fail)
Appendix Two – Assignment Briefs Semester 2
Core units
Submission Deadline
Before 10am on:
25/02/2022 20 working days after deadline (L4, 5 and 7) 15 working days after deadline (L6) 10 working days after deadline (block delivery)
Marks and Feedback
25/03/2022
Key assignment details
Unit title & code
Leadership and Team Working for Paramedic Practice (PAR002-2)
Assignment number and title Assessment One
Assignment type
Coursework Essay (CW_ESS) Third-person writing style
Weighting of assignment 50%
Size or length of assessment 2000 words
Unit learning outcomes 1. Demonstrate the following knowledge and understanding
• Demonstrate an appropriate knowledge and understanding of the role of leadership and management theories and frameworks in the context of paramedic science.
2. Demonstrate the following skills and abilities
• Ability to apply the relevant management and leadership theories, principles or skills to enable effective personal performance and professional practice in paramedics.
What am I required to do in this assignment?
Formative Assessment
• Group exercises on leadership and team-working in professional practice with lecturer feedback
Summative Assessment
• An essay that identifies and explores the influences of leadership frameworks and models in paramedic / healthcare practice.
Additional Guidance
• You should explore no more than four frameworks or models. • Your discussion could include other service users/service provision, for example, the fire & rescue service, SPOC, MDTs etc. • While threshold two relates to your own leadership style it should be written in the third person and draw on analytical perspectives underpinned with appropriate academic references. • Critically appraise the chosen frameworks/models and how they influence paramedic practice.
Presenting your work
You should format your document as follows:
• Font size: 12pt • Font type: – Arial or Calibri • Line spacing: – 1.5 – 2.0
Links to any Study Hub self-help guides relevant to your assessment or a generic signpost/link to the StudyHub guides:
What do I need to do to pass? (Threshold Expectations from UIF)
• Identify frameworks/models that relate to paramedic practice and the delivery of care utilising multi-disciplinary teams and including single point of contact referrals.
• Explore and analyse at least three leadership frameworks/models which can influence your own leadership style and capability and consider the impact this may have on your personal and professional development.
• Analyse and evaluate these leadership methodologies, whilst considering your decision-making processes to enhance your leadership skills and abilities as a leader and team member.
How do I produce high quality work that merits a good grade?
• You should focus clearly in some depth on all elements of the task set in a carefully structured manner. • The issues addressed are highly relevant and are analysed in a structured and considered manner. • Analysis and application of the knowledge and theory base is clear and substantial. Relevant evidence had also been analysed in a competent manner. • Referencing is correct, follows the guidelines given and consistently supports and enhances the work. No significant errors seen. • Presentation is good throughout showing close attention to detail. Written expression is also good with no significant errors seen.
How does this assignment relate to what we are doing in scheduled sessions?
• This unit will prepare you to adopt a leadership role and function as a registered paramedic. As a healthcare professional you will be working within multi-professional groups where effective team working is necessary for high quality care. • This unit will enable you to develop knowledge and skills relevant to leadership and team working. You will engage in group work intended to develop your leadership style and team working skills. You will be supported in finding ways to share your own perceptions as well as encouraging others to do the same in an objective, honest, respectful, constructive, sensitive and purposeful manner.
Assignment Brief
How will my assignment be marked?
Your assignment will be marked according to the threshold expectations and the criteria on the following page.
You can use them to evaluate your own work and consider your grade before you submit.
Grading Domain
70%+ (1st Class) 62-68% (2:1) 52-58% (2:2) 42-48% (3rd Class) Threshold Standard 35-38% (Fail) 0-32% (Fail)
Communication and expression 10% Weighting
Identify frameworks/models that relate to paramedic practice and the delivery of care utilising multidisciplinary teams and including single point of contact referrals. 20% Weighting
Explore and analyse at least three leadership frameworks/models which can influence your own leadership style and capability and consider the impact this may have on your personal and professional development.
30% Weighting
Expression and structure are excellent throughout and enhance the argument. Grammar, spelling and structure are of a very high standard with very minor errors, meeting high professional standards Consistently and critically explores and analyses frameworks/models that relate to paramedic practice and the delivery of care utilising multidisciplinary teams and including single point of contact referrals.
Consistently and critically explores and analyses at least three leadership frameworks/models. The discussions of leadership style(s) and capability are considered in a detailed depth. The impact this may have on personal and professional development is clear. Expression and structure are consistently clear and enhance the argument. Grammar and spelling are of a high standard, with few errors, and consistently meet professional standards Expression and structure are generally clear and make the argument readily accessible. Grammar and spelling are good, with few errors, and generally meet professional standards Expression and/or structure demonstrate basic understanding of the argument. Grammar and spelling adequately meet professional standards Expression and/or structure make the argument difficult to access. Grammar and spelling are below acceptable professional standards Expression and/or structure make the argument incoherent. Grammar and spelling are significantly below acceptable professional standards
Appraises frameworks/models that relate to paramedic practice and the delivery of care utilising multidisciplinary teams and including single point of contact referrals. Examines frameworks/models that relate to paramedic practice and the delivery of care utilising multidisciplinary teams and including single point of contact referrals. Identifies some frameworks/models that relate to paramedic practice and the delivery of care utilising multidisciplinary teams and including single point of contact referrals. Inadequately identifies frameworks/models that relate to paramedic practice and the delivery of care utilising multidisciplinary teams and including single point of contact referrals. Does not identify any frameworks/models that relate to paramedic practice and the delivery of care utilising multidisciplinary teams and including single point of contact referrals.
Appraises at least three leadership frameworks/models. The discussions of leadership style(s) and capability are considered in reasonable depth. The impact this may have on personal and professional development broadly clear.. Examines at least three leadership frameworks/models. The discussions which are presented show a good influence of leadership style and capability. There is consideration for the impact this may have on personal and professional development. Adequately determines at least three leadership frameworks/models which can influence your own leadership style and capability. Adequately considers the impact this may have on personal and professional development. Inadequately determines at least three leadership frameworks/models. The discussions of leadership style and capability inadequately considers the impact this may have on personal and professional development. Does not determine at least three leadership frameworks/models. The discussion of leadership style and capability and rarely considers the impact this may have on personal and professional development.
Grading Domain
70%+ (1st Class) 62-68% (2:1) 52-58% (2:2) 42-48% (3rd Class) Threshold Standard 35-38% (Fail) 0-32% (Fail)
Analyse and evaluate these leadership methodologies, whilst considering your decision-making processes to enhance your leadership skills and abilities as a leader and team member.
30% Weighting
Critically analyses and evaluates leadership methodologies, whilst using excellent reflection and decision-making processes. Enhancement of leadership skills and abilities as a leader and team member show insight. Appraises and evaluates leadership methodologies, whilst using good reflection and decision-making. Clear and good discussions surrounding the processes to enhance leadership skills and abilities as a leader and team member as seen. Few errors seen. Examines and explores leadership methodologies, whilst using sound reflection and decision-making processes. There are some good discussions to enhance the leadership skills and abilities as a leader and team member. Describes these leadership methodologies, whilst using adequate reflection on your decision-making processes. Enhancement of leadership skills and abilities as a leader and team member are discussed in a superficial manner.. Offers some comment on these leadership methodologies, whilst using inadequate reflection on your decision-making processes Enhancement of leadership skills and abilities as a leader and team member are poorly explored. Does not consider these leadership methodologies and offers no reflection on decision-making processes. Enhancement of leadership skills and abilities as a leader and team member are not considered.
Use of references
10% Weighting
Consistently insightful use of a range and variety of relevant knowledge and materials, including primary sources, to support, develop and hypothesise the argument. Referencing fully meets course requirements in text and reference list, with very few slips in consistency, clarity or format Consistently good use of a range and variety of relevant knowledge and materials, including primary sources, to support and develop the argument. Referencing overall consistently meets course requirements in text and reference list with few slips in consistency, clarity or format Sound use of relevant knowledge and materials to support the argument, including some primary and varied sources. Referencing generally meets course requirements, in text and reference list, but may include slips in consistency, clarity or format Adequate use of relevant knowledge and materials to support the argument, showing limited analysis Inconsistent referencing, in text and/or reference list, which may not fully meet course requirements. Limited use of relevant materials to support the argument, showing no or very limited analysis Absent or very poor referencing, in text and reference list, which does not meet course requirements Very limited or absent use of relevant materials to support the argument, showing no or very limited analysis. Absent or very poor referencing, in text and reference list, which does not meet course requirements
Submission Deadline
Before 10am on:
01/04/2022 20 working days after deadline (L4, 5 and 7) 15 working days after deadline (L6) 10 working days after deadline (block delivery)
Marks and Feedback
13/05/2022
Unit title & code Key assignment details
Trauma Management in Paramedic Practice (PAR005-2)
Assignment number and title Assignment One
Assignment type
Coursework – Case Study (CW_CS) (Third person writing style)
Weighting of assignment 50%
Size or length of assessment 2000 words (+10% allowance)
Unit learning outcomes 1. Demonstrate the following knowledge and understanding
• Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of trauma theories and principles within the context of promoting excellence in patient care.
2. Demonstrate the following skills and abilities
• Conduct effective assessment and management of a trauma patient and to propose clear and effective clinical decision-making in practice.
What am I required to do in this assignment?
Formative Assessment
• Assess and manage care of service users in a range of simulated scenarios. Feedback will be given verbally from peers and in written format from academics.
Summative Assessment
• Compare and contrast a trauma assessment you have completed, using a case from practice.
Additional Information:
• Analyse a minimum of two trauma theories against your chosen case.
• Using contemporary literature, support or refute the chosen theories to identify practice learning.
• Within this assessment you must analyse trauma theories within the context of promoting excellence in patient care. This can be from:
o the management and decision-making view, or o the physical care delivered by the clinicians, or o a combination of both
• Add your mentor verification form as an appendix.
• Your case study must be accompanied by a signed statement from your mentor verifying that permission has been sought from the patient/service user to discuss their case. If you do not include your verification form with your submission, this will trigger a
‘fail’ grade for the respective grading domain. See the grading rubric for clarification.
Presenting your work:
• Font size: 12pt • Font type: – Arial or Calibri • Line spacing: – 1.5 – 2.0
The following links offer guidance on presenting your work: • https://lrweb.beds.ac.uk/studyhub-library/self-help-resources/ • https://lrweb.beds.ac.uk/a-guide-to-referencing • https://lrweb.beds.ac.uk/studyhub-library/what-we-offer/ • https://lrweb.beds.ac.uk/media/222mr2fv/case-studies.docx
What do I need to do to pass? (Threshold Expectations from UIF)
• Identify a case study that explore key trauma theories in the context of using underpinning knowledge of paramedic science.
• Analyse and construct convincing arguments that support an evidence-based rationale including decision-making, assessments, and of trauma management prioritization.
• Identify and use appropriate academic literature to underpin your analysis, rationale, discussion and understanding.
How do I produce high quality work that merits a good grade?
• Ensure your work consistently analyses and constructs arguments using contemporary literature. • Seek opportunities to remodel and synthesise your discussions. • Evaluate the evidence you present against the chosen case and hypothesise effective and realistic outcomes. • Your focus needs to be concise to ensure you have the scope to explore each theory. • Validate your perspectives through effective debate and evaluation.
How does this assignment relate to what we are doing in scheduled sessions?
• develop your knowledge and skills in relation to assessment and care management for patients in critical and complex situations. • support the recognition and the potential that exists with the escalation towards criticality. • explore scene management and understand how crucial it is to minimise risk before casualties can be assessed, treated, and transported to hospital. • Discuss and rehearse rapid and effective clinical decision making and its essential role for the preservation of life. • Present a structured system-based approach to patient assessment to enable you to conduct a rapid assessment based and initiate life preserving treatment.
Assignment Brief
How will my assignment be marked?
Your assignment will be marked according to the threshold expectations and the criteria on the following page.
You can use them to evaluate your own work and consider your grade before you submit.
Threshold Domains
Identify a case study that explores key trauma theories in the context of using underpinning knowledge of paramedic science. 20% Weighting
70%+ (1st Class)
The introduction and rationale for the chosen case have been to a high standard. The case for enquiry has been equally supported with a clear intent and focus towards enhancing theory and practice.
62-68% (2:1)
The chosen case allows for a contemporary exploration of practice. The rationale for choosing the case has been presented and supported with literature.
52-58% (2:2)
The case chosen is relevant to current practice and provides sufficient scope of enquiry. A rationale is provided for its identification and use; however, this could be clearer and more purposeful.
42-48% (3rd Class) Threshold Standard
The case chosen has allowed for a contemporary review of trauma theories. Some relevant concepts are introduced, and the theories described. Improvements could be made with both structure and how they are discussed.
35-38% (Fail)
Only some of the tasks have been addressed. Comprehension when used, is also limited. The rationale for selecting the chosen case is fragmented. There is no mentor verification form submitted with the main article. Emailed forms cannot be accepted. (35% =
maximum grade for this domain) 0-32% (Fail)
The case study does not support the chosen case and the selected theories to underpin are not linked effectively. Multiple errors seen with a lack of focus.
Analyse and construct convincing arguments that support an evidence-based rationale including decision-making, assessments, and of trauma management prioritisation.
30% Weighting
A high standard of consistency is evident, where both analysis and rationale are synthesized to either assert existing evidence or modify new understandings, for and/or against accepted practices. A good standard has been observed that considers the evidence-base against the chosen case. There is evidence of literature scrutiny, however, there are some inconsistencies around depth and/or direction. Some understanding is seen against the efforts to both analyse and argue for/against the provided evidence. Applying the discussions to the chosen case is limited at times. Understanding is shown for the key tasks where both knowledge and theory are considered. Analysis of the proposed evidencebase is limited, as was the application. There is a fragmented understanding identified where the requisite analysis and criticality are inadequately supported. There are some errors in both rationale and the overall decisionmaking. Does not demonstrate analytical appreciation and does not present a convincing argument for the selected trauma theories.
Threshold Domains
Identify and use appropriate academic literature to underpin your analysis, rationale, discussion and understanding.
30% Weighting
The selected literature has been presented to a high standard. The discussions presented are effectively and consistently supporting the overall direction. There is a clear appreciation for the validity of the chosen literature. There are some clear theory-practice relationships explored and proposed. The literature chosen is contemporary and good attempts have been made to analyse and present a logical discussion. Consistency can be improved. There is some evidence of an underpinning approach to the task, however, is predominantly descriptive and only introduces basic concepts. The literature used has not been integrated well and the discussions used to analyse against practice have been poorly formed. There is some relevant knowledge presented. The work lacks focus or control. There is an inadequate level of discussion, analysis or understanding of the chosen material.
70%+ (1st Class) 62-68% (2:1) 52-58% (2:2) 42-48% (3rd Class) Threshold Standard 35-38% (Fail)
Focus on the task
10% Weighting
Had focused clearly on all elements of the task set, showing appreciation to reframing and discovering new solutions. The discussions presented are carefully structured. Had focused on all elements of the task set in a structured manner with depth at times. There is some evidence of comparing and contrasting the chosen trauma theories. Had focused on most elements of the task set in a reasonably structured manner. The depth of discussion could be more consistently presented. The threshold standards have been satisfied, however, are predominantly descriptive and lack any technical handling or exploration. Had focused on some elements of the task set in a descriptive, and at times poorly structured way. Had not addressed all elements of the task set showing a lack of focus and organisation.
0-32% (Fail)
Presentation and written expression
10% Weighting
Presentation is good throughout showing close attention to detail. Written expression is also good with no significant errors seen. Presentation is generally good showing attention to detail. Written expression is also good with a small number of errors seen. Presentation is acceptable showing attention to detail. Written expression is generally clear with some errors seen. Presentation is broadly acceptable, but improvements should have been made. Some written expression errors seen throughout. The presentation and written expression are inconsistent and do not support the flow or direction of the task. Some effort is seen, however, falls below the standard expected. Presentation is poor, requiring much more attention to detail. An unacceptable number of written expression errors and problems.
Submission Deadline
Before 10am on:
20/05/2022 20 working days after deadline (L4, 5 and 7) 15 working days after deadline (L6) 10 working days after deadline (block delivery)
Marks and Feedback
24/06/2022
Unit title & code Key assignment details
Leadership and Team Working for Paramedic Practice (PAR002-2)
Assignment number and title Assessment Two
Assignment type
Coursework – Reflective Writing (CW-RW) First-person writing style
Weighting of assignment 50%
Size or length of assessment 2500 words
Unit learning outcomes 1. Demonstrate the following knowledge and understanding
• Demonstrate an appropriate knowledge and understanding of the role of leadership and management theories and frameworks in the context of paramedic science.
2. Demonstrate the following skills and abilities
• Ability to apply the relevant management and leadership theories, principles or skills to enable effective personal performance and professional practice in paramedics.
What am I required to do in this assignment?
Formative Assessment
• Group exercises on leadership and team-working in professional practice with lecturer feedback
Summative Assessment
• A reflective essay that explores your use of leadership frameworks and models.
Additional Guidance
• A complete SWOT analysis needs to added to your appendix. • There should be clear critical reflection that links your chosen framework and/or model to both profession and NHS Leadership principles • Using the above two guidance points you are encouraged to create a relevant and methodical development plan, that constructively explore your own consideration for development. This needs to be written as a narrative, and as a table or a list using appropriate references to support your ideas and conceptualisations.
Presenting Your Work
You should format your document as follows:
• Font size: 12pt • Font type: – Arial or Calibri • Line spacing: – 1.5 – 2.0
Links to any Study Hub self-help guides relevant to your assessment or a generic signpost/link to the StudyHub guides • https://lrweb.beds.ac.uk/studyhub-library/self-help-resources/ • https://lrweb.beds.ac.uk/a-guide-to-referencing • https://lrweb.beds.ac.uk/studyhub-library/what-we-offer/
What do I need to do to pass? (Threshold Expectations from UIF)
• Develop and identify your strengths and weakness (SWOT) in relation to leadership, team working style and abilities supported by evidence-based practice.
• Link your findings and evidence to the professional standards and NHS Leadership principles.
• Construct and implement a personal development plan that identifies and reflects your current development as a leader and how this relates to your personal and professional development.
How do I produce high quality work that merits a good grade?
• You should focus clearly in some depth on all elements of the task set in a carefully structured manner. • The issues addressed are highly relevant and are analysed in a structured and considered manner. • Referencing is correct, follows the guidelines given and consistently supports and enhances the work. No significant errors seen. • Presentation is good throughout showing close attention to detail. Written expression is also good with no significant errors seen. • Analysis and application of the knowledge and theory base is clear and substantial. Relevant evidence had also been analysed in a competent manner.
How does this assignment relate to what we are doing in scheduled sessions?
• develop your understanding of the qualities of a contemporary paramedic leader who has personal confidence, competence in communicating and awareness of the impact they make on others in professional circumstances. • explore a range of theoretical concepts associated with leadership and effective team working. • introduce several tools which will support you to reflect on your own leadership abilities and role in promoting effective team working.
Assignment Brief
How will my assignment be marked?
Your assignment will be marked according to the threshold expectations and the criteria on the following page.
You can use them to evaluate your own work and consider your grade before you submit.
Grade Domains
70%+ (1st Class) 62-68% (2:1) 52-58% (2:2) 42-48% (3rd) Threshold Standard 35-38% (Fail) 0-32% (Fail)
Develop and identify your strengths and weakness (SWOT) in relation to leadership, team working style and abilities supported by evidence-based practice.
30% Weighting
The essay investigates and critically analyses the development, identifying your strengths and weakness. Excellently supported by evidence-based practice. The essay appraises your development, identifying your strengths and weakness. Abilities are well supported by evidence-based practice. The essay examines your development, identifying your strengths and weakness. Abilities are soundly supported by evidence-based practice.
Link your findings and evidence to the professional standards and NHS Leadership principles.
30% Weighting
Clearly links and critically discusses findings and evidence to the professional standards and NHS Leadership principles. Clearly links and appraises findings and evidence to the professional standards and NHS Leadership principles. Links and examines findings and evidence to the professional standards and NHS Leadership principles. The essay describes your development, identifying your strengths and weakness. Abilities are adequately supported by evidence-based practice. The essay poorly describes your development, identifying your strengths and weakness. Work is inadequately supported by evidence-based practice. The essay inadequately describes your development, identifying your strengths and weakness. Work is not supported by evidence-based practice.
Links and describes findings and evidence to the professional standards and NHS Leadership principles. Poorly links and describes findings and evidence to the professional standards and NHS Leadership principles. Does not link findings and evidence to the professional standards and NHS Leadership principles.
Construct and implement a personal development plan that identifies and reflects your current development as a leader and how this relates to your personal and professional development.
20% Weighting
Constructs a personal development plan that includes an excellent reflection of their personal development as a leader. Justifies how this relates to their personal and professional development. Constructs a personal development plan that includes a good reflection of their personal development as a leader. Appraises how this relates to their personal and professional development. Constructs a personal development plan that includes a sound reflection of their personal development as a leader. Classifies how this relates to their personal and professional development. Constructs a personal development plan that includes an adequate reflection of their personal development as a leader. Lists how this relates to their personal and professional development. Constructs a personal development plan that includes an inadequate reflection of their personal development as a leader. Little insight into how this relates to their personal and professional development. Constructs a personal development plan that does not include reflection of their personal development as a leader. Offers no insight into how this relates to their personal and professional development.
Grade Domains
70%+ (1st Class) 62-68% (2:1) 52-58% (2:2) 42-48% (3rd) Threshold Standard 35-38% (Fail) 0-32% (Fail)
Communication and expression
10% Weighting
Use of references
10% Weighting
Expression and structure are excellent throughout and enhance the argument. Grammar, spelling, and structure are of a very high standard with very minor errors, meeting high professional standards Consistently insightful use of a range and variety of relevant knowledge and materials, including primary sources, to support, develop and hypothesise the argument. Referencing fully meets course requirements in text and reference list, with very few slips in consistency, clarity or format Consistently good use of a range and variety of relevant knowledge and materials, including primary sources, to support and develop the argument. Referencing overall consistently meets course requirements in text and reference list with few slips in consistency, clarity or format Sound use of relevant knowledge and materials to support the argument, including some primary and varied sources. Referencing generally meets course requirements, in text and reference list, but may include slips in consistency, clarity or format Adequate use of relevant knowledge and materials to support the argument, showing limited analysis Inconsistent referencing, in text and/or reference list, which may not fully meet course requirements. Limited use of relevant materials to support the argument, showing no or very limited analysis Absent or very poor referencing, in text and reference list, which does not meet course requirements Very limited or absent use of relevant materials to support the argument, showing no or very limited analysis. Absent or very poor referencing, in text and reference list, which does not meet course requirements
Expression and structure are consistently clear and enhance the argument. Grammar and spelling are of a high standard, with few errors, and consistently meet professional standards Expression and structure are generally clear and make the argument readily accessible. Grammar and spelling are good, with few errors, and generally meet professional standards Expression and/or structure demonstrate basic understanding of the argument. Grammar and spelling adequately meet professional standards Expression and/or structure make the argument difficult to access. Grammar and spelling are below acceptable professional standards Expression and/or structure make the argument incoherent. Grammar and spelling are significantly below acceptable professional standards
Submission Deadline
Before 10am on:
01/07/2022 20 working days after deadline (L4, 5 and 7) 15 working days after deadline (L6) 10 working days after deadline (block delivery)
Marks and Feedback
29/07/2022
Unit title & code Key assignment details
Assessment and Management of Long-term Conditions. (PAR001-2)
Assignment number and title Assignment One
Assignment type
Coursework – Case Study (CW-CS) Third-person writing style
Weighting of assignment 100%
Size or length of assessment 2500 Words
Unit learning outcomes 1. Demonstrate the following knowledge and understanding:
• Demonstrate your knowledge and understanding of the impact of long-term conditions on patients and their carers and explore your role in promoting their recovery.
2. Demonstrate the following skills and abilities
• Evaluate and assess the appropriate needs of patients and their carers in the pre-hospital setting and devise plans for appropriate referral, care and treatment.
What am I required to do in this assignment?
Summative Assessment
• An essay that critically reviews how long-term conditions affect patients and their carers, and explores the avenues of support that are available in and out of hospital to optimise self-management of the long-term condition being discussed. (Your essay must be accompanied by a written verification from your mentor that the topic has been selected by you from your practice experiences in agreement with your mentor).
Additional Information:
• Your case study must be accompanied by a signed statement from your mentor verifying that permission has been sought from the patient/service user to discuss their case. If you do not include your verification form with your submission, this will trigger a
‘fail’ grade for the respective grading domain. See the grading rubric for clarification.
Presenting your work:
• Font size - 12pt • Font type – Arial or Calibri • Line spacing - 1.5 – 2.0.
The following links offer guidance on presenting your work. • https://lrweb.beds.ac.uk/studyhub-library/self-help-resources/ • https://lrweb.beds.ac.uk/a-guide-to-referencing • https://lrweb.beds.ac.uk/studyhub-library/what-we-offer/
What do I need to do to pass? (Threshold Expectations from UIF)
• Explore and identify the biopsychosocial factors associated with long term conditions and the role that the Paramedic has in providing support to their patients and carers in managing these conditions.
• Using a case study from practice reflect on the impact that your chosen long-term condition has on the patient, their carers and the role of the Paramedic in providing care and support.
• Compare/evaluate the concepts of empowerment, enablement and recovery utilising the theories of social prescribing to optimise the patient’s ability to manage their own long-term condition/s, as part of a wider safe and effective care plan.
How do I produce high quality work that merits a good grade?
• There should be a clear focus on all elements of the task, doing so in a constructive and critical manner. • Analysis and insight should be consistently seen demonstrating significant skills of synthesis. • Referencing must follow the guidelines to consistently support and enhance the work. • The evidence used must be of a high quality and integrated skillfully to support discussion and critical analysis.
How does this assignment relate to what we are doing in scheduled sessions?
• This assignment will allow you to demonstrate how you have explored a range of long-term conditions whilst considering the anatomical, pathophysiology of the chosen condition/s and biopsychosocial perspectives. • The unit will provide insight to the challenges of living and coping with a long-term condition/s, the appropriate care and management pathways available especially within the family context as well as the role and responsibilities of the multi-disciplinary team. • Using a variety of resources including case presentations from practice you will learn and apply a range of theories in providing care for patients with long-term conditions and the concepts of self-management of these conditions. • You will apply knowledge gained in other units to help you understand the theoretical concepts underpinning these skills and to help you determine the significance of the assessment outcomes.
Assignment Brief
How will my assignment be marked?
Your assignment will be marked according to the threshold expectations and the criteria on the following page.
You can use them to evaluate your own work and consider your grade before you submit.
Grading Domain
Clear focus on all elements of the task in a constructive and critical manner. 30% Weighting
70%+ (1st Class)
The task was set in a carefully structured manner showing attention to criticality and analysis. Discussions were controlled and well presented. No significant errors seen.
62-68% (2:1)
Had focused on most elements of the task set in a reasonably structured manner showing depth at times. There is evidence of a developing approach towards critical analysis.
52-58% (2:2)
Had focused in some depth on all elements of the task, however, both constructive and critical approaches required more discussion. Some errors seen.
42-48% (3rd Class) Threshold Standard
Had focused on some elements of the task with adequate depth. The work is generally descriptive and structured adequately.
35-38% (Fail)
Has focused on some elements of the task set in a descriptive but at times poorly structured way. There is no mentor verification form submitted with the main article. Emailed forms cannot be accepted. (35% =
maximum grade for this domain) 0-32% (Fail)
There was a lack of focus or direction with multiple aspects of the task being poorly completed.
The issues identified are all highly relevant and are analysed in an insightful and considered manner demonstrating significant skills of synthesis.
30% Weighting
The issues addressed are highly relevant and are analysed in a structured and considered manner. Clear skill of synthesis supports an insightful interpretation of the evidence presented. The issues addressed are relevant and are analysed in a structured and considered manner. Efforts to show insight and synthesis are more developed, however, improvements can be made. Some relevant issues are selected and comprehension of them is demonstrated. Efforts to show insight and synthesis are seen, however, there are errors. There is an adequate level of comprehension towards the material introduced. No significant skills of synthesis seen, however, efforts to interpret information are seen. Some relevant issues are selected but limited comprehension is demonstrated at times. There is an inadequate presentation of analysis and does not demonstrate effective synthesis. A poor approach to analysis is seen with little or no consideration for the issues presented.
Grading Domain
Compare, discuss and evaluate the concepts of empowerment, enablement and recovery utilising the theories of social prescribing to optimise the patient’s ability to manage their own long-term condition/s, as part of a wider safe and effective care plan. 20% Weighting
70%+ (1st Class)
Analysis and application of knowledge and theory base is clear, meaningful and has significance. Relevant evidence has also been analysed in a competent manner.
62-68% (2:1)
Analysis and application of the knowledge and theory base is broad and clearly relevant. Some relevant evidence had been analysed in a competent manner.
Shows a good Shows an adequate understanding with understanding of some analysis and some aspects of the application of key knowledge and theory aspects of the task. base. Analysis of relevant Attempts are seen to evidence is limited at look at the holistic times, however, does view of concepts present a holistic view required by this task. of the concepts required by this task. Errors a frequently seen.
35-38% (Fail)
A fragmented approach is seen which superficially covers the main task. Improvements across multiple aspects is needed.
0-32% (Fail)
An inadequate presentation of information with little or no understanding for the main concepts of this task.
Referencing is correct and follows the guidelines to consistently support and enhance the work.
10% Weighting
Referencing is correct, follows the guidelines given and consistently supports and enhances the work. No significant errors seen. Referencing is correct and supports and enhances the quality of the work. Few errors seen. An appropriate number of references are used and generally cited and used correctly. They are integrated well with some errors seen. An adequate number of references seen but could be integrated more effectively with fewer errors in presentation. An adequate number of references seen but could be integrated more effectively with fewer errors in presentation. An absence of / or low number of references are seen. There is a lack of awareness towards supporting the work.
Presentation and Written Expression
10% Weighting
Presentation is good throughout showing close attention to detail, understanding of the theory base and applied throughout. Written expressions are also good with no significant errors seen. The presentation is generally good, showing attention to detail, and written expression with a small number of errors seen. Relevant and contemporary evidence included. Presentation is acceptable by showing some attention to detail. Written expressions are generally clear with some errors seen. The presentation is broadly acceptable, but improvements should have been made. Some written expression errors seen throughout. Presentation does not support effective discussion or expression. Meaning could be clearer. Presentation is poor and does not demonstrate an understanding of the relevant knowledge, theory and evidence. Inaccuracies seen. An unacceptable number of written expression errors and problems seen.
Submission Deadline
Before 10am on:
01/08/2022 20 working days after deadline (L4, 5 and 7) 15 working days after deadline (L6) 10 working days after deadline (block delivery)
(Week Commencing)
Marks and Feedback
29/08/2022 (Week Commencing)
Unit title & code Key assignment details
Trauma Management in Paramedic Practice (PAR005-2)
Assignment number and title Assignment Two
Assignment type
Practical – OSCE (PR-OSCE)
Weighting of assignment 50%
Size or length of assessment 30 minutes
Unit learning outcomes 1. Demonstrate the following knowledge and understanding
• Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of trauma theories and principles within the context of promoting excellence in patient care.
2. Demonstrate the following skills and abilities
• Conduct effective assessment and management of a trauma patient and to propose clear and effective clinical decision-making in practice.
What am I required to do in this assignment?
Formative Assessment
• Assess and manage care of service users in a range of simulated scenarios. Feedback will be given verbally from peers and in written format from academics.
Summative Assessment
• Complete a simulated patient episode. The OSCE will include a discussion to establish the underpinning evidence-base supporting your decisions.
Additional Information:
• If a critical fail is trigger during the OSCE, the following will apply. In this instance of a critical fail, either 35% or a lower grade based on performance, will be recorded. You will have a second attempt after the exam board has confirmed your grade. Please see the OSCE sheet for more information on what constitutes a critical fail.
What do I need to do to pass? (Threshold Expectations from UIF)
• Prepare and submit/complete an appropriate assessment of a simulated trauma patient.
• Identify, select, and demonstrate an effective use of clinical pharmacology and equipment, in the support of your simulated patient.
• Demonstrate a safe, clear, and effective assessment and management of a trauma patient.
• Appraise and evaluate your approach and subsequent interventions and escalate the care of your patient in accordance with recognised JRCALC guidelines.
How do I produce high quality work that merits a good grade?
• The performance was safe with the required skill/s performed well with confidence and fluency. • The student's manner and behaviour were professional and promoted confidence. Patient/client dignity was maintained, and a range of relevant needs were met. • Initiated and maintained some good quality communication with strengths seen in terms of verbal and non-verbal skills. Was consistently responsive where required. • Conveyed through the rationale given a broad understanding of significant principles, knowledge and evidence linked to the activity.
How does this assignment relate to what we are doing in scheduled sessions?
The assignment will:
• develop your knowledge and skills in relation to assessment and care management for patients in critical and complex situations. • support the recognition and the potential that exists with the escalation towards criticality. • explore scene management and understand how crucial it is to minimise risk before casualties can be assessed, treated, and transported to hospital. • Discuss and rehearse rapid and effective clinical decision making and its essential role for the preservation of life. • Present a structured system-based approach to patient assessment to enable you to conduct a rapid assessment based and initiate life preserving treatment.
Assignment Brief
How will my assignment be marked?
Your assignment will be marked according to the threshold expectations and the criteria on the following page.
You can use them to evaluate your own work and consider your grade before you submit.
Threshold Domains
Prepare and submit/complete an appropriate assessment of a simulated trauma patient. 20% Weighting
70%+ (1st Class)
The skills, fluency, confidence and rationale were all clear during this patient episode. The assessment was safe.
Identify, select, and demonstrate an effective use of clinical pharmacology and equipment, in the support of your simulated patient.
20% Weighting
A confident display that combined both pharmacology and equipment to ensure rapid care and therapeutic goals were achieved. JRCALC used to support safe practice, but not relied on.
Demonstrate a safe, clear, and effective assessment and management of a trauma patient.
20% Weighting
A sound understanding and application of the trauma primary survey. Insight and appreciation towards assessment dynamics were clear. Clearly confident and fluent in the assessment.
62-68% (2:1)
The assessment was safe. Most of the skills performed were done so with confidence. There was some logic to the flow.
52-58% (2:2)
The assessment was appropriate and safe, however, lacked fluency at times. Confidence and execution can be improved.
A good understanding of pharmacology, outside of JRCALC. A proactive approach was seen that combine both pharmacology and equipment for a positive therapeutic outcome. JRCALC was used to support safe practice, but not relied on. A reasonable understanding of pharmacology was presented. Correct equipment was selected JRCALC was used All could be interlinked more effectively.
42-48% (3rd Class) Threshold Standard
The level presented was of a basic standard. The practice was safe; however, it was disjointed.
35-38% (Fail)
The assessment was fragmented and lacked focus or finesse. The approach required more insight and awareness to the options available.
The use/introduction of pharmacology was of a basic standard. The equipment used was correct, however, how it was applied could be improved. JRCALC was used The understanding of pharmacology was disjointed and lacked finesse and confidence. The use of equipment lacked familiarity and confidence. JRCALC was not always considered.
0-32% (Fail)
The assessment was poor, and the skills demonstrated fall below the expected standard. The practice can be considered unsafe.
There was a poor understanding of pharmacology. The use of equipment lacked insight or positive therapeutic action. JRCALC was not used.
A good trauma primary survey. The chief complaint(s) were identified and acted upon. The pace and direction of the assessment displayed reasonable confidence. A reasonably well completed trauma survey where findings were acted upon. Fluency and confidence can be improved. The trauma survey was used, however was disjointed. Improvements could be made regards effective assessments. Ongoing management was also disjointed, and errors were made. The trauma survey was fragmented in its use with some aspects overlooked. More care and confidence are required. The trauma survey was not distinguishable and lack purpose or intent. Ongoing management was ineffective.
Threshold Domains
Appraise and evaluate your approach and subsequent interventions and escalate the care of your patient in accordance with recognised JRCALC guidelines.
20% Weighting
A high standard of care was delivered through effective decision-making and an understanding of the chief complaint. Management of the case was fluent and delivered with confidence. Through an effective assessment a rapid appraisal was possible. Care was delivered in a timely manner. Overall management could be fine-tuned. The chief complaints were identified and options for differentials were included in your decision-making. Some fluency and confidence were seen. JRCALC was consulted (as appropriate) The chief complaints were noted as were the appropriate interventions. Fluency and execution require improvement.
JRCALC was consulted (as appropriate) The understanding of the presenting complaint(s) was fragmented and lacked confidence. There was minimal appreciation for escalating concerns.
JRCALC was intermittently used, however, could be more effectively used. There was no understanding of the chief complaint(s) and the subsequent actions lacked consideration and control. JRCALC was not consulted (as appropriate)
70%+ (1st Class) 62-68% (2:1)
Overall Performance
20% Weighting
The performance was safe with the required skill/s performed well with confidence and fluency. The performance was safe, and most skills were performed well, although confidence and fluency could be higher at times. The performance was generally safe but some skill/s lacked fluency and confidence in execution. The performance was generally safe, but the skill/s lacked fluency and confidence in execution. The performance was unsafe. Aspects of the skill/s required were not demonstrated at the appropriate level.
If a critical fail is triggered a grade of 35% or lower, depending on overall performance, will be applied. The performance was unsafe. The practice displayed lacked the required standard expected of this level.
52-58% (2:2) 42-48% (3rd Class) Threshold Standard 35-38% (Fail) 0-32% (Fail)
Submission Deadline
Before 10am on:
05/08/2022 20 working days after deadline (L4, 5 and 7) 15 working days after deadline (L6) 10 working days after deadline (block delivery)
Marks and Feedback
02/09/2022
Unit title & code Key assignment details
Assessment and Management of Long-Term Conditions (PAR001-2)
Assignment number and title Assignment Two
Assignment type
Practice Assessment Document (PR-PLAC)
Weighting of assignment 0%, Pass/Fail
Size or length of assessment Equivalent to 2500 words,
Unit learning outcomes 1. Demonstrate the following knowledge and understanding
• Demonstrate the knowledge of the impact of long-term conditions on patients and their carer’s and explore your role in promoting their recovery.
2. Demonstrate the following skills and abilities
• Evaluate and assess the appropriate needs of patients and their carer’s in the pre-hospital setting and devise plans for appropriate care and treatment.
What am I required to do in this assignment?
Formative Assessment:
• Your PAD will be audited at set points through the year where you will be expected to have achieved the following: o Semester One – 33% o Semester Two – 66% o Semester Three – All completed. • Where required, Personal Development Plans can be used to support your progress. • Feedback will occur via your PebblePad system
Summative Assessment:
• You will be continually assessed in practice by a Practice Educator (PEd.) on the criteria adapted from the Health and Care
Professions Council, Guidance on Conduct and Ethics for Students (2016).
• At the end of your placement year, your PEd. and Personal Academic Tutor (PAT) will meet with you to agree on your progress needs into your subsequent year, working towards your final year submission.
• While the placement documentation is a continuous document you are expected to underpin your progress by:
o Completing all summative assessment of elements of practice at minimal supervision level. o Identifying two service users to provide feedback on your practice. o Practicing in accordance with your level of study and ensure appropriate professional conduct.
• You will enter this information in your PebblePAD and submission will occur automatically after you have shared with your assessor and saved your progress.
• DO NOT ACCESS your PebblePad via ATLAS as your work will not be saved. Only use your PebblePad Dashboard.
What do I need to do to pass? (Threshold Expectations from UIF)
• Complete all elements of practice at the required standard of minimal supervision.
• Identify at least two service users to provide feedback on your practice including your own reflection.
• Apply in accordance with your level of study and ensure appropriate professional conduct in practice.
How do I produce high quality work that merits a good grade?
• This is a pass/fail assessment; therefore, the threshold expectations must be achieved.
How does this assignment relate to what we are doing in scheduled sessions?
• You will be able to apply the skills and theoretical knowledge acquired during lectures and practical skills sessions, linking theory to practice under the guidance of your allocated Practice Educator/s in placement. • By doing so you will be able to identify and develop your personal, professional knowledge and skills by evidencing each element through formative and summative assessments.
Assignment Brief
How will my assignment be marked?
Your assignment will be marked according to the threshold expectations and the criteria on the following page.
You can use them to evaluate your own work and consider your grade before you submit.
Grading Domains
Complete all elements of practice at the required standard as ‘Minimal Supervision’.
Identify at least two service-users to provide feedback and reflect on your practice.
Practice in accordance with and at the required standard and level of study required whilst ensuring appropriate acknowledgement to your professional conduct throughout.
Threshold Standard
Complete all elements of practice at the required minimum standard.
Identified at least two service-users to provide feedback and reflected on their practice.
Practice in accordance with and at the required standard and level of study required whilst ensuring appropriate acknowledgement to their professional conduct throughout. If a Personal Develop Plan is in place, it must not be restrictive to progression.
Marginal Fail
A few elements of practice were not completed at the required minimum standard.
Fail
Many elements of practice were not completed to the required minimum standard of assisted.
Less than two service users were identified to give feedback, or no reflection of your practice was given.
Your practice was deemed to be not fully in accordance with and at the required standard and level of study required whilst ensuring appropriate acknowledgement to your professional conduct throughout. Personal Development Plan in place, however, is restrictive to progression. No service user feedback was provided, and no reflection of your practice given.
Your practice was deemed to be not in accordance with and at the required standard and level of study required whilst ensuring appropriate acknowledgement to your professional conduct throughout. Personal Development Plan in place, PEd and PAT unwilling to allow the student to progress.
