50 minute read
Appendix Two – Assignment Briefs Semester 2
What am I required to do in this assignment?
Summative
• Critically analyse a case presentation from practice of a ‘critically unwell’ patient that has influenced your personal and professional development.
• (Your essay must be accompanied by written verification from your mentor that the topic has been selected by you from your practice experiences in agreement with your mentor).
Additional Guidance
• Identify a critically unwell case from practice that allows you to construct a convincing argument for the most appropriate paramedic intervention(s). o You should focus on 2 or 3 interventions and critically analyse your rationale for this case, this needs to be mapped against contemporary evidence-based practice. o Your discussions should interpret and validate against approved scope of practice. o As a key part of your writing, you should have a forward-looking perspective that synthesises your case against future practices and the profession’s direction.
• 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
Assignment is written using the following: • Font size - 12 • 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)
• Evaluate relevant contemporary evidence-based practice regarding acute clinical conditions.
• Reflect on the development of your paramedic practice and interventions available in managing a critically unwell patient, whilst considering the underpinning theories of Paramedic Science and evidence-based medicine.
• Demonstrate your understanding of the most appropriate paramedic interventions and treatment options with reference to contemporary academic literature and research.
How do I produce high quality work that merits a good grade?
• Clear focus on all elements of the task in a constructive and critical manner. • The issues identified are all highly relevant and are analysed in an insightful and considered manner demonstrating significant skills of synthesis. • A broad range of high-quality evidence and literature is utilised skillfully to support discussion and critical analysis. • Referencing is correct and follows the guidelines to consistently support and enhance the work.
How does this assignment relate to what we are doing in scheduled sessions?
• The aim of this unit is to develop your knowledge and skills in relation to the assessment and care management for patients with acute conditions. • Such conditions have the potential to become life threatening within a short period of time and therefore require prompt assessment and stabilisation. • A structured system-based approach to patient assessment will be adopted throughout the unit to enable you to differentiate between normal body function, deterioration and dysfunction.
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
Evaluate relevant contemporary evidencebased practice regarding acute clinical conditions.
30% Weighting
70%+ (1st Class)
The case presentation chosen is relevant, appropriate and clearly focuses on all elements of the task in a constructive, critical and reflective way to support and enhance contemporary paramedic practices.
62-68% (2:1)
The case chosen demonstrates and supports contemporary exploration of practice/s. The key elements and rationale for choosing the case have been presented and supported with appropriate literature. The evaluation of evidence is constructive.
52-58% (2:2)
The case chosen is relevant to current practice and provides sufficient scope of enquiry and evaluation. A rationale is provided for its identification and use; however, this could be more detailed and requires more depth.
42-48% (3rd Class) Threshold Standard
The case chosen has allowed for a review of contemporary theories to be explored., however, they have been superficial in quality. There has been a basic approach towards evaluation that does not fully explore the topic beyond a descriptive position.
35-38% (Fail)
Only some of the tasks have been addressed. Demonstration of evaluation is limited or poorly presented. The rationale for selecting the chosen case is inappropriate or limited in supporting study. 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 assignment brief and the selected theories to underpin / support evaluation has not been established. Multiple errors are seen with a poor focus.
Reflect on the development of your paramedic practice and interventions available in managing a critically unwell patient, whilst considering the underpinning theories of Paramedic Science and evidence-based medicine.
30% Weighting
A consistently high standard has been seen that validates the interventional enquiry of this work. Insight and effective interpretations have been introduced and explored with rigor. A scientific viewpoint for evidence-based medicine is seen as a common thread throughout. A good standard of work which has both reflected and considered the chosen practice interventions. There is good evidence of a reflective behaviour towards both practice and the underpinning science. The threshold expectations have been satisfied to a good standard, with some superficial aspects seen. There is evidence of reflection to explore the interventional focus against an evidence-base. A scientific viewpoint is being introduced. The threshold standards have been satisfied; however, the narrative is descriptive and often superficial. The use of evidence-based medicine is identified but could be better employed. The selected interventions are suitable; however, they are superficially explored. Had focused on some elements of the task set in an overly descriptive manner, and at times poorly structured way. There is limited evidence to demonstrate understanding and appreciation for both interventions and evidencebased medicine. Had not addressed the task sufficiently to meet the requirements of Level 6 Undergraduate study. There is a lack of both focus and organisation. The overall reflection is poorly constructed and lacks a framework of enquiry.
Demonstrate your understanding of the most appropriate paramedic interventions and treatment options with reference to contemporary academic literature and research.
20% Weighting
The evidence and literature selected has been presented to a high standard. Effective evaluation and recommendations are made that support the focus of this work. There is a clear appreciation of and for the evidence and literature chosen. Good relationships have been constructed to support paramedic interventional theory and practice. The literature chosen is contemporary and good attempts have been made to analyse and present this in a logical format. There is some correlation between theory and practice. There is some evidence of theories and underpinning approach to the task. Improved selection of evidence can be made. Understand of the appropriate interventions is superficial at times. The literature identified has not been integrated well and the discussion / analysis used to underpin practice have been poorly constructed. The understanding of the appropriate interventions is frequently superficial. There is a poor control of understanding towards appropriate paramedic interventions. There is an inadequate level of discussion, analysis or understanding of the chosen material.
Grading Domains
Use and Quality of Referencing 10% weighting
Presentation and Written expression 10% Weighting
70%+ (1st Class)
Referencing is correct and adheres fully to the Harvard guidelines, and consistently supports and enhances the quality of the work. No significant errors seen. Referencing is correct, consistently supporting and enhancing the quality of the work. Occasional errors seen. An appropriate number of references are used, generally cited correctly, and have been integrated. With few errors seen. A relevant number of references seen but they could be integrated more effectively with fewer errors in presentation. The overall quality and number of references incorporated / integrated is poor. There are errors noted throughout. Had failed to support the majority of the assignment with adequate references, with referencing errors seen throughout.
62-68% (2:1) 52-58% (2:2)
Presentation is excellent showing significant attention to detail. Written expression is also excellent with no significant errors seen. Presentation is good showing attention to detail. Written expression is also good with a very small number of errors seen. Presentation is generally good showing some attention to detail. Written expression is generally clear with some errors seen. Presentation is broadly acceptable, but improvements could have been made. Written expression lacks clarity and type errors were seen. Presentation is poorly presented, and improvements should have been made. Meaning is generally clear but does not always get to the point. Frequent errors seen. Presentation is generally poor, requiring much more care. An unacceptable number of written expression errors and problems.
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:
04/03/2022 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
Transition to Paramedic Practice for Paramedics (PAR002-3)
Assignment number and title Assignment 1
Assignment type
Coursework – reflective writing (CW-RW)
Weighting of assignment 50%
Size or length of assessment 2500 words (+10% allowance)
Unit learning outcomes 1. Demonstrate the following knowledge and understanding
• Critically reflect on and present your personal achievements and development as a paramedic fit for employment and prepared for future learning
2. Demonstrate the following skills and abilities
• Contribute to the learning and development of colleagues and juniors through effective role modelling and structured teaching
What am I required to do in this assignment?
Summative Assessment
• Construct your professional portfolio, in line with the HCPC Standards of Continuing Professional Development
Additional Guidance:
• Your assignment should make use of a report format using sectional headings and must have a contents page. All headings and subheadings are included in your word count, however, your contents page is not.
• All evidence used to support your work must be included as Appendices (not included in your overall word count).
• Your assignment should be split as follows:
o An introduction that includes a summary of your Practice History (500 words) o An in-depth statement detailing how you have met the HCPC Standards for CPD (1500 words), o A reflective account and development plan exploring your plan for learning beyond registration (500 words)
• Care should be taken to ensure you accurately and effectively reference your work.
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)
• Identify and reflect on achievements and challenges you have faced in developing as a paramedic, acknowledging the limits of your competence and acting accordingly.
• Articulate how clinical supervision and preceptorship in healthcare can support professional development and promote safe practice.
• Construct a personal development plan for learning beyond registration.
How do I produce high quality work that merits a good grade?
• Had focused clearly on all elements of the task in a thoughtful and constructively critical manner. • The issues are all highly relevant and are analysed in an insightful and considered manner demonstrating significant skills of synthesis. • Referencing is correct. It follows the guidelines given to the letter and consistently supports and enhances the work. • Presentation is excellent showing significant attention to detail. Written expression is also excellent with no significant errors seen. • Shows a broad and critical understanding of the knowledge and theory base. Also demonstrates significant levels of application and synthesis regarding the evidence analysed.
How does this assignment relate to what we are doing in scheduled sessions?
The assignment will:
• Assist you in making the transition from student to registered paramedic practitioner. • Assist you in developing skills and strategies for facilitating learning for service users, carers and colleagues, reinforcing your role in influencing others. • Explore support systems for the paramedic and discuss expectations of the lifelong learner and future professional development. • Give you opportunities to prepare for employment as a paramedic by developing a CV.
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 Domain
Identify and reflect on achievements and challenges you have faced in developing as a paramedic, acknowledging the limits of your competence and acting accordingly.
30% Weighting
Articulate how clinical supervision and preceptorship in healthcare can support professional development and promote safe practice.
30% Weighting
Construct a personal development plan for learning beyond registration.
20% Weighting
70%+ (1st Class)
The presentation includes excellent reflection on the achievements and challenges faced when developing as a paramedic. Excellently acknowledges the limits of their competence and how they acted accordingly.
Has a strong understanding of the HCPC Standards for CPD.
Articulates the investigation and analysis of how clinical supervision and preceptorship in healthcare can support professional development and promote safe practice.
Constructs a personal development plan that includes an excellent reflection of their personal development. Justifies what steps they need to progress beyond registration. Constructs a personal development plan that includes a good reflection of their personal development. Appraises what steps they need to progress beyond registration. Constructs a personal development plan that includes sound reflection of their personal development. Classifies what they need to progress beyond registration. Constructs a personal development plan that includes an adequate reflection of their personal development. Lists what steps they need to progress beyond registration. Constructs a personal development plan that includes an inadequate reflection of their personal development. Has little insight into what steps they need to progress beyond registration. Constructs a personal development plan that does not include reflection of their personal development. Offers no insight into what steps they need to progress beyond registration.
62-68% (2:1)
The presentation includes good reflection on the achievements and challenges faced when developing as a paramedic. Very good acknowledgement of the limits of their competence and how they acted accordingly. Has Generally clear understanding of the HCPC Standards for CPD.
Evaluates how clinical supervision and preceptorship in healthcare can support professional development and promote safe practice.
52-58% (2:2)
The presentation includes sound reflection on the achievements and challenges faced when developing as a paramedic. Sound acknowledgement of the limits of their competence and how they acted accordingly. Has a good understanding of the HCPC Standards for CPD.
42-48% (3rd Class) Threshold Standard
The presentation includes adequate reflection on the achievements and challenges faced when developing as a paramedic. Adequate acknowledgement of the limits of their competence and how they acted accordingly. Has an adequate understanding of the HCPC Standards for CPD.
Explores how clinical supervision and preceptorship in healthcare can support professional development and promote safe practice. Describes how clinical supervision and preceptorship in healthcare can support professional development and promote safe practice.
35-38% (Fail)
The presentation includes inadequate reflection on the achievements and challenges faced when developing as a paramedic, poorly acknowledging the limits of their competence, and acting accordingly.
Has a barely adequate understanding of the HCPC Standards for COD.
0-32% (Fail)
The presentation lists achievements and challenges faced when developing as a paramedic, and rarely acknowledges the limits of their competence and how they acted accordingly. A poor understanding of the HCPC Standards for CPD.
Offers some comment on how clinical supervision and preceptorship in healthcare can support professional development and promote safe practice. Does not consider how clinical supervision and preceptorship in healthcare can support professional development and promote safe practice.
Grade Domain
Communication and expression
10% Weighting
Use of references
10% Weighting
70%+ (1st Class)
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
62-68% (2:1)
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
52-58% (2:2)
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
42-48% (3rd Class)
Threshold Standard
Expression and/or structure demonstrate basic understanding of the argument. Grammar and spelling adequately meet professional standards
35-38% (Fail)
Expression and/or structure make the argument difficult to access. Grammar and spelling are below acceptable professional standards
0-32% (Fail)
Expression and/or structure make the argument incoherent. Grammar and spelling are significantly below acceptable professional standards
Submission Deadline
Before 10am on:
25/03/2022 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
15/04/2022
Unit title & code Key assignment details
Minor Illnesses and Injuries (PAR003-3)
Assignment number and title Assignment One
Assignment type
Presentation - VIVA (PR-VIVA)
Weighting of assignment 100%
Size or length of assessment Equivalent to 2500 words,
Unit learning outcomes 1. Demonstrate the following knowledge and understanding
• Critically review the assessment and decision-making process around minor injuries and illness
2. Demonstrate the following skills and abilities
• Apply effective clinical practice and analyse assessment processes in the context of contemporary evidence
What am I required to do in this assignment?
Formative
• Peer presentations – micro presentations in-class to develop confidence in presenting your clinical material. Lecturer feedback will be provided.
Summative
• Create a 30-minute presentation to a body of peers and teaching staff. Your individual presentation must explore a minor illness or injury. (30-minute presentation, including a 10-minute discussion for questions, equiv. 2500 words, 100%).
Additional Information
• You will select a minor injury or illness that you have either encountered in practice, or you can select a commonly encountered minor illness or injury that you have an interest in.
• You will prepare a 20-minute presentation on your chosen subject and a further 10 mins of questions by the panel.
• Your presentation may include PowerPoint, flipchart, and handouts.
• You should ensure that you have a comprehensive knowledge of your chosen subject and be able to discuss at depth the causes, presentation, potential complications, treatment, and ongoing management of the condition.
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 a presentation relevant to topic
• Identify and analyse a case review that evaluates contemporary evidence-based literature regarding a minor illness or injury.
• Your presentation should focus on the ‘underpinning theories of Paramedic Science and explore the challenges associated with treatment and referral options in practice.
• A 10-minute discussion period is to be included as part of your presentation.
How do I produce high quality work that merits a good grade?
• Had focused clearly on all elements of the task in a thoughtful and constructively critical manner. • The issues are all highly relevant and are analysed in an insightful and considered manner demonstrating significant skills of synthesis. • The presentation skills used were eloquent and engaged the audience in a manner that facilitated significant learning. The teaching/ presentation aids utilised were innovative and of high quality. • Referencing is correct. It follows the guidelines given to the letter and consistently supports and enhances the work. • A broad range of high-quality literature is utilised skillfully demonstrating significant skills of critical analysis.
How does this assignment relate to what we are doing in scheduled sessions?
The assignment will:
• enable you to manage people with minor illnesses and injuries in a range of settings thus avoiding unnecessary and inappropriate use of hospital services. • focus on the management of minor illness and injury by paramedics. • Support you in the development of assessment skills to differentiate minor and potentially major illnesses or injuries. Sorting these out and managing them appropriately is challenging, but essential for modern-day health care where fast access to primary health care and appropriate use of resources is key.
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 Domain
70%+ (1st Class) 62-68% (2:1) 52-58% (2:2) 42-48% (3rd Class) Threshold Standard 35-38% (Fail) 0-32% (Fail)
Develop a presentation relevant to topic
20% Weighting
The presentation skills used were eloquent and engaged the audience in a manner that facilitated significant learning. The teaching/ presentation aids utilised were innovative and of high quality. The presentation skills used were of high quality and engaged the audience in a manner that clearly supported learning. The facilitation/ presentation aids utilised were helpful and of high quality. The presentation skills used were of good quality and engaged the audience in a manner that facilitated learning. The facilitation/ presentation aids utilised were helpful and of good quality. The presentation skills used were acceptable and began to engage the audience in a manner that facilitated learning. The facilitation/ presentation aids utilised were acceptable, enhancements could be made. The presentation skills used were poor in terms of quality and rarely engaged the audience in a manner that helped learning. The facilitation/ presentation aids utilised were poor and should have been enhanced further. The presentation skills used were of poor quality and did not engage the audience. Very little could be learnt. The facilitation/ presentation aids utilised were very poor and unclear.
Identify and analyse a case review that evaluates contemporary evidence-based literature regarding a minor illness or injury.
30% Weighting
Had focused clearly on all elements of the task in a thoughtful and constructively critical manner. Had focused on key elements of the task in a generally thoughtful and constructively critical manner. Had focused on the main elements of the task set in a reasonably structured manner with some evidence of depth. Had focused on some elements of the task set in a reasonably structured manner but lacked depth at times. Had focused on one or two elements of the task which was delivered in a poorly structured manner and was lacking in depth. Had not focused on the elements of the task and lacked any structure. It was very descriptive and lacked depth.
Your presentation should focus on the ‘underpinning theories of Paramedic Science and explore the challenges associated with treatment and referral options in practice. The issues are all highly relevant and are analysed in an insightful and considered manner demonstrating significant skills of synthesis. A broad range of relevant issues are analysed in a considered manner demonstrating skills of synthesis. A range of relevant issues are analysed demonstrating good skills of analysis. The relevance and analysis of selected issues is at times superficial. Limited comprehension is demonstrated on some. The relevance and analysis of selected issues is at times superficial. Limited comprehension is demonstrated on some. The relevance and analysis of selected issues is at times superficial. Limited comprehension is demonstrated on some.
30% Weighting
Grade Domain
70%+ (1st Class) 62-68% (2:1) 52-58% (2:2) 42-48% (3rd Class) Threshold Standard 35-38% (Fail) 0-32% (Fail)
Use of supporting literature 10% Weighting
Use and quality of referencing (text and final reference list)
10% Weighting
A broad range of highquality literature is utilised skillfully demonstrating significant skills of critical analysis. Relevant and highquality supporting literature is included and there is evidence of critical analysis of this.
Referencing is correct. It follows the guidelines given to the letter and consistently supports and enhances the work. Referencing is correct, consistently supporting and enhancing the quality of the work. Few errors seen. Relevant supporting literature is included and there is evidence of critical analysis of this although that analysis could be improved in places. Some relevant supporting literature is included but this lacks breadth and quality in terms of its analysis.
An appropriate number of references are used and generally cited correctly and integrated well with few errors seen. A relevant number of references seen but they could be integrated more effectively with fewer errors in presentation Some supporting literature is included but this lacks relevance, breadth and quality in terms of its analysis.
A very small number of relevant references seen. They could have been integrated more effectively. There were several errors in citation and syntax. Some supporting literature is included but this lacks relevance, breadth and quality. Literature was from superficial public websites
The references were superficial and irrelevant. There were not integrated effectively and rarely supported the work. Referencing and citation did not follow the guidelines for presentation
Submission Deadline
Before 10am on:
27/05/2022 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
Transition to Professional Practice for Paramedics (PAR002-3)
Assignment number and title Assessment 2
Assignment type
Practical Other (PR-OT) Third person writing style
Weighting of assignment 50%
Size or length of assessment 2500 words (+10% allowance)
Unit learning outcomes 1. Demonstrate the following knowledge and understanding
• Critically reflect on and present your personal achievements and development as a paramedic fit for employment and prepared for future learning
2. Demonstrate the following skills and abilities
• Contribute to the learning and development of colleagues and juniors through effective role modelling and structured teaching
What am I required to do in this assignment?
Summative Assessment
• Compile an evidenced based teaching plan for teaching an aspect of knowledge or a skill to a junior colleague. Support the plan with an evidence-based rationale for the content of the teaching session and for your proposed approach to facilitating learning.
Additional Guidance:
• The teaching session should be: o aimed at a current 3rd year student on the BSc Paramedic degree program (Level 6 Study) who will teach. o can be either a theoretical or practical aspect of the program but must be an area or skill that is completed in the 1st year and used in practice.
• The assignment should be written in two parts:
o Firstly, written as a plan detailing the components of the session and how this should run. o Secondly, the components of the session should be supported by literature and evidence for your teaching session.
• A Scheme of Work is included in your BREO shell and should be completed and attached to your work as an Appendix. Ensure you clearly reference elements of your Scheme of Work in your main body of text.
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)
• Evaluate educational strategies for supporting teaching and learning in the practice setting.
• Propose a short peer-assisted learning session to teach junior colleague(s). This should include a Scheme of Work/Session Plan.
• Provide an evidence-based rationale for the content of the session and for the approach planned to facilitate learning.
How do I produce high quality work that merits a good grade?
• Had focused clearly on all elements of the task in a thoughtful and constructively critical manner. • The issues are all highly relevant and are analysed in an insightful and considered manner demonstrating significant skills of synthesis. • Referencing is correct. It follows the guidelines given to the letter and consistently supports and enhances the work. • Presentation is excellent showing significant attention to detail. Written expression is also excellent with no significant errors seen. • Shows a broad and critical understanding of the knowledge and theory base. Also demonstrates significant levels of application and synthesis regarding the evidence analysed.
How does this assignment relate to what we are doing in scheduled sessions?
The assignment will:
• Assist you in making the transition from student to registered paramedic practitioner. • Assist you in developing skills and strategies for facilitating learning for service users, carers and colleagues, reinforcing your role in influencing others. • Explore support systems for the paramedic and discuss expectations of the lifelong learner and future professional development. • Give you opportunities to prepare for employment as a paramedic by developing a CV.
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 Domain
70%+ (1st Class) 62-68% (2:1) 52-58% (2:2) 42-48% (3rd) Threshold Standard 35-38% (Fail) 0-32% (Fail)
Evaluate educational strategies for supporting teaching and learning in the practice setting.
30% Weighting
Had focused clearly on all elements of the task in a thoughtful and constructively critical manner. Had focused on key elements of the task in a generally thoughtful and constructively critical manner. Had focused on the main elements of the task set in a reasonably structured manner with some evidence of depth. Had focused on some elements of the task set in a reasonably structured manner but lacked depth at times.
Propose a short peerassisted learning session to teach junior colleague(s). This should include a Scheme of Work/Session Plan.
20% Weighting
The issues are all highly relevant and are analysed in an insightful and considered manner demonstrating significant skills of synthesis. The Scheme of Work is of a high quality and easily maps to the needs of the audience. A broad range of relevant issues are analysed in a considered manner demonstrating skills of synthesis. The Scheme of Work is included and shows some innovation to the chosen topic. A range of relevant issues are analysed demonstrating good skills of analysis. The Scheme of Work is included and shows some attention to detail. The relevance and analysis of selected issues is at times superficial. Limited comprehension is demonstrated on some. The Scheme of Work is included, however, is superficial regards content. Had focused on some elements of the task set in a poorly structured manner and lacked depth Had focused on only one element of the task set in a poorly structured manner and lacked depth
The relevance and analysis of selected issues is at superficial. Limited comprehension is demonstrated. The Scheme of Work is included; however, the plan is not logical, or it lacks content. The relevance and analysis of selected issues is at superficial. Limited comprehension is demonstrated on all aspects of the work. No Scheme of Work included, or where it has, the quality is far below a Level 6 standard.
Provide an evidencebased rationale for the content of the session and for the approach planned to facilitate learning.
30% Weighting
Shows a broad and critical understanding of the knowledge and theory base. Also demonstrates significant levels of application and synthesis regarding the evidence analysed. Shows a critical understanding of the knowledge and theory base. Demonstrates good skills of application and synthesis regarding the evidence analysed. Shows a good understanding of the knowledge and theory base. Demonstrates sound skills of application and analysis regarding the evidence analysed. Shows an understanding and application of some relevant aspects of the knowledge and theory base. Some skills of analysis demonstrated regarding the rather limited evidence analysed. Shows little understanding and application of some aspects of the knowledge and theory base. Poor skills of analysis demonstrated regarding the rather limited evidence analysed. Shows no understanding and application of all aspects of the knowledge and theory base. Lacks skills of analysis demonstrated regarding the rather limited evidence analysed.
Grade Domain
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 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
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:
04/07/2022 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
25/07/2022 Week Commencing
Unit title & code Key assignment details
The Critically Unwell Patient (PAR001-3)
Assignment number and title Assignment Two
Assignment type
Observed Structured Clinical Exam (PR-OSCE)
Weighting of assignment 50%
Size or length of assessment Equivalent to 2500 Words (30 minutes)
Unit learning outcomes 1. Demonstrate the following knowledge and understanding
• Reflect upon paramedic practice in life threatening situations and critically analyse the factors that influence the effective management of these situations.
2. Demonstrate the following skills and abilities
• Manage patients effectively within clinical practice and in simulation to the level expected of the Paramedic as defined by the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC)
What am I required to do in this assignment?
Summative Assessment
• Complete a simulated cardiac arrest scenario, including a discussion, to support your Advanced Life Support (ALS) approach.
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)
• Successfully discharge the Advanced Life Support algorithm in the care of a simulated cardiac arrest of either an adult or paediatric patient.
• Demonstrate a comprehensive understanding of evidence-based practice (EBP) to support your care decisions.
• Identify a leadership approach in the management of your simulated scenario.
• Provide a structured but concise assessment summary of a patient with an acute condition supported by an evidenced based rationale for the assessment.
• Evaluate assessment outcomes, propose a differential diagnosis and make judgements regarding the most likely diagnosis based on available evidence.
• Formulate a plan to manage the presenting acute condition including relevant pharmacology.
How do I produce high quality work that merits a good grade?
• Consistently conveyed through the rationale given, a comprehensive, thorough and in-depth understanding of the principles, knowledge and evidence linked to the activity. The assessment was completed to a high standard with excellent appreciation for theory to practice challenges. • Expertly initiated and maintained communication throughout. Was both responsive and supportive, utilising excellent interpersonal skills throughout. The required skill/s were expertly and confidently performed / delivered. • A confident, purposeful and measurable performance that showed, to a high standard, an effective and dynamic appreciation of theory to practice. The management was safe, prompt, and effective. • A very confident assessment which considered all aspects of care and decision-making to deliver a timely and effective care plan.
Pharmacology was accurate and effective where the JRCALC was used as a tool to support existing knowledge for safe practice.
How does this assignment relate to what we are doing in scheduled sessions?
• This unit aims to develop your knowledge and skills in relation to assessment and care management for patients with acute conditions. • Such conditions have the potential to become life threatening within a short period of time and therefore requires prompt assessment, interventions and stabilisation. • A structured system-based approach to patient assessment, intervention/s, management and stabilisation will be adopted throughout the unit to enable you to differentiate between normal body function and dysfunction.
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
Successfully discharge the Advanced Life Support algorithm in the care of a simulated cardiac arrest of either an adult or paediatric patient.
30% Weighting
70%+ (1st Class)
The performance was very confident, efficient and safe. The required skill/s were expertly and confidently performed / delivered.
62-68% (2:1)
The performance was safe. The majority of the skill/s required were performed consistently with reasonable confidence that demonstrated fluency.
52-58% (2:2)
The performance was considered appropriate and safe. However, some skill/s was lacking in confidence and fluency, requiring improvement.
Demonstrate a comprehensive understanding of evidence-based practice (EBP) / algorithm to support interventions and care decisions.
15% Weighting
Comprehensively conveyed / demonstrated to support underpinning rationale. In-depth understanding of the underlying principles and evidence-based practices were consistently linked to the activity. The student's manner and behaviour were consistent in generating confidence with close attention to professional standards and the needs of the patient. The student's manner and behaviour were professional and engendered some confidence. Patient/client dignity was maintained, and key relevant needs were met.
42-48% (3rd Class) Threshold Standard
The performance was considered safe. However, the skills performed were inconsistent and were limited in confidence and fluency.
The student's manner and behaviour were generally professional and promoted patient/client dignity. The performance generated confidence beyond a minimum standard. Key patient/client needs were met.
35-38% (Fail)
The performance was considered unsafe. Some skill/s were performed with minimal confidence and fluency to fully demonstrate understanding.
If a critical fail is triggered a grade of 35% or lower, depending on overall performance, will be applied.
The student's manner and behaviour did not generate sufficient confidence. Some elements were broadly professional and generally maintained patient/ client dignity but only to a minimum standard.
0-32% (Fail)
The overall performance was considered unsafe. The majority of the skills required were not demonstrated at an appropriate level or expected standard.
Confidence was below the required standard for Level 6 undergraduate study. The decisions had no clear correlation to evidence-based practice.
Identify a leadership approach in the management of your simulated scenario.
15% Weighting
Expertly initiated and maintained communication throughout. Was both responsive and supportive, utilising excellent Competently initiated and maintained good communication. Was both responsive and supportive, utilising good and varied interpersonal skills throughout. Initiated and maintained some good communication with some strengths seen in terms of verbal and non-verbal skills utilised. Initiated and maintained some useful communication but was limited in some aspects of the verbal and non-verbal skills utilised. Began to achieve some effective communication but this was limited in both the variety and depth of the interpersonal skills utilised. Poor communication and interpersonal skills were demonstrated. Was not responsive to any communication cues.
Grade Domains
70%+ (1st Class)
interpersonal skills throughout. Was responsive where required Was generally responsive where required. Was not responsive to some communication cues.
Provide a structured but concise assessment summary of a patient with an acute condition supported by an evidenced based rationale for the assessment.
15% Weighting
Consistently conveyed through the rationale given, a comprehensive, thorough and in-depth understanding of the principles, knowledge and evidence linked to the activity. The assessment was completed to a high standard with excellent appreciation for theory to practice challenges. Conveyed through the rationale given a broad and in-depth understanding of the principles, knowledge and evidence linked to the activity. The assessment was safely executed with aspects of competent practice. Conveyed through the rationale given a good and generally broad understanding of significant principles, knowledge and evidence linked to the activity. The assessment was safe, with aspects of good practice. Some relevant rationale was identified and was broadly accurate in terms of the knowledge and principles expected. A safe assessment was completed; however, its concise approach can be improved. Some relevant rationale was identified but was only superficially linked to the knowledge and principles expected at this level. The assessment was fragmented and had aspects of poor structure. The rationale provided was either was effectively linked. The assessment was not timely and lacked structure.
Evaluate assessment outcomes, propose a differential diagnosis and make judgements regarding the most likely diagnosis based on available evidence.
15% Weighting
A confident, purposeful and measurable performance that showed, to a high standard, an effective and dynamic appreciation of theory to practice. The management was safe, prompt, and effective. A good and purposeful assessment that was reactive to the information provided in a timely manner. Actions were confidently delivered. The management was safe and very clear. A good assessment which considered and managed the information presented. There was a good level of underpinning knowledge which was seen to inform practice; however, some time management could be improved. The management was safe and clear. An adequate decisionmaking display which considers diagnostic differences. The underpinning evidence was superficial, however, did satisfy to an acceptable standard. The management was safe. An inadequate decision-making display which considers some diagnostic difference. The underpinning knowledge was poor and at an unacceptable standard The management was unsafe in some areas. Poor decision making which did not consider diagnostic differences. The underpinning evidence was lacking and of an unacceptable standard. The management was unsafe.
Grade Domains
Formulate a plan to manage the presenting acute condition including relevant pharmacology.
10% Weighting
A very confident assessment which considered all aspects of care and decisionmaking to deliver a timely and effective care plan. Pharmacology was accurate and effective. JRCALC was as a tool to support existing knowledge for safe practice. A broad and effective awareness and management focus which was reactive to the information provided. Pharmacology was to a confident standard with a few minor errors. JRCALC was utilised to support efficient practice. A good management which showed a general awareness of safe management for the presenting condition. Pharmacology shows a good level of understanding; however, improvements could be made. JRCALC was used consistently. A safe management, however, was superficial in aspects of care delivery. The pharmacological understanding was at a safe, yet basic standard. JRCALC used appropriately. Poor management of the presenting acute condition. Poor understanding of relevant pharmacology. JRCALC used at times. Unable to formulate a plan to manage the presenting acute condition. Unacceptable understanding of relevant pharmacology that was unsafe. JRCALC not used effectively.
Submission Deadline
Before 10am on:
15/07/2022 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
05/08/2022
Unit title & code Key assignment details
Quality and Safety in Paramedic Practice (PAR004-3)
Assignment number and title Assignment One
Assignment type
PR – Project
Weighting of assignment 100%
Size or length of assessment 4000 words (+10% allowance)
Unit learning outcomes 1. Demonstrate the following knowledge and understanding
• Conceptual understanding of the local service provisions with regard to quality and patient safety and identify an aspect of that service that requires improvement.
2. Demonstrate the following skills and abilities
• Critically evaluate service improvement initiatives in order to make recommendations for best practice.
What am I required to do in this assignment?
Formative Assessment
• Week 20 – Provide individual briefings that outline your chosen dissertation topic and your approaches to inquiry. Lecturer feedback will be provided.
Summative Assessment
• A case review, exploring an aspect of local service provision and critically analyse the relationships of quality, safety, and care delivery, identifying and recommending evidence-based practice (EBP) improvements.
(Your project must be accompanied by written verification from your workplace mentor or manager that discussions and agreement have taken place to identify the area of development discussed in this assignment).
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.
Additional Information:
• Your case review should identify a local service provision that you encounter while attending placement.
• You must provide clear discussions on the following: Quality Improvement mechanism Safety Care delivery • There should be a clear association, in your work, with/for evidence-based practice (EBP).
• A literature review must be included as part of your body of work, where you must include your search methodology. When deciding on the approach to your case review, you should consider existing literature: o Qualitative, o Quantitative, o Cross-sectional, or o Systematic review. • Your verification form must be included as an appendix.
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:
• Writing your Literature Review: https://lrweb.beds.ac.uk/media/0nbb1ugm/dissertation-literature-review.docx
• Dissertation Systematic Literature Review Methodology https://lrweb.beds.ac.uk/media/0nbb1ugm/dissertationliterature-review.docx
• Case Study (StudyHub guide) https://lrweb.beds.ac.uk/media/222mr2fv/case-studies.docx (While you are being asked to write a Case Review, not a Case study, by using a combination of these links you will begin to appreciate the combined focus required in your writing).
• Other common resources: 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)
• Identify a specific aspect of service provision that requires improvement and explore the feasibility of this with your practice educator.
• Conduct a critical review of relevant evidence supporting the focus related to the paramedic environment.
• Apply a change management process that considers the optimisation of quality, safety, and care delivery.
How do I produce high quality work that merits a good grade?
You should:
• Deliver a consistent and insightful article that demonstrates your critical appreciation for both the topic and the process. • Present significant and critically evaluative skills that explore and expand the contemporary evidence you select. • Ensure your work is accurately and effectively cited and referenced. • Validate through effective academic discussion your theory to practice interpretations, justifying the positions you establish.
How does this assignment relate to what we are doing in scheduled sessions?
The assignment will:
• introduce and expose you to Service Improvements in health care, quality, and patient safety. • enable you to analyse and suggest improvements to practice that enhance quality and where appropriate patient safety within a specific area of health care practice. • enable to you to engage in process and recognise a distinguishing feature of the graduate paramedic; the ability to critically analyse the existing evidence for current practice and formulate views and judgements about how the quality of future practice might be developed and evaluated. Graduate paramedics, through such processes, can be active participants in service developments that are important to the quality improvement agenda in health care.
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
Identify a specific aspect of service provision that requires improvement and explore the feasibility of this with your practice educator. 20% Weighting
70%+ (1st Class)
A highly relevant topic with insight, consistency, and a broad critical understanding. There are significant applications of service improvement that enhances the work.
62-68% (2:1)
The selected focus is clear and contemporary, with a strong rationale for quality, safety, and care delivery. Analysis is seen with a service improvement appreciation.
52-58% (2:2)
The chosen service provision is identified well. A suitable rationale, showing a concern for analysis of quality, safety, and care delivery is seen, however, improvements can be made.
42-48% (3rd Class) Threshold Standard
The chosen service provision is adequate; rationale for selection is provided, however, is superficially explored. Aspects of analysis are seen. There is structure but lacks depth at times.
35-38% (Fail)
The identification and subsequent rationale are inadequate in both depth and theory. 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)
Had failed to identify, apply, and analyse an aspect of service provision in a manner consistent with that expected of Level 6 undergraduate study.
Conduct a critical review of relevant evidence supporting the focus related to the paramedic environment.
25% Weighting
A broad and critical understanding of both knowledge and theory base. Demonstrates significant evaluation and interpretation skills regarding the evidence analysed. Shows a critical understanding of the material introduced. The discussions employed are consistent and demonstrate a propositional lens to practice solutions, regarding the evidence analysed. Focus is seen showing a good understanding of the selected service provision. There is evidence of a critical review, however, lacks consistency and control at times. Understanding and application of relevant evidence is seen across the theory-base. There are some analytical skills observed regarding the limited evidence presented. Focus and integration can be improved. The evidence presented is descriptive and often lacks control and scrutiny. Key issues are superficially presented leading to a generalization of the relationship to practice. Has failed to use or include the evidence effectively. There is no focus or appreciation for quality, safety, or care delivery in practice.
Apply a change management process that considers the optimisation of The focus has been consistent and measurable. The validating approach to change Focus on key aspects of change management is seen with investigative links to practice. A good range of improvement scrutiny is seen, with some good skills of analysis. A change management model has been selected and adequately The use of change management is vague and lacks focus. Minimal attention is given to quality, Has failed to include sufficient discussions of change management processes, expected
Grading Domain
quality, safety, and care delivery. (25% Weighting
Use of Evidence and References 15% Weighting
Issue Handling and Depth of Discussion 15% Weighting
70%+ (1st Class)
management shows an excellent understanding of optimizing practice. Evidence of a modifying behaviour is seen, demonstrating skills of synthesis. The discussions are reasonably structured with some depth. embedded into the discussions. Key issues are identified with some evidence of analysis safety, or care delivery optimisation. for Level 6 undergraduate study.
The evidence is contemporary and effectively supports the ongoing direction of work. Referencing is correct. It follows the guidelines given to the letter and consistently supports and enhances the work. The evidence is generally well chosen; however, improvements could be made. Referencing is correct, consistently supporting and enhancing the quality of the work. Few errors seen. The evidence selected is generally good, however, how it is integrated requires refinement. An appropriate number of references are used and generally cited correctly and integrated well with few errors seen. Evidence is included, however, how the integration demonstrates limited comprehension. A relevant number of references seen but they could be integrated more effectively with fewer errors in presentation. Evidence is weak or not sufficiently contemporary. An inadequate number of references are seen with poor integration. There are errors seen throughout. The evidence employed is either missing or poorly selected in the supporting of both the topic and/or direction. Had failed to support the assignment with adequate references and referencing errors are seen throughout.
The issues are all highly relevant and analysed in an insightful and considered manner demonstrating significant skills of synthesis A broad range of relevant issues are analysed in a considered manner demonstrating skills of synthesis. A range of relevant issues are analysed demonstrating good skills of analysis. Had focused on some elements of the task set in a reasonably structured manner but lacked depth at times. Had failed to address some of the tasks and was poorly structured. Discussions were descriptive in nature and lacks depth. Had failed to address the task in a manner consistent with that expected at undergraduate level study.
62-68% (2:1) 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
26/08/2022
Unit title & code Key assignment details
Minor Illnesses and Injuries (PAR003-3)
Assignment number and title Assignment Two
Assignment type
Placement 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
• Critically review the assessment and decision-making process around minor injuries and illness
2. Demonstrate the following skills and abilities
• Apply effective clinical practice and analyse assessment processes in the context of contemporary evidence
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).
• Towards the end of your placement year, your PEd. and Personal Academic Tutor (PAT) will meet with you to agree on your progress needs 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 elements of practice at independent level. o Identifying 2 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)
How do I produce high quality work that merits a good grade?
• This is a pass/fail assessment and so 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 knowledge you have gained during lectures and practical sessions to then apply to practice under the watchful guidance of an experienced Practice Educator. • By doing this you will be able to develop your personal professional knowledge by bridging the gap between theory to practice.
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
Complete all elements of practice at the required standard as independent
Threshold Standard
Complete all elements of practice at the required standard as independent.
Identify at least two service-users to provide feedback and reflect on your practice. Identified at least two service-users to provide feedback and reflected on their practice.
Marginal Fail
Not all elements of practice at the required standard as independent were completed.
Less than two service users were identified to give feedback, or no reflection of your practice was given.
Practice in accordance with and at the required standard and level of study required whilst ensuring appropriate acknowledgement to your professional conduct throughout. 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 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
Fail
No elements of practice were completed to the required standard of independent.
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.
