Individual assignment (60%)
Assignment description:
1. Discuss the challenge or problem.
2. Provide details of the process of designing and implementing the policy
What actors/stakeholders will be involved in agenda setting, policy formulation,
implementation and if necessary, in evaluating the policy
Why have you selected these actors
(Consider the power/influence and role of these actors and stakeholders in the
country and internationally, and how might that influence your policy)
proposal.
(Reflect on the challenges and barriers you may encounter in the policy design and
implementation process. This could be based on the stakeholders involved (or not involved)
as well as available resources and country context).
Further guidance:
– Assessment criteria for written work can be found on your course KEATS page. Please consult
the appropriate criteria for your level (BSc/MSc).
– References (in-text, footnotes, endnotes) count towards your overall word count, as do sub_x005f headings. Text included as bullet points, tables, ‘boxes’ or similar ARE included in the word
count. Bibliography (which you must include at the end), and the cover page DO NOT count
towards your word count.
– Going over the word count range by >10% will incur an automatic 10-point reduction in your
overall mark. Going over the word count range by >20% will incur a mark of zero. Going under
the minimum word count does not incur an automatic penalty, but you may lose points for
lacking depth.
– The cover page should include your k-number, the due date, and word count.
– The assignment must be submitted on KEATS using the Feedback Studio/TurnItIn tool on the
module KEATS page. All work will be assessed for Plagiarism.
HEALTH SYSTEMS AND POLICY
ASSESSMENT BRIEF – INDIVIDUAL ASSESSMENT 2023/2024
3. Use the health policy triangle or other policy analysis frameworks to critique your policy
Focusing on the SAME country as your group presentation, identify ONE problem or challenge faced
by the country’s health system and design a policy proposal to address it. Your work should address
the following:
(What is the challenge or problem Why it is important Draw on data and evidence to
describe the challenge/problem. Consider the current health policies and programmes in the
country and why these are inadequate. You can focus on the same challenge/problem as
discussed in your group presentation, but it is not required).
Word count: 2000 words (+/- 10%)
Due date: 4
th January 2024, 14:00e List will have two sections, the first section
with the subheading ‘Academic References’ and the second section with the sub-heading ‘Non Academic References’.
Part 4 – Personal Reflections (approximately 400 words)
In this final section reflect on your learnings from this assessment and answer the following
questions:
1. What you found most challenging about researching and writing this business report.
2. How you selected the information you used in your report, for example, what resources
did you find most useful
3. How has your understanding of X as a business and social media platform evolved For
example, what aspects surprised you or challenged your preconceived notions
4. How has completing this assessment influenced your understanding of business
management concepts
5. How did you ensure you had good academic integrity throughout the writing of this
report
Mark Allocation: Higher marks will be awarded to work which clearly demonstrates own
understanding and originality, critical and analytical thinking and which draws on a range of
relevant readings from both academic and non-academic sources. All citations must be read, you
may be asked questions regarding these readings.
The report must be referenced correctly following Harvard or Vancouver academic standards.
Remember, academic integrity is crucial, and any form of academic dishonesty can lead to
penalties according to the UCL Student Academic Misconduct Procedure.
Reference List
Abernathy, P.M. and Sciarrino, J. (2019) The Strategic Digital Media Entrepreneur. NJ USA, John
Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Kim, C. and Mauborgne, R. (2015) Blue Ocean Strategy. USA: Harvard Business Review Press.
Mackay, B., Arevuo, M., Mackay, D. and Meadows, M. (2020) Strategy Theory Practice and
Implementation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Porter (2008) The Five Competitive Forces That Shape Strategy. United States: Harvard Business
School Press, Harvard Business Review, Vol.86 (1) p. 78-137.
Whittington, R., Regner, P., Angwin, D., Johnson, G. and Scholes, K. (2020) Exploring Strategy, 12th
Ed. Harlow: Pearson.
Acknowledgement
OpenAI was used to generate ideas for this assessment brief. OpenAI, ChatGPTPlus, 25th July
2023, ChatGPT (openai.com)
Section C: Module Learning Outcomes covered in this
Assessment
This assessment contributes towards the achievement of the following stated module Learning
Outcomes as highlighted below:
Discuss the problems and issues that surround management practice in organisations,
using a critical and informed approach.
Explain and evaluate the main environmental, strategic and operating concerns facing
organisations and managers.
Produce, justify, and support arguments in favour of or against particular initiatives
and approaches.
Apply effectively a range of concepts, methods, and analytical approaches to
specific cases.
Section D: Groupwork Instructions (where
relevant/appropriate)
N/A – this is an individual assessment
Section E: How your work is assessed
Within each section of this assessment you may be assessed on the following aspects, as applicable and
appropriate to this assessment, and should thus consider these aspects when fulfilling the requirements of
each section:
The accuracy of any calculations required.
The strengths and quality of your overall analysis and evaluation;
Appropriate use of relevant theoretical models, concepts and frameworks;
The rationale and evidence that you provide in support of your arguments;
The credibility and viability of the evidenced conclusions/recommendations/plans of action
you put forward;
Structure and coherence of your considerations and reports;
Appropriate and relevant use of, as and where relevant and appropriate, real world examples,
academic materials and referenced sources. Any references should use either the Harvard OR
Vancouver referencing system (see References, Citations and Avoiding Plagiarism)
Academic judgement regarding the blend of scope, thrust and communication of ideas,
contentions, evidence, knowledge, arguments, conclusions.
Each assessment requirement(s) has allocated marks/weightings.
Student submissions are reviewed/scrutinised by an internal assessor and are available to an External
Examiner for further review/scrutiny before consideration by the relevant Examination Board.
It is not uncommon for some students to feel that their submissions deserve higher marks (irrespective of
whether they actually deserve higher marks). To help you assess the relative strengths and weaknesses of
your submission please refer to SOM Assessment Criteria Guidelines, located on the Assessment tab of
the SOM Student Information Centre Moodle site.
The above is an important link as it specifies the criteria for attaining the pass/fail bandings shown below:
At UG Levels 4, 5 and 6:
80% to 100%: Outstanding Pass – 1st; 70% to 79%: Excellent Pass – 1st; 60%-69%: Very Good Pass – 2.1;
50% to 59%: Good Pass – 2.2; 40% to 49%: Satisfactory Pass – 3rd; 20% to 39%: Insufficient to Pass –
Fail; 0% to 19%: Poor and Insufficient to Pass – Fail.
At PG Level 7:
86% to 100%: Outstanding Pass – Distinction; 70% to 85%: Excellent Pass – Distinction; 60%-69%: Good
Pass – Merit; 50% to 59%: Satisfactory – Pass; 40% to 49%: Insufficient to Pass – Fail; 0% to 39%: Poor and
Insufficient to Pass – Fail.
You are strongly advised to review these criteria before you start your work and during your work, and
before you submit.
You are strongly advised to not compare your mark with marks of other submissions from your student
colleagues. Each submission has its own range of characteristics which differ from others in terms of
breadth, scope, depth, insights, and subtleties and nuances. On the surface one submission may appear to
be similar to another but invariably, digging beneath the surface reveals a range of differing
characteristics.
Students who wish to request a review of a decision made by the Board of Examiners should refer to
the UCL Academic Appeals Procedure, taking note of the acceptable grounds for such appeals.
Note that the purpose of this procedure is not to dispute academic judgement – it is to ensure correct
application of UCL’s regulations and procedures. The appeals process is evidence-based and
circumstances must be supported by independent evidence.
Section F: Additional information from module leader
(as appropriate)
The Assessment Rubric can be found on Moodle under the heading:
‘Assessment Briefs, Submission Links and Essential Guidance’
