As part of the formal assessment for the programme you are required to submit a
Digital Health Leadership assignment. Please refer to your Student Handbook for full details of the programme assessment scheme and general information on preparing and submitting assignments.
After completing the module, you should be able to:
- Recognise the economic, social, legal, ethical, and political context of current innovations in healthcare and how digital solutions are designed and
- Critically analyse the value and benefit of digital technologies in patient care and service delivery for different stakeholders, and discuss the risks and challenges associated with digital
- Apply theoretical learning and digital health concepts to a proposal of a digital health
- Demonstrate practical ability in the application of digital health leadership skills. Graduate Attribute: Effective Communication -Students will communicate effectively both verbally and in writing, using a range of media widely used in relevant professional context. They will be IT, digitally and information
All learning outcomes and the graduate attribute must be met to pass the module.
Your assignment should include: a title page containing your student number, the module name, the submission deadline and the exact word count of your submitted document; the appendices if relevant; and a reference list in (see referencing section for more information). You should address all the elements of the assignment task listed below. Please note that tutors will use the assessment criteria set out below in assessing your work.
You must not include your name in your submission because Arden University operates anonymous marking, which means that markers should not be aware of the identity of the student. However, please do not forget to include your STU number.
Maximum word count: 2500 words or Arden University equivalence, depending on format chosen
Please refer to the full word count policy which can be found in the Student Policies section here: Arden University | Regulatory Framework.
Please note the following: Students are required to indicate the exact word count on the title page of the assessment.
The word count includes everything in the main body of the assessment (including in text citations and references). The word count excludes numerical data in tables, figures, diagrams, footnotes, reference list and appendices. ALL other printed words ARE included in the word count.
Please note that exceeding the word count by over 10% will result in a 10-percentage point deduction.
Produce a “pitch” to propose a digital health and care initiative, which will enhance, improve, or transform an aspect of health and social care service delivery. The overall pitch should not exceed 2500 words or Arden University equivalence. A “pitch” is a form of business proposal, pitching the idea, and usually presented to management, budget holders, and/or grant awarding panels.
The pitch should:
- outline the problem or issue for resolution
- showcase the proposed digital initiative
- analyse the value and benefit of digital technologies for different stakeholders
- discuss the risks and challenges associated with digital
- describe a digital badge that can be achieved by the workforce upon implementation of the initiative
As listed above, the pitch should include a proposal of a “digital badge(s)”, as an outcome if the initiative were to go to implementation. This badge is a training or educational element to the initiative, that should be suitable for the health and care workforce in question to achieve to demonstrate their understanding/skill in the implementation. This aspect demonstrates your leadership skills and supports awareness of the development of the workforce to enhance their own digital skills.
The pitch could be presented as a document, a presentation slide deck, as a presentation delivered as a recording, or a poster or leaflet. The choice is your responsibility, and all options offer the equal opportunity to demonstrate achievement of the learning outcomes. Please use the assessment rubric to support your assessment development, as this shows what the piece will be marked against.
This module is marked using the Arden University Categorical Marking Criteria
(2500 Words or equivalence)
(100 Marks) (LOs: 1,2,3,4,GA)
You have the opportunity to submit a 500 word draft or plan to receive formative feedback.
The feedback is designed to help you develop areas of your work and it helps you develop your skills as an independent learner.
If you are a distance learning student, you should submit your work, by email, to your tutor, no later than 2 weeks before the actual submission deadline. If you are a blended learning student, your tutor will give you a deadline for formative feedback and further details.
Formative feedback will not be given to work submitted after the above date or the date specified by your tutor – if a blended learning student.
You MUST underpin your analysis and evaluation of the key issues with appropriate and wide ranging academic research and ensure this is referenced using the AU Harvard system(s).
Follow this link to find the referencing guides for your subject: Arden Library
Assignments submitted late will not be accepted and will be marked as a 0% fail.
Your assessment can be submitted as a single Word (MS Word) or PDF file, PowerPoint MS) or, as multiple files.
If you chose to submit multiple files, you must name each document as the question/part you are answering along with your student number ie Q1 Section A STUXXXX. If you wish to overwrite your submission or one of your submissions, you must ensure that your new submission is named exactly the same as the previous in order for the system to overwrite it.
You must ensure that the submitted assignment is all your own work and that all sources used are correctly attributed. Penalties apply to assignments which show evidence of academic unfair practice. (See the Student Handbook which is available on the A-Z key information on iLearn.)
Assessment Criteria (Learning objectives covered – all.
|Level 5 reflects the continuing development in knowledge, understanding and skills from Level 4. At Level 5, students are not expected to be fully autonomous but are able to take responsibility for their own learning with appropriate guidance and direction. Students are expected to further develop their theoretical knowledge within a more intellectual context and to demonstrate this through more complex forms of expression which move beyond the descriptive or
imitative domain. Students are expected to demonstrate skills of analysis in both problem-solving and resolution.
|Generic Assessment Criteria|
|First (1)||80%+||An outstanding information base exploring and analysing the discipline, its theory and any associated ethical considerations. There is sophisticated use and management of learning resources, and a high degree of autonomy is demonstrated. Writing is outstandingly well structured and accurately referenced throughout. Where appropriate, outstanding professional skills are demonstrated. The work is
original and with some additional effort could considered for internal publication.
|70-79%||An excellent knowledge base within which the discipline is explored and analysed. There is a degree of originality in the approach. The work demonstrates confidence and autonomy and extends to consider ethical issues. Learning resources have been managed confidently. Writing is exceptionally well structured and accurately referenced throughout. Where appropriate, an excellent level of professional skills
is demonstrated, and the work demonstrates a high level of intellectual and academic skills.
|Upper second (2:1)||60-69%||A very good knowledge base which explores and analyses the discipline, its theory, and any associated ethical issues. There is evidence of some originality and independence of thought. A very good range of learning resources underpin the work and there is evidence of
growing confidence and self-direction. The work demonstrates the ability to analyse the subject and apply theory with good academic and intellectual skills. Academic writing skills are very good, expression is accurate overall, and the work is consistently referenced throughout.
|Lower second (2:2)||50-59%||A good understanding of the discipline which begins to analyse the subject and apply some underpinning theory. There may be reference to some of the ethical considerations. The work shows a sound level of competence in managing basic sources and materials. Academic writing skills are good and accurate overall, and the work is planned and structured with some though. Professional skills are good (where appropriate). The work lacks original thought, but academic and intellectual skills are moving into the critical domain. The work is
|Third (3)||40-49%||Satisfactory level of performance in which there are some omissions in understanding the subject, its underpinning theory, and ethical considerations. There is little evidence of independent thought, and the work shows a basic use of sources and materials. Academic and intellectual skills are limited. The work may lack structure overall. There are some difficulties in developing professional skills (where
appropriate). There is an attempt to reference the work.
|Marginal Fail||30-39%||A limited piece of work in which there are clear gaps in understanding the subject, its underpinning theory, and ethical considerations. The work shows a limited use of sources and materials. Academic and professional skills are weak and there are errors in expression and the work may lack structure overall. There are difficulties in developing professional skills (where appropriate). The work lacks original
thought and is largely imitative.
|Clear fail||29% and Below||A poor performance in which there are substantial gaps in knowledge and understanding, underpinning theory and ethical considerations. The work shows little evidence in the use of appropriate sources and materials. Academic writing skills are very weak and there are numerous errors in expression. The work lacks structure overall. Professional skills (where appropriate) are not developed. The work is
Quality Content Writing Firm