Within public health, growing rates of overweight and obesity worldwide are generally considered to be a health crisis

Background
Within public health, growing rates of overweight and obesity worldwide are generally considered to be a health crisis. This prompts questions about the causes of this public health issue, and thus how it can be addressed. There is much societal debate about whether obesity is primarily the result of biology, individual lifestyle choices, or determined by social factors, making obesity a whole-of-society concern.
This assessment task requires students to critique the determinants of obesity, in terms of the relative contribution and relationship between social determinants, and individual lifestyle choices.
Assessment specifications
Due date: Tuesday 3 April 2018, 9am
Weighting: 40%
Length and/or format: 2000 words (+/- 10%)
Purpose: Demonstrate understanding of the evidence and key debates on determinants of a specific health issue, particularly in relation to personal and social responsibility for health.
Learning outcomes assessed: 1, 2, 3
How to submit: Electronically through Turnitin via the unit’s LEO
Return of assignment: Marks and feedback will be provided via LEO
Assessment criteria: See marking rubric below
Instructions
Your task is to write an academic essay that addresses the question:
Is obesity determined by individual lifestyle choices and/or broader social determinants?
This essay requires you to consider social determinants of health, which can include social, economic, environmental and political factors that impact on health risk (or protective) factors such as diets and physical activity levels. If you wish, you can choose to focus on the determinants of obesity in a specific country.
Your essay should:
1. Include an introduction that briefly outlines your main argument in response to the essay question, and what you will cover in your essay.
2. Briefly outline the nature and scale of the obesity issue and its key behavioural risk factors: unhealthy diets and physical inactivity.
3. Most of your essay should be dedicated to clearly outlining your arguments on the relative importance of different determinants of unhealthy diets and physical inactivity, and any relationships between determinants. You may use specific examples to illustrate your argument, if you wish. Your arguments must be supported by citing academic literature and/or official statistical resources (ABS, WHO etc) as appropriate.
4. Outline the implications of your argument, in terms of whether it is a personal and/or social/government responsibility to address obesity risk factors.
5. Include a brief conclusion that concisely summarises your key points and main argument.
Useful resources:
Please also see the ‘background readings and resources’ on LEO for weeks 1-5 (especially week 4).
Black, C., Moon, G., & Baird, J. (2014). Dietary inequalities: What is the evidence for the effect of the neighbourhood food environment? Health & Place, 27, 229-242.
Brownell, K. D., Kersh, R., Ludwig, D. S., Post, R. C., Puhl, R. M., Schwartz, M. B., & Willett, W. C. (2010). Personal responsibility and obesity: a constructive approach to a controversial issue. Health Affairs, 29(3), 379-387.
Commission on Social Determinants of Health (2008). Closing the gap in a generation: health equity through action on the social determinants of health. Final report of the Commission on Social Determinants of Health. Geneva: World Health Organization, available at http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/43943/1/9789241563703_eng.pdf
UK Government Office for Science (2007). Foresight report. Tackling Obesities: Future Choices, available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/reducing-obesity-future-choices
Referencing
APA 6th is the required referencing style for this assessment task. Please ensure that you are familiar with the formatting and usage requirements for this style. Aside from the ACU Library materials provided, you may wish to use the Academic Referencing Tool from the La Trobe University Library.
Turnitin: Turnitin is a tool used to assist in the detection of referencing problems and/or plagiarism. Turnitin generates a similarity index for a document: that is, what percentage of the document contains material that is matched to accessible sources. Presence of similarity does not necessarily indicate plagiarism: there are many reasons why similar text is discovered in student documents. For example, Turnitin often classifies reference lists themselves as “similar”—this is similarity, but not plagiarism.
Assessment policy and procedures
Students should make themselves familiar with the University’s Assessment Procedures
http://handbook.acu.edu.au/handbooks/handbook_2018/general_information/assessment_procedures This link outlines how to apply for an extension or special consideration (under ‘Student responsibilities’ and ‘Processes when personal circumstances affect performance’).
Please note that marks will be deducted for late submission of assignments (without an approved extension), as per the University’s policy. The policy states: “Assessment tasks submitted after the due or extended date will incur, for each whole or part of a calendar day that the work is overdue, a 5% penalty of the maximum marks available for that assessment task up to a maximum of 15%. Assessment tasks received more than three calendar days after the due or extended date will not be allocated a mark.”
Marking rubric
In line with section 5.1 of ACU’s Assessment Policy, all assessment marking and grading must be criterion-referenced and use standards-based grading. Assessment criteria and standards are related to unit learning outcomes. Student performance on a task is evaluated against each criterion, and according to the set standards of achievement for that criterion.
Assessment criteria and standards for this task are provided in the following rubric. Each criterion is marked according to a five-point standard, from “poor” to “excellent”, with a descriptor for each standard. Within each standard there is a small marking range that further differentiates Your final mark for the task reflects evaluation against all criteria.
Relevant PUBH630 learning outcome: Assessment task 1
1. Demonstrate advanced knowledge of the different types of health determinants and their significance to public health practice (GA: 2, 5)
2. Evaluate the impacts, interactivity and distribution of health determinants at a community or population level, and how these relate to complex public health/societal issues (GA: 2, 4, 8)
3. Critique current debates on social and behavioural determinants of health, particularly in relation to personal and social responsibility for health (GA: 1, 2, 3)
Assessment criteria and relevant unit learning outcome(s) Standard achieved
Excellent Very good Good Fair Poor
1. Describes the nature and scale of the obesity issue.
LO2: health determinants interactivity and distribution at a community and population levels in relation to complex public health/societal issues
1 Submission provides a comprehensive
description of the nature/scale of obesity as a public health issue, well supported by appropriate evidence.
(5- 4.5 marks) Submission provides an informative description of the nature/scale of obesity as a public health issue, supported by adequate and appropriate evidence.
(4-3.5 marks) Submission provides a satisfactory description of the nature/scale of obesity as a public health issue, supported by some evidence.
(3- 2.5 marks) Submission provides minimal description of the nature/scale of obesity as a public health issue, but requires better support with evidence.
(2- 1.5 marks) Submission provides very limited description of the nature/scale of obesity as a public health issue, supported by little to no evidence. (1- 0 marks)
2. Identify and discuss the determinants of obesity, and any relationships between determinants.
LO1: health determinants and their impact on public health LO3: Critique current debate on determinants of health in relation to personal and social responsibility for health
3 Submission
demonstrates high-level understanding of the key determinants of obesity and their interrelationships.
(5- 4.5 marks) Submission demonstrates very good understanding of the key determinants of obesity and their interrelationships.
(4-3.5 marks) Submission demonstrates satisfactory understanding of determinants of obesity and their interrelationships.
(3- 2.5 marks) Submission demonstrates limited understanding of some determinants of obesity and their interrelationships.
(2- 1.5 marks) Submission demonstrates very little (or no) understanding of the determinants of obesity or their interrelationships.
(1- 0 marks)
Assessment criteria and relevant unit learning outcome(s) Standard achieved
Excellent Very good Good Fair Poor
3. Clear and well-constructed analysis on whether obesity is a personal and/or social/government responsibility
Critique whether obesity is a personal or social responsibility
LO3: Critique current debate on determinants of health in relation to personal and social responsibility for health Submission provides the reader with an extremely informative analysis in relation to personal and social/government responsibility for obesity, and the implications for addressing obesity. Submission provides the reader with a reasonably informative analysis in relation to personal and social/government responsibility for obesity, and the implications for addressing obesity. Submission provides the reader with a somewhat informative analysis in relation to personal and social/government responsibility for obesity, and the implications for addressing obesity. Submission provides the reader with a barely informative analysis in relation to personal and social/government responsibility for obesity. Limited analysis of the implications for addressing obesity. Submission provides the reader with no or unfocused and/or uninformative analysis in relation to personal and social/government responsibility for obesity. Little or no analysis of the implications for addressing obesity.
2 (5- 4.5 marks) (4-3.5 marks) (3- 2.5 marks) (2- 1.5 marks) (1- 0 marks)
4. Structure and fluency of writing
Overall the essay is well-written, concise, well-structured and meets word limit requirements.
LO1: health determinants and their impact on public health LO2: health determinants interactivity and distribution at a community and population levels
1 Submission demonstrates a very high quality of writing, logical, clear and eloquent, meets word limit requirements. There are no errors with grammar, spelling and punctuation, and the meaning is easily discernible. The essay reads without interruption.
(5- 4.5 marks) Submission demonstrates very good quality of writing, mostly clear, logical and well written throughout, although with a few minor errors, meets word limit requirements. There are minimal errors with grammar, spelling and punctuation, and the meaning is easily discernible.
(4-3.5 marks) Submission demonstrates good
quality of writing, logic, meets word limit requirements. There are some errors with grammar, spelling and punctuation, and the meaning is easily discernible.
(3- 2.5 marks) Submission
demonstrates low
quality of writing, errors in spelling/sentence structure/organisation, but the meaning is discernible. Within or close to word limit requirements.
(2- 1.5 marks) Submission demonstrates poor standard of writing, no adherence to world limit requirements, there are substantial errors with grammar, spelling and punctuation. The errors detract significantly and/or the reader cannot make sense of the content.
(1- 0 marks)
in relation to complex public health/societal issues
LO3: Critique current debate on determinants of health in relation to personal and social responsibility for health
5. Sources and references Accurate, consistent and appropriate referencing to support claims and arguments
LO1: health determinants and their impact on public health LO2: health determinants interactivity and distribution at a community and population levels in relation to complex public health/societal issues
LO3: Critique current debate on determinants of health in relation to personal and social responsibility for health
1 All references used are credible and relevant. Accurate use of APA referencing style in all instances. All statements of fact and ideas taken from elsewhere are referenced. A wide range of peer-reviewed references used.
(5- 4.5 marks) All references used are credible and relevant. Accurate use of APA referencing style on most occasions. Almost all statements of fact and ideas taken from elsewhere are referenced. A good range of peer-reviewed references used. (4-3.5 marks) Most references used are credible and relevant. Accurate use of APA referencing style on most occasions. There is a limited range of peer-reviewed references used. (3- 2.5 marks) Some credible and relevant references are used. Some errors in the use of APA referencing style. Few peerreviewed references used.
(2- 1.5 marks) Not all references are credible and/or relevant. Many inaccuracies with the APA referencing style or there are no references used.
(1- 0 marks)
Total marks available: 40 marks
Task weighting for unit: 40%