2808NRS Human Pathophysiology and Pharmacology 2
A2 Written Assignment: Concept map assignment
Concept map + 500 words written section
Weighting: 30% Due Date: 5 pm, 29th August 2022 Aim:
The aim of this assessment is to provide you with an opportunity to demonstrate your critical thinking skills, your capacity to differentiate a normal from abnormal patient presentation and to identify appropriate, evidence-based, diagnostic investigations and treatment modalities associated with an assigned case study.
This assessment item will assess:
Learning Outcome 1: Apply your knowledge of the pathophysiology of disorders of the cardiovascular, respiratory, endocrine, renal, gastrointestinal and haematological systems to solve clinical problems. Learning Outcome 2: Relate the clinical manifestations and diagnostic findings of health deviations to the underlying pathophysiology of disease states.
Learning Outcome 3: Select diagnostic tests, physical assessment techniques and treatment modalities that are appropriate to the disorders being examined.
Instructions:
For this task you will create a single page (using PowerPoint or Microsoft Word) colour coded concept map and provide a 500-word written explanation, demonstrating analysis of a case-study scenario that will be provided at the start of your course.
Your concept map must include:
An interpretation of three patient risk factors (from the case-study scenario) and a demonstration of how these risk factors link and relate to the diagnosed disease/disorders’ aetiology and/or pathophysiology, using evidence-based literature.
A step-by-step pathophysiological sequence between the diagnosed disease/disorders’ aetiology and five of the patient’s clinical manifestations (from the case-study scenario), using evidence-based literature.
In your 500-word written explanation:
From your analysis and interpretation of the evidence-based research, explain and justify the appropriate diagnostic investigations to confirm the patient’s diagnosis and explain and justify the appropriate treatment modalities approach to treat and manage the patient’s diagnosis.
2808NRS Human Pathophysiology and Pharmacology 2
A2 Written Assignment – Concept map assignment
1
Other elements:
A word limit of 500 words needs to be strictly adhered to. The word limit for an assessment item includes in-text citations and quotations. The word limit DOES NOT include the reference list. Please note the marker will cease marking your submitted work once they have reached 500 words.
The concept map and the written component should be in one file.
Always refer to the Griffith Guide on Writing Assignments. Ensure your assignment format adheres to the essay guidelines.
Ensure that you use scholarly literature1 (digitized readings, research articles, relevant Government reports and textbooks) that has been published within the last ten [10] years (between 2012 – 2022 (inclusive)).
Use the APA7 referencing style.
You may use headings to organize your written explanation (this will be included in your word count)
Use academic language2 throughout. Use the Griffith Guide on Academic Writing.
Refer to the marking rubric when writing your assignment. This will assist you in calculating the weightings of the sections for your assignment.
Submit your assignment via Turnitin as per the instructions on your Learning@Griffith course site. Submit in the ‘FINAL Written Essay’ assessment tab.
Please ensure you receive a Turnitin receipt (take a screenshot) after submitting your assignment and please check you have uploaded the correct assessment into the correct folder.
Scholarly or peer-reviewed journal articles are written by scholars or professionals who are experts in their field, as opposed to literature such as magazine articles, which reflect the taste of the general public and are meant as entertainment.
Everyday language is predominately subjective. It is mainly used to express opinions based on personal preference or belief rather than evidence. Written academic English is formal. It avoids colloquialisms and slang, which may be subjective to local and social variations. Formal language is more precise and stable, and
therefore more suitable for the expression of complex ideas and the development of reasoned argumentation 2808NRS Human Pathophysiology and Pharmacology 2
A2 Written Assignment – Concept map assignment
2
2808NRS Human Pathophysiology and Pharmacology 2 A2 Written Assignment: Concept map assignment
Concept Map Section
EXEMPLARY Exceptionally high quality of performance or standard of learning achievement. ACCOMPLISHED High quality performance or standard of learning achievement. DEVELOPING Satisfactory quality of performance or standard of learning achievement. BEGINNING Unsatisfactory quality of performance or standard of learning achievement.
Criterion One An interpretation of the three patient’s risk factors (from the case-study scenario) and a demonstration of how these risk factors link and relate to the diagnosed disease/disorder’s aetiology/pathophysiology in the concept map. Exceptionally high standard as evidenced by an accurate interpretation of the three patient’s risk factors. Clear and correct links between the three risk factors and diagnosed disease/disorder’s aetiology/pathophysiology is evident in the concept map. High-quality standard as evidenced by an accurate interpretation of most of the patient risk factors. Clear and mostly correct links between most of the risk factors and diagnosed disease/disorder’s aetiology/pathophysiology is evident in the concept map. Satisfactory standard as evidenced by an adequate interpretation of some of the patient risk factors. Some links between the risk factors and diagnosed disease/disorder’s aetiology/pathophysiology is evident in the concept map. Unsatisfactory standard as evidenced by an inaccurate or absent interpretation of the patient risk factors. Links between the risk factors and diagnosed disease/disorder’s aetiology/pathophysiology are not clearly evident in the concept map. /6
Mark allocation 6-5.5 5-4 3.5-2.5 <2
Criterion Two A step-by-step pathophysiological sequence between the diagnosed disease/disorder’s aetiology and all the patient’s clinical manifestations (from the case-study scenario) in the concept map. Exceptionally high standard as evidenced by a logical step by step pathophysiological sequence between the diagnosed disease/disorder’s aetiology and the patient’s clinical manifestations clearly evident in the concept map. High-quality standard as evidenced by a sound step by step pathophysiological sequence between the diagnosed disease/disorder’s aetiology and the patient’s clinical manifestations evident in the concept map. Satisfactory standard as evidenced by an inconsistent step by step pathophysiological sequence between the diagnosed disease/disorder’s aetiology and the patient’s clinical manifestations evident in the concept map. Unsatisfactory standard as evidenced by an inaccurate or absent step by step pathophysiological sequence between the diagnosed disease/disorder’s aetiology and the patient’s clinical manifestations. /6
Mark allocation 6-5.5 5 -4 3.5-2.5 <2
EXEMPLARY Exceptionally high quality of performance or standard of learning achievement. ACCOMPLISHED High-quality performance or standard of learning achievement. DEVELOPING Satisfactory quality of performance or standard of learning achievement. BEGINNING Unsatisfactory quality of performance or standard of learning achievement.
Criterion Three An interpretation of the five patient’s clinical manifestations (from the case-study scenario) and a demonstration of how these clinical manifestations link with the disease’s/disorder’s pathophysiological sequence in the concept map. Exceptionally high standard as evidenced by an accurate interpretation of the five patient’s clinical manifestations. Clear links between the five clinical manifestations and the disease’s/disorder’s pathophysiological sequence in the concept map. High-quality standard as evidenced by an accurate interpretation of most of the patient’s clinical manifestations. Clear links between most of the clinical manifestations and the disease’s/disorder’s pathophysiological sequence are evident in the concept map. Satisfactory standard as evidenced by an adequate interpretation of some of the patient’s clinical manifestations. Some links between the clinical manifestations and the disease’s/disorder’s pathophysiological sequence are evident in the concept map. Unsatisfactory standard as evidenced by an inaccurate or absent interpretation of the patient’s clinical manifestations. Links between the clinical manifestations and the disease’s/disorder’s pathophysiological sequence are not clearly evident in the concept map. /10
Mark allocation 10 – 9 8.5 – 6.5 6 – 4.5 4 – 1
500-word Written Section
Criterion four Using evidence-based literature, justify the diagnostic investigations in terms of their relevance and appropriateness for the diagnosed disease/disorder. Exceptionally high standard as evidenced by an accurate justification of ALL diagnostic investigations in terms of their relevance and appropriateness for the diagnosed disease/disorder. High quality standard as evidenced by an accurate justification of most of the diagnostic investigations in terms of their relevance and appropriateness for the diagnosed disease/disorder. Satisfactory standard as evidenced by a brief, but sufficient justification of some of the diagnostic investigations in terms of their relevance and appropriateness for the diagnosed disease/disorder. Unsatisfactory standard as evidenced by an inadequate justification of the diagnostic investigations in terms of their relevance and appropriateness for the diagnosed disease/disorder. /9
Mark allocation 9 – 7.5 7 – 5.5 5 – 3.5 3 – 1
Criterion five Using evidence-based literature, justify the treatment modalities in terms of their relevance and appropriateness for the diagnosed disease/disorder. Exceptionally high standard as evidenced by an accurate justification of ALL the treatment modalities in terms of their relevance and appropriateness for the diagnosed disease/disorder. High-quality standard as evidenced by an accurate justification of how most of the treatment modalities in terms of their relevance and appropriateness for the diagnosed disease/disorder. Satisfactory standard as evidenced by a brief, but sufficient justification of how some of the treatment modalities in terms of their relevance and appropriateness for the diagnosed disease/disorder. Unsatisfactory standard as evidenced by an inadequate justification of the treatment modalities in terms of their relevance and appropriateness for the diagnosed disease/disorder. /9
Mark allocation 9 – 7.5 7 – 5.5 5 – 3.5 3 – 1
Presentation and Referencing
Criterion Six Presentation, grammar and academic writing. An exemplary demonstration of academic writing standards; Exemplary sentence and paragraph structure, with few, if any errors, indicates a sophisticated ability to communicate ideas effectively. High-quality demonstration of academic writing standards; appropriate sentence and paragraph structure, with some errors, that indicates an effective ability to communicate ideas effectively. Sufficient demonstration of academic writing standards; Developing sentence and paragraph structure, and/or there are some errors that disrupt the communication of ideas. Does not comply with academic writing standards; Poor sentence and paragraph structure, and poor logical flow demonstratesan inability to communicate ideas effectively. /4
Mark allocation 4 3 2 1
Criterion Seven Use of the literature. Exceptionally high standard as evidenced by synthesis and accurate integration of high quality, credible evidence to support ideas that are relevant to the topic. High-quality standard as evidenced by some synthesis and integration of good quality, credible evidence to support ideas that are relevant to the topic. Satisfactory standard as evidenced by attempting synthesis and integration of reasonable quality, credible evidence to support ideas in the writing; not all sources are from scholarly sources. Unsatisfactory standard as evidenced by a lack of synthesis and integration of evidence resulting in a lack of support for ideas in the writing. /3
3 2 1 0
Criterion Eight Referencing. Exceptionally high standard as evidenced by exemplary use of APA 7 format in-text and reference list with no errors. High-quality standard as evidenced by the consistent use of APA 7 format in-text and reference list with minimal errors. Satisfactory standard as evidenced by the developing use of APA 7 format in-text and reference list, but with several errors. Unsatisfactory standard as evidenced by the beginning or absent use of APA 7 format intext and reference list with many errors. /3
Mark allocation 3 2 1 0
TOTAL /50
