violent societies, violent lives

violent societies, violent lives Assignment (project 1500 words) Choose a specific area of violence (suicide amongst men) and critically review the resources and in" rel="nofollow">information that are available through websites (or a specific website) related to this area usin" rel="nofollow">ing an evaluative checklist. Identify any gaps in" rel="nofollow">in the available resources and make recommendations as to how these could be addressed. • Chose a specific website for me that focuses on suicide amongst men • I would prefer it to be a current website, it doesn’t have to be a good one because the aim is to critically evaluate it • Please in" rel="nofollow">include a lin" rel="nofollow">ink to the choses website in" rel="nofollow">in the essay Evaluative checklist Credibility: • Check for in" rel="nofollow">information about the author’s education, train" rel="nofollow">inin" rel="nofollow">ing and experience in" rel="nofollow">in the field. • Look for biographical in" rel="nofollow">information such as the author’s title (Dr., Prof. etc.) and career history. • Is there evidence of the author’s standin" rel="nofollow">ing amongst their peers? Accuracy: • Is there a date on the in" rel="nofollow">information? • Is the in" rel="nofollow">information current, or are the ideas now out dated? • Is the in" rel="nofollow">information detailed, exact and comprehensive? Reasonableness: • Does the article present a balanced argument? • Is the tone of the writin" rel="nofollow">ing reasoned? • How objective is the author? • Is the in" rel="nofollow">information consistent? • Are there conflicts of in" rel="nofollow">interest? Support: • Where did the in" rel="nofollow">information come from? • Are the sources for the in" rel="nofollow">information listed? • Is there a bibliography? • What support does the author give for the in" rel="nofollow">information provided? • Is contact in" rel="nofollow">information provided for the author? Don’t forget conclusion Learnin" rel="nofollow">ing outcome: Identify and review available preventative and supportive resources that currently exist within" rel="nofollow">in a Public Health context. Markin" rel="nofollow">ing criteria: Percentage Descriptor 90-100% Outstandin" rel="nofollow">ing Exceptionally detailed and origin" rel="nofollow">inal response to the assignment, with critical use of in" rel="nofollow">independently sourced contextual material. Outstandin" rel="nofollow">ing demonstration of lin" rel="nofollow">inked understandin" rel="nofollow">ing and application of relevant theory, concepts and models. Extremely well structured with high level of analysis. No obvious errors in" rel="nofollow">in referencin" rel="nofollow">ing or grammar or syntax as appropriate. 80-89% Excellent Very full, in" rel="nofollow">independent response to the assignment with totally relevant material which is well beyond any module in" rel="nofollow">input, demonstratin" rel="nofollow">ing in" rel="nofollow">independent study. Excellent understandin" rel="nofollow">ing and application of relevant theory, concepts and models. Very clear logical structure. Very few errors in" rel="nofollow">in referencin" rel="nofollow">ing or grammar or syntax as appropriate. 70-79% Very good Full response to the assignment with all content relevant and focused. Very good understandin" rel="nofollow">ing of relevant theory, concepts and models. Application of appropriate theory to examples/practice, demonstratin" rel="nofollow">ing a rigorous approach to a variety of ideas, contexts and frameworks. Few errors in" rel="nofollow">in referencin" rel="nofollow">ing or grammar or syntax as appropriate. 60-69% Good Answers most if not all detailed aspects of the question. Content main" rel="nofollow">inly relevant and accurate. Good knowledge and understandin" rel="nofollow">ing of relevant theory and concepts and application of theoretical models. Evidence of a developin" rel="nofollow">ing appreciation of contextual issues. Some small repeated errors in" rel="nofollow">in referencin" rel="nofollow">ing or grammar or syntax as appropriate 50-59% Competent Main" rel="nofollow">in issues addressed and solid attempt to answer question. Some relevant content applied. Sound knowledge and understandin" rel="nofollow">ing of relevant theory and concepts and identification of main" rel="nofollow">in issues Some repeated errors in" rel="nofollow">in referencin" rel="nofollow">ing or grammar or syntax as appropriate. 40-49% Pass Satisfactory attempt to address question/issues with some content relevant to assignment topic. Material engages with relevant module materials, but largely repeats taught in" rel="nofollow">input and lacks development or personal in" rel="nofollow">interpretation. Some general understandin" rel="nofollow">ing of topic theory and concepts. Lacks coherence. 30-39% Fail Some learnin" rel="nofollow">ing outcomes and / or assessment criteria not met. Questions not answered fully. Content not wholly relevant. Little or no evidence of understandin" rel="nofollow">ing of relevant theory. Very repetitive of taught in" rel="nofollow">input – no development or application. The use of extensive quoted passages evident. Evidence of sufficient grasp of learnin" rel="nofollow">ing outcomes to suggest that the student will be able to retrieve the module on resubmission. 20-29% Fail No learnin" rel="nofollow">ing outcomes fully met. Little attempt to engage with the module materials or ideas. 9% - 19% Fail Little attempt to engage with assignment brief and has not met learnin" rel="nofollow">ing outcomes. Inadequate demonstration of knowledge or understandin" rel="nofollow">ing of key concepts, theories or practice. 0-9% Fail No real attempt to address the assignment brief or learnin" rel="nofollow">ing outcomes