Criteria Criteria You will be assessed according to the marking rubric below: Criteria Unsatisfactory Pass Credit Distinction High Distinction An introduction which clearly and concisely summarises the assignment content and forecasts the substance of the full discussion in the body of the text. Marking Rubric: 5% of 50 marks No Introduction or one that does not summarise the assignment content. An introduction which adequately summarises the assignment content and predicts the substance of the full discussion in the body of the text in a few paragraphs. An introduction which thoroughly summarises the assignment content and predicts the substance of the full discussion in the body of the text in a few paragraphs. An introduction which extensively summarises the assignment content and convincingly predicts the substance of the full discussion in the body of the text in a few informative paragraphs. An introduction which definitively summarises the assignment content and cogently predicts the substance of the full discussion in the body of the text in a few paragraphs. Details of the workplace; the physical space it occupies, the type of work, number of workers, worker profiles (e.g., gender; age, socio-economic background, experience, length of employment in the workplace, duration and frequency of exposure to the health hazard). Identification of the occupational health hazard and associated risks What are the legal requirements and any ethical considerations? Is change needed? Explain what the change/s may be. Consider the current management/ control measures in place and the effect these have on eliminating or minimising the occupational health hazard. Marking Rubric: 10% of 50 marks Inadequate or inappropriate discussion without evidence of incorporation of the relevant literature surrounding the topic on the workplace details, worker profiles and exposure to hazard. The occupational health hazard and associated risks not identified or poorly identified. Development and relevance of selected topic and workplace adequately discussed based on the appropriate literature The occupational health hazard and associated risks adequately identified. Development and relevance of selected topic and workplace thoroughly discussed with appropriate reference to the associated literature. The occupational health hazard and associated risks effectively identified. Development and relevance of selected topic and workplace extensively discussed with detailed reference to the related literature in the general field surrounding the topic relating to the workplace details, worker profiles and exposure to hazard. The occupational health hazard and associated risks comprehensively identified. Development and relevance of selected topic and workplace extensively discussed with wide reference to the related literature in the general field surrounding the topic relating to the workplace details, worker profiles and exposure to hazard. The occupational health hazard and associated risks expansively identified. Extensive discussion with wider reference to current literature with high evidence of cited reading of the broader literature on the chosen occupational health program; the identification and justification of the development and implementation of the program; details of the monitoring and evaluation of the program; and the methods and tools used for the evaluation process Particulars of the methods/ tools you would use for undertaking the evaluation. Marking Rubric: 30% of 50 marks Inadequate or inappropriate discussion without evidence of reading of the relevant literature on the chosen occupational health program; the identification and justification of the development and implementation of the program; details of the monitoring and evaluation of the program; and the methods and tools used for the evaluation process Adequate discussion with evidence of reading of the relevant literature on the chosen occupational health program; the identification and justification of the development and implementation of the program; details of the monitoring and evaluation of the program; and the methods and tools used for the evaluation process Thorough discussion with appropriate reference to current literature with evidence of cited reading of the relevant literature on the chosen occupational health program; the identification and justification of the development and implementation of the program; details of the monitoring and evaluation of the program; and the methods and tools used for the evaluation process Extensive discussion with wide reference to current literature with constant evidence of cited reading of the broader literature on the chosen occupational health program; the identification and justification of the development and implementation of the program; details of the monitoring and evaluation of the program; and the methods and tools used for the evaluation process Extensive discussion with wider reference to current literature with high evidence of cited reading of the broader literature on the chosen occupational health program; the identification and justification of the development and implementation of the program; details of the monitoring and evaluation of the program; and the methods and tools used for the evaluation process A conclusion that summarises the main content of the discussion informed by the beginning of the process in the introduction where you outlined the content and discussion. Marking Rubric: 3% of 50 marks No conclusion A conclusion that adequately summarises the main content of the discussion in a few paragraphs A conclusion that thoroughly summarises the main content of the discussion in a few paragraphs A conclusion that extensively summarises the main content of the discussion in a few paragraphs A conclusion that decisively summarises the main content of the discussion in a few paragraphs Presented in academic assignment style format, following the Harvard system of in-text acknowledgements, reference list. Marking Rubric: 2% of 30 marks Poorly structured and/ or unclear and/ or not written in formal style and/ or extensive spelling/ typographical and/ or grammatical errors. Reference list absent. Not using the Harvard system with little or no in-text citation. Generally adequately structured following Harvard format with the majority of sources cited in-text and appropriately quoted and/ or paraphrased; proof read for spelling/ typographical and grammar and clearly written using the conventions of formal academic writing; i.e., with in-text citation and an adequate reference list citing at least 8 sources in-text and listing the related references. Well structured, fluent and clearly written using the conventions of formal academic writing following the Harvard format with the majority of sources cited in-text and appropriately quoted and/ or paraphrased with minimum spelling/typographical or grammatical errors and clearly written using the conventions of formal academic writing; i.e., with numerous in-text citation a reference list adequate reference list citing at least 12 sources in- text and listing the related references. Professional presentation, written with fluency and clarity using the conventions of formal academic writing following the Harvard format with all of the sources cited in-text and appropriately quoted and/ or paraphrased; with no spelling/ typographical or grammatical errors and clearly written using the conventions of formal academic writing; i.e., with numerous in-text citation and a reference list citing at least 15 sources in-text and listing the related references. Highly professional presentation, written with exceptional fluency and clarity using the conventions of formal academic writing following the Harvard format with all of the sources cited in-text and appropriately quoted and/ or paraphrased without spelling/typographical or grammatical errors and clearly written using the conventions of formal academic writing; i.e., with numerous in-text citation and a reference list citing at least 20 sources in-text and listing the related r