REHB8101 Assessment 1: Reflective Assignment
Reflective Assignment: IPP competencies and Therapeutic Communication (Individual reflection)
Please note that this assignment should be completed in CADMUS – see link in FLO
Part 2: Individual critical reflection on IPP & therapeutic communication (worth 60% of this task). 1000-word limit
Building on your group reflection on interprofessional practice (IPP) competency, this individual assessment requires you to complete critical reflections using Gibbs Reflective Cycle to structure your writing:
Critical reflection (deepest level) is required. Use Gibbs Reflective Cycle to structure both reflections.
1. | |
Description. What happened? | |
Feelings? | |
Evaluation. What went well, what didn’t? | |
Analysis (Critical reflection focus here) | |
Conclusion and action plan | |
2. | |
Description. What happened? | |
Feelings? | |
Evaluation. What went well, what didn’t? | |
Analysis (Critical reflection focus here) | |
Conclusion and action plan | |
Please carefully review the assessment rubric for this assessment.
References:
Please ensure that you include the following information as part of your reference section.
Did you use AI tools in any part of this assessment?
☐Yes
☐No
Academic integrity: refer to university policy.
Artificial intelligence: Limited use of AI.
AI-Prompted
For this assessment task, students are permitted to use in-built generative AI such as slide design or grammatical/editing but are required to generate their own responses in line with conditions and expectations of the task outlined in the instructions. Students must acknowledge AI suggestions that were acted on/incorporated into the final submission. Students are required to acknowledge how they used AI in their final submission.
How should the use of AI be acknowledged in the assessment task?
Students must provide a declaration acknowledging which AI technologies have been used and how. This should be included at the beginning of the submission. Drafts should be kept demonstrating authorship and may be requested by assessors. An appendix containing all prompts and output generated from AI should be included with the final submission.
For example:
- I acknowledge the use of ChatGPT in suggested grammar and spelling (OpenAI, Year). The prompts and output from ChatGPT are included in Appendix 1.
A reference to the use of AI should be included in the reference list.
For example:
(Year). ChatGPT (Month, Year, Version) [Large language model]. https://chat.openai.com/chat
You are not allowed to:
· share assessment questions with any AI platform or tools or homework help websites, recognising that this will be considered an infringement of university intellectual property.
· submit output generated by generative AI as your own work. This may constitute contract cheating which is, Academic Misconduct.
Be aware that when submitting this assignment, you are agreeing that “I understand the rules of this assessment and will comply with these academic integrity requirements.”
To better understand AI and its use for study within the parameters of this assessment, you can refer to https://library.flinders.edu.au/students/ai In particular you should note the instances where the use of AI tools may constitute academic misconduct. That includes using AI beyond what is listed as permitted above and not properly acknowledging (referencing) use of output from AI tools, which included keeping a record of what prompts were used.
Tips & reminders
· A brief introduction and conclusion may be useful.
· Reflection and discussion may be related to your success or failure in the use of IPP competencies (the value of reflection is to keep learning)
· All literature and teaching content must be referenced using APA 7th.
· Reference list does NOT contribute to word count but in text references do.
· Exceeding the word limit will result in the assignment being marked only to this point.
Criteria | HD (85–100%) | DN (75–84%) | CR (65–74%) | P (50–64%) | F (<50%) | |
IPP Reflection | Description & Feelings (5%) | Clear, concise and focused description of event; | Clear description and relevant feelings | Incomplete, unclear or overly descriptive. | ||
Evaluation (5%) | Thoughtful and balanced evaluation clearly linked | Clear evaluation of strengths and limitations. | Minimal or absent evaluation. | |||
Analysis (includes integration of | Sophisticated critical analysis of assumptions, | Strong critical analysis with clear integration | Clear analysis supported by relevant literature. | Analytical reflection evident (not merely | Primarily descriptive. Literature absent or not | |
Conclusion & Action Plan (5%) | Insightful synthesis and specific, realistic | Clear learning and specific future actions. | Learning and appropriate actions identified. | Learning articulated with some specific actions. | Learning unclear; actions vague or absent. | |
Therapeutic Communication Reflection (50%) | Description & Feelings (5%) | Clear, focused description of a specific | Clear description; relevant feelings identified. | Incomplete or vague. | ||
Evaluation (5%) | Balanced and thoughtful evaluation of | Clear evaluation of strengths and limitations. | Minimal or absent evaluation. | |||
Analysis (includes integration of | Advanced critical analysis of verbal/non-verbal | Strong analysis with effective integration of | Clear analytical reflection supported by relevant | Analytical reflection evident (not merely | Primarily descriptive. Literature absent or not | |
Conclusion & Skill Development Plan | Clear synthesis with highly specific and | Clear learning and specific future strategies. | Learning identified with appropriate actions. | Learning articulated with some specific actions. | Vague intentions; no actionable plan. | |
Presentation, Referencing & Academic | Professional, coherent and critically reflective | Clear structure and reflective tone. No | Structured and understandable. Referencing mostly AI declaration included. | Poor organisation. Significant referencing | ||
