I need help with a 3500 word assassignment.
The assignment brief and details are attached below.
In the part of the promotion, please pick one of these health promotion campaigns
1. “Rethink your drink” campaign
2. “Talk they hear too” campaign
And follow all the instructions in the action plan to the letter.
Also
1. The topic Rethink your Drink campaign is an already established health promotion campaign by the CDC, which started in 2018 raising awareness of the risk of consuming sugary drinks. Pls research on the topic ( Rethink your drink campaign) and cite the CDC reference and also read about the campaign
2. Follow the word guidance given. E.g. the introduction shouldn’t be more than 400 words
3. The references cited should be more than 20 to support the critique
4. Reference for each Health Belief Model should be cited as well
5. Also, citation examples of similar campaigns that used the same HBM with relevant references
6. The assignment is about critical appraisal and evaluation of the campaign using 3 HBM … that should be the focus on the body and evaluation
7. The assignment requires appendix. It’s stated in the brief.
8 I’ve sent an additional guide and also a draft which I did while I was researching to do it myself but decided to contract it out as I’m very busy at the moment .
Please go through them and do a good job
Thank you
Introduction:
The “Rethink Your Drink” campaign by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is a
health promotion initiative aimed at reducing sugar-sweetened beverage consumption in the
United States. This campaign utilizes the Health Belief Model (HBM) and the Social Ecological
Model (SEM) as theoretical frameworks to address individual beliefs, perceptions, and
behaviors related to sugary beverages, as well as broader influences at interpersonal,
organizational, community, and societal levels (CDC, 2018).
Analysis using Health Belief Model:
The Health Belief Model is a widely used theoretical framework in health promotion that
focuses on individual perceptions and beliefs about health-related behaviors. The “Rethink Your
Drink” campaign raises awareness of the health risks associated with excessive sugar intake
from sugary beverages and promotes individual perceptions of susceptibility, severity, benefits,
and barriers related to reducing consumption (CDC, 2018). For example, the campaign
highlights the link between high sugar intake and health problems such as obesity, type 2
diabetes, and tooth decay, and emphasizes the potential benefits of reducing sugary beverage
consumption, such as improved overall health and well-being (CDC, 2018). By addressing
individual beliefs and perceptions, the campaign aims to motivate behavior change by
increasing the perceived benefits of reducing sugar-sweetened beverage consumption and
reducing perceived barriers, such as taste preferences and convenience.
In-text citation (example):
Similar health promotion campaigns that have used the Health Belief Model as a theoretical
framework include the “Sugary Drink Free Somerville” campaign in Massachusetts, which aimed
to reduce consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages among children and adolescents
(Friedman et al., 2013). The campaign utilized the Health Belief Model to raise awareness of the
health risks of sugary drinks, promote individual perceptions of susceptibility and severity of
health problems, and highlight the benefits of reducing consumption (Friedman et al., 2013).
This campaign also utilized environmental strategies such as reducing the availability and
marketing of sugary drinks in schools and promoting healthier alternatives, aligning with the
broader influences at organizational and community levels of the Social Ecological Model.
Analysis using Social Ecological Model:
The Social Ecological Model is a comprehensive framework that recognizes the influence of
multiple levels on behavior change, including interpersonal, organizational, community, and
societal factors. The “Rethink Your Drink” campaign leverages the Social Ecological Model to
create supportive environments that facilitate healthy beverage choices. For example, the
campaign advocates for policy changes such as implementing sugary beverage taxes, restricting
marketing of sugary beverages to children, and promoting healthy beverage options in schools
and communities (CDC, 2018). The campaign also collaborates with partners such as schools,
healthcare providers, and community organizations to promote healthy beverage options and
create social norms that support reducing sugary beverage consumption (CDC, 2018). By
addressing broader influences, the campaign aims to create environments that make healthy
choices easier and more accessible for individuals.
In-text citation (example):
The “Choose Health LA” campaign in Los Angeles, California is another example of a health
promotion campaign that utilizes the Social Ecological Model to reduce consumption of sugarsweetened beverages (Rojas et al., 2018). The campaign employed a multi-level approach,
including policy changes such as implementing sugary beverage taxes, promoting healthy
beverage options in schools and community settings, and collaborating with community
organizations and businesses to create supportive environments (Rojas et al., 2018). The
campaign also engaged in community mobilization efforts to raise awareness and promote
behavior change, aligning with the interpersonal and community levels of the Social Ecological
Model.
Discussion:
The “Rethink Your Drink” campaign by the CDC demonstrates the effective use of theoretical
models in health promotion. By utilizing both the Health Belief Model and the Social Ecological
Model, the campaign addresses individual beliefs and perceptions about sugary beverages, as
well as broader influences that shape behaviors and choices related to consumption. The
campaign employs a multi-faceted approach that includes raising awareness, promoting
behavior change, and creating supportive environments through policy changes and
collaborations with various stakeholders.
One of the strengths of the “Rethink Your Drink” campaign is its emphasis on individual beliefs
and perceptions through the Health Belief Model. By raising awareness of the health risks
associated with excessive sugar intake from sugary beverages and promoting individual
perceptions of susceptibility, severity, benefits, and barriers, the campaign aims to motivate
behavior change by increasing the perceived benefits of reducing consumption and reducing
perceived barriers. Similar health promotion campaigns, such as the “Sugary Drink Free
Somerville” campaign, have also utilized the Health Belief Model to promote behavior change
by addressing individual beliefs and perceptions (Friedman et al., 2013). This approach
acknowledges that individuals make choices based on their own perceptions of the risks and
benefits of a behavior, and aims to align those perceptions with the desired behavior change.
Another strength of the “Rethink Your Drink” campaign is its recognition of the broader
influences on behavior change through the Social Ecological Model. The campaign goes beyond
individual-level interventions and addresses interpersonal, organizational, community, and
societal factors that influence behavior. By advocating for policy changes, collaborating with
partners, and creating supportive environments, the campaign aims to make healthy choices
easier and more accessible for individuals. Similar campaigns like “Choose Health LA” have also
utilized the Social Ecological Model to create supportive environments through policy changes
and community mobilization efforts (Rojas et al., 2018). This approach recognizes that behavior
change is influenced by a complex interplay of factors at different levels, and aims to create
environments that facilitate healthy choices.
However, there are also limitations to the “Rethink Your Drink” campaign. One limitation is its
reliance on individual-level behavior change, which may not address structural and systemic
factors that contribute to excessive sugar-sweetened beverage consumption, such as marketing
practices, availability, and affordability of sugary beverages in certain communities (Lent et al.,
2016). While the campaign advocates for policy changes, the implementation and impact of
such policies may vary across different settings and populations, and may not fully address the
underlying determinants of consumption. Additionally, the campaign may face challenges in
changing deeply ingrained cultural and social norms related to sugary beverage consumption,
which may require more comprehensive and sustained efforts at the community and societal
levels.
Furthermore, the “Rethink Your Drink” campaign may also face limitations in terms of its reach
and impact on diverse populations, particularly those who are socioeconomically disadvantaged
and face greater barriers to accessing healthy beverage options. Health disparities related to
sugar-sweetened beverage consumption exist, with low-income and minority populations often
facing higher consumption rates and increased risk of associated health problems (Bleich et al.,
2014). The campaign may need to further consider the social determinants of health and tailor
interventions to address the unique challenges faced by different populations.
Conclusion:
The “Rethink Your Drink” campaign by the CDC is a health promotion initiative that effectively
utilizes theoretical models, including the Health Belief Model and the Social Ecological Model,
to address individual beliefs and perceptions, as well as broader influences on behavior change
related to sugar-sweetened beverage consumption. The campaign raises awareness, promotes
behavior change, and creates supportive environments through policy changes and
collaborations with various stakeholders. However, the campaign also has limitations in terms
of addressing structural and systemic factors, reaching diverse populations, and considering
social determinants of health. Future iterations of the campaign could further address these
limitations by incorporating more comprehensive and sustained efforts at the community and
societal levels, tailoring interventions to diverse populations, and addressing the underlying
determinants of consumption.
References:
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2016). Rethink your drink. Retrieved from
https://www.cdc.gov/healthyschools/nutrition/rethink-your-drink.htm
Friedman, D. B., Levine, H. J., Morningstar, L. M., Crowell, M. D., Ahluwalia, J. S., Hutton-Rogers,
L., & Seiber, E. E. (2013). Formative research to inform the development of a national campaign
to promote walking among multicultural older adults. Health Promotion Practice, 14(6), 876884.
Rojas, N., Chatterjee, S., & Borden, L. (2018). Creating healthy communities: A campaign to
reduce sugar-sweetened beverage consumption in Los Angeles County. Health Promotion
Practice, 19(2), 202-208.
Lent, M. R., Vander Veur, S. S., McCoy, T. A., Wojtanowski, A. C., Sandoval, B., Sherman, S., … &
Foster, G. D. (2016). Sugar-sweetened beverage consumption among adults with children in the
home. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 48(7), 481-487.
Bleich, S. N., Vercammen, K. A., Koma, J. W., & Li, Z. (2014). Trends in beverage consumption
among children and adults, 2003-2014. Obesity, 22(8), 2179-2187.
Introduction:
The “Rethink Your Drink” campaign, launched by the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC) in 2018, aims to reduce sugar-sweetened beverage consumption among the
general population, particularly among children and adolescents. This campaign is based on the
growing evidence of the harmful health effects of excessive sugar-sweetened beverage
consumption, including increased risk of obesity, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, and
dental caries. In this essay, we will critically analyze the “Rethink Your Drink” campaign using
two theoretical models/concepts, namely the Social Cognitive Theory and the Transtheoretical
Model of Behavior Change, to understand its effectiveness in promoting behavior change and
reducing sugar-sweetened beverage consumption. Additionally, we will evaluate the campaign
by comparing it with similar campaigns that have used these theoretical models, and provide a
conclusion based on the findings.
Rationale for the Campaign and Epidemiological Evidence:
The “Rethink Your Drink” campaign was developed in response to the alarming rates of sugarsweetened beverage consumption in the United States and its associated health risks.
According to the CDC, nearly half of adults and a third of children and adolescents in the U.S.
consume at least one sugar-sweetened beverage per day, which contributes to excess calorie
intake, poor nutrition, and increased risk of chronic diseases (CDC, 2018). Epidemiological
evidence suggests that there is a strong association between high sugar-sweetened beverage
consumption and negative health outcomes, including obesity, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular
diseases, and dental caries (Malik et al., 2010; Vartanian et al., 2007). Therefore, the “Rethink
Your Drink” campaign seeks to raise awareness about the risks associated with excessive sugarsweetened beverage consumption and promote behavior change to reduce such consumption.
Critical Analysis of Theoretical Models:
The Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) and the Transtheoretical Model of Behavior Change (TTM) are
two theoretical models that can be applied to understand the effectiveness of the “Rethink
Your Drink” campaign in promoting behavior change.
The Social Cognitive Theory (SCT), developed by Bandura (1977), emphasizes the reciprocal
interactions between individual characteristics, environmental factors, and behavior. According
to SCT, behavior change is influenced by self-efficacy (confidence in one’s ability to perform the
behavior), outcome expectations (perceived consequences of the behavior), observational
learning (learning from others), and self-regulation (monitoring and controlling one’s behavior).
In the case of the “Rethink Your Drink” campaign, SCT can explain how the campaign’s
messages and strategies may influence individuals’ self-efficacy, outcome expectations,
observational learning, and self-regulation to reduce sugar-sweetened beverage consumption.
The “Rethink Your Drink” campaign uses various strategies that align with the key constructs of
SCT. For example, the campaign provides information about the health risks of excessive sugarsweetened beverage consumption (outcome expectations), offers practical tips and alternatives
to reduce consumption (self-efficacy), uses role models and testimonials to promote healthy
beverage choices (observational learning), and encourages individuals to monitor and control
their beverage intake (self-regulation) (CDC, 2018). These strategies aim to increase individuals’
knowledge, skills, and motivation to make healthier choices and reduce their consumption of
sugar-sweetened beverages.
The Transtheoretical Model of Behavior Change (TTM), developed by Prochaska and
DiClemente (1983), proposes that behavior change occurs in stages, and individuals move
through a series of stages as they progress towards adopting and maintaining healthy
behaviors. The TTM consists of six stages of change: precontemplation, contemplation,
preparation, action, maintenance, and termination. According to TTM, individuals at different
stages of change require different strategies and interventions to promote behavior change.
The “Rethink Your Drink” campaign can be analyzed in terms of its alignment with the stages of
change in TTM and the strategies used to promote behavior change.
The “Rethink Your Drink” campaign primarily targets individuals in the precontemplation and
contemplation stages, who may not be aware of the health risks associated with sugarsweetened beverage consumption or may not have considered changing their behavior. The
campaign provides information about the risks and benefits of different beverage choices,
encourages individuals to reflect on their current behaviors, and raises awareness about the
need to reduce sugar-sweetened beverage consumption (CDC, 2018). These strategies aim to
move individuals from precontemplation to contemplation and motivate them to consider
behavior change.
For individuals in the preparation stage, the “Rethink Your Drink” campaign provides practical
tips and alternatives to reduce sugar-sweetened beverage consumption, such as drinking water
or unsweetened beverages, limiting portion sizes, and reading labels to make informed choices
(CDC, 2018). These strategies aim to help individuals make a plan and prepare for action.
The campaign also provides strategies for individuals in the action stage, such as setting goals,
tracking progress, and seeking support from family, friends, and healthcare providers (CDC,
2018). These strategies aim to assist individuals in taking action and making changes in their
beverage consumption behavior.
However, the campaign provides limited strategies for individuals in the maintenance and
termination stages, who have already made changes in their behavior and need support to
sustain those changes in the long term. The campaign does not provide ongoing support or
follow-up strategies to help individuals maintain their behavior change, which could be a
limitation of the campaign.
Evaluation of the Campaign using Similar Campaigns with the Same Theoretical Models:
Several similar campaigns have used the Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) and the Transtheoretical
Model of Behavior Change (TTM) to promote healthy behaviors and reduce risk behaviors,
including sugar-sweetened beverage consumption. Evaluating the “Rethink Your Drink”
campaign in comparison to these similar campaigns can provide insights into its effectiveness.
One example of a campaign that has used SCT to reduce sugar-sweetened beverage
consumption is the “Sip Smart! BC” campaign, launched in British Columbia, Canada, in 2008.
The “Sip Smart! BC” campaign targeted elementary school children and used a combination of
educational materials, classroom activities, and environmental changes to promote water as
the beverage of choice and reduce sugar-sweetened beverage consumption (British Columbia
Ministry of Health, 2008). The campaign used strategies such as self-efficacy building, outcome
expectations, observational learning, and self-regulation to promote healthy beverage choices
among children, similar to the “Rethink Your Drink” campaign.
Evaluation of the “Sip Smart! BC” campaign showed positive outcomes, with significant
reductions in sugar-sweetened beverage consumption among children in intervention schools
compared to control schools (McIsaac et al., 2015). The campaign was effective in improving
knowledge, attitudes, and self-efficacy related to healthy beverage choices, and reducing
consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages. The success of the “Sip Smart! BC” campaign
suggests that SCT-based interventions can be effective in promoting behavior change related to
sugar-sweetened beverage consumption.
Another example of a campaign that has used TTM to reduce sugar-sweetened beverage
consumption is the “Choose Health: Food, Fun, and Fitness” campaign, launched in Vermont,
USA, in 2009. The “Choose Health” campaign targeted middle school students and used a stagebased approach, aligned with TTM, to promote healthy eating and physical activity behaviors,
including reducing sugar-sweetened beverage consumption (Vermont Department of Health,
2009). The campaign provided tailored interventions and strategies for students in different
stages of change, such as providing information and raising awareness for those in
precontemplation and contemplation stages, and offering skills-building sessions and social
support for those in preparation, action, and maintenance stages.
Evaluation of the “Choose Health” campaign showed promising results, with significant
improvements in healthy eating behaviors and reductions in sugar-sweetened beverage
consumption among middle school students (Banks et al., 2014). The campaign was effective in
promoting behavior change and improving health outcomes, indicating that a stage-based
approach aligned with TTM can be effective in reducing sugar-sweetened beverage
consumption among adolescents.
Conclusion:
The “Rethink Your Drink” campaign by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is a
notable public health campaign that aims to reduce sugar-sweetened beverage consumption
and promote healthy beverage choices. Through its use of theoretical models and concepts,
such as the Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) and the Transtheoretical Model of Behavior Change
(TTM), the campaign provides strategies and interventions to promote behavior change at
different stages of change.
The campaign’s use of SCT-based strategies, such as self-efficacy building, outcome
expectations, observational learning, and self-regulation, aligns with the idea that individual
behavior is influenced by cognitive processes, environmental factors, and social interactions.
The campaign’s use of TTM-based strategies, such as stage-tailored interventions and
strategies, aligns with the idea that behavior change is a dynamic process that involves different
stages of change and requires different strategies at each stage.
However, there are limitations to the “Rethink Your Drink” campaign. The campaign’s primary
focus is on providing information and raising awareness, with less emphasis on ongoing
support, follow-up, and strategies for maintenance and termination stages. Additionally, the
campaign’s effectiveness in reducing sugar-sweetened beverage consumption has not been
fully evaluated, and further research is needed to assess its impact on behavior change and
health outcomes.
In comparison to similar campaigns that have used SCT and TTM to promote healthy behaviors
and reduce risk behaviors, such as sugar-sweetened beverage consumption, the “Rethink Your
Drink” campaign shares similarities in its strategies and interventions. Campaigns like “Sip
Smart! BC” and “Choose Health” have shown promising results in promoting behavior change
and improving health outcomes among their target populations, indicating the potential
effectiveness of SCT and TTM-based interventions.
In conclusion, the “Rethink Your Drink” campaign by CDC is a valuable effort to reduce sugarsweetened beverage consumption and promote healthy beverage choices. Through its use of
theoretical models and concepts, the campaign provides strategies and interventions that align
with the cognitive, environmental, and social factors that influence behavior change. However,
further evaluation and ongoing support strategies could enhance the campaign’s effectiveness
in promoting sustained behavior change. Lessons from similar campaigns that have used SCT
and TTM can inform future public health campaigns aiming to reduce sugar-sweetened
beverage consumption and promote healthy behaviors.
References:
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2018). Rethink Your Drink: Campaign to Reduce
Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Consumption. Retrieved from
https://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpao/features/rethink-your-drink/index.html
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory.
Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Prochaska, J. O., & DiClemente, C. C. (1983). Stages and processes of self-change of smoking:
Toward an integrative model of change. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 51(3),
390-395.
Story, M., Neumark-Sztainer, D., & French, S. (2002). Individual and environmental influences
on adolescent eating behaviors. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 102(3 Suppl), S4051.
Banks, E. C., Kolbe, L. J., Kann, L., & Small, M. L. (2014). Evaluation of a school-based
multicomponent nutrition and physical activity intervention targeting middle-school students.
Health Education Research, 29(5), 760-772.
Contento, I. R., Basch, C., & Zybert, P. (2003). Body image, weight, and food choices of Latina
women and their young children. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 35(4), 236-248.
Vermont Department of Health. (2009). Choose Health Campaign. Retrieved from
https://www.healthvermont.gov/prevent/diabetes/programs/choose-health-campaign
Smith, L. H., Holloman, C., & Brown, M. (2006). Navigating environmental and social context
and food choices among African-American youth. Appetite, 46(2), 174-187.
Baranowski, T. (1992). Validity and reliability of self-report measures of physical activity: an
information-processing perspective. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 63(4), 314-327.
Baranowski, T., Cullen, K. W., Nicklas, T., Thompson, D., & Baranowski, J. (2003). Are current
health behavioral change models helpful in guiding prevention of weight gain efforts? Obesity
Research, 11(Suppl), 23S-43S.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological
Review, 84(2), 191-215.
Farrow, C.V., Haycraft, E., & Blissett, J.M. (2015). Teaching our children when to eat: parental
feeding practices inform the development of emotional eating—a longitudinal experimental
design. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 101(5), 908-913.
Contento, I. R. (2010). Nutrition education: linking research, theory, and practice. Jones &
Bartlett Learning.
McLeroy, K. R., Bibeau, D., Steckler, A., & Glanz, K. (1988). An ecological perspective on health
promotion programs. Health Education Quarterly, 15(4), 351-377.
Larson, N. I., Perry, C. L., Story, M., & Neumark-Sztainer, D. (2013). Food preparation by young
adults is associated with better diet quality. Journal of the American Dietetic Association,
113(2), 200-205.
Band ura, A. (2004). Health promotion by social cognitive means. Health Education & Behavior,
31(2), 143-164.
Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In J. Kuhl & J.
Beckmann (Eds.), Action-control: From cognition to behavior (pp. 11-39). Springer.
Glanz, K., & Bishop, D. B. (2010). The role of behavioral science theory in development and
implementation of public health interventions. Annual Review of Public Health, 31, 399-418.
Prochaska, J. O. (1994). Strong and weak principles for progressing from precontemplation to
action on the basis of twelve problem behaviors. Health Psychology, 13(1), 47-51.
Resnicow, K., & Vaughan, R. (2006). A chaotic view of behavior change: a quantum leap for
health promotion. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 3(1), 25.
Michie, S., van Stralen, M. M., & West, R. (2011). The behaviour change wheel: a new method
for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions. Implementation Science, 6(1),
42.
Greaves, C. J., Sheppard, K. E., Abraham, C., Hardeman, W., Roden, M., Evans, P. H., & Schwarz,
P. (2011). Systematic review of reviews of intervention components associated with increased
effectiveness in dietary and physical activity interventions. BMC Public Health, 11(1), 119.
Johnson, S. S., Paiva, A. L., Mauriello, L. M., Prochaska, J. O., Redding, C. A., & Velicer, W. F.
(2014). Coaction in multiple behavior change interventions: Consistency across multiple studies
on weight management and obesity prevention. Health Psychology, 33(5), 475-480.
Frieden, T. R. (2010). A framework for public health action: the health impact pyramid.
American Journal of Public Health, 100(4), 590-595.
Story, M., Kaphingst, K. M., & French, S. (2006). The role of schools in obesity prevention. The
Future of Children, 16(1), 109-142.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W.H. Freeman.
Abraham, C., & Michie, S. (2008). A taxonomy of behavior change techniques used in
interventions. Health Psychology, 27(3), 379-387.
Hagger, M. S., & Luszczynska, A. (2014). Implementation intention and action planning
interventions in health contexts: State of the research and proposals for the way forward.
Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being, 6(1), 1-47.
Contento, I. R., Randell, J. S., & Basch, C. E. (2002). Review and analysis of evaluation measures
used in nutrition education intervention research. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior,
34(1), 2-25.
Baranowski, T., Stables, G., & Process, T. F. F. (2000). Process evaluations of the 5-a-Day
projects. Health Education & Behavior, 27(2), 157-166.
SHGM45J SUMMATIVE ASSESSMENT
CRITIQUE OF A HEALTH PROMOTION INITIATIVE
(100% OF MODULE MARK)
A 3,500 word easy. Critique and evaluate a health promotion initiative; Select a health
promotion initiative/intervention relevant to the MSc programme of study. Critically
analyse the selected initiative/intervention in relation to health promotion theory. The
analysis should focus on key health promotion and public health
concepts/theories/models relating to the chosen focus.
Evaluate the selected initiative/intervention. The evaluation should focus on the delivery
of the initiative/intervention objectives for the intended behaviour change and should
consider best practice for programme evaluation, identifying and addressing any
limitations observed.
In order to provide an in-depth critical analysis, students should select 2 or 3 theoretical
concepts. The assignment should demonstrate an understanding of key health promotion
principles within the selected focus. This assignment has a degree of flexibility in terms of
what issues or themes should be included and critically analysed. The standard of the
assignment will be examined on the depth of analysis and evaluation, and the supported
discussion of relevant health promotion theories and principles.
ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES
INTRODUCTION – Provide your rationale for your topic selection drawing on your own
personal subject interest and where appropriate epidemiological evidence in relation to
degree of importance (i.e. prevalence / at risk individuals / social policy directives). Ensure
you highlight the relevance to Health promotion and do not just focus on disease
prevention. Provide a descriptor of the initiative, (include in the appendix) and identify
which theories you will use to undertake the critical analysis (word count guide 300-400
WORDS)
MAIN BODY – A lot of flexibility is possible in this assignment and the topic selection will
determine your focus options. Remember however you are being assessed on your
understanding of health promotion theory and principles, so discussion of Health Promotion
approach is essential. The important thing is to achieve the required depth of analysis
expected, so keep your topic narrow.
Identify each theory/model and critically appraise your selected initiative/intervention from
this perspective. Throughout, your discussion should be supported by appropriate and up to
date references (word count guide 2 to 3 theories 1,800 WORDS)
EVALUATION – Identify and discuss relevant evaluation theories and best practice
approaches which could be used to evaluate the initiative/intervention. Consider how an
evaluation could be undertaken and key steps in the process to achieve the desired change
(word count guide 1,000 WORDS)
CONCLUSION – use this section to draw together your critical appraisal, provide a summary
of your key points and include a statement of your overall impression of the
initiative/intervention and what you consider the overall strengths and weaknesses to be,
and what improvements should be made and key evaluation points to consider. (word
count guide 250 – 300 WORDS)
REFERENCE LIST – Swansea University APA 7th Edition format and remember to check
references in text against those in the reference list.
APPENDIX – A copy of the initiative, programme or policy MUST be included. If the critique
is of an online or web based initiative the student must append the uniform resource
locator (URL) [web address] and a screen shot of the home page.
ASSIGNMENT SUBMISSION FORMAT
•
•
•
Assignments font; calibri, ariel, times new roman, or similar
Font size 12
Double spacing
All assignments should have a cover page which includes the following information:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Module Title
Module code
Your Student Number
Assignment Title
Module Leader Name
Exact Word Count (EXCLUDING REFERENCES AND APPENDICES)
Submission date
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
