Purpose: You will have the opportunity to describe the pathophysiology

Purpose: You will have the opportunity to describe the pathophysiology and pharmacological management for a ‘person/client’ who has either asthma or alzheimer’s disease by making a vodcast. These conditions have been identified as National Health Priority Areas according to the Australian Institute for Health and Welfare. This assignment will also help you demonstrate effective communication in oral and written English language and visual media. Overview: This assessment task requires you to make a 7-minute recorded oral presentation referred to as a vodcast (a video with audio, written text and pictures/diagrams) about either asthma or alzheimer’s disease. You will need to include a video of yourself presenting in the recording. Vodcasts exceeding 7 minutes and 30 seconds in length will not be listened to after this point and will attract mark deductions. Further information about the vodcast, including the questions you need to address as part of your presentation, as well as the submission instructions will be provided on CANVAS in Week 5. Due date: 30th September at 10am Weighting: 25% Length and/or format: 7-minute video recording (Individual assignment) Learning outcomes assessed: LO2, LO3 How to submit: Submit your vodcast online through Canvas by the topic due date. Return of assignment: Marks to be released via the BIOL122 Canvas site within 3 weeks of the assessment due date Assessment criteria: Marking rubric Detailed description Choose one topic for submission. This assessment task requires you to make a 7-minute vodcast presentation (i.e., a video with audio, written text, and pictures/diagrams) about asthma or alzheimer’s disease. The vodcast will be assessed according to the following criteria: Coverage(or depth) of the subject matter, which includes the quality of your case and how well your client’s case is integrated how well your client’s case is integrated into your presentation, Accuracy of the information Clarity of the presentation Quality of the scenario created and the presentation Referencing Your vodcast has to be about a specific person who has either asthma or alzheimer’s disease. Your client and their case must be specific to your chosen profession: if, for example, you are a Bachelor of Midwifery student, your case must be about a pregnant woman (or someone who has recently given birth) and the relevance of the condition you are discussing must be evident in your presentation (see example below). Note that 12 marks (out of a maximum of 100) are associated with the quality of your case study and its relevance to your profession (see rubric), and therefore a case study that has no (or has only limited) relevance to your chosen profession will profoundly decrease the total number of marks your presentation may attract. You will then be required to answer a series of specific questions that relate directly to your person and the condition they have. All of your answers must be specific to this person, and mark deductions will be applied if your presentation does not relate to the person you have introduced. Please note that the answers to the specific questions should be integrated into your presentation and case study rather than stated as stand-alone answers unrelated to your client. Vodcasts are expected to stay within the 7-minute time limit. Presentations exceeding 7 minutes will incur mark deductions and will not be listened to beyond 7 minutes and 30 seconds (see rubric). When submitting your vodcast to Canvas, make sure you adopt the following naming principles: SURNAME_FIRST NAME_TOPIC. For example, if John Doe created a presentation on asthma, the file name would be “Doe_John_Asthma”. For further details, see the checklist provided for you. You will need to research your topic; please ensure that you keep a record of any references that you have used. You will be required to write an annotated bibliography containing 5-10 citations as part of this assignment. An annotated bibliography provides information regarding how you used the research to support your assignment. You will need to create your own person (living or fictional) according to the following criteria. You will need to introduce your client at the beginning of your presentation and present information about them that is relevant to your presentation. Information you may want to consider includes the following: Name, gender, age Diagnosed condition Information about risk factors that are relevant to your patient’s chosen condition (e.g. their weight, exercise level, occupation, family history, alcohol intake Information about any ongoing treatment or medications taken Note that not all information presented above may be relevant for your case study and/or other important information may not be stated in the example above. provide a details of whole presentation with references BIOL122 vodcast rubric v2 Criteria Ratings Points Depth Q1 view longer description 10 to >8.5 pts High Distinction The answer is complete, and all aspects of the problem are covered in enough detail 8.5 to >7.5 pts Distinction The answer has only a few minor omissions 7.5 to >6.5 pts Credit The main aspects of the question are covered, but the answer should have been more detailed 6.5 to >5 pts Pass There is one major point missing from the answer 5 to >0 pts N The question is not addressed at all, or there are several major points missing / 10 pts Accuracy Q1 view longer description 10 to >8.5 pts High Distinction The answer contains no incorrect information 8.5 to >7.5 pts Distinction The answer is good but contains some minor errors 7.5 to >6.5 pts Credit The answer is adequate but contains several minor errors 6.5 to >5 pts Pass The answer is acceptable but contains at least one major error 5 to >0 pts N The answer does not reflect adequate understanding of the subject matter / 10 pts Clarity Q1 view longer description 5 to >4.25 pts High Distinction The explanation is clear; scientific terminology is appropriately used 4.25 to >3.75 pts Distinction The explanation is clear, but some of the terms are not (or are inappropriately) used 3.75 to >3.25 pts Credit The explanation is clear, but scientific terminology is not appropriately used throughout 3.25 to >2.5 pts Pass Some elements of the explanation are unclear and/or confusing 2.5 to >0 pts N The explanation lacks clarity and/or is confusing / 5 pts Depth Q2 view longer description 10 to >8.5 pts High Distinction The answer is complete, and all aspects of the problem are covered in enough detail 8.5 to >7.5 pts Distinction The answer has only a few minor omissions 7.5 to >6.5 pts Credit The main aspects of the question are covered, but the answer should have been more detailed 6.5 to >5 pts Pass There is one major point missing from the answer 5 to >0 pts N The question is not addressed at all, or there are several major points missing / 10 pts Accuracy Q2 view longer description 10 to >8.5 pts High Distinction The answer contains no incorrect information 8.5 to >7.5 pts Distinction The answer is good but contains some minor errors 7.5 to >6.5 pts Credit The answer is adequate but contains several minor errors 6.5 to >5 pts Pass The answer is acceptable but contains at least one major error 5 to >0 pts N The answer does not reflect adequate understanding of the subject matter / 10 pts Clarity Q2 view longer description 5 to >4.25 pts High Distinction The explanation is clear; scientific terminology is appropriately used 4.25 to >3.75 pts Distinction The explanation is clear, but some of the terms are not (or are inappropriately) used 3.75 to >3.25 pts Credit The explanation is clear, but scientific terminology is not appropriately used throughout 3.25 to >2.5 pts Pass Some elements of the explanation are unclear and/or confusing 2.5 to >0 pts N The explanation lacks clarity and/or is confusing / 5 pts Depth Q3 view longer description 10 to >8.5 pts High Distinction The answer is complete, and all aspects of the problem are covered in enough detail 8.5 to >7.5 pts Distinction The answer has only a few minor omissions 7.5 to >6.5 pts Credit The main aspects of the question are covered, but the answer should have been more detailed 6.5 to >5 pts Pass There is one major point missing from the answer 5 to >0 pts N The question is not addressed at all, or there are several major points missing / 10 pts Accuracy Q3 view longer description 10 to >8.5 pts High Distinction The answer contains no incorrect information 8.5 to >7.5 pts Distinction The answer is good but contains some minor errors 7.5 to >6.5 pts Credit The answer is adequate but contains several minor errors 6.5 to >5 pts Pass The answer is acceptable but contains at least one major error 5 to >0 pts N The answer does not reflect adequate understanding of the subject matter / 10 pts Clarity Q3 view longer description 5 to >4.25 pts High Distinction The explanation is clear; scientific terminology is appropriately used 4.25 to >3.75 pts Distinction The explanation is clear, but some of the terms are not (or are inappropriately) used 3.75 to >3.25 pts Credit The explanation is clear, but scientific terminology is not appropriately used throughout 3.25 to >2.5 pts Pass Some elements of the explanation are unclear and/or confusing 2.5 to >0 pts N The explanation lacks clarity and/or is confusing / 5 pts Quality of the scenario created 12 to >10 pts High Distinction A strong and convincing case is presented, which is specific/relevant to the chosen profession, AND convincing and meaningful references are made to the case throughout the entire presentation 10 to >9 pts Distinction A reasonable case is presented, which is somewhat specific/relevant to the chosen profession AND several meaningful references are made to the case throughout the presentation 9 to >7.5 pts Credit The presentation makes some meaningful references to a case that is somewhat relevant to the chosen profession, but it could be stronger and more convincing 7.5 to >6 pts Pass The presentation attempts to make references to a case, but the case lacks clear relevance and/or the quality of the proposed case is poor 6 to >0 pts N The presentation submits a case that has no relevance to the chosen profession, OR no meaningful references are made to the case in the presentation / 12 pts Quality of the presentation 8 to >6.5 pts High Distinction The overall quality of the presentation (including intonation, tempo of delivery, slide design, creativity, and following all the instructions) is excellent 6.5 to >6 pts Distinction The overall quality of the presentation is good 6 to >5 pts Credit The overall quality of the presentation is adequate 5 to >4 pts Pass The quality of the presentation is acceptable 4 to >0 pts N The slide design is confusing and is of poor quality and/or the speech is unintelligible or computer-generated / 8 pts Referencing 5 to >4.25 pts High Distinction Bibliography is fully annotated, all sources are credible, and the bibliography is appropriately formatted 4.25 to >3.75 pts Distinction Bibliography is fully annotated, most sources are credible, and the bibliography is appropriately formatted 3.75 to >3.25 pts Credit Bibliography is mostly annotated and some of the sources are credible and/or the bibliography has a few minor errors 3.25 to >2.5 pts Pass Bibliography is not appropriately annotated/formatted but includes credible sources of information 2.5 to >0 pts N Bibliography is missing and/or is not annotated and/or does not include credible sources / 5 pts Time penalty 0 pts Full marks The presentation is not longer than 7 minutes and 5 seconds???No time penalty 0 pts No marks Time deductions 7:06 and 7:10 = -2 marks; 7:11 and 7:20 = -4 marks; 7:21 and 7:30 = -6 marks; Greater than 7:30 = -10 marks and presentation is no longer listened to / 0 pts Total points: 0

******CLICK ORDER NOW BELOW AND OUR WRITERS WILL WRITE AN ANSWER TO THIS ASSIGNMENT OR ANY OTHER ASSIGNMENT, DISCUSSION, ESSAY, HOMEWORK OR QUESTION YOU MAY HAVE. OUR PAPERS ARE PLAGIARISM FREE*******."