Reference no: EM131237659 , Length: word count:350

Discussion - Module: 350 words maximum Vancouver style reference .

1. Read the following:

Nestle, M 2000, ‘Ethical dilemmas in choosing a healthful diet: vote with your fork!',Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, vol. 59, pp. 612-629.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/12212146_Ethical_dilemmas_in_choosing_a_healthful_diet_vote_with_your_fork!

Lang, T 2005, ‘Food control or food democracy? Re-engaging nutrition with society and the environment', Public Health Nutrition, vol. 8, no. 6A, pp. 730-737.

https://journals.cambridge.org/download.php?file=%2FPHN%2FPHN8_6a%2FS1368980005000996a.pdf&code=83c2dc720ddb398c81bc6fe8a66d382c

Chapter 12 in Lawrence, G, Lyons, K & Wallington, T 2010, Food security, nutrition and sustainability, London: Earthscan

Chapter 11, Paarlberg, R 2010, Food politics, Oxford: Oxford University Press

2. Compare and contrast the key issues raised by these readings. Write a summary evaluating the ideas presented.

Rationale:

Discussion posts help students to engage with their peers and share knowledge. In your future working lives you will need to be able to put forward your ideas in an authoritative way. This assessment task expects students to stimulate lively discussion by using a ‘conversational' tone, making reference to the scholarly literature where appropriate, while keeping submissions sharp and to the point. This assessment task has been scaffolded, whereby students start with shorter posts and as confidence and competence is developed, expectations of the depth of your analysis will rise with longer posts.

Purpose:

This assessment item will enable you to:

Develop skills in sharing knowledge with class members in a constructive way

Analyse and evaluate a variety of videos, journal articles and other materials relevant to course content

Develop skills in writing succinctly, using the scholarly literature to support your ideas.

Instructions:

You are expected to engage in all discussion tasks associated with the modules. To obtain a higher grade than a credit, you are required to complete all the assessable and non-assessable discussion tasks. You will be assessed on your overallparticipation (criteria 3) in the discussion throughout the unit. Only SIX assessable discussion activities will be assessed for knowledge (criteria 1) and communication skills (criteria 2). In your posts you are expected to critically appraise your peers' postings, but in a respectful and collegiate fashion. The specifics of each assessable and non-assessable discussions can be found on the unit Moodle site.

All students will be provided with feedback following their first two assessable postings (worth 10%, using the same marking rubric and dividing by 3). This will provide an opportunity to gauge your progress and the appropriate level of academic content in what for many of you may be the first experience in on-line learning. You will be assessed on the quality of the next four assessable postings (worth 30%), following the last posting. You may move the discussion in any broad direction that is related to the question/s and issues raised by the question/s. The Unit Convenor will monitor the Assessable Discussions regularly, and will intervene where appropriate e.g. to recognise a particularly valuable discussion or correct a misconception. It is the Assessable Discussion for you to explore in whatever directions and dimensions that you wish provided they are related to the question/s and the module/topic content. In addition, a penalty may be imposed if the Unit Convener believes that your language or content is inappropriate or offensive. Due levels of respect, professionalism and high ethical standards are expected of all at all times.