Referencing 10% Provided a comprehensive reference list and accurately referenced all sources using the modified Author-Date Harvard. Provided a comprehensive reference list and accurately referenced most sources using the Author- Date Harvard. Minor errors noted. Author-Date Harvard referencing style used to accurately reference the majority of sources. Several errors noted. Author-Date Harvard referencing style used but with frequent errors. Used incorrect referencing style or made a large number of referencing errors.

Presented a clear and logical discussion in an appropriate academic style. Some spelling or grammatical errors, and mostly suitable use of terminology. Written clearly with academic style and structure evident in most, but not all, paragraphs. Multiple examples of incorrect spelling, grammar and / or terminology. Did not present information in an academic style. Lacked clear and logical structure and written expression. Frequent spelling, grammatical and / or terminology errors.

Academic Writing 10% Consistently demonstrated a high level of academic writing with a clear & logical structure. Free from spelling, grammatical and/or terminology error. Presented a well-structured discussion in academic style with a clear and logical flow. Mostly correct spelling and grammar and appropriate terminology used throughout.

Process of comparing and contrasting two models is structured. Strengths, limitations, similarities and differences largely discussed at depth. Preference/non-preference for one model over the other and why, is clearly discussed. Two relevant models compared and contrasted. Discussion around strengths, limitations, similarities and differences is undeveloped. Preference/non-preference for one model over the other and why, is discussed at a basic level. Little or no evidence of understanding the purpose of the activity. Strengths and limitations not discussed at any depth. Similarities and differences largely omitted. No preference decided upon. Limited or no discussion of why one model is preferred over the other.

Compare and contrast two reflection models (one of which is a non- western model) 30% Well-structured throughout. Consistently high level of critical analyses. Arguments clear and comprehensive. Deep discussion of strengths, limitations, similarities and differences. Preference/reason for non- preference is clearly focused and succinct. Understanding of the process of comparing and contrasting is clearly and concisely demonstrated. Strengths, limitations, similarities and differences thoroughly discussed overall. Preference/reason for non-preference is clearly communicated at depth.

At least 2 person-centred strategies relating to planning and achieving personal and professional goals identified. Significance of professional development to practice is clearly demonstrated. At least 2 strategies identified. Limited depth of discussion. Demonstrates a basic understanding of person-centred approaches relating to planning and achieving professional development and how they benefit practice. Little or no identification of person centred strategies relating to required elements. Less than two strategies/processes identified and /or discussed for each element.

Identification and discussion of at least two person-centred strategies relating to planning and achieving professional development goals and how they benefit practice 10% At least 2 person-centred strategies identified and discussed at depth. Highly developed critical thinking demonstrated. In- depth analysis including future and solutions focused thinking related to personal and professional growth and improved client, outcomes. At least 2 person-centred strategies relating to planning and achieving personal and professional goals identified and discussed at depth. Demonstrates an in-depth understanding of the significance of reflection to personal development and professional practice.

At least 2 person-centred strategies identified for each element. Understanding of the significance of reflection for communication, empowerment, care of self is clearly demonstrated. 2 strategies identified for each element. Limited depth of discussion. Demonstration of understanding of person- centred approaches relating to required elements is present but superficial. Little or no identification of person centred strategies relating to required elements. Less than 2 strategies/processes identified and /or discussed for each element.

Identification and discussion of at least two person-centred strategies relating to: 1. personal and professional reflection (1 of each) 2. communication (2) 3. self-empowerment and self- care (1 of each) (2 strategies for each element) 10% At least 2 person-centred strategies identified and discussed for each element. Takes a global view. Broad, in-depth understanding and appreciation of the significance of reflection for person-centred communication, empowering and caring for self. At least 2 person-centred strategies identified and discussed for each element. Thorough, relevant discussion throughout, including person-centred approaches to communicate with and empower self.

Self -reflection undertaken. A basic understanding of the significance of self – reflection is demonstrated. Required elements are identified but not expanded upon to any significant depth. Definition demonstrates a superficial understanding of person- centred care. Little or no evidence of understanding the assessment purpose is demonstrated. Insufficient or no self-reflection undertaken. Limited discussion on personal and professional strengths and areas for improvement. Little or no attempt made at defining person-centred care Superficial depth of discussion overall, scattered and muddled thinking is demonstrated.

Reflection on personal and professional strengths, areas for improvement, and definition of person- centred care of self and others 20% Sophisticated and detailed self-reflection demonstrating a superior level of self-awareness, emotional intelligence and critical thinking related to strengths and areas for improvement. Definition is insightful, comprehensive and succinct. Detailed, focused reflection, demonstrating a high level of self- awareness and critical thinking related to strengths and areas for improvement. Definition demonstrates a thorough understanding of person-centred care Self-reflection is mostly clear and understanding of its purpose is apparent. Discussion demonstrates evidence of self-awareness and emerging critical thinking skills. All elements are discussed clearly. Definition demonstrates a clear understanding of person-centred care

Criteria High Distinction Distinction Credit Pass Fail Identification and discussion of at least 3 values that guide personal and professional decisions 10% At least three values. Identification and discussion of values is comprehensive and analytical. A high level of understanding of the significance of reflecting on values to improve practice is clearly demonstrated. Detailed breadth and depth of discussion. At least three values. Identification and discussion of values is insightful. Significance of the reflecting on values to improve practice is discussed at depth. At least three values. Identification and discussion of values is well-articulated. Significance of the reflecting on values to improve practice is clearly demonstrated. At least three values identified and discussed at a basic level. Significance of the reflecting on values to improve practice is present but not clearly demonstrated. Required elements absent or largely omitted. Less than three values identified and /or discussed.