REHB8101 Assessment 1: Reflective Assignment Reflective Assignment: IPP competencies and Therapeutic Communication (Individual reflection)
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.
Critical reflection on IP competency. Interprofessional competency (choose ONE element only): |
|
|
Description. What happened? |
|
|
Feelings? |
|
|
Evaluation. What went well, what didn’t? |
|
|
Analysis (Critical reflection focus here) |
|
|
Conclusion and action plan |
|
|
2.
Critical reflection on therapeutic
communication. Therapeutic communication (learning
moment): |
|
|
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;
personal thoughts and assumptions clearly articulated and relevant. |
Clear description and relevant feelings
identified. |
Incomplete, unclear or overly descriptive. |
||
|
Evaluation (5%) |
Thoughtful and balanced evaluation clearly linked
to the chosen IPP competency. |
Clear evaluation of strengths and limitations. |
Minimal or absent evaluation. |
|||
|
Analysis (includes integration of
literature) (30%) |
Sophisticated critical analysis of assumptions,
team processes, professional identity or dynamics. Relevant IPP literature
integrated to compare and evaluate experience. Clear transformation in
understanding demonstrated. |
Strong critical analysis with clear integration
of relevant literature. Experience evaluated against theory. |
Clear analysis supported by relevant literature.
Some comparison evident. |
Analytical reflection evident (not merely
descriptive). Relevant literature applied meaningfully in analysis. |
Primarily descriptive. Literature absent or not
meaningfully applied. |
|
|
Conclusion & Action Plan (5%) |
Insightful synthesis and specific, realistic
behaviour-focused actions grounded in learning. |
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
therapeutic communication moment; emotional awareness evident and relevant. |
Clear description; relevant feelings identified. |
Incomplete or vague. |
||
|
Evaluation (5%) |
Balanced and thoughtful evaluation of
communication behaviours and relational impact. |
Clear evaluation of strengths and limitations. |
Minimal or absent evaluation. |
|||
|
Analysis (includes integration of
literature) (30%) |
Advanced critical analysis of verbal/non-verbal
behaviours, relational impact and missed opportunities. Therapeutic
communication literature integrated to evaluate effectiveness and demonstrate
transformation in understanding. |
Strong analysis with effective integration of
relevant communication theory. Clear comparison between theory and
experience. |
Clear analytical reflection supported by relevant
literature. Some evaluation evident. |
Analytical reflection evident (not merely
recounting events). Relevant theory applied meaningfully in analysis. |
Primarily descriptive. Literature absent or not
meaningfully applied. |
|
|
Conclusion & Skill Development Plan
(5%) |
Clear synthesis with highly specific and
practical strategies for future communication practice. |
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
Integrity (10%) |
Professional, coherent and critically reflective
writing. Accurate APA 7 referencing. Appropriate scholarly sources used. Word
limit adhered to. AI declaration accurate. |
Clear structure and reflective tone. No
referencing or expression errors. Requirements met. |
Structured and understandable. Referencing mostly
correct. Word limit adhered to. AI declaration included. |
Poor organisation. Significant referencing
errors. Word limit exceeded (marking stops at limit). AI declaration
missing/inaccurate. |
||