In no more than 2 pages, you will write an advocacy letter arguing for a call to action about my chosen topic (chemical pollution in air). This will need to be addressed to government. You will need to refer to the assessment 1 and blog 2 for reference.Please refer to the attached documents for the precise instructions. I have also included examples of advocacy letters.Many thanks.
Assessment 2: Advocacy Letter GUIDELINES Due date: 8 November 2019 @2 pm Weighting: 30% of Semester total This assessment is designed to develop a core health promotion skill: advocacy. Oral and written communication skills are vital to effective health promotion practice. In this assessment, you will practice building evidence-informed arguments that are succinct and informative and written for a government official/audience or industry official. This assessment is completed in two stages: Task: Develop an Advocacy Letter intended to raise awareness and issue a call for action in response to your chosen Planetary Health topic from Assessment 1. In your first assessment you used the evidence to discuss the role of Health Promotion in responding to a particular planetary health challenge. To raise awareness of your chosen topic/challenge, your task for this assessment will be to write an advocacy letter to a relevant government or industry official. In no more than 2 pages, you will write an advocacy letter arguing for a call to action about your chosen topic. Your audience is a government official of your choosing (e.g. Minister of Health, Minister of Environment, or Prime Minister) or a relevant industry official, so your language should be formal and accessible, and your argument succinct and evidence-based. Your letter can focus locally or globally. You will need to: Explain the topic/challenge you have chosen and why it matters • Include relevant evidence to describe the problem and why it matters. This may be in a defined setting/population, geographic location etc. • Think about establishing a sense of urgency about this challenge. Explain the significant human health impacts of your chosen topic and why this matters OR the aspects of our society which either protect or jeopardise the health of natural systems, and by extension, jeopardise human health. This will obviously depend on which aspect of planetary health you focussed on in Assessment #1. • Include the relevant evidence. • You can choose to focus on a particular population or geographical location. You will need to make sure it is clearly linked with your chosen topic. Outline recommendations for the government or industry official, in terms of calls to action. • The proposed recommendations need to address how governments and/or industry should go about increasing public awareness about the importance of your chosen topic with the potential for acting on it with programs/policies. This means considering what needs to happen to raise awareness and/or specific changes needed to address the issue from a health promotion perspective. The proposed recommendations must be realistic and feasible, and be informed by evidence. • Include relevant evidence to support proposed recommendations. Communication style and presentation An advocacy letter requires a balance of professional, accessible and evidenced-informed writing. This means that you are expected to develop rational arguments about the significance of this health challenge, drawing on credible, peer-reviewed evidence. These arguments need to be developed in a logical and coherent manner to be persuasive and effective in creating change. This means avoiding contradictory statements and ensuring all content is relevant and ultimately consistent with the recommendations. You will have limited space to make your arguments so you will need to write as comprehensively and succinctly as possible. To help, it might be useful to focus on a particular area of the problem (e.g. a particular health consequence of climate change). Remember, the audience for an advocacy letter is not interested in the research/analysis procedures conducted to produce the evidence. Instead, the audience wants to know the writer’s perspective on the problem and potential solutions or ways forward. Keep the content relevant to the scope of the assessment outlined above. The Letter needs to be: Clear and coherent structure The content is structured to create a concise and informative letter. As a result of this clear structure, the arguments flow in a logical manner. The writer may use clear descriptive subheadings to guide the reader through the argument. Focussed and succinct writing To provide an adequately comprehensive but targeted argument, the focus of the letter needs to be limited to a particular problem or area of a problem. All aspects of the letter (from the message to the layout) need to strategically planned out to focus on achieving the intended goal of convincing the target audience of the significance of the problem and the importance of the proposed recommendations. Professional and accessible language This refers to using clear and simple language (i.e. not academic jargon), and also providing well explained and easy to follow arguments. Do not assume your reader has prior in-depth knowledge of the topic so write for a professional, but “lay” audience, explaining concepts clearly in accessible language. Adheres to conventions of written English The word choice, grammar punctuation and spelling adheres to conventions of written English. Appropriately referenced Acknowledges sources and adheres to referencing conventions, in text and in reference list. Adheres to presentation requirements Adheres to presentation requirements and word limit (no more than 2 pages, excluding references). Please note that any text over the 2 page limit (excluding the references) will not be marked. Use 11-12 point Times New Roman, 1.5 spacing throughout and 2cm margins. References Please present the references at the end of your letter in ‘Vancouver’ format. For guidance on the use of citation styles, refer to the UQ library on http://www.library.uq.edu.au/useit/. References are not included in the 2 page limit. Recommended readings Below is a list of some background articles you may wish to read: Chapman, S. (2015) Reflections on a 38-year career in public health advocacy: 10 pieces of advice to early career researchers and advocates. Public Health Research and Practice, 25(2). Doi.10.17061/phrp2521514 Please see examples of advocacy letters in the Assessment Folder on Blackboard. Submission instructions: 1. This assignment is to be uploaded via the TurnItIn submission link on Blackboard. This includes all EXTERNAL and INTERNAL students. Instructions are on the Blackboard site. 2. You must read the student declaration before you submit your assessment. 3. Please make sure you have received your submission receipt. http://www.library.uq.edu.au/useit/ Assessment 1 - Advocacy Letter Marking Criteria Criterion Standards to achieve a mark of: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 CONTENT Describe your planetary health problem and why it matters – include relevant evidence to describe the problem and why it matters. This may be in a defined setting/population (25%) No description of the problem. No rationale for why the specific planetary health issue matters. No use of evidence. Description unclear and lacking in logic; Inconsistent use of evidence. Some description of problem but unclear or lacking in logic. Minimal use of evidence. Satisfactory description of problem. Partially clear and logical. Described elements of the problem. Mixed use of evidence. Good description of problem and why it matters is somewhat clear and logical ; Some arguments are supported by evidence. Very good description of problem and why it matters is mostly clear and logical; Arguments are mostly supported by relevant evidence. Excellent description of problem and why it matters is clear and logical; Arguments are insightful and supported by a critical selection of high quality relevant peer-reviewed articles. Describe the significant human health impacts of the planetary health problem and why this matters - include relevant evidence to describe the human health impacts of the planetary health issue and why it matters. This may be in a defined setting/population, or in general. (25%) No description of the human health impacts and why it matters. No use of evidence. Description of human health impacts are unclear and lacking in logic; Inconsistent use of evidence. Description of human health impacts are partially clear and somewhat logical; Described some elements of the problem. Minimal use of evidence. Satisfactory description of human health impacts -partially clear and logical; Satisfactory description of elements of the problem. Mixed use of evidence. Good description of human health impacts - somewhat clear and logical. Some arguments are supported by evidence. Very good description of human health impacts - mostly clear and logical. Arguments are mostly supported by relevant evidence. Excellent, clear and logical description of human health Arguments are well-supported by relevant evidence. Outline recommendations for government or industry official to address the human health impacts of the planetary health problem: inclusive of relevant evidence to support proposed recommendations. (25%) No recommendations provided. No use of evidence. Recommendations are not relevant to the context/audience. Recommendations are unclear or lacking in logic. Minimal use of evidence. Recommendations are partially relevant/specific to the context and the audience. Recommendations are partially logical, clear. Minimal use of evidence. Satisfactory recommendations – partially clear and logical but not clearly specific to the context and audience. Mixed use of evidence. Good recommendations - somewhat relevant and specific to the context and the audience. Recommendations are somewhat logical and clear. Some use of evidence. Very good recommendations - mostly relevant and specific to the context and the audience. Recommendations are mostly logical, clear and evidence-based. Excellent recommendations - highly relevant and specific to the context and the audience. Recommendations are logical, clear and evidence-based. COMMUNICATION STYLE AND PRESENTATION Clear and coherent structure – content structured to create a concise and informative document; arguments flow logically; may use sub-headings to help structure. (5%) Little to no attention to structure; arguments difficult to follow. Very little structure but difficulty in following arguments. Some structure but lacks coherence and logical flow. Structure is partially logical, clear and informative; some difficulty in following arguments. Structure is somewhat logical, clear and informative; somewhat easy