Medicine writing

Medicine writing

Paper instructions:
There are 2 options in the requirements, you need to listen to the voice tape(online, and the link is in the requirements), then do the paper!
About these 2 options, pls choose the first one.

Task Description
The task is a scientific narrative, communicating science to a lay audience, based on a
trigger from the ABC Health Report and taking into consideration the aspects of
narrative The task consists of two sections, the narrative to a lay audience and the
rationale for the narrative.

For this task you must select a story from the Health Report from:

for-acute-low-back-pain/5621820
OR

5640822
You should listen to both the stories and select one that is of interest to you.
The task has 2 components €“
1. Telling the story €“ The Narrative (300 €“ 500 words)
Imagine you are going to tell a story to a group of non-science friends at a quiet dinner party.
Write this 300 €“ 500 word story so that it conveys the essence of the particular Health Report
that you’ve selected. REMEMBER: you are telling a story. Even though you want to give the
vital information, you also want the listener or reader to get really interested in the topic to
care about what you are are telling them. Don’t just summarise the report. Use some
storytelling techniques to draw the listener in and to hold their attention till the pay-off’ comes
sometime before the end of the story.
2. Explaining your choices €“ The Rationale (400 words)
Write a 400 word piece that that explains the storytelling choices that you made: how did you
adjust your story to suit the context of the dinner party and the listeners who were there; how
did you use characters, setting, intrigue, rhythm and so on; of all the information that you
could have included, how did you decide on what you kept in and what you left out; how did
you decide on the order in which you delivered the information, emotions, mood-adjustments
and so on; what theme or message or moral of the story’ did you convey effectively to the
listener/reader; is there anything special and new that you’ve realised or learned as a result
of doing these two tasks? And feel free to mention things that you couldn’t get right; things
that you know a good storyteller would do but that you haven’t figured out yet.
Assessment Criteria
The assessment is worth 10% of your final BMED2405 unit of study mark.
Marks will be broken down thus:
Narrative €“ /4
Rationale €“ /4
Science €“ /2
In the narrative we will assess:
effectiveness of storytelling: the conscious use of narrative technique and style to convey
information in an engaging way. e.g. how well you’ve deployed the various techniques of
storytelling. (NB: you don’t have to use ALL the techniques. Part of good storytelling is
knowing which techniques to use and which ones to avoid for each particular context and
drama.)
consistency of style: do you use the same narrative style or switch narrative modes? If
you switch modes, how effectively have you done this?
engagement of the intended audience: how effectively have you engaged the intended
audience
initial engagement and maintenance of engagement: how effective the story is: how
intriguing is it; how much does it draw the reader/listener in; how well does it appeal to
the emotions (e.g. the curiosity or maybe the empathy or maybe the anxiety of the
reader/listener)
how clearly has the main information (or theme or moral) come across by the end of the
story.
In the rationale we will assess:
evidence that you have understood and how well you have understood some of the basic
technical aspects of storytelling
how well you’ve rationalized use of the various techniques of storytelling, including which
techniques you used and which you avoided
rationalefor your selective narrative style
The narrative is practical and creative. The rationale is analytical and expository.
Page 3
The Science component will be evaluated throughout the narrative and rationale. In the
Science we will assess:
communication of science (as per task description)
use of scientific language conveyed in casual context OR justification of analogy
conveyance of scientific concepts even if not using jargon, by analogy or with sufficient
description to a lay audience to communicate the concepts effectively.
Marks for the Science component broadly fit within the following standards of attainment:
0.5 limited reference to any science or limited communication of the science
1 light on the science or concepts conveyed with limited effectiveness
1.5 well communicated key concepts
2 communication of the scientific concepts to a lay audience couldn’t be bettered
As per other assessments in BMED240X we use the following standards of attainment in the
overall grading of your assessments.
Grade Descriptors Explanation / Interpretation