Taking the Stand - Student Evaluation

Student Completing this form: ______________________ Name of Student FILL IN NAME OF STUDENT WHO IS BEING GRADED HERE Criteria Performance Indicators Proficient Needs Improvement Unacceptable Engagement & Awareness /2 The student approaches the recording with professionalism and passion. The student demonstrates a clear interpretation of a global is local issue in London. (Score 2.0 – 1.75) The student approaches the recording with a lack of passionate expression and/or professionalism. The student demonstrates an indistinct interpretation of a global is local issue in London. (Score 1.5 - 1.0) The student approaches the recording with unprofessionalism. The student demonstrates a missing interpretation of a global is local issue in London. (Score 0.75 - 0) Interpretation of Health Impacts /3 The issue is unique, and the student critically reflects on and articulated how the challenge and impacts the population of interest and the London community broadly. (Score 3.0 - 2.0) The issue is original but lacks critical reflection and/or clear articulation of the impacts on the population of interest and the London community broadly. (Score 1.75 - 1.0) The issue is unoriginal and missing critical reflection on and unclear articulation of the impacts on the population of interest and the London community broadly. (Score 0.75 - 0) Responding with Solutions /5 Recording identifies the complexity of the health inequity and system structures that are creating it. The student proposes evidence-based and feasible policy solutions to address the global is local issue. (Score 5.0 - 3.75) Recording superficially explores contextual issues that are impacting the inequity selected. Includes vague discussion of evidence-based policy solutions OR unreaslistic. (Score 3.5 - 2.0) Recording lacks discussion of contextual issues that are impacting the inequity selected. Student misses concrete details of evidence-based policy solutions. (Score 1.75 - 0) TOTAL /10

Name of Student FILL IN NAME OF STUDENT WHO IS BEING GRADED HERE Criteria Performance Indicators Proficient Needs Improvement Unacceptable Engagement & Awareness /2 The student approaches the recording with professionalism and passion. The student demonstrates a clear interpretation of a global is local issue in London. (Score 2.0 – 1.75) The student approaches the recording with a lack of passionate expression and/or professionalism. The student demonstrates an indistinct interpretation of a global is local issue in London. (Score 1.5 - 1.0) The student approaches the recording with unprofessionalism. The student demonstrates a missing interpretation of a global is local issue in London. (Score 0.75 - 0) Interpretation of Health Impacts /3 The issue is unique, and the student critically reflects on and articulated how the challenge and impacts the population of interest and the London community broadly. (Score 3.0 - 2.0) The issue is original but lacks critical reflection and/or clear articulation of the impacts on the population of interest and the London community broadly. (Score 1.75 - 1.0) The issue is unoriginal and missing critical reflection on and unclear articulation of the impacts on the population of interest and the London community broadly. (Score 0.75 - 0) Responding with Solutions /5 Recording identifies the complexity of the health inequity and system structures that are creating it. The student proposes evidence-based and feasible policy solutions to address the global is local issue. (Score 5.0 - 3.75) Recording superficially explores contextual issues that are impacting the inequity selected. Includes vague discussion of evidence-based policy solutions OR unreaslistic. (Score 3.5 - 2.0) Recording lacks discussion of contextual issues that are impacting the inequity selected. Student misses concrete details of evidence-based policy solutions. (Score 1.75 - 0) TOTAL /10

Name of Student FILL IN NAME OF STUDENT WHO IS BEING GRADED HERE Criteria Performance Indicators Proficient Needs Improvement Unacceptable Engagement & Awareness /2 The student approaches the recording with professionalism and passion. The student demonstrates a clear interpretation of a global is local issue in London. (Score 2.0 – 1.75) The student approaches the recording with a lack of passionate expression and/or professionalism. The student demonstrates an indistinct interpretation of a global is local issue in London. (Score 1.5 - 1.0) The student approaches the recording with unprofessionalism. The student demonstrates a missing interpretation of a global is local issue in London. (Score 0.75 - 0) Interpretation of Health Impacts /3 The issue is unique, and the student critically reflects on and articulated how the challenge and impacts the population of interest and the London community broadly. (Score 3.0 - 2.0) The issue is original but lacks critical reflection and/or clear articulation of the impacts on the population of interest and the London community broadly. (Score 1.75 - 1.0) The issue is unoriginal and missing critical reflection on and unclear articulation of the impacts on the population of interest and the London community broadly. (Score 0.75 - 0) Responding with Solutions /5 Recording identifies the complexity of the health inequity and system structures that are creating it. The student proposes evidence-based and feasible policy solutions to address the global is local issue. (Score 5.0 - 3.75) Recording superficially explores contextual issues that are impacting the inequity selected. Includes vague discussion of evidence-based policy solutions OR unreaslistic. (Score 3.5 - 2.0) Recording lacks discussion of contextual issues that are impacting the inequity selected. Student misses concrete details of evidence-based policy solutions. (Score 1.75 - 0) TOTAL /10

Name of Student FILL IN NAME OF STUDENT WHO IS BEING GRADED HERE Criteria Performance Indicators Proficient Needs Improvement Unacceptable Engagement & Awareness /2 The student approaches the recording with professionalism and passion. The student demonstrates a clear interpretation of a global is local issue in London. (Score 2.0 – 1.75) The student approaches the recording with a lack of passionate expression and/or professionalism. The student demonstrates an indistinct interpretation of a global is local issue in London. (Score 1.5 - 1.0) The student approaches the recording with unprofessionalism. The student demonstrates a missing interpretation of a global is local issue in London. (Score 0.75 - 0) Interpretation of Health Impacts /3 The issue is unique, and the student critically reflects on and articulated how the challenge and impacts the population of interest and the London community broadly. (Score 3.0 - 2.0) The issue is original but lacks critical reflection and/or clear articulation of the impacts on the population of interest and the London community broadly. (Score 1.75 - 1.0) The issue is unoriginal and missing critical reflection on and unclear articulation of the impacts on the population of interest and the London community broadly. (Score 0.75 - 0) Responding with Solutions /5 Recording identifies the complexity of the health inequity and system structures that are creating it. The student proposes evidence-based and feasible policy solutions to address the global is local issue. (Score 5.0 - 3.75) Recording superficially explores contextual issues that are impacting the inequity selected. Includes vague discussion of evidence-based policy solutions OR unreaslistic. (Score 3.5 - 2.0) Recording lacks discussion of contextual issues that are impacting the inequity selected. Student misses concrete details of evidence-based policy solutions. (Score 1.75 - 0) TOTAL /10