National Open University and Distance-UNAD

Academic and Research Vice rectory

Activities guide and Evaluation Rubric

1. Course description

School Health Sciences School

Level Undergraduate
Academic field Elective disciplinary specific
Course name Geopolitics and environment
Code 151021
Enableme Ye No
Type of course Methodological ☒ ☐
nt s t
Number of 2
credits

2. Activity description:

Type of Individu Collaborativ

☒ ☒ Weeks 6
activity: al e
Moment of Intermediat
Initial ☐ ☒ Final ☐
evaluation: e, Unit: 1
Evaluative weight: 75 Delivery environment: Monitoring
points and evaluation
Starting date: September
End date: October 15, 2018
06, 2018
Competence to developed:

The task-based learning strategy (ABT) will be used for the

management of learning in response to the problem nucleus. The ABT
involves the students in a process that contributes significant meaning
to the development of the task. In this way, the work is not of
memorization, but the exploration, organization, and transfer of the
best solution to the task are expected. Its implementation involves
the definition of several limited, autonomous tasks (microtasks) that
contribute to the accomplishment of a broader task (macro task)
which in turn motivates the development and increases the
importance of micro-tasks (Guichon, 2006). In ABT the activity is
oriented by a learning goal in which the students elaborate a real and
authentic product, they seek to achieve one or several specific
objectives that must be reached in a determined time.
The central focus of the ABT is that activities have real meaning for
students. The activities and the tasks can be in two ways, one has to
do with what the student needs to do or get done in his real life; And
another that is related to a specific pedagogical objective of a course.
The teacher becomes a "monitor", that is to say, is not in the center
of the learning process but goes next as an observer and guide to the
achievement of the proposed objectives, allowed the student all his
protagonism when putting into play his previous and new knowledge,
interests and tastes, as well as his strategies of interaction with the
resources and people that surrounded him in the accomplishment of
the task.
Thematics:
Pre-task, Task Cycle and Post task

Products Phases of Learning Strategy:

to be
delivered Individual Activity
by the Conceptual review through a search of the bibliographic
student information suggested in relation to the themes of the
unit.

Solve the questions for each topic:

Topic 1: Definition of geopolitics

• What is the modern definition of geopolitics?
What are the characteristics of geopolitical criticism?

Topic 2: Environmental determinants of health

• What are the environmental determinants of health?
• What are the theoretical models for addressing
environmental determinants?

Topic 3: Sustainable human development and

geopolitics
• What is the relationship between geopolitics,
globalization and sustainable development?
• What are the strategies that favor the environment and
human development?
Academic products and weighting of individual
activity

You must upload the resolved questions to the

collaborative working environment.

Total weighting:

75/175

Collaborative activity *

Students will first designate the job roles according to the

Guidelines for the development of collaborative work at the end
of this guide.
The student will work as a team with the members of the
group in which:

1. Review the Environmental Determinants document and

from there select a problematic situation that creates
affects the context where it lives and / or works. It
performs an analysis of the affectations to health
(magnitude, frequency, and severity) and the impacts
on the human development of the chosen problem.

2. It establishes a conceptual map where it characterizes

the causal chain of the chosen problematic, beginning
with the geopolitical context, that affects the
environment and in turn, generates environmental
determinants to the health and effects on the human
development.

3. Write a three-page document where you construct the

health problem and characterizes and sustains it from
the concepts learned.

Academic products and weighting of collaborative

activity

The consolidated work must be uploaded to the evaluation and

monitoring environment, complying with the presentation
rules.
 
Participation in the Collaborative Forum according to assumed
roles will be considered.

Total weighting:

100/175
 General guidelines of the collaborative work for the
development of the activity

The steps that constitute the exercise of collaborative

work on the part of the students are presented below:

First step: recognition of actors as subjects. Students

at the beginning of the course, in the space destined
to do so, will recognize as participants of a
collaborative group, they can present their strengths
to the group's service and define the communication
channels.
Planning
activities Second step: planning of academic activities.
for the According to the elements that make up the principle
developmen of responsible action, students can design a work plan
t of based on the analytical reflection of the activity
collaborativ agenda, the evaluation plan, the guides and rubrics
e work given for the development of each activity Academic

Third step: the staging of the principles of

collaborative work. It is important that students
internalize each of the principles of collaborative work
and implement from the beginning of the academic
course and with the assurance excellence in their
learning processes and the presentation of written
products that respond to the expected quality in the
Course.
Roles to be Director: Organize, coordinate, directing and evaluate
developed based on their experience on the topic, the debate
by the within the group.
student Co-director: Complement and highlight the
within the contributions that are relevant to the final product.
collaborativ The leader of the debate: Generate the academic
e group debate required to highlight concepts and domains on
(Debate) the topic of discussion. It permanently questions the
group in the search for bridges between what has been
learned and what is proposed.
Rapporteur: To argue rigorously to enrich the subject,
 is the one that collects and systematizes the
information to be delivered to the compiler.
Compiler: Elaborate the document that is constituted
as the final product of the debate and the academic
synthesis within the collaborative group and the
cooperative and ensures compliance with the criteria
of the rubric.
Compiler: Consolidate the document that is constituted
by the final product of the debate, considering that the
participants included were only who intervened in the
process. You must inform the person in charge of the
alerts to whoever notifies those who did not
participate, that they are not included in the product to
be delivered.
Reviewer: Ensure that the writing complies with the
Roles and presentation rules of the work required by the teacher.
responsibili Evaluator: Ensure that the document contains the
ties to criteria present in the rubric. You must inform the
produce person in charge of the alerts so that you inform the
deliverables other members of the team in case any adjustments
by students need to be made on the subject.
Deliveries: Alert on the delivery times of the products
and send the document in the stipulated times, using
the resources destined for the shipment, and indicate
to the other partners that the delivery has been made.
Alerts: Ensure that the members of the group are
notified of new developments at work and inform the
documents in the work forum and messaging of the
course, which has sent the document.
Recommend 1. Permanent reading of the documents presented in
ations by the course
the teacher: 2. Autonomous distribution of study times. At least 6
hours a week
3. Presentation of high quality argued papers
4. Permanent participation in forums
5. Participation in the chat + skype of each teacher. It
is advisable to consult the synchronous and
asynchronous attendance schedules of your teacher in
the teacher accompaniment agenda that are in the
initial information environment.
 Use of the APA standard, version 3 in Spanish
(Translation of the English version 6)
Use of
For the presentation of written works must consider
references
the criteria of the form presented in each of the guides
of activities
Plagiarism What is plagiarism for UNAD? Plagiarism is defined by
policies the dictionary of the Royal Academy as the action of
"substantially copying other people's works, giving
them as their own." Therefore, plagiarism is a serious
offense: it is the academic equivalent, to theft. A
student who plagiarizes does not take his education
seriously and does not respect the intellectual work of
others.

There is no small plagiarism. If a student makes use of

any portion of another person's work and does not
document their source, they are committing an act of
plagiarism. Now, it is evident that we all have the
ideas of others when it comes to presenting ours, and
that our knowledge is based on the knowledge of
others. But when we rely on the work of others,
academic honesty requires that we explicitly announce
the fact that we are using an external source, either by
appointment or by an annotated paraphrase (these
terms will be defined below). When we make an
appointment or a paraphrase, we clearly identify our
source, not only to give recognition to its author but
also to allow the reader to refer to the original if he
wishes.

There are academic circumstances in which,

exceptionally, it is not acceptable to quote or
paraphrase the work of others. For example, if a
teacher assigns his or her students a task in which
students are clearly asked to respond using their ideas
and words exclusively, then the student should not
appeal to external sources even if they are properly
 referenced.

4. Evaluation Rubric Format

Evaluation Rubric Format
Type of Individual Collaborativ
☒ ☐
activity activity e activity
Moment of
Intermediat
the Initial ☐ ☒ Final ☐
e, unit 1
evaluation
Evaluat Level of performance individual activity Score
ed
aspects High valuation Half Valuation Low Valuation
The student does
The student
The not answer all
poses answers to The student does
answer guiding questions
the guiding not answer the
to the and / or in some
questions, based guiding
guiding cases is not based 75
on bibliographical questions.
question on bibliographic
references
s references
(Up to 75 (Up to 50 (Up to 0
points) points) points)
Final 75
 NATIONAL OPEN UNIVERSITY AND DISTANCE-UNAD

COURSE: Geopolitics and environment

EVALUATION RÚBRIC UNIT 1
Performance Criteria of Collaborative Activity
Evaluated Scor
High valuation Half valuation Low valuation
aspects e
The student
presents the
incomplete
The student presents
workshop and
The student does the the middle of the
partially complies
workshop and meets specified goals. Do the
with the evaluation
the evaluation aspects publication in a timely
aspects specified
specified. Publishes in manner according to
in the workshop,
a timely manner the the rectoral resolution
publishes in an
work in the of the collaborative
untimely manner
collaborative forum work and the complies
according to the
Delivery of and complies with the with the APA
rectoral resolution  40
the work. APA standards for standards of
of collaborative
referencing and referencing and
work and does not
submission of papers. submission of papers.
comply with the
The work is original The work is copied or
APA standards of
and not copied or pasted from other
reference and
pasted from other sources in a
presentation of
sources. percentage higher
works. The work is
than 70%.
copied or pasted
from other
sources.
(Up to 40 points) (Up to 25 points) (Up 0 points)
 NATIONAL OPEN UNIVERSITY AND DISTANCE-UNAD

COURSE: Geopolitics and environment

EVALUATION RÚBRIC UNIT 1
Performance Criteria of Collaborative Activity
Evaluated Scor
High valuation Half valuation Low valuation
aspects e
The report
The report evidences The report shows a
demonstrates a clear
a regular low argumentation
Consolidate and coherent
argumentation of the of the analysis in
d report of argumentation of the
analysis in the forum, the forum, most of
the debate analysis in the forum
instead, some the individual  40
of the of the individual
individual responses responses are
forum questions and the
are added. copied.
form of the workshop.
(Up to 40 points) (Up to 25 points) (Up to 0 points)
 The student does
The student  The student
not participate in
participates in the participates in the
the forum with an
forum with at least 3 forum with 2
argument based
The debate contributions argued contributions argued
on the comments
of the against the comments against the comments  20
of the classmates,
Forum of the companions, of the classmates,
with bibliographic
with bibliographic with bibliographic
support,
support, evidencing support, evidencing
evidencing his
his knowledge his knowledge
knowledge.
(Up to 20 points) (Up to 10 points) (Up to 0 points)
Final  100
Final Score 175