Task Description

You are required to select one nutritionally vulnerable community group and write a report analysing the socioecological factors that may impact their nutritional health and wellbeing.

Your analysis must move beyond individual behaviour to critically examine how broader social, cultural, environmental, economic, and policy-level factors shape food access, food choice, food security, and health outcomes for your chosen group.

You must justify why these factors are relevant using current, high-quality evidence and public health nutrition frameworks.

Choosing a nutritionally vulnerable community

A nutritionally vulnerable community experiences systemic disadvantage or increased risk of poor nutritional health due to structural, social, cultural, or environmental factors.

Examples may include (but are not limited to):

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities
Refugee or newly arrived migrant populations
Low-income households experiencing food insecurity
Rural or remote communities
Older adults living alone
People living with disability
Children in socioeconomically disadvantaged communities

You may choose a community group relevant to Australia or a global context, provided sufficient evidence is available.

Report focus and expectations

Your report should be structured and written in an academic, professional tone. While headings may vary, the report should clearly address the following:

1.     Introduction

• Briefly describe the chosen community group
• Justify why this group is considered nutritionally vulnerable
• Outline the purpose and scope of the report

2. Overview of nutritional health concerns

• Identify key nutrition-related health issues affecting the group
• Briefly link these concerns to broader public health nutrition priorities

3. Socioecological analysis

Using a socioecological framework, critically analyse factors at multiple levels that influence nutritional health, such as:

• Individual and interpersonal factors (e.g. health literacy, cultural food practices, household dynamics)
• Community and environmental factors (e.g. food environments, geographic access, availability and affordability of healthy foods)
• Social and cultural factors (e.g. cultural safety, historical context, social exclusion, community strengths)
• Systemic and policy-level factors (e.g. income support, food systems, public health nutrition policies, regulation, colonisation and its ongoing impacts)

Your analysis should demonstrate systems thinking, showing how these factors interact rather than considering them in isolation.

4. Implications for public health nutrition practice

Briefly reflect on how understanding these factors is essential for designing effective, culturally safe, and equitable nutrition interventions

5. Conclusion

• Summarise key insights from your analysis
• Reinforce the importance of addressing socioecological determinants in public health nutrition

Use of evidence

You must support your analysis with current, credible sources, such as peer-reviewed literature, government reports, and national or international public health nutrition guidelines.

Evidence should be used critically, not descriptively. 

This assessment should clearly set the scene for the felt needs assessment and nutrition intervention design for Assessment 2.

Level of Gen AI use allowed:

Level 2: You may use Al for planning, idea development, and research. Your final submission should show how you 
have developed and refined these ideas.

You will be assessed on your ability to:

• Critically evaluate socioecological, cultural, and systemic determinants of nutritional health
• Justify the relevance of these factors using appropriate evidence
• Apply public health nutrition frameworks effectively
• Communicate ideas clearly, logically, and professionally

Task Description

This assessment requires you to apply public health nutrition principles to the design of a community nutrition intervention for populations experiencing constrained food environments, from Assessment 1.

Using ethical and evidence-informed approaches, you will:

• Construct felt needs assessment interview questions and analyse the perceived (felt) needs of your chosen community,
• Use these needs to inform the design of a nutrition intervention, and
• Develop an evaluation plan to assess the effectiveness of the proposed intervention.

Cultural Responsiveness Requirement:
Students must demonstrate culturally responsive practice in their analysis, intervention, and evaluation. This includes consideration of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and their dietary practices, cultural food preferences, and systemic barriers to nutrition. Students are expected to incorporate these perspectives ethically.

As students are not able to collect primary felt needs data for this assessment, perceived (felt) needs must be explored using secondary or simulated data sources, which may include published qualitative data, case studies, or simulated interview responses generated using AI tools such as CoPilot or ChatGPT. Any simulated data must be clearly identified as simulated and must not be presented as real community consultation. We will explicitly discuss how you are to generate your felt needs assessment responses using AI during the Week 4 and 5 live recorded tutorial.

Please note: While the word count for this task is identical to Assessment 1, Assessment 2 requires a higher level of application and design (constructing a nutrition intervention and evaluation plan) compared to the purely analytical nature of Assessment 1, hence the higher weighting.

Your proposed intervention must:

• be informed by the identified felt needs,
• align with relevant nutrition guidelines, food standards, and regulatory frameworks, and
• demonstrate principles of health promotion, equity, and culturally responsive practice, with particular attention to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

This task assesses your ability to move from contextual understanding to practical, ethical, and evidence-based action in public health nutrition.

Report Focus and Expectations

This report must be presented as a structured report using clear headings and subheadings. The focus is on demonstrating the ability to move logically from community context, to identified perceived (felt) needs, to the design and evaluation of a feasible community nutrition intervention.

The report should include the following sections and remain within the suggested word limits.

1. Community Context (~100–150 words)

Briefly introduce the community group selected for Assessment 1, using strengths-based and culturally respectful language. This section should summarise:

• the community group and setting,
• key social, cultural, environmental, and systemic factors that shape food and nutrition experiences, and
• how broader structures and contexts contribute to nutrition-related inequities experienced by the community.

When describing the community, emphasise existing assets, strengths, cultural practices, resilience, and sources of knowledge relevant to nutrition, alongside any barriers or challenges.

This section should be concise and draw primarily on work completed in Assessment 1. Detailed epidemiological data is not required; however, contextual factors and culturally relevant considerations that will inform a strengths-based nutrition intervention should be clearly noted.

2. Felt Needs Assessment: Question Design and Data Generation (~250–300 words)

Develop a short set of felt needs assessment interview questions (approximately 5–8 open-ended questions) designed to explore the community’s perceived nutrition-related needs, priorities, and challenges.

As primary data collection is not required for this assessment, you will then:

• use an AI tool (e.g. ChatGPT or Copilot) to generate simulated responses from a hypothetical representative from your chosen community group of approximately 10 participants of varying demographic profiles (for example: cultural diversity, and variability relating to age , education attainment, household income)  and (if possible)
• draw on existing qualitative data from published reports, case studies, or publicly available sources.

You must clearly state:

• the approach used to generate or source the data, and
• the assumed characteristics of participants

Simulated data must be clearly identified as such. Interview or focus group questions should be included in the appendix and referenced in this section. Ensure cultural perspectives are considered in question design, especially where Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are represented or relevant.

3. Analysis of Perceived (Felt) Needs (~400–450 words)

Analyse the interview or focus group data to identify key themes representing the perceived nutrition-related needs of the population group.

In this section, you should:

• identify 2–4 key themes and prioritise these needs with justification,
• describe each theme clearly, and
• support themes with brief illustrative participant quotes.

Perceived needs must be framed as health needs or issues, rather than solutions or determinants (e.g. avoid framing needs as “more education” or attributing needs solely to individual behaviour).

Cultural considerations:

• Interpret data through a lens of culturally safe practice
• Consider Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander dietary practices, preferences, and systemic barriers where relevant

The focus of this section is on interpreting community perspectives, not on intervention design.

4. Proposed Community Nutrition Intervention (~350–400 words)

Using the identified felt needs, propose a community nutrition intervention that is appropriate to the community group and setting.

This section must include:

• a clear overall goal,
• 1-2 SMART objectives, and
• a set of practical strategies aligned with each objective.

The proposed intervention should:

• align with relevant nutrition guidelines, food standards, and regulatory frameworks,
• demonstrate principles of health promotion, equity, and culturally responsive practice, including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander considerations,
• be feasible and appropriate to the community context and
• be sure to include at least one relevant group-based education strategy.

This section requires a program proposal for an intervention, not a detailed implementation or budgeting plan.

5. Evaluation Plan (~200–250 words)

Outline a brief evaluation plan describing how the effectiveness of the proposed intervention could be assessed.

You should:

• Identify what aspects would be evaluated (e.g. process, impact, or outcomes),
• Suggest appropriate evaluation methods or indicators, and
• Briefly justify why these methods are suitable for the proposed intervention and population group.
• Include consideration of cultural relevance and acceptability for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. A high-level evaluation plan is sufficient; detailed tools or statistical analysis are not required.

Appendices (not included in word count)

Appendices must include:

• felt needs interview questions, and
• a brief description of how simulated data were generated.

Level of Gen AI use allowed:

Level 4: You may use Al extensively throughout your work either as you wish, or as specifically directed in your assessment. Focus on directing AI to achieve your goals while demonstrating your critical thinking.

You will be assessed on the following categories;

• Community context and use of Assessment 1
• Felt needs assessment design and data generation
• Analysis of perceived (felt) needs
• Nutrition intervention design (goal, objectives, strategies). 
• Evaluation plan
• Academic communication and use of evidence

Task Description

In this task, you will:

1. Conduct a food price survey at one local supermarket or general store where you live, using principles similar to the Healthy Diets ASAP method. You will record the prices of items in both a healthy (recommended) food basket and a current (unhealthy) food basket.
2. Contribute your data to the shared class Excel sheet (available on Moodle under the Assessment tile) no later than 5 pm, Friday Week 5. The combined dataset will allow you to:
   • Compare healthy vs. unhealthy basket costs across the class sample.
   • Analyse price differences and trends between locations.
3. Determine average household income for your survey location using ABS data (e.g., Census and SEIFA data). Use this information to assess the affordability of both healthy and unhealthy food baskets relative to local incomes.
4. Analyse the dataset and identify one interesting finding or trend. Examples could include:

• • A significant difference between healthy and unhealthy basket costs.
  • Items that are disproportionately expensive in particular areas.
  • Patterns of affordability or inaccessibility linked to income, remoteness, or socio-economic factors.

Write a 1,000-word commentary essay that:

• • Describes your finding and its significance in the context of public health nutrition.
  • Discusses affordability and/or accessibility in relation to nutrition-related health outcomes, including considerations for vulnerable populations and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities.
  • Connects your findings to Australian nutrition guidelines, food standards, and policy frameworks as appropriate.
  • Supports your analysis with credible evidence and incorporates a culturally responsive perspective.
     

Report Focus and Expectations

This assessment is presented as a structured analytical commentary and must use clear headings and subheadings. The emphasis is on demonstrating the ability to collect, analyse, and interpret food price and affordability data, and to critically discuss the implications for public health nutrition, equity, and access to healthy diets.

The report should move logically from description of the survey context, to analysis of food basket affordability, and then to interpretation of one key finding in relation to public health nutrition evidence, policy, and priority populations.

The report should include the following sections and remain within the suggested word limits.

Suggested Report Structure

1. Survey Context and Method Overview (~150–200 words)
Briefly describe:

• The location and type of food outlet surveyed
• The use of an ASAP-style food basket approach
• How the healthy (recommended) and current (unhealthy) baskets were defined
• The use of ABS income data to assess affordability

This section should demonstrate understanding of the method, not reproduce the full ASAP protocol.

2. Affordability Analysis and Key Finding (~300–350 words)
Using the combined class dataset:

• Present the cost of the healthy and current food baskets
• Describe how affordability was assessed using local household income data
• Clearly identify one key finding or trend emerging from the data

This may include differences by location, income level, remoteness, or basket type.

3. Interpretation and Public Health Nutrition Implications (~300–350 words)
Critically discuss:

• Why this finding matters for public health nutrition
• How affordability or accessibility may influence dietary patterns and nutrition-related health outcomes
• Implications for vulnerable populations, including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities

This section should demonstrate analytical thinking rather than simple description.

4. Policy, Guidelines, and Equity Considerations (~200–250 words)
Link your finding to:

• Australian Dietary Guidelines and relevant food standards
• Public health nutrition policy frameworks (e.g. food security, affordability, equity)
• Culturally responsive and equity-focused approaches to improving access to healthy diets

Level of Gen AI use allowed:

Level 2: You may use Al for planning, idea development, and research. Your final submission should show how you 
have developed and refined these ideas.

You will be assessed on the following categories;

• Food price survey context and method understanding
• Data analysis and identification of key finding
• Interpretation and public health nutrition implications
• Equity, vulnerable populations, and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander considerations 
• Use of evidence, policy and guidelines 
• Academic communication and referencing (5 marks)

Task Description

This assessment requires you to demonstrate your ability to critically defend a position on a contemporary public health nutrition issue, using evidence from peer-reviewed literature, policy documents, and population-level data.

You will select from a list of statements related to public health nutrition provided to follow. During a short individual oral defence (viva), you will be asked to critically respond to the statement, drawing on relevant evidence and concepts from across the unit.

This task assesses your ability to:

• synthesise research and provide policy evidence,
• demonstrate current systems and equity-based thinking,
• communicate clearly and professionally, and
• respond to questions that probe your understanding and reasoning.

The viva format reflects real-world public health nutrition practice, where professionals must justify decisions, interpret evidence, and respond to critique in professional settings.

Defence Statements

You will be asked to select and defend or critically respond to one statement. 

Choose one of the following statements; 

1. Improving food affordability alone is insufficient to address food insecurity in Australia.
2. Public health nutrition interventions that focus primarily on individual behaviour change risk reinforcing health inequities.
3. Current Australian nutrition guidelines inadequately address the needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.
4. Ultra-processed food availability is a greater driver of poor dietary patterns than individual choice.
5. Population-level nutrition interventions are more effective than targeted interventions for reducing dietary inequities.
6. Relocating supermarkets to eliminate 'food deserts' is less effective than increasing income support for improving the nutritional health of low-income households

Expectations for the Oral Defence

During your oral defence, you are expected to:

• Clearly articulate your understanding of the statement and your position in relation to it, demonstrating critical engagement rather than agreement or disagreement alone. You should explore multiple perspectives, acknowledge areas of uncertainty, and recognise potential biases or limitations in the evidence.
• Support your argument using relevant and credible evidence, which may include:
  • peer-reviewed research,
  • Australian nutrition guidelines,
  • relevant policy or regulatory frameworks,
  • population-level data or food consumption trends.
• Demonstrate understanding of socioecological and systemic influences on nutrition, including how factors beyond individual behaviour shape dietary patterns and health outcomes.
• Incorporate equity and culturally responsive perspectives, with appropriate consideration of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and other priority populations.
• Respond thoughtfully to follow-up questions, demonstrating the ability to reflect on your reasoning, assumptions, and interpretation of evidence in real time.

You are not required to use slides. Brief notes may be used to support your defence; however, responses should not be read verbatim. 

For this  Assessment task, please ensure a stable internet connection and a working camera for the 10-minute session. 

Individual students' oral defence will be recorded and stored by the University for moderation purposes, and as required. 

Level of Gen AI use allowed:

Level 2: You may use Al for planning, idea development, and research. Your final submission should show how you 
have developed and refined these ideas.

The 72-hour grace period does not apply to this assessment.

You will be assessed on the following categories;

• Position and critical argument 
• Use and interpretation of evidence
• Socioecological and systems thinking 
• Equity and culturally responsive perspectives 
• Oral communication and response to questions