Develop an understanding in the work place
Develop a practical understanding and application of specific actions, processes, and techniques needed to move into the “next generation” of organizations.
Identify and describe organizational situations.
In assignment 2 you investigate two specific supply chain risk and vulnerability topics. The assignment is designed to develop your knowledge of these topics and to test your ability to formulate and structure a critical argument. You are to submit two 800 word (maximum) essays. The assignment is 50% of the module.
Choose 2 topics
Choose
List A
1) Supply chain risk management. Discuss one or two sectors in regard to the application and/or development of supply chain risk management.
2) Vulnerability of supply chains. Discuss one or two sectors using the ideas and model in Peck (2005).
3) Business Continuity Management (BCM). Discuss the relevance and/or application of BCM to one or two sectors.
List B
1) Modern slavery risk in supply chains. Discuss the issues and risks of modern slavery in the context of one or two sectors
2) Counterfeit risk in supply chains. Discuss the issues and risks associated with counterfeit materials and goods in the context of one or two sectors.
3) Conflict mineral risk in supply chains. Discuss the issues and risks of conflict minerals in the context of one or two sectors.
Create a question for each essay
Each essay is to discuss a topic in the context of one or two sectors in the list provided on the moodle site (and you can discuss different sectors to those you analysed in assignment 1). Do this by formulating and answering a question, such as:
Is the typical fresh food supply chain more susceptible to counterfeiting than the typical automotive supply chain?
Are aerospace supply chains becoming more or less vulnerable at levels 1 and 2 of the Peck model?
Why is modern slavery a continuing problem in tea supply chains?
The question is the title of your essay and you must answer the question. That does not mean you are obliged to give a clear-cut answer as the real world is not straightforward, but you need to tell the reader your answer. Don’t leave it to the reader to guess your answer.
Make use of literature in your essay
You must make use of literature. The purpose of the assignment is to increase your knowledge of topics and reading literature is the route to doing that. Be aware that 30% of the assignment mark is connected to quality, relevance and number of sources.
one topic from list A and one from list B.
Assignment 2 Specification v1 June 2021 1
Each essay must make use of and cite academic literature and can also make use of and cite other sources of information. It is probable you will have 8 to 12 or perhaps more references for each 800 word essay.
The reference list (which must be in APA format) should be divided into two sub-sections: Academic References and Other References.
Academic literature
You must make use of academic literature in each essay. An academic source is a journal article or book found through the library’s EBSCO Discovery Service or the library’s book catalogue. If you are not familiar with these services you should take time to learn how to use them.
Other literature
Non-academic literature and information about the topic and sector(s) you are analysing can be useful. Various Non-Governmental Organisations (NGO) write reports about issues in sectors and supply chains. News articles can provide supporting evidence for a line of argument. Web sources can be sources of data about a sector and supply chains.
SHADOW HEALTH- HEENT(HEAD-EYES-EARS-NOSE AND THROAT)
Shadow Health: “HEENT: Tina Jones”
Upon completion of the Shadow Health assignment, you need to synthesize the clinical findings from your completed assessment and provide a list of the following:
1:Assessment findings
2:Differential diagnosis
3:Final diagnosis
4:Pathophysiology of the selected diagnosis
5:Treatment plan utilizing the enclosed template, including any medication recommendations, along with the rationale
Your submission should be 3 pages with a minimum of 3 scholarly references and a minimum of 1 reference from UpToDate®. The faculty member will review your recorded assessment of “HEENT: Tina Jones” in Shadow Health prior to assignment grading.
Discuss and evaluate Inequalities in mental health
Inequalities in mental health
What you will learn
Learning outcome 1
Understand the forms of discrimination that can exist
within mental health
• A.C. 1.1 – Define the term ‘health inequality’
• A.C. 1.2 – Analyse the relationship between
discrimination and mental ill health
Learning outcome 2
Understand the perceptions of deviance and mental ill
health
• A.C. 2.1 – Define the concept of deviant behaviour
• A.C. 2.2 – Explain how deviancy amplification can occur
• A.C. 2.3 – Analyse the reasons for deviancy amplification
for people with mental ill health
Learning outcome 3
Know the ways in which agencies can address
discrimination towards people with mental ill health
• A.C. 3.1 – Analyse the approaches that agencies can take
to address discrimination towards people with mental ill
health.
Essay title
Explain the impact of social inequalities on the prevalence
of mental ill-health with reference to social class.
1000 – 1500 word essay.
LO3. Review a sample of scholarly research. LO4. Develop policy recommendations in a specific area of economics
This assignment is an individual written assignment not to exceed 2,000 words (exclusive of citations). It is a literature review and policy evaluation exercise, completed on a topic of the student’s own choosing.
The assignment is completed using a template available on the Moodle site. This document explains how students should complete that template, and outlines the criteria against which their submissions will be evaluated.
The assignment has some specific instructions:
• There are three sections to the assignment. Each has a designated word count. This is a strict maximum for each section. You cannot use a lower word count in one section to allow you to write more for another.
• Section 2 is the literature review. You are only allowed to review three articles in your review. You may cite as many items as you wish in Section 1 and Section 2.
• You are not permitted to include any of the following items in this document: graphs; tables; diagrams; quotations; and equations.
These instructions are strictly enforced during marking. Failure to respect these requirements will be reflected in the grade.
‘Legally, ethically and morally, the decision of the Court of Arbitration of Sport in CAS 2018/0/5794 Semenya vs International Association of Athletics Federations is monstrous’. Critically analyse this statement.
Assessment Task
You MUST answer both Part A and Part B:
Part A
Question Two
‘Legally, ethically and morally, the decision of the Court of Arbitration of Sport in
CAS 2018/0/5794 Semenya v International Association of Athletics Federations is monstrous’.
Critically analyse this statement.
(1,250 words)
You must also answer Part B
Part B
Sam Barnes is twenty-five years old and is a professional tennis player, playing on the ATP Tour. Originally from Bristol, Barnes now lives in Surrey with his girlfriend Tatiana Hesketh, a racing driver who races in Formula Three. Since bursting on to the tennis scene with a run to the semi-finals of the Men’s Singles at Wimbledon as a nineteen-year-old, Sam has matured into a top 16 player, and now regularly reaches the quarter and semi-finals of the grand slams, reaching the quarter-finals of Wimbledon again in 2019, the French Open in 2020 and the semi-finals of the Australian Open in 2020 and 2021. Sam has represented Great Britain and Northern Ireland in the Davis Cup, and is expected to represent his country again at the Tokyo Olympics in 2021. He is currently ranked 11 in the latest world rankings.
The International Tennis Federation (‘ITF’) administers the Tennis Anti-Doping Programme on behalf of the ATP. The ITF is a signatory to the World Anti-Doping Code (‘WADA Code’). Consequently, the Tennis Anti-Doping Programme (‘TADP’) seeks to implement the WADA Code in its entirety.
As a world-leading tennis player, Barnes is entered into the International Registered Testing Pool which means that he is subject to the ‘whereabouts’ provisions of the Tennis Anti-Doping Programme.
On 30th September 2020, Barnes received a notification from the ITF that he had missed his third out-of-competition test in the past twelve months. Consequently, Barnes has committed an offence under Article 2.4 of the TADP and WADA Code respectively. The details of the missed tests are as follows:
1) 28th January 2020
Barnes’s ADAMS profile stated that he would be at home between 6am and 7am. When testers arrived at 6:30am, he was not at home. Barnes was still travelling back from a tournament in Australia, as his flight was delayed by several hours due to bad weather.
2) 17th September 2020
Again, Barnes had stated on his ADAMS profile that he would be at home between 6am and 7am; testers arrived, but only his girlfriend, Tatiana Hesketh was at home. Hesketh told the testers that Barnes had made a last-minute decision to enter the ATP St Petersburg Open, in St Petersburg, Russia in order to get more match practice. On 17th September, Barnes played a second-round match.
3) 22nd September 2020
Again, testers turned up to Barnes’s home, at 6:30am on the basis that Barnes’s ADAMS information stated that he would be at home between 6am and 7am. Once again, no one was at home. On the 21st September, Barnes had played a semi-final at the St Petersburg Open, losing in three sets. Following his defeat, Barnes decided to stay in St Petersburg for a few days to do some sightseeing.
While at the St Petersburg Open, Barnes was tested following his Quarter-Final, played on the 19th September. On 1st October, Barnes was notified by the ITF that this test had come back positive for cocaine. As cocaine is on WADA’s Prohibited List, the positive test is evidence of a doping offence under Article 2.1 of the TADP and WADA Code.
Barnes immediately requested that his “B sample” was tested, which also came back positive for cocaine. Barnes has always taken seriously his status as an international athlete and role model and has campaigned to “stamp out doping” in sport. On the 2nd of October, Barnes made a statement to the media which stated the following;
I took part in the St Petersburg Open as an opportunity to get some extra match practice. The night before my Quarter-Final, I was invited to present an award at a ceremony organised by a Russian magazine and I agreed to do it. I attended the after-party with my agent, and before midnight, I felt strange, so I decided to leave. I have never taken any illegal drugs or doped in any way, and so I’m doing everything I can to determine how this positive test has happened.
The following day, a British tabloid newspaper, under the headline, “Is our Sam being stitched up by the Russians?” stated that the spiking of drinks in St Petersburg is rife, and that several other attendees to the after party may also have had their drinks spiked with drugs.
As is his right, Barnes requested that the matter be heard by the Independent Tribunal.
The Tribunal upheld both charges and found the following:
(a) That the sample (as confirmed by the testing of the B sample) tested positive for cocaine. Cocaine is a prohibited substance by virtue of its inclusion on the Prohibited List.
(b) That the presence of a Prohibited Substance in an athlete’s sample is doping offence as specified by Article 2.1 of the World Anti-Doping Code.
(c) Further, as The Code states, “it is each athlete’s personal duty to ensure that no Prohibited Substance enters his or her body”. Consequently, there is no excuse which can absolve Mr Barnes from responsibility in anyway.
(d) As regards the “whereabouts” offence, the failure lay in Barnes failing to update his location via ADAMS, which means that he is entirely culpable for this offence.
(e) Individually, both penalties would require a four-year ban, which means that the Tribunal has no option other than to impose an eight-year ban.
Astonished by the harshness of the findings of the Tribunal, and the fact that an eight-year ban would effectively end his career, Barnes wishes to appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) against both the findings and sanction imposed. Barnes has instructed your firm Chalk Dobson Nottingham, which specialises in Sports Law to act for him. Barnes has also told you that on the evening of 19th September, at the afterparty, he was approached several times by people who recognised him, asked for pictures and autographs. Shortly before he left, he was also told of rumours that some people were taking illegal drugs at the event.
You have been tasked with writing the main submission for the reference to CAS.
Write the submission to CAS on behalf of your client.
(2,000 words).
Assessment Learning Outcomes
a) Demonstrate a detailed knowledge of selected aspects of the law as it applies to sport
b) Demonstrate an understanding of the role of in the organisation and regulation of sport
c) Apply legal principles to moderately complex problem questions
d) Provide some critical evaluation of aspects of sports law and their significance to society
“Does the doctor always know best?”
Instructions:•
• You are required to submit a bibliography for this assessment.
This assignment is assessed and forms 25% of your overall module mark.
• Before writing your essay, you are advised to consult the assessment criteria used for marking. This is available on the Blackboard page ‘Law Assessment (undergraduate)’ under exam and assessment guides.
Please take note of the following information before beginning your assessment
• Summative assessments form part or all of your overall module mark.
• When uploading your essay, please ensure that in the ‘Submission Title’ box, you use your student number. This will ensure complete anonymity during the marking process.
• Do not put your name anywhere on your assessment (unless specifically instructed to do so). Doing so will break your anonymity.
• Your assessment must be completed and submitted as a Word Document. PDF files cannot be accepted and will not be marked.
• If your work is submitted late then you will be subject to late penalties being applied to your final mark.
• Penalties will be applied to over-length work. If your work exceeds the maximum word limit by 1- 300 words, an automatic penalty of 5 marks will be deducted from your essay. If you exceed the word limit by 301 words or more, a further 5 marks will be deducted.
• Full details on penalties can be found in the Assessment Handbook on Blackboard.
• Extensions are not granted. If you are unable to submit your assessment on time, please submit a mitigating circumstances application via your MyStudentRecord within 7 days of the original deadline.
• IT issues are not considered to be a mitigating circumstance. You should aim to finish and submit your work before the stated deadline to ensure that last minute errors do not occur.
• You are advised to back-up your work regularly either using a memory stick, OneDrive, an email or a printed hard copy.
• You must reference any sources cited using OSCOLA.
• Your cover page should include the following information: o Student Number
o Question Number or Title o Total word count
Essay Question:
“Does the doctor always know best?”
Critically discuss the question above, in the context of doctors’ professional standard of care and in light of relevant case law.
Sidenote:
• Please use Introduction, Body Paragraph and Conclusion* format.
• Please use OSCOLA referencing with footnotes.
Additional Resources/Readings:
*These readings may help to further understand the Essay Question*
https://research-information.bris.ac.uk/en/publications/delivering-informed-consent-post-imontgomeryi-implications-for-me
The Changing Face of Pre-Operative Medical Disclosure: Placing the Patient at the Heart of the Matter in Law Quarterly Review Article by Rob Heywood; José Miola
TRUMPING BOLAM: A CRITICAL LEGAL ANALYSIS OF BOLITHO’S “GLOSS” Published online by Cambridge University Press: Rachael Mulheron
Link: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008197310000826
Using a policy of your choice, assess the extent to which the policy is ‘fit for purpose’, including any changes you would make.
DRUGS AND SOCIETY
When thinking about whether or not the policy is ‘fit for purpose’, you may want to consider the
following:
-What is the main aim of the policy and how successful do you think it was in achieving this aim?
-Who created the policy?
-Who is the target audience of the policy?
-When/Where was the policy created?
-What does the policy tell us about perceptions/experiences of drugs over space and time?
-What are the intended and/or unintended consequences of the policy?
-Are there any exceptions to the policy?
-How is the policy enacted and enforced?
-How are harms/risks portrayed in this policy?
-How are drugs perceived in this policy?
-What are the moral and/or legal implications of this policy?
-How, if at all, do you think this policy could be improved?
-What changes would you make and why?
-How, if at all, do you think this policy has been impacted by COVID-19?
Select any two of the categories and explain to executive management why your selected categories are extremely important to organization effectiveness and efficiency.
HR Knowledge 1: The Legal Environment
Thoroughly review the following video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJhRXBpXTPI&t=1s
Based on your review, please respond to the following:
Specifically focus on the 4 categories of the regulatory environment. Select any two of the categories and explain to executive management why your selected categories are extremely important to organization effectiveness and efficiency. Remember, you are briefing executive management and not lower managers or employees, so your response should be appropriate to higher management communication.
Please make sure you follow instructions!!!
The references must be done exactly as the example is being sent.
