• Class Number 3219
  • Term Code 3330
  • Class Info
  • Unit Value 6 units
  • Mode of Delivery In Person
  • COURSE CONVENER
    • Dr Jinhu Li
  • LECTURER
    • Dr Jinhu Li
    • Dr Son Nghiem
  • Class Dates
  • Class Start Date 20/02/2023
  • Class End Date 26/05/2023
  • Census Date 31/03/2023
  • Last Date to Enrol 27/02/2023
SELT Survey Results

This course provides an introduction to health services research, health care systems, policy formulation and analysis. The overall aim of this course is to enable you to understand the principles of health services research and policy, including the frameworks for formulating and assessing health policy. The course aims to provide you with a broad overview of the structure and components of contemporary healthcare systems, methods and mechanisms in health services research and policy how they function. This includes equipping you with the capacities to draw on material from a wide range of sources.. The course syllabus will include:

·      Introduction to health care systems

·      Health services, goals and research

·      Health policy formulation, analysis and implementation

Learning Outcomes

Upon successful completion, students will have the knowledge and skills to:

  1. Describe the major components of the Australian health system and compare these with other countries.
  2. Describe Australia’s primary health care system and distinguish this from secondary and tertiary health care. Understand the structures that underpin the delivery of health care in Australia
  3. Understand the principles underpinning the evaluation of health services structure, process and outcomes, including some approaches to health services research and health system reform
  4. Understand the concept of policy making, involvement of potential stakeholders and their contributions to and influence on policy formulation
  5. Understand policy making on complex problems and challenges in policy implementation in health sector
  6. Systematically analyse health policy and develop alternative health policy reform proposals

Research-Led Teaching

All speakers make use of the disciplinary research to benefit student learning and outcomes. Some share their own research findings with the students and discuss the policy implications. Some speakers who work in the policy area share their real world experiences. This course has been designed to cover the disciplinary theories, methods, concepts, norms of health policy and administration with emphasis on population health with a view to helping student learning.

Field Trips

N/A

Additional Course Costs

N/A

Examination Material or equipment

N/A

Required Resources

N/A

Required readings and resources will be identified for each session and listed (or uploaded) on Wattle throughout the course.


Recommended student system requirements 

ANU courses commonly use a number of online resources and activities including:

  • video material, similar to YouTube, for lectures and other instruction
  • two-way video conferencing for interactive learning
  • email and other messaging tools for communication
  • interactive web apps for formative and collaborative activities
  • print and photo/scan for handwritten work
  • home-based assessment.

To fully participate in ANU learning, students need:

  • A computer or laptop. Mobile devices may work well but in some situations a computer/laptop may be more appropriate.
  • Webcam
  • Speakers and a microphone (e.g. headset)
  • Reliable, stable internet connection. Broadband recommended. If using a mobile network or wi-fi then check performance is adequate.
  • Suitable location with minimal interruptions and adequate privacy for classes and assessments.
  • Printing, and photo/scanning equipment

For more information please see https://www.anu.edu.au/students/systems/recommended-student-system-requirements

Staff Feedback

Students will be given feedback in the following forms in this course:

· Written comments on assignments;

· Verbal comments;

· Feedback to the whole class;

· To groups; and

· To individuals.

Student Feedback

ANU is committed to the demonstration of educational excellence and regularly seeks feedback from students. Students are encouraged to offer feedback directly to their Course Convener or through their College and Course representatives (if applicable). Feedback can also be provided to Course Conveners and teachers via the Student Experience of Learning & Teaching (SELT) feedback program. SELT surveys are confidential and also provide the Colleges and ANU Executive with opportunities to recognise excellent teaching, and opportunities for improvement.

Other Information

Adjustments to delivery in 2020

Course delivery and assessment in 2020 was adjusted due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Any information below that replaces what was published in the Class Summary for Semester 1, 2020 was approved by the Associate Dean Education (as is required after 10% commencement of a course). Where an activity or assessment is not referenced below, it remains unchanged.

Teaching Activities

  • Lectures were largely pre-recorded, though some were done by Zoom and then recorded and posted.

Assessment

Adjustments were made to assignment due dates; for details see the course Wattle site.

Class Schedule

Week/Session Summary of Activities Assessment
1 Introduction to Health Services Research. Essay plan, essay, presentation and online discussion
2 Health service organisation in Australia. Healthcare financing. Essay plan, essay, presentation and online discussion
3 International health systems. Healthcare expenditure in Australia. Essay plan, essay, presentation and online discussion
4 Health workforce. Health system reform. Essay plan, essay, presentation and online discussion
5 Health Economics. Economic evaluation. Online quiz and online discussion
6 Co-production in health research. Discrete Choice Experiments. Online quiz and online discussion
7 Qualitative method in health research. Causal identification methods in health research. Online quiz and online discussion
8 Implementation research. Value based healthcare . Online quiz and online discussion
9 Health budget stewardship. Health policy analysis. Assignment 2 essay and online discussion
10 Health policy and the budget cycle. The process of policy making. Assignment 2 essay and online discussion
11 Health Policy at the Local level. Advocacy in action/research. Assignment 2 essay and online discussion
12 Primary care reform. Assignment 2 essay and online discussion

Tutorial Registration

N/A as exercises and discussion are built into the lecture time slot and online discussion is available.

Assessment Summary

Assessment task Value Due Date Return of assessment Learning Outcomes
A comparison of Australia's health system with [selected country]'s health system 35 % 30/03/2023 20/04/2023 1
A policy analysis exercise 35 % 26/05/2023 30/06/2023 4,6
Formative assessment: 1) Essay plan; 2) Online quiz; 3) Online discussion posts 30 % * 30/06/2023 1,2,3,4,5,6

* If the Due Date and Return of Assessment date are blank, see the Assessment Tab for specific Assessment Task details

Policies

ANU has educational policies, procedures and guidelines , which are designed to ensure that staff and students are aware of the University’s academic standards, and implement them. Students are expected to have read the Academic Integrity Rule before the commencement of their course. Other key policies and guidelines include:

Assessment Requirements

The ANU is using Turnitin to enhance student citation and referencing techniques, and to assess assignment submissions as a component of the University's approach to managing Academic Integrity. For additional information regarding Turnitin please visit the Academic Skills website. In rare cases where online submission using Turnitin software is not technically possible; or where not using Turnitin software has been justified by the Course Convener and approved by the Associate Dean (Education) on the basis of the teaching model being employed; students shall submit assessment online via ‘Wattle’ outside of Turnitin, or failing that in hard copy, or through a combination of submission methods as approved by the Associate Dean (Education). The submission method is detailed below.

Moderation of Assessment

Marks that are allocated during Semester are to be considered provisional until formalised by the College examiners meeting at the end of each Semester. If appropriate, some moderation of marks might be applied prior to final results being released.

Participation

Face-to-face students are expected to attend lectures and contribute to discussions and any exercises during/following each lecture. When this is not possible students are expected to listen to the audio recording(s) of all lectures and discussions loaded onto Wattle. 

Examination(s)

N/A

Assessment Task 1

Value: 35 %
Due Date: 30/03/2023
Return of Assessment: 20/04/2023
Learning Outcomes: 1

A comparison of Australia's health system with [selected country]'s health system

Component 1: Write an essay (worth 25% of final mark).

Essay topic: A comparison of Australia's health system with [your choice/selected country]'s health system

Word limit: 2000 words excluding tables, figures and references

Grading : total marks = 100

Please use the following headings:

  • Introduction - 5 marks
  • Organisational and funding structure of the health systems - 30 marks
  • Provision of primary health care - 10 marks
  • Provision of hospital care - 10 marks
  • Provision of medicines – 10 marks
  • Conclusion - 15 marks

PLEASE NOTE:

Communication: Papers organisational structure, grammar and formatting – 10 marks

Use of evidence: Grasp and use of supporting evidence and accurate referencing - 10 marks


Component 2: Oral presentation to summarize the written essay (worth 10% of final mark).

Please note:

The oral presentation is to be recorded by the student and uploaded as a video file for assessment.

Due date for the presentation: 20th April, 2023 at 11.59pm

Rubric

GradeOrganisation and funding structureProvision of primary health carProvision of hospital carProvision of medicinesConclusion

High distinction

Identifies and clearly explains the organisational and funding structure of each country regarding primary health care, hospital care and medicines.

Identifies and clearly explains similarities and differences

Identifies and clearly explains the provision of primary health care in both countries

Identifies and clearly explains similarities and differences

Demonstrates an understanding of different types of primary health care

Identifies and clearly explains the provision of hospital care in both countries

Identifies and clearly explains similarities and differences

Demonstrates an understanding of different types of hospital care

Identifies and clearly explains the provision of medicines in both countries

Identifies and clearly explains similarities and differences

Demonstrates an understanding of different types of medicines

Derives plausible conclusions based on evidence.


Considers the implications of the comparisons in terms of access, equity and/or other quality measures 

Distinction

Identifies the organisational and funding structure of each country regarding primary health care, hospital care and medicines.

Identifies and explains similarities and differences

Identifies and clearly explains the provision of primary health care in both countries


Identifies and clearly explains similarities and differences

Identifies and clearly explains the provision of hospital care in both countries

Identifies and clearly explains similarities and differences

Identifies and clearly explains the provision of medicines in both countries

Identifies and clearly explains similarities and differences

Derives conclusions based on evidence.


Reflects on quality measures such as equity and access

Credit

Identifies some of the organisational and funding structure of each country regarding primary health care, hospital care and medicines.

Identifies similarities and differences

Describes what primary health care is provided in both countries but not how it is provided.


Identifies similarities and differences

Describes what hospital care is provided in both countries but not how it is provided

Identifies similarities and differences

Describes what medicines are provided in both countries but not how they are provided

Identifies similarities and differences

Makes statements based on evidence


Mentions quality measures but does not specify which measures

Pass

Identifies some the organisational and funding structure of each country.

Identifies similarities OR differences but not both

Describes provision of primary health care in both countries but not how it is provided.


Identifies similarities OR differences but not both

Describes what hospital care is provided in both countries but not how it is provided

Identifies similarities OR differences but not both


Describes what medicines are provided in both countries but not how it is provided

Identifies similarities OR differences but not both

Some statements made based on evidence


No mention of quality measures

Fail

Does not identify and/or clearly explain the organisational and funding structure of each country regarding primary health care, hospital care and medicines.

Does not identify similarities and differences

Partially identifies the provision of primary health care in both countries.


Does not identify similarities and differences

Partially identifies the provision of primary health care in both countries

Does not identify similarities and differences

Partially identifies the provision of medicines in both countries

Does not identify similarities and differences

Few statements made based on evidence


No mention of quality measures

Assessment Task 2

Value: 35 %
Due Date: 26/05/2023
Return of Assessment: 30/06/2023
Learning Outcomes: 4,6

A policy analysis exercise

A policy analysis exercise

You will be given the choice of two policies to analyse. Select one of these for analysis.

Word limit: 2000 words excluding tables, figures and references

Grading total = 100 marks

Please use the following headings:

  • The Policy Framework – 20 marks
  • Agenda Setting – 15 marks
  • Alternative Solutions - 15 marks
  • Criteria to be used in the decision-making framework - 15 marks
  • Implementation and Evaluation - 15 marks

PLEASE NOTE

Papers organisational structure, grammar and formatting – 10 marks

Grasp and use of supporting evidence and referencing - 10 marks

Rubric

GradePolicy frameworkAgenda settingAlternative solutionsDecision makingImplementation

High distinction

Clearly introduces the topic and locates it in the current and historical context

e.g. background of the policy and what it is designed to address.

Identifies and clearly explains who is affected by the policy and the nature of the health problem.

Derives plausible conclusions based on the evidence and demonstrates an ability to provide an informed opinion

Identifies and clearly explains how the policy entered the public agenda and got to be considered by policy makers, who set the agenda, and whether there is any evidence of policy networks of communities at work. For example:

i. who is affected, actors involved in the policy and

ii. how their efforts enabled or impeded the relationship,

iii. any processes including communication channels and events that promoted or impeded adoption of the policy

iv. what contextual factors influenced this policy in terms of enabling or constraining its development and/or implementation.

Derives plausible conclusions based on the evidence and demonstrates an ability to provide an informed opinion

Describes and clearly explains some possible alternative solutions considering some of the following approaches:

i. financial incentives (provide, consumer, other)

ii. education/information (provider, consumer, other)

iii. organisation infrastructure (new program, modification of existing program)

iv. collaboration with others (community, other orgs)

v. policy considerations (internal policies, payers’ (e.g. Medicare or employer) policies

vi. state or federal law or regulation.

Derives plausible conclusions based on the evidence and demonstrates an ability to provide an informed opinion

Identifies and clearly explains criteria to be used in the decision-making framework. For example:

i. population benefit

ii. ethics/equity

iii. perspectives of various constituencies beyond consumer and provider.

Derives plausible conclusions based on the available evidence and demonstrates an ability to provide an informed opinion

Identifies and clearly explains the impact and projected outcomes of the policy addressing:

i. relevance

ii. progress

iii. efficiency

iv. effectiveness

v. impact

Identifies areas for which there is no available information and elaborates on the implications of this.

Derives plausible conclusions based on the available evidence and demonstrates an ability to provide an informed opinion

Distinction

Clearly introduces the topic and locates it in the current and historical context e.g. background of the policy and what it is designed to address.

Identifies and partially explains who is affected by the policy and the nature of the health problem

Derives plausible conclusions based on the evidence and demonstrates an ability to provide an informed opinion

Identifies and partially explains how the policy entered the public agenda and got to be considered by policy makers, who set the agenda, and whether there is any evidence of policy networks of communities at work. For example:

i. who is affected, actors involved in the policy and

ii. how their efforts enabled or impeded the relationship,

iii. any processes including communication channels and events that promoted or impeded adoption of the policy

iv. what contextual factors influenced this policy in terms of enabling or constraining its development and/or implementation.

Derives plausible conclusions based on the evidence and demonstrates an ability to provide an informed opinion

Describes and partially explains some possible alternative solutions considering some of the following approaches:

i. financial incentives (provide, consumer, other)

ii. education/information (provider, consumer, other)

iii. organisation infrastructure (new program, modification of existing program)

iv. collaboration with others (community, other orgs)

v. policy considerations (internal policies, payers’ (e.g. Medicare or employer) policies

vi. state or federal law or regulation

Derives plausible conclusions based on the evidence and demonstrates an ability to provide an informed opinion

Identifies and partially explains criteria to be used in the decision-making framework. For example:

i. population benefit

ii. ethics/equity

iii. perspectives of various constituencies beyond consumer and provider

Derives plausible conclusions based on the available evidence and demonstrates an ability to provide an informed opinion

Identifies and partially explains the impact and projected outcomes of the policy addressing:

i. relevance

ii. progress

iii. efficiency

iv. effectiveness

v. impact

Identifies areas for which there is no available information and attempts to understand why

Derives plausible conclusions based on the available evidence and demonstrates an ability to provide an informed opinion

Credit

Locates the topic in the current and historical context e.g. background of the policy and what it is designed to address.

Partially identifies and partially explains who is affected by the policy and the nature of the health problem

Provides some conclusions and partially demonstrates an ability to provide an informed opinion

Partially identifies and partially explains how the policy entered the public agenda and got to be considered by policy makers, who set the agenda, and whether there is any evidence of policy networks of communities at work. For example:

i. who is affected, actors involved in the policy and

ii. how their efforts enabled or impeded the relationship,

iii. any processes including communication channels and events that promoted or impeded adoption of the policy

iv. what contextual factors influenced this policy in terms of enabling or constraining its development and/or implementation.

Provides some conclusions and partially demonstrates an ability to provide an informed opinion 

Partially describes and partially explains some possible alternative solutions considering some of the following approaches:

i. financial incentives (provide, consumer, other)

ii. education/information (provider, consumer, other)

iii. organisation infrastructure (new program, modification of existing program)

iv. collaboration with others (community, other orgs)

v. policy considerations (internal policies, payers’ (e.g. Medicare or employer) policies

vi. state or federal law or regulation

Provides some conclusions and partially demonstrates an ability to provide an informed opinion 

Partially identifies and partially explains criteria to be used in the decision-making framework. For example:

i. population benefit

ii. ethics/equity

iii. perspectives of various constituencies beyond consumer and provider

Provides some conclusions and partially demonstrates an ability to provide an informed opinion

Partially identifies and partially explains the impact and projected outcomes of the policy addressing:

i. relevance

ii. progress

iii. efficiency

iv. effectiveness

v. impact

Identifies areas for which there is no available information

Provides some conclusions and partially demonstrates an ability to provide an informed opinion

Pass

Locates the topic in the current and historical context e.g. background of the policy and what it is designed to address.

Partially identifies but does not explain who is affected by the policy and the nature of the health problem

Does not provide conclusions

Partially demonstrates an ability to provide an informed opinion

Partially identifies but does not explains how the policy entered the public agenda and got to be considered by policy makers, who set the agenda, and whether there is any evidence of policy networks of communities at work. For example:

i. who is affected, actors involved in the policy and

ii. how their efforts enabled or impeded the relationship,

iii. any processes including communication channels and events that promoted or impeded adoption of the policy

iv. what contextual factors influenced this policy in terms of enabling or constraining its development and/or implementation.

Does not provide conclusions and partially demonstrates an ability to provide an informed opinion

Partially describes but does not explain some possible alternative solutions considering some of the following approaches:

i. financial incentives (provide, consumer, other)

ii. education/information (provider, consumer, other)

iii. organisation infrastructure (new program, modification of existing program)

iv. collaboration with others (community, other orgs)

v. policy considerations (internal policies, payers’ (e.g. Medicare or employer) policies

vi. state or federal law or regulation

Does not provide conclusions

Partially demonstrates an ability to provide an informed opinion

Partially identifies but does not explain criteria to be used in the decision-making framework. For example:

i. population benefit

ii. ethics/equity

iii. perspectives of various constituencies beyond consumer and provider

Does not provide conclusions

Partially demonstrates an ability to provide an informed opinion

Partially identifies but does not explain the impact and projected outcomes of the policy addressing:

i. relevance

ii. progress

iii. efficiency

iv. effectiveness

v. impact

Does not identify areas for which there is not available information as a reason for not covering that aspect of implementation

Does not provide conclusions

Partially demonstrates an ability to provide an informed opinion

Fail

Does not locate the topic in the current and historical context e.g. background of the policy and what it is designed to address.

Does not identify or explain who is affected by the policy and the nature of the health problem

Does not provide conclusions

Does not demonstrate an ability to provide an informed opinion

Does not identify or explain how the policy entered the public agenda and got to be considered by policy makers, who set the agenda, and whether there is any evidence of policy networks of communities at work. For example, 

i. who is affected, actors involved in the policy and

ii. how their efforts enabled or impeded the relationship,

iii. any processes including communication channels and events that promoted or impeded adoption of the policy

iv. what contextual factors influenced this policy in terms of enabling or constraining its development and/or implementation.

Does not provide conclusion and does not demonstrate an ability to provide an informed opinion

Does not describe or explain some possible alternative solutions considering some of the following approaches:

i. financial incentives (provide, consumer, other)

ii. education/information (provider, consumer, other)

iii. organisation infrastructure (new program, modification of existing program)

iv. collaboration with others (community, other orgs)

v. policy considerations (internal policies, payers’ (e.g. Medicare or employer) policies

vi. state or federal law or regulation

Does not provide conclusions

Does not demonstrate an ability to provide an informed opinion

Does not identify or explain criteria to be used in the decision-making framework. For example:

i. population benefit

ii. ethics/equity

iii. perspectives of various constituencies beyond consumer and provider

Does not demonstrate an ability to provide an informed opinion

Does not identify or explain the impact and projected outcomes of the policy addressing:

i. relevance

ii. progress

iii. efficiency

iv. effectiveness

v. impact

Does not identify areas for which there is not available information as a reason for not covering that aspect of implementation Does not provide conclusions

Does not demonstrate an ability to provide an informed opinion

Assessment Task 3

Value: 30 %
Return of Assessment: 30/06/2023
Learning Outcomes: 1,2,3,4,5,6

Formative assessment: 1) Essay plan; 2) Online quiz; 3) Online discussion posts

Formative assessment is worth a total of 30% marks

1) Essay plan for the comparison of Australia's health system with [selected country]'s health system

Due date: 9th March, 2023, 11.59PM

Word limit: 750 words Value: 10% 

A essay plan template will be available on Wattle to complete.

2) Online Q&A based on module 2 (lectures in weeks 5,6,7,8)

Value: 10%

Due date: 4th May, 2023, 11.59 PM

The online Q&A will be available to complete from the 28/04/2023.

3) Ongoing discussion on the online forum

Due date: 26 May, 2023, 11.59 PM

On Wattle students will be asked to contribute to at least 5 posts of at least 150 words per post to a forum on the assignment tab in Wattle. For instructions please see the introduction to health services research and policy lecture slides.

The course convener will add in a weekly discussion topic related to the weekly lecture. Replies to this will be counted towards your final mark. The discussion must be posted in the forum found on the assignment tab in Wattle.

The post introducing yourself to the class is not counted towards your final mark.

Academic Integrity

Academic integrity is a core part of the ANU culture as a community of scholars. The University’s students are an integral part of that community. The academic integrity principle commits all students to engage in academic work in ways that are consistent with, and actively support, academic integrity, and to uphold this commitment by behaving honestly, responsibly and ethically, and with respect and fairness, in scholarly practice.


The University expects all staff and students to be familiar with the academic integrity principle, the Academic Integrity Rule 2021, the Policy: Student Academic Integrity and Procedure: Student Academic Integrity, and to uphold high standards of academic integrity to ensure the quality and value of our qualifications.


The Academic Integrity Rule 2021 is a legal document that the University uses to promote academic integrity, and manage breaches of the academic integrity principle. The Policy and Procedure support the Rule by outlining overarching principles, responsibilities and processes. The Academic Integrity Rule 2021 commences on 1 December 2021 and applies to courses commencing on or after that date, as well as to research conduct occurring on or after that date. Prior to this, the Academic Misconduct Rule 2015 applies.

 

The University commits to assisting all students to understand how to engage in academic work in ways that are consistent with, and actively support academic integrity. All coursework students must complete the online Academic Integrity Module (Epigeum), and Higher Degree Research (HDR) students are required to complete research integrity training. The Academic Integrity website provides information about services available to assist students with their assignments, examinations and other learning activities, as well as understanding and upholding academic integrity.

Online Submission

You will be required to electronically sign a declaration as part of the submission of your assignment. Please keep a copy of the assignment for your records. Unless an exemption has been approved by the Associate Dean (Education) submission must be through Turnitin.

Hardcopy Submission

For some forms of assessment (hand written assignments, art works, laboratory notes, etc.) hard copy submission is appropriate when approved by the Associate Dean (Education). Hard copy submissions must utilise the Assignment Cover Sheet. Please keep a copy of tasks completed for your records.

Late Submission

Late submission of assessment tasks 1 & 2 without an extension are penalised at the rate of 5% of the possible marks available per working day or part thereof. Late submission of assessment tasks is not accepted after 10 working days after the due date, or on or after the date specified in the course outline for the return of the assessment item. Late submission is not accepted for take-home examinations.


No submission of assessment tasks without an extension after the due date will be permitted for formative assessment tasks (task 3). If a formative assessment task is not submitted by the due date, a mark of 0 will be awarded.

Referencing Requirements

The Academic Skills website has information to assist you with your writing and assessments. The website includes information about Academic Integrity including referencing requirements for different disciplines. There is also information on Plagiarism and different ways to use source material.

Returning Assignments

Assignments will be available to view on Wattle.

Extensions and Penalties

Extensions and late submission of assessment pieces are covered by the Student Assessment (Coursework) Policy and Procedure. Extensions may be granted for assessment pieces that are not examinations or take-home examinations. If you need an extension, you must request an extension in writing on or before the due date. If you have documented and appropriate medical evidence that demonstrates you were not able to request an extension on or before the due date, you may be able to request it after the due date.

Resubmission of Assignments

Assignments may not be resubmitted

Privacy Notice

The ANU has made a number of third party, online, databases available for students to use. Use of each online database is conditional on student end users first agreeing to the database licensor’s terms of service and/or privacy policy. Students should read these carefully. In some cases student end users will be required to register an account with the database licensor and submit personal information, including their: first name; last name; ANU email address; and other information.
In cases where student end users are asked to submit ‘content’ to a database, such as an assignment or short answers, the database licensor may only use the student’s ‘content’ in accordance with the terms of service – including any (copyright) licence the student grants to the database licensor. Any personal information or content a student submits may be stored by the licensor, potentially offshore, and will be used to process the database service in accordance with the licensors terms of service and/or privacy policy.
If any student chooses not to agree to the database licensor’s terms of service or privacy policy, the student will not be able to access and use the database. In these circumstances students should contact their lecturer to enquire about alternative arrangements that are available.

Distribution of grades policy

Academic Quality Assurance Committee monitors the performance of students, including attrition, further study and employment rates and grade distribution, and College reports on quality assurance processes for assessment activities, including alignment with national and international disciplinary and interdisciplinary standards, as well as qualification type learning outcomes.

Since first semester 1994, ANU uses a grading scale for all courses. This grading scale is used by all academic areas of the University.

Support for students

The University offers students support through several different services. You may contact the services listed below directly or seek advice from your Course Convener, Student Administrators, or your College and Course representatives (if applicable).

Dr Jinhu Li
u1118227@anu.edu.au

Research Interests


Health economics, Causal inference econometric methods, Economic evaluation, Discrete Choice Experiments.

Dr Jinhu Li

Wednesday 14:00 16:00
Wednesday 14:00 16:00
Dr Jinhu Li
61255622
Jinhu.Li@anu.edu.au

Research Interests


Dr Jinhu Li

Wednesday 14:00 16:00
Wednesday 14:00 16:00
Dr Son Nghiem
61255622
Son.Nghiem@anu.edu.au

Research Interests


Dr Son Nghiem

Responsible Officer: Registrar, Student Administration / Page Contact: Website Administrator / Frequently Asked Questions