Produce a 10-minute film presentation and write a 300-word individual reflective commentary (40%). This assignment has two parts:
Part 1) Students will work in groups up to 5 students to produce a 10-minute video presentation to show how a group of people with a protected characteristic has its needs responded to by different areas of the human services.
In planning and organising your film presentation, you are required to do the following:
(1) outline service needs of a group of people with a protected characteristic;
https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/Documents/Advice%20booklets/equlity-act-2010-overview.pdf
(2) account for the role and main duties, responsibilities and tasks of the professions involved, and the challenges they have encountered, in developing a response to those needs – answer the following questions:
How do the needs of a group of people with a protected characteristic are met by a team of different professionals?
What are the main duties/responsibilities of the professionals involved?
What have the main challenges in dealing with this group been?
What arrangements would you have for improving equality and diversity?
(3) A critical analysis of relevant policy and legislation of your service user group with a protected characteristic, assessing whether they are meeting the needs of your chosen group. A place to start your search would be the Department of Health (https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-of-health) and for policies prior to 2014 (http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/*/http://www.doh.gov.uk/).
(4) finally, you also need to provide at least one recommendation as to how the professional role performed by you could further be developed in relation to your service user group.
Sample Solution
Toward the finish of Olympian 9, the tribute for Epharmostos, the boss wrestler from Opountian Lokris, Pindar proclaims phya, his quirky rendering of physis (“by and large best”: Ol. 9.100);[1] he says that the envoy’s announcement should record that his victor was conceived (“with speedy hands, agile legs, assurance in his look”), all the normal and acquired enrichments vital for athletic achievement (Ol. 9.108ff).[2] Despite his accentuation on Epharmostos’ introduction to the world (“with perfect assistance he was conceived”), Pindar, bizarrely, names neither the dad of the victor nor recognizes any family at all. In a class as worried about family and way of life as epinikian, the exclusion is striking and conceivably inconvenient for the talk of epinikian acclaim. Mill operator comments that such an exclusion would more likely than not just happen at “the guidance of the customer himself”, and accordingly we ought to reason that Epharmostos did not respect family or father’s name “as basic to his self-definition.”[3] Pindar’s encomium still capacities, however the nonappearance of family exasperates a large number of the normal highlights of epinikian, particularly the standard combination of phya and family.[4] Family, by means of the dad’s name, was a component of the messenger’s declaration â or angelia â and would have been reported after Epharmostos’ victory.[5] While Pindar’s epinikian brings out the angelia, it uninhibitedly incorporates, rejects, or adjusts components of the proclamation.[6] The alteration, or exclusion, of a segment of the angelia in this manner fills in as an opening for my investigation of the tribute: instead of spotlight on the subject of why Pindar did exclude the dad’s name, this article clarifies how Pindaric acclaim, especially the recognition of acquired capacity, still capacities in a tribute that precludes a key segment of epinikian poetics. Pindar, regardless of the apparent nonappearance of family in this tribute, in any case adulates phya through ethnos and polis and with a provincial story of early Lokrian and Opountian history. While the attention on the combination of the victor with ethnos and polis is absolutely not without parallel, Ol. 9 is solitary in its accentuation on the connection of account and history. The Archaic and early Classical digestion of parentage to ethnic and community history joins such apparently divergent ideas as legacy, family ancestry, and lineage with ethnic plunge and metro establishment. The polis, one segment of the angelia, can supplant family, another segment, as a result of the thinking about ethnic and urban way of life as basically genealogical. In her investigation of the economy of recognition in epinikian, Kurke presumes that the family is critical not exclusively to the festival of athletic achievement however to progress itself (1991, 3; cf. Cole 1987, 560). She proposes that the family association is sufficiently significant that we ought to perceive Pindar’s (and his victor’s) diverse idea of self-character, which was coordinated, to an incredible degree, with family.[7] In this thinking about self-personality, individual athletic triumph can be comprehended as a restoration of the family, particularly through the illustrations of new birth, marriage, and ceremonies for dead ancestors.[8] Thus, the avoidance of family from Epharmostos’ tribute is unforeseen: his triumph, while it might have conveyed notoriety to his living>
Toward the finish of Olympian 9, the tribute for Epharmostos, the boss wrestler from Opountian Lokris, Pindar proclaims phya, his quirky rendering of physis (“by and large best”: Ol. 9.100);[1] he says that the envoy’s announcement should record that his victor was conceived (“with speedy hands, agile legs, assurance in his look”), all the normal and acquired enrichments vital for athletic achievement (Ol. 9.108ff).[2] Despite his accentuation on Epharmostos’ introduction to the world (“with perfect assistance he was conceived”), Pindar, bizarrely, names neither the dad of the victor nor recognizes any family at all. In a class as worried about family and way of life as epinikian, the exclusion is striking and conceivably inconvenient for the talk of epinikian acclaim. Mill operator comments that such an exclusion would more likely than not just happen at “the guidance of the customer himself”, and accordingly we ought to reason that Epharmostos did not respect family or father’s name “as basic to his self-definition.”[3] Pindar’s encomium still capacities, however the nonappearance of family exasperates a large number of the normal highlights of epinikian, particularly the standard combination of phya and family.[4] Family, by means of the dad’s name, was a component of the messenger’s declaration â or angelia â and would have been reported after Epharmostos’ victory.[5] While Pindar’s epinikian brings out the angelia, it uninhibitedly incorporates, rejects, or adjusts components of the proclamation.[6] The alteration, or exclusion, of a segment of the angelia in this manner fills in as an opening for my investigation of the tribute: instead of spotlight on the subject of why Pindar did exclude the dad’s name, this article clarifies how Pindaric acclaim, especially the recognition of acquired capacity, still capacities in a tribute that precludes a key segment of epinikian poetics. Pindar, regardless of the apparent nonappearance of family in this tribute, in any case adulates phya through ethnos and polis and with a provincial story of early Lokrian and Opountian history. While the attention on the combination of the victor with ethnos and polis is absolutely not without parallel, Ol. 9 is solitary in its accentuation on the connection of account and history. The Archaic and early Classical digestion of parentage to ethnic and community history joins such apparently divergent ideas as legacy, family ancestry, and lineage with ethnic plunge and metro establishment. The polis, one segment of the angelia, can supplant family, another segment, as a result of the thinking about ethnic and urban way of life as basically genealogical. In her investigation of the economy of recognition in epinikian, Kurke presumes that the family is critical not exclusively to the festival of athletic achievement however to progress itself (1991, 3; cf. Cole 1987, 560). She proposes that the family association is sufficiently significant that we ought to perceive Pindar’s (and his victor’s) diverse idea of self-character, which was coordinated, to an incredible degree, with family.[7] In this thinking about self-personality, individual athletic triumph can be comprehended as a restoration of the family, particularly through the illustrations of new birth, marriage, and ceremonies for dead ancestors.[8] Thus, the avoidance of family from Epharmostos’ tribute is unforeseen: his triumph, while it might have conveyed notoriety to his living>
