Leadership and Human Factors Development Portfolio

Assessment 1: Leadership and Human Factors Development Portfolio

Unmarked, 100 Possible Points100 Points Possible

Attempt

In Progress

Group or individual task: Individual

Submission format: Written submission

Length: 1,600 words, +/- 10% (excluding reference list)

Course Learning Outcome(s): Apply advanced self-management skills to initiate, evaluate, and perform effectively in complex and dynamic paramedic advanced practitioner professional environments.

Value: 30% of your marks for this unit

Task Overview

In this assessment, you will develop a leadership development portfolio that critically examines your own leadership, supervision, and human factors awareness within paramedic practice. Rather than analysing leadership solely through observation of others, this task requires you to reflect on your own developing leadership capability, drawing on relevant leadership theories, human factors literature, and your professional context. The portfolio is designed to be applicable to both critical care paramedic and community/paramedic practitioner roles. This assessment emphasises self-awareness, critical reflection, and professional growth, rather than leadership performance or role seniority.

Learning Intent

This assessment evaluates your ability to:

• Critically reflect on your own leadership and supervision practices
• Apply leadership theory to real-world paramedic contexts
• Analyse the impact of human factors on clinical decision-making and team performance
• Integrate theory, reflection, and professional experience
• Identify and articulate a realistic leadership development plan

Portfolio Structure

Your portfolio must be presented as a single, cohesive written submission and include all four components outlined below. Suggested word counts are provided as a guide. Headings should be used clearly to identify each component.

Component 1: Leadership Self-Assessment (Approx. 400 words)

Critically reflect on your current leadership capability using at least two leadership frameworks relevant to healthcare or paramedicine (e.g. situational leadership, shared leadership, transformational leadership). This is not a personality profile or skills checklist. The focus is on critical insight, not self-promotion.

In this section, you should:

• Describe how you typically assume leadership in clinical settings
• Identify contexts where leadership feels comfortable versus challenging
• Consider your role in supervision, decision-making, and team coordination
• Critically analyse strengths and limitations using leadership theory

Component 2: Human Factors in Your Clinical Practice (Approx. 400 words)

Reflect on a real clinical situation from your own practice where human factors influenced performance or decision-making. This does not need to involve a critical incident or adverse outcome.

You should analyse:

• Cognitive load, stress, fatigue, or time pressure
• Communication, authority gradients, or team dynamics
• Environmental or organisational constraints
• How leadership behaviours mitigated or exacerbated risk

Your reflection must be explicitly linked to human factors literature and demonstrate understanding of how these factors shape clinical performance.

Component 3: External Perspective on Your Leadership (Approx. 400 words)

In this component, you will reflect on external perspectives that have influenced your understanding of yourself as a clinical leader.

This may include:

• Informal feedback from colleagues or supervisors
• Experiences of being supervised or mentored
• Moments of affirmation, challenge, or conflict
• Observations of how others respond to your leadership

You are not required to formally collect feedback, conduct surveys, or name individuals. All reflections must remain anonymous and professionally appropriate. The emphasis is on how external perspectives informed or challenged your self-assessment, not on reporting others opinions.

Component 4: Leadership Development Plan (Approx. 400 words)

Drawing on insights from the previous components, outline a targeted leadership development plan. This section should demonstrate forward-looking professional intent.

You should:

• Identify 23 specific leadership or supervision capabilities you wish to develop
• Justify why these areas are priorities for your current or future role
• Describe evidence-informed strategies for development
• Consider how leadership demands may differ across critical care and community practice contexts

Use of Evidence and Referencing

You are expected to engage with leadership and human factors literature throughout the portfolio.

• Sources should include peer-reviewed literature and/or recognised professional frameworks relevant to paramedic practice
• Referencing must follow formatting

Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI)

may be used appropriately and transparently to support learning in this assessment.

Acceptable uses include:

• Organising ideas or structuring reflections
• Clarifying terminology or summarising leadership frameworks

Unacceptable uses include:

• Generating reflective content without personal engagement
• Producing generic or templated reflections not grounded in your own experience

You must include the following statement at the end of your submission:

I acknowledge the use of generative AI tools (insert tools used) in preparing this assessment. Any AI use was limited to idea organisation or clarification and did not replace my own reflection or critical analysis.

Submissions that demonstrate implausibly generic reflection or lack authentic engagement with personal practice may be subject to further review under processes.

Submission Format

• Length: 1,600 words, +/- 10 % (excluding reference list)
• Headings should be used to identify the different components
• The submission should adhere to
• Only MS word files will be accepted

Submission Details

Step 1: Scroll to below the marking rubric.

Step 2: In the choose a submission type section, upload the MS Word file of your Assignment.

Step 3: Read and accept the Student Declaration

Step 4: Click submit assignment (right bottom of screen).

NOTE: By submitting the assessment, you acknowledge the following:

• I certify that the attached assignment is my/our own work and that any material or ideas drawn from other sources have been appropriately acknowledged.
• Any supporting tools used have also been appropriately acknowledged, including the use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) programs. All use of AI tools should be acknowledged with a written statement at end of the assignment, including: 1) which tools you used, with the version number 2) how you used them. For example, Acknowledgement: I acknowledge the use of ChatGPT 3.5 to brainstorm ideas for the structure and to help me understand what cultural norms are. I used Grammarly to edit my draft.
• I note that the University reserves the right to check my work for academic misconduct in line with the Academic Misconduct Rules (Students). I understand that informal interviews may be conducted as part of an assessment task, where staff require further information to confirm the learning outcomes have been met.
• Copyright in assessment tasks remains my property. I grant permission to the University to make copies for review, record-keeping and training purposes within the University. Should the reproduction of all or part of an assessment task be required by the University for any purpose other than those mentioned, appropriate authorisation will be sought from me.

Additional Resources

Acknowledgement : This assessment task was formatted with the support of OpenAIs ChatGPT and/or Microsoft CoPilot. Academic oversight, contextual adaptation, and clinical alignment were conducted by the unit coordinator.

Paramedic Clinical Leadership Portfolio (1.26)

Paramedic Clinical Leadership Portfolio (1.26)

Criteria

Ratings

Pts

Component 1: Leadership Self-Assessment

20 to >16 pts

High Distinction

Demonstrates highly developed critical insight into personal leadership practice. Integrates multiple leadership frameworks with nuance, clearly articulating strengths, limitations, and contextual variability. Reflection shows strong self-awareness and theoretical sophistication.

16 to >14 pts

Distinction

Demonstrates strong critical reflection using leadership theory to analyse personal practice. Strengths and limitations are clearly identified, though integration or depth may be uneven.

14 to >12 pts

Credit

Demonstrates sound reflection with appropriate use of leadership frameworks, though analysis may be descriptive and lack depth.

12 to >10 pts

Pass

Demonstrates basic reflection on leadership practice with minimal critical engagement or limited application of theory.

10 to >0 pts

Below Pass

Demonstrates basic reflection on leadership practice with minimal critical engagement or limited application of theory.

/ 20 pts

Component 2: Human Factors in Clinical Practice

20 to >16 pts

High Distinction

Provides a sophisticated analysis of human factors grounded in a real clinical context. Demonstrates deep understanding of how cognitive, social, and system factors influenced performance and leadership. Explicitly links theory to practice with insight and clarity.

16 to >14 pts

Distinction

Provides a strong analysis of human factors with clear links between theory and clinical experience. Some aspects may lack depth or breadth.

14 to >12 pts

Credit

Demonstrates appropriate understanding of human factors with relevant examples, though analysis may be partially descriptive or uneven.

12 to >10 pts

Pass

Identifies relevant human factors but with limited analysis or weak linkage to theory and leadership implications.

10 to >0 pts

Below Pass

Minimal or incorrect understanding of human factors; reflection lacks relevance, depth, or theoretical grounding.

/ 20 pts

Component 3: External Perspective on Leadership

20 to >16 pts

High Distinction

Demonstrates excellent critical engagement with external perspectives, thoughtfully integrating them with self-assessment and theory. Shows insight into how feedback and experience shape leadership identity and behaviour.

16 to >14 pts

Distinction

Demonstrates meaningful reflection on external perspectives with clear links to leadership development, though integration may be limited.

14 to >12 pts

Credit

Reflects on external perspectives appropriately but analysis may remain descriptive or under-developed.

12 to >10 pts

Pass

Mentions external perspectives with minimal critical reflection or limited relevance to leadership development.

10 to >0 pts

Below Pass

Little or no meaningful engagement with external perspectives; reflection is superficial or irrelevant.

/ 20 pts

Component 4: Leadership Development Plan

20 to >16 pts

High Distinction

Presents a highly coherent, realistic, and evidence-informed leadership development plan. Goals are specific, well-justified, and clearly linked to prior reflection, theory, and professional context. Demonstrates strong forward-thinking professional intent.

16 to >14 pts

Distinction

Presents a clear and relevant development plan grounded in reflection and theory, though goals or strategies may lack precision or depth.

14 to >12 pts

Credit

Presents a reasonable development plan with some theoretical grounding, though goals may be generic or insufficiently justified.

12 to >10 pts

Pass

Presents a basic development plan with limited linkage to reflection or theory; goals may be vague or aspirational.

10 to >0 pts

Below Pass

Development plan is absent, unrealistic, or lacks connection to reflection, or professional context.

/ 20 pts

Language, academic skills & presentation

5 to >4 pts

[a] Beyond standard achieved

Grammar, spelling and language are of a high standard; you have used complex sentences and language. Submission adheres fully to formatting guidelines.

4 to >3 pts

[b] Acceptable standard achieved

Some grammar, spelling and language errors were present in your writing, which impact the quality of your expression. Submission mostly adheres to formatting guidelines. Consider revisiting some of the resources in the unit overview and general resources.

3 to >0 pts

[c] Poor standard achieved

Your writing contains spelling, grammar and language errors, which impact the reader’s ability to interpret meaning from your writing. Submission does not adhere to formatting guidelines. It would be beneficial for you to make an appointment with a librarian or seek academic writing support.

/ 5 pts

Academic literature

7.5 to >6 pts

[a] Beyond standard achieved

Consistent use of highly appropriate primary academic sources which are credible and relevant to the topic no more than 5 years old. Dated sources are appropriately justified.

6 to >4.5 pts

[b] Acceptable standard achieved

Demonstrates use of a mix of academic sources, but weighted more towards secondary sources and not contemporary primary sources.

4.5 to >0 pts

[c] Poor standard achieved

Few or no credible and/or relevant sources have been used to support the development of your ideas. Please revisit the resources provided in the unit overview and general resources.

/ 7.5 pts

Referencing

7.5 to >5 pts

[a] Beyond standard achieved

In-text and end-text referencing is expertly handled and error free. Live DOI links included.

5 to >0 pts

[b] Acceptable standard achieved

In-text and end-text referencing is present but contains minor errors. Some live DOI links included.

0 pts

[c] Poor standard achieved

In-text and end-text referencing is omitted, or is very poorly handled with many errors. DOI links are broken. You are at risk of academic misconduct. Please revisit the resources provided in the unit overview and general resources.

/ 7.5 pts

Total Points: 0

Choose a submission type.

Drag a file here, or click to select a file to uploadDrag a file here, orChoose a file to uploadFile permitted: DOC, DO