Evaluate one or more health promotion programmes.

Refer to the paper 2 assessment criteria when awarding marks. These can be found under the “Your tests” tab > supplemental materials.

The command term “evaluate” requires candidates to make an appraisal of one or more health programmes by weighing up the strengths and limitations. Although a discussion of both strengths and limitations is required, it does not have to be evenly balanced to gain marks.

The health promotion programme(s) chosen are likely to relate to one or more of the health problems presented in the psychology guide:

• stress
• obesity
• addiction
• chronic pain
• sexual health.

Relevant health promotion programmes may include, but are not limited to:

• the Victoria (Australia) campaign, “Go for your life” promoting healthy eating and exercise in schools (2004)
• the Florida (US) campaign, “TRUTH” an anti-smoking campaign arranged by and aimed at adolescents (1998-1999)
• the Canadian community-based peer intervention program to prevent pregnant mothers from drinking alcohol (Carr, 1994)
• programmes based on social learning theory (for example, the Sabido method to encourage safe sex practices)
• Project SMART (US), promoting positive health decisions in middle school aged children.

Evaluation points may include, but are not limited to:

• alternative programmes
• whether or not the programme is based on a psychological health model/theory
• cultural and ethical considerations in implementation
• methodological concerns in measuring programmes’ outcomes
• empirical evidence related to effectiveness of the programme.

If the candidate addresses only strengths or only limitations, the response should be awarded up to a maximum of [3] for criterion D: critical thinking. All remaining criteria should be awarded marks according to the best fit approach.