1 Answers must be submitted via CUOnline Moodle as a WORD™ document Submission deadline: Wednesday 18 th March 2015 at 23.55h This coursework must be submitted as a WORD™ electronic copy via the Turnitin™ link on the Coursework section in 206BMS CUOnline. Ensure that your student ID number is in the header of each page. Your submission must be your answers only. DO NOT submit the question texts. Please ensure that the question numbers are clear. This coursework is based initially on the case study below, and then includes additional aspects of food-borne disease and gastrointestinal pathogens. Throughout, your answers must be based on cited evidence/literature. Where required, answers will need to contain microbiological details of infectious disease, including microbiological, cellular and molecular details of interactions between bacteria and host. Where appropriate, answer lengths are based on single line spaced Times New Roman 12pt font, e.g. [½ page]. Please use this font size. Answers should be concise and precise, containing sufficient detail to ensure clarity. Remember that this item is the coursework for this module (50% of the module mark. See Module Guide for information. As a guide this assessment should require 24h-48h of student effort). Where required answers must be presented in the format given (e.g. hand-drawn graph, Excel graph, with all workings etc as stipulated). Literature in addition to the module textbook will need to be consulted. Referencing: details of all reference sources must be correctly presented throughout the answer texts and at the end – and remember that you must not plagiarise. Do not copy word-for- word or quote from sources, but write using your own words. Continued..../ Coventry University Department of Applied Sciences and Health 206BMS Infection and Immunity 2014/2015 COURSEWORK Interpretative problem based exercise /structured question set by Dr. N.D. Parker 2 Case study A 35-year-old man had been feeling unwell for a few days with non- specific aches and pains in his joints and a slight headache. The following day he felt considerably worse, with severe colicky abdominal pain and he developed bloody diarrhoea, going to the lavatory 10 times in the day and persisting overnight. He then went to the accident and emergency department at hospital where he was admitted. Because he was dehydrated he was given intravenous rehydration and blood and faeces samples were sent for culture. Infection with Campylobacter jejuni was suspected as his history revealed that he had consumed a chicken mayonnaise sandwich which he thought was “a bit odd”. Some weeks later he began to develop weakness in his feet, which gradually spread to his legs and after more days the paralysis affected his leg muscles. With treatment, these symptoms gradually resolved. Questions: (Remembe ...

1. 1
Answers must be submitted via CUOnline Moodle
as a WORD™ document
Submission deadline: Wednesday 18
th
March 2015 at 23.55h
This coursework must be submitted as a WORD™ electronic
copy via the Turnitin™ link on the Coursework section in
206BMS CUOnline. Ensure that your student ID number is in
the header of each page.
Your submission must be your answers only. DO NOT submit
the question texts. Please ensure that the question numbers
are clear.
This coursework is based initially on the case study below, and
then includes

2. additional aspects of food-borne disease and gastrointestinal
pathogens.
Throughout, your answers must be based on cited
evidence/literature. Where
required, answers will need to contain microbiological details of
infectious
disease, including microbiological, cellular and molecular
details of interactions
between bacteria and host.
Where appropriate, answer lengths are based on single line
spaced Times New
Roman 12pt font, e.g. [½ page]. Please use this font size.
Answers should be concise
and precise, containing sufficient detail to ensure clarity.
Remember that this item is the
coursework for this module (50% of the module mark. See
Module Guide for information. As
a guide this assessment should require 24h-48h of student
effort). Where required answers
must be presented in the format given (e.g. hand-drawn graph,
Excel graph, with all workings
etc as stipulated).

3. Literature in addition to the module textbook will need to be
consulted. Referencing:
details of all reference sources must be correctly presented
throughout the answer texts
and at the end – and remember that you must not plagiarise. Do
not copy word-for-
word or quote from sources, but write using your own words.
Continued..../
Coventry University
Department of Applied Sciences and Health
206BMS Infection and Immunity
2014/2015
COURSEWORK
Interpretative problem based exercise /structured question
set by Dr. N.D. Parker
2
Case study

4. A 35-year-old man had been feeling unwell for a few days with
non-
specific aches and pains in his joints and a slight headache. The
following
day he felt considerably worse, with severe colicky abdominal
pain and
he developed bloody diarrhoea, going to the lavatory 10 times
in the day
and persisting overnight. He then went to the accident and
emergency
department at hospital where he was admitted. Because he was
dehydrated he was given intravenous rehydration and blood and
faeces
samples were sent for culture. Infection with Campylobacter
jejuni was
suspected as his history revealed that he had consumed a
chicken
mayonnaise sandwich which he thought was “a bit odd”. Some
weeks
later he began to develop weakness in his feet, which gradually
spread to
his legs and after more days the paralysis affected his leg
muscles. With

5. treatment, these symptoms gradually resolved.
Questions:
(Remember to use 12pt Times New Roman font, single line
spaced)
1. What was the likely source of infection in this case study?
What are the common
sources of Campylobacter jejuni infection that lead to human
infection?
1 mark [2-4 sentences]
2. Is disease produced by Campylobacter classified as a “food
infection” or “food
intoxication”? Explain your reasoning, including definitions of
these terms.
2 marks [½ page]
3. Campylobacter spp and Salmonella spp (including a variety
of serotypes) are
relatively common in the UK. Using Public Health England
data (you must use
these to plot your own single graph in EXCEL™), compare the
number of cases

6. of these pathogens over 10 YEARS UP TO 2012. Summarise
and discuss your
comparisons as a series of succinct bullet points.
3 marks [Up to ⅔ page, including graph]
4. Give an account of Campylobacter pathogenesis and
virulence factors, and use this
knowledge to explain the initial symptoms of gastroenteritis
disease (as described
in the case study).
4 marks [1 page]
5. Discuss long term consequences of Campylobacteriosis,
particularly relating this to
relevant symptoms described in the case study.
2 marks [½ page]
3
6. Briefly explain the routine laboratory techniques and tests
(microscopy,

7. bacterial culture - media and conditions and biochemical tests)
used to isolate and
identify Campylobacter. This section should contain
descriptions and explanations
of methods.
3 marks [½ page]
7. For each of the options below, state whether each statement
is true or false and
provide brief explanations/descriptions for every alternative to
verify your
true/false answers. (Marks will only be given if there are
explanations).
C.jejuni can be typed:
(a) based on lipopolysaccharides
(b) using the Widal reaction.
(c) according to Lancefield’s grouping
(d) using ‘phage typing.
4 marks [A sentence or two for each statement]
8. Based on published literature, discuss two examples of types
of ELISAs used in

8. Campylobacter research/typing/identification, including whether
they are direct or
indirect ELISAs.
2 marks [½ page]
9. Several loci have been targeted for PCR-based identification
of Campylobacter.
Based on research literature, name these, describe what each
encodes and discuss
some applications of such molecular analysis in the
identification of C.jejuni.
5 marks [1 page]
10. What antibiotic treatment may have been given to the
patient in the case study?
Briefly consider concerns about antibiotic resistance.
3 marks [½ page]

9. Continued........
4
11.
As part of the follow-up laboratory investigation it was decided
to determine the
heat sensitivity of Campylobacter by incubating bacteria at
specific temperatures
and performing viable counts by plating out suspensions onto
blood agar. Viable
count results are given in Table 1 below:
Table 1. The effect of temperature on Campylobacter jejuni

10. (a) Process these Campylobacter data, and plot an appropriate
graph to calculate
the Decimal Reduction Times (D-values) for the three
concentrations of
disinfectant against the Campylobacter. The graph MUST BE
HAND-
DRAWN, plotted on standard graph paper, of sufficient size,
with clear
data points, AND lines showing how the D-values were
determined must
be clearly shown on the graph. YOU MUST SCAN in your
hand-drawn
graph into your WORD™ answer. You must show ALL your
data
processing clearly and logically, including how D-values were
determined.
[You will need to find out how to plot an appropriate graph and
calculate the
Decimal Reduction Times (D-values) for the three
temperatures.]
6 marks
(b) Are these D-values consistent with published data?
Comment and justify your
answer.
2 marks [Short paragraph]

11. (c) Using the counts in the table, what percentages of the
original suspension had
been killed after 4min at 40°C and 50°C? Show all your
calculations. 2 marks
12. The administration of prophylactic antibiotics or probiotics
to animals (including
poultry) is an approach designed to reduce problems with
bacterial pathogens but
also for other reasons. Discuss scientifically the rationale and
effectiveness of
both of these two and implications for human health.
3 marks [⅔ page]
Continued…./
Time
(min)
Temperature (°C)
40 50 60
Number of colony forming units/ml

12. 0 6.80 x 10
8
6.80 x 10
8
6.80 x 10
8
2 5.62 x 10
8
1.26 x 10
8
6.31 x 10
5
4 3.16 x 10
8
3.98 x 10
7
3.98 x 10
3
6 2.82 x 10
8
6.31 x 10
6
56

13. 8 1.58 x 10
8
1.58 x 10
6
Not determined
10 1.26 x 10
8
4.47 x 10
5
Not determined
20 1.78 x 10
7
63 Not determined
30 2.24 x 10
6
Not determined Not determined
5
As well as a bacterial cause of human gastroenteritis it was also
suggested, in this
case, that rotavirus infection may have also been a possibility.
13. According to WHO protocols, in the laboratory, how would
a faecal specimen
be processed and stored prior to the actual testing for
rotaviruses?

14. 2 marks [⅓ page]
14. Examination of poultry in the flock that supplied the factory
showed that some
birds harboured rotavirus. Discuss the significance of this for
human infection.
2 marks [up to ⅓ page]
References. Remember to use academically credible information
sources. Reference
your work throughout the text and list fully and correctly ALL
the references you
used to complete this work. They must be presented in the
Coventry University
Harvard format. Use the link from CUOnline for full details of
how to present
different information sources. Present them alphabetically and
do not divide them into
different types (e.g. books, journal articles etc).
3 marks (For overall presentation).

15. Dr N Parker
February 2015
------- END --------
Life Styles Inventory (LSI)
SAJJATREE TRIPITAK
[email protected]
MGMT 591: Leadership and Organizational Behavior
Professor Frank Readus
01/18/2015

16. Personal Thinking Styles
The LSI chart shows that my primary thinking style is
avoidance (raw 25, 99%) and
dependent (raw 32, 99%). People inavoidance style usually like
to avoid making
decisions and leave them to others. The commitment would be
their difficulty in
management and leadership. I kind of agree with that because I
do pay most
attentions to my own concerns and most likely ignore others;
however, I disagree
with that it is difficult to forgive myself after making mistakes
because mistakes don’t take me down for a long time and I
would like to do whatever it needs to correct the issues. Other
than avoidance, dependent is so true to me and I feel like this
thinking style totally descripts me. I am very sensitive to
people’s feelings and I usually let them get satisfied and then
follow them. For example, whenever I hang out with my friends,
I always let them decide what to do and I just need to join them
without making challenging plans and decisions.

17. My secondary thinking style is conventional thinking (raw 29,
97%), which makes sense that it comes with my primary
thinking style.That group of people respects others pretty much
and is conservative. They like to follow policies and practices
avoid conflicts. In their opinions, rules are usually in a higher
priority than ideas. I totally agree with this because I don’t like
to try new things or ideas. I believe rules exist for reasons and
are made based on trustworthy experience, so following rules
would be a less risky behavior and I don’t like take even a small
risk in my life.
It turns out that my limiting style is achievement that is actually
a key factor to a successful leadership. The achievement style
means achieving and enthusiasm as well as high level of
aspiration. People in achievement style would like to think
ahead, share responsibilities, set own goals and accomplish
them. They focus on results and are not afraid to tough tasks.
Therefore, they would most possibly enjoy the success in the
end. The LSI result chart shows that I got only a raw score of 15
and a percentile score of 7%, which means I have problems in
this area. Without achievement-oriented thinking, I may not be
capable of setting goals, making plans and progress, and finally
accomplish a project successfully. The lack of those skills will
stop me from being capable of managing and achieving the
success.
Primary style:
Impact on Management Style
A. Planning
I am not a person with achievement-oriented thinking, so I am
not capable to plan things and set goals. Based on the LSI
result, I got a really low score in achievement, which shows that
I have limited ability to make plans.

18. B. Organizing
Once again, due to lacking such abilities to set goals and make
plans, I am not capable to organize people or resources in order
to lead a project or team. In addition, I am most likely to be
organized due to my dependent personal style.
C. Leading
The basic requirements of leading are making decisions and
commitments; however, I am a dependent person with avoidance
thinking and I couldn’t meet any of those requirements. As a
result, I am not able to lead even a very small team.
D. Controlling
As you see, I am a dependent person and I don’t like to control
things or people; instead, I like to follow others or rules.
Moreover, I am a conventional person and respect others but not
create new ideas. It turns out I am not able to control a team or
project.
Genesis of Personal Style
My family did develop my personal style of conventional and
dependent thinking. Since I was a child, my family has decided
everything I need to do. I usually didn’t have any idea or plan
because I knew my family would give me one and I preferred to
be passive and follow them. In another word, I really depended
on my family and even could not live well without them. In
school, I always tried avoid thinking about plans when staying
with my friends because it was a kind of tough job to me and I
enjoyed following them and didn’t need to be responsible. When
meeting conflicts, I was always the girl who was always
listening and keeping quite. Both my family and school life
were leading me to develop a personal style avoidance.
Conclusion and Reflection

19. According to the LSI results, my primary thinking style is
avoidance and dependence and secondary thinking style is
conventional. It shows that I am not able to lead due to lacking
basic leader personalities and management skills. In addition,
my childhood lifeis the most import reason why I developed
those person styles. I am taking this course is to learn
management skills and I hope MGMT591 would help me
develop more about leader styles such as achievement-oriented
thinking.
LSI Results
Position
Style
Raw Score
Percentile Score
1
Humanistic-Encouraging
29
44
2
Affiliative
29
46
3
Approval
27
94
4
Conventional
29
97
5
Dependent
32
99

20. 6
Avoidance
25
99
7
Oppositional
11
75
8
Power
5
42
9
Competitive
10
34
10
Perfectionistic
12
9
11
Achievement
15
7
12
Self- Actualizing
25
38

21. Your LSI Styles Profile
The raw and percentile scores in the table below and the
extensions on the circumplex shown below depict your
perceptions of how you think and behave.
The CONSTRUCTIVE Styles (11, 12, 1, and 2 o'clock
positions) reflect self-enhancing thinking and behavior that
contribute to one's level of satisfaction, ability to develop
healthy relationships and work effectively with people, and
proficiency at accomplishing tasks.
The PASSIVE/DEFENSIVE Styles (3, 4, 5, and 6 o'clock
positions) represent self-protecting thinking and behavior that
promote the fulfillment of security needs through interaction
with people.
The AGGRESSIVE/DEFENSIVE Styles (7, 8, 9, and 10 o'clock
positions) describe self-promoting thinking and behavior used
to maintain status/position and fulfill security needs through
task-related activities.
Position
Style
Score
Percentile
1
Humanistic-Encouraging
23
14
2
Affiliative
29
46
3

22. Approval
22
88
4
Conventional
21
87
5
Dependent
24
91
6
Avoidance
23
99
7
Oppositional
13
81
8
Power
20
93
9
Competitive
20
84
10
Perfectionistic
19
44
11
Achievement
23
21
12

23. Self-Actualizing
20
21
The raw scores potentially range from 0 to 40. The percentile
scores represent your results compared to those of 9,207
individuals who previously completed the Life Styles Inventory.
For example, a percentile score of 75 means that you scored
higher along a particular position than 75% of the other
respondents in the sample and, in turn, indicates that the style
represented by that position is strongly descriptive of you. In
contrast, a score of 25 means that you scored higher than only
about 25% of the other respondents and therefore indicates that
the style represented by that position is not very descriptive of
you.Your LSI Styles Circumplex
For detailed descriptions of each of these 12 styles,click on the
circumplex graphic in each of the 12 sections.
Examining your Circumplex
To accurately interpret your LSI results, it is important for you
to consider your score on each style in terms of its range (high,
medium, or low) on the profile. The three ranges correspond to
the percentile points in the circumplex and in the table above.
LSI Assignment Guidelines
Developing a willingness and ability to engage in self-reflection
is a critical leadership skill that is not easily learned yet which
reaps many rewards. The LSI enables you to examine your own
unique way of thinking and how it influences your behavior.

24. Your Assignment:
Complete (on your own) the LSI according to the procedure
outlined here, so that you end up with your "Life Styles
Circumplex" profile: 12 "personal thinking style" scores, one
score for each section of the circumplex.
Write a 3–5 page paper examining and explaining your LSI
results. There are more details in the table below.
LSI Style Interpretations: Go to the LSI1 Results page, find
your circumplex profile, and click on the circumplex "slice" of
one of the styles. The site will bring you to a customized
interpretation of the style you clicked on. Click on each of the
12 "slices" to see all of the customized style description pages.
How to Use the Inventory
Click here to go to the Life Styles Inventory (LSI) exercise.
Follow the instructions given on the LSI Website.
The content of your LSI paper must include a copy of your LSI
results (circumplex and chart) and the following written
sections:
Section
Points
Description
Title page
Title of your applied research paper, your name, e-mail address,
course number and title, instructor, and date.
Personal Thinking Styles
25
Identify your primary and backup thinking styles: What are your
"primary" (highest percentile score) and "backup" (second
highest percentile) personal thinking styles as shown in your
circumplex? Discuss how your primary and backup personal
styles are manifested in your life and work (see the LSI Self
Development Guide online). Using the style interpretations in
the LSI Guide, describe the styles and give your perceptions
about the results. Do you agree or disagree with them and why?

25. Identify your limiting style: Identify and illustrate one style you
think might be working against you to reduce your overall
effectiveness. Name the style you have chosen, make a few
remarks about why you are choosing this style as limiting your
professional effectiveness in organizations.
Select one behavior associated with this style that you think you
would like to change and the difference it will make. Be sure to
support your interpretation with examples, etc.
LSI Style Interpretations: Go to the LSI1 Results page, find
your circumplex profile, and click on the circumplex "slice" of
one of the styles. The site will bring you to a customized
interpretation of the style you clicked on. Click on each of the
12 "slices" to see all of the customized style description pages.
Impact on Management Style
35
What impact do your personal styles have on your management
style? Explore and assess the impact of your personal styles on
your effectiveness as a manager in terms of the four functions
of management:
a. Planning;
b. Organizing;
c. Leading; and
d. Controlling.
If you are currently not a manager, assume you are and predict
your effectiveness as such.
Genesis of Personal Style
35
Critically evaluate and explain on how you developed the
personal styles that were revealed in your LSI. What role, for
example, did family relationships, school, organizational
memberships, culture, etc. have in shaping your personal style?
Conclusion and Reflection
25
Think about your LSI results and your responses to the above
questions. Summarize any concluding comments. Close your
paper with a statement of at least one question or goal you hope

26. your work in MGMT591 will help you to address and comment
with a few sentences to describe the value of this exercise to
your personal and professional development.
Please note: The LSI Self-Development Guide is integrated into
the LSI1 Participant account, and is available after you
complete the LSI Survey and have access to your results. In-
depth and personalized style descriptions can be found by
clicking on the style "slices" of the circumplex. For example, if
you would like to learn more about the Humanistic-Encouraging
style (Style 1), you simply click on the circumplex "slice" for
that style. The same goes for the other 11 styles.
You can find the Challenge of Change and the Self-
Improvement Plan information by using two of the additional
links that become available in you LSI online account after the
survey is complete. These links are "The Challenge of Change"
and "Your Self-Improvement Plan." Good luck with the
exercise!
LSI Grading Rubric:
WRITTEN LSI PAPER RUBRIC
Criteria
Failed to Meet Minimum Standards
Met Minimum Standards
(60% = 72 pts) D
Satisfactory
(70% = 84 pts) C
Good
(80 % = 96 pts) B
Superior
(90% = 108 pts) A
Part I: Personal Thinking Styles
(25 Points)
Results not apparent
0
Mentions style names; does not describe; does not evaluate
17.0
Defines styles; reflects barely adequate information to acquaint

27. the reader with the style's application
19.5
Contains a focus and provides sufficient detail to set the stage
for the analysis but may not support evaluative statements
22.0
Defines styles; validates results; supports impressions; complete
information
25.0
Part II: Impact On Management Style
(35 Points)
No managerial impact apparent
0
Gives examples of behaviors, but does not relate them to the
managment functions or the personal styles
21.5
Mentions the management functions with examples or relates to
the personal styles, but not both
24.5
Loosely connects management functions and styles; uses vague
examples or examples lacking depth of application
28.0
Shows clear connection between styles and their impact on the
management styles; uses specific examples
35.0
Part III: Genesis of Personal Styles
(35 Points)
None provided
0
Too shallow; insufficient depth; provides only one example to
support development
21.5
Provides a review of 2–3 supporting experiences; does not
relate them to style development
24.5
Loosely connects personal experiences to style results; uses
vague examples lacking depth of application

28. 28.0
Gives a clear and focused analysis; uses several specific
examples; directly relates experiences to how styles were
formed
35.0
Part IV: Conclusion and Reflection
(25 Points)
No reflective statement or summary offered
0
Perfunctory effort at drawing lessons from the assignment
17.0
One key lesson; no other insights offered
19.5
Good faith effort in discussing the lessons from the assignment;
some insights are included
22.0
Well presented insights on how the assignment influenced
personal, academic, and professional development; includes
statement regarding MGMT591
25.0