PYB300 Behavioural Science and Contemporary Challenges
The Complete Exam Bible · Semester 2 2026PYB300 Overview
- Capstone of the Behavioural Science degree
- Team grant prospectus with a partner
- Short-answer STARL examination
- Assessable tutorials in Weeks 5 to 9
PYB300 Behavioural Science and Contemporary Challenges is the capstone unit of the Bachelor of Behavioural Science at QUT.
- Assessed by A team grant prospectus, five in-tutorial portfolio artefacts, a peer evaluation and a short-answer examination.
- Exam shape Three selection criteria answered with STARL in 1 hour 40 minutes, one of them a compulsory teamwork criterion.
- Hardest step Writing specific, first-person actions and results that a marker who has never met you can match to the criterion.
- How to prepare Draft STARL answers to criteria from real behavioural science job ads, using the team project as one example.
How PYB300 is assessed
| Component | Weight | Format |
|---|---|---|
| Assessment 1: Professional Portfolio | 20% | Individual; five professional artefacts (group contract, project plan, agenda, progress report and minutes) demonstrated in tutorials in Weeks 5 to 9, 4% each; work completed outside class is not marked |
| Assessment 2A: Grant Prospectus | 40% | Team based; a design thinking response to a real issue from the partner organisation; due in Week 11, listed for 6 October 2026 at 11:59pm with no 48-hour extension; 4,000 words with a 10% leeway |
| Assessment 2B: Peer Evaluation | 5% | Individual teamwork score, the mean of team members' ratings on four criteria, lodged in Feedback Fruits after the prospectus is submitted |
| Assessment 3: Examination | 35% | Individual short-answer examination in the Central Examination Period, handwritten in 1 hour 40 minutes with no perusal time and no generative AI; three selection criteria answered with STARL, one set for everyone on teamwork and two picked from a list of five |
The four published weights total 100%. The opening line of the assessments overview numbers the items differently from its own table, calling the Grant Prospectus Assessment 1, while the table and the task pages use the labels shown here. The Week 5 welcome page says the group contract contributes 3%, whereas the portfolio task page, its criteria sheet and the tutorial slides give 4% for each of the five artefacts. The overview lists the peer evaluation in Week 13, while the schedule shows it due on 16 October in the Week 12 row. Confirm these details in Canvas and your unit outline.
Assessment structure
Current PYB300 dates
| Date | Item | Control |
|---|---|---|
| 6 October 2026 | Grant Prospectus | Team submission due at 11:59pm; no 48-hour extension. |
| 16 October 2026 | Peer Evaluation | Ratings due at 11:59pm in Feedback Fruits; no 48-hour extension. |
Dates are as published in the 2026 PYB300 unit schedule. Confirm exact deadlines and submission settings in the live LMS.
What PYB300 covers
Ten chapters follow the unit week by week, from the grant prospectus to the selection criteria examination. Each one links to its free chapter guide.
The Community Sector and the Grant Prospectus
What a grant prospectus is · work integrated learning with a community partner · one cohesive story · an About Us section written in third personThis chapter covers the Week 1 and Week 2 foundations of PYB300: what a grant prospectus is, why a community organisation wants one, and how the unit's work integrated learning partnership shapes the task.
- What a grant prospectus is and why organisations prepare one
- Work integrated learning with a real community partner
- The town hall meetings in Weeks 2 and 9
- The prospectus sections and their reading order
- Writing for a general audience rather than an essay marker
- About Us: slanting the section towards delivery of the program
Evidence Base, Program Team and Partnerships
Literature and desktop review · reporting a study by sample, purpose and findings · linking statements · team roles · realistic partnersThe evidence base is the longest section of the prospectus, a literature and desktop review of three to four pages that argues the need for the program, sets out what research says about tackling the issue, and judges how existing programs measure up.
- The three jobs of the evidence base
- Peer-reviewed research for need and strategies; websites for existing programs
- Scoping the topic and keeping the literature inside that scope
- Reporting a study: sample, purpose and findings
- Synthesis and linking statements back to the program
- The Team section: roles and responsibilities, not head counts
Design Thinking and the Theory of Change
Personas, problem statements and the worst possible idea · the theory of change worksheet · scoping a program ideaBefore any section is written, a PYB300 team needs a program idea.
- Design thinking as practical, creative problem solving
- Empathise: personas and their four key questions
- Define: the user needs, need and insight template
- Ideate: the worst possible idea technique
- The theory of change worksheet and its questions
- Scoping the idea without making it too narrow
Aims, Activities and Outcomes
An aim with target group, need and change word · short, medium and long-term outcomes · telling activities from outcomesEvery later section of the prospectus has to agree with three statements: the aim, the activities and the outcomes.
- What an aim is and how many a program needs
- Three checks on an aim: target group, need, change word
- Outcomes as the difference the program makes
- Short, medium and long-term outcomes and how they connect
- Measurable outcomes: how much, for whom, by when
- Activities as observable, completable tasks
Program Logic Models
The unit template as a pipeline · inputs, activities, outputs and outcomes · counting outputs · assumptions and external factorsThe writing guide calls the program logic an essential component of the prospectus.
- Why programs use a logic model
- The pipeline model read from left to right
- Situation: a succinct problem statement
- Inputs: key resources only
- Activities and their sequence
- Outputs as activity data over twelve months
Service Models and Client Journey Maps
Eligibility to exit in the template steps · a published Queensland service model · journey maps and barriers to engagementA service model shows how a program and all its elements will be delivered, and a client journey map shows how that delivery feels to the person using it.
- What a service model shows and explains
- Diagram plus written explanation, and their suggested lengths
- The template steps: eligibility, entry, intake, services, exit, evaluation
- Common elements: values, outcomes and staff roles
- Reading a published service model stage by stage
- Client journey maps: actions, thoughts and feelings
Process and Outcome Evaluation Plans
Process versus outcome evaluation · headline and subsidiary questions · indicators, data, timing, roles, reporting and costsPYB300 limits the evaluation plan to two types: process evaluation, which asks whether activities were implemented as planned and produced the expected outputs, and outcome evaluation, which asks whether people in the target group actually changed as intended.
- Process evaluation versus outcome evaluation
- Focus questions, indicators, data, timeline, roles, reporting and costs
- Headline and subsidiary evaluation questions
- Linking indicators to outcomes and outputs
- Timing data collection from baseline to follow-up
- Costing staff time and the unit's evaluation figure
Implementation Plans and Budget Assumptions
A GANTT chart from Month 1 to Month 12 · start-up activity categories · budget assumptions · balancing income, expenses and in-kind supportThe last two components of the prospectus test whether the program is achievable.
- Why the plan targets a six to twelve month start-up
- GANTT chart rules: Month 1 to Month 12, start-up only
- Activity categories: digital, human resources, property, training, service development
- Writing brief but informative GANTT descriptions
- Budget assumptions: parameters instead of exact costs
- Income equals expenses, with in-kind contributions on both sides
Teamwork Skills and the Professional Portfolio
Tutorial artefacts and the criteria sheet · attendance and deferred tasks · agendas and minutes · peer evaluation · tricky conversationsThe Professional Portfolio is worth 20% and is earned in the room: five assessable tutorials, each producing a team artefact that every member submits individually for 4%.
- Five assessable tutorials and the 4% per artefact rule
- Attendance, photo identification and end-of-class confirmation
- Deferred tasks and when withdrawal applies instead
- The criteria sheet bands: 4%, 2% and 0%
- Group contract, project plan, agenda, progress report and minutes
- Peer evaluation: four criteria and Feedback Fruits
Selection Criteria and the STARL Model
Selection criteria for graduate roles · Situation, Task, Action, Result, Learning · the exam page's eight tips · planning the writing timeThe final examination is a job application written by hand.
- What selection criteria are and why graduate roles use them
- The five moves: Situation, Task, Action, Result, Learning
- The exam format: three criteria, one compulsory on teamwork
- Eight tips from the exam page turned into checks
- What is and is not marked
- Choosing criteria and examples, and reusing a role
It asks third-year students to integrate what they have learned across the degree through tasks typical of graduate roles in the behavioural sciences, and it includes the live demonstration of skills that supports the degree's APAC accreditation. In the first strand, teams of about five work with a community partner, Uniting Care Queensland in 2026, which briefs them on real community challenges at two town hall meetings.
Each team designs a pilot program and writes a grant prospectus: an About Us section, an evidence base, a program description and program logic, a service model and client journey map, the team and its partnerships, an evaluation plan, a GANTT implementation plan and budget assumptions.
Weekly workshops step through each component, from design thinking and aims to evaluation, implementation and budgets.
Alongside the prospectus, the tutorials in Weeks 5 to 9 each produce a professional artefact: a group contract, a project plan, a meeting agenda, a progress report and meeting minutes. Together they form the individual Professional Portfolio, and marks go only to work demonstrated in the room.
Once the prospectus is submitted, team members rate one another in a peer evaluation. The second strand turns to careers, with a Week 10 workshop on responding to selection criteria and job seeking and a Week 12 careers panel.
The final examination asks for three selection criteria responses written with the STARL model, so the skills practised in the team project become the evidence for an individual, job-application style answer written by hand.
Worked example · free
Rebuild a teamwork story as a STARL response
- 1Situation: In the PYB300 capstone of my Behavioural Science degree, my five-person team was designing a program for a community partner, and two members wanted competing program ideas.
- 1Task: As the member keeping our project plan, I needed the team to agree on one idea within a week so drafting could start.
- 1Action: I met each member to hear their reasons, summarised both ideas against the partner's brief and the evidence we had found, and proposed a short meeting where we scored each idea on the same criteria before voting.
- 1Result: The team chose one idea with everyone's agreement, merged a strength of the other into it, and began drafting a week earlier than our plan required.
- 1Learning: I learned that conflict eases when people see their reasons taken seriously, and I now set shared criteria before any group decision.
Key terms
- Grant prospectus
- A foundation document that captures a program idea, its evidence, delivery, evaluation and costs, so an organisation can adapt it quickly when a funding round opens.
- Town hall meeting
- A partner briefing held on campus in Week 2 and a question and answer session in Week 9, both unrecorded because some information shared is commercial in confidence.
- Design thinking
- An approach to practical, creative problem solving that moves from empathising with a user through defining the problem to generating ideas.
- Program aim
- The overarching statement of the need a program addresses and the change it will achieve, naming the target group and a direction of change.
- Program logic
- A one or two page diagram showing how inputs and activities produce outputs and short, medium and long-term outcomes, with the assumptions and external factors involved.
- Service model
- A diagram and written explanation of how a program is delivered, from eligibility and entry through intake and core services to exit and evaluation.
- Client journey map
- A chronological picture of a client's actions, thoughts and feelings at each touchpoint with a service, used to expose barriers to engagement.
- Process evaluation
- Evaluation of whether a program's activities were implemented as planned and produced the expected outputs.
- GANTT chart
- A chart of tasks against time; in the prospectus it shows the start-up plan from Month 1 to no later than Month 12.
- Professional Portfolio
- The individual assessment made of five teamwork artefacts, each demonstrated in an assessable tutorial and worth 4% of the grade.
- Selection criteria
- Statements of the knowledge, skills or attributes an employer requires, which applicants address one by one with evidence from their experience.
- STARL model
- A structure for selection criteria responses: Situation, Task, Action, Result and Learning, written as one first-person example per criterion.
PYB300 FAQ
How is the unit assessed?
Four weighted pieces make up the grade. The individual Professional Portfolio is worth 20%, earned 4% at a time in the assessable tutorials. The team Grant Prospectus is worth 40% and the Peer Evaluation 5%. The individual Examination carries the remaining 35% and sits in the central examination period.
The two individual coursework pieces and the examination together mean 60% of the grade depends on your own demonstrated work.
What happens in the final examination?
The paper runs for 1 hour 40 minutes, handwritten, with no perusal time and no generative AI. You answer three selection criteria with the STARL model: the first is set for everyone and is about working effectively as part of a team, and you pick the other two from a list of five. Spelling, formatting and paragraph structure attract no marks; the marker looks for your use of STARL.
How long should each STARL response be?
The exam guidance asks for no more than one page per response. A single paragraph is usually enough, with two to four sentences for each letter of STARL. Write each criterion separately, in the first person, using one example that best fits that criterion, and reuse the criterion's own terms so the marker can see the match.
What if I miss a portfolio tutorial?
Portfolio marks are only given for skills demonstrated in the tutorial, so work done afterwards does not count. If special circumstances stop you attending, you apply through the deferred exam process, with supporting documents lodged ahead of the tutorial or no later than three business days after it. Approved students join live, one-hour group sessions after the prospectus is due, and these cannot themselves be deferred.
How long is the grant prospectus, and can it be extended?
The limit is 4,000 words with a 10% leeway, so the body may run to 4,400 words but no further. Body text, tables, figures and in-text citations all count, while the cover, contents page, references and appendices do not. The 48-hour late submission period does not apply to this task, so a documented extension application must be lodged by the due date.
How is the peer evaluation score worked out?
Your teamwork score is the mean of the ratings your team members give you on four criteria: meeting attendance and participation, collaboration including design thinking and feedback, timely and effective communication, and how promptly and well you deliver your written sections. Ratings are lodged in Feedback Fruits after submission, and any comments are seen only by the unit coordinator.
Is this unit hard?
The difficulty is mostly organisational rather than conceptual. Twenty per cent depends on attending and contributing in five specific tutorials, 40% rests on a team document for a real partner with no 48-hour extension, and the examination asks you to write three polished, specific responses by hand in 100 minutes. Students who keep records of their own contributions find the examination much easier.
Can I use generative AI in this unit?
Ethical and responsible use is authorised in the Professional Portfolio and the Grant Prospectus, within the unit's guidance: for example, it must not write any section, generate data or produce recommendations, and only QUT-endorsed tools should be used. Its use is prohibited during the examination, although the unit suggests it can help you practise STARL responses beforehand.
Questions students ask in each PYB300 chapter
- What exactly is a grant prospectus?
- It is a foundation document that captures a program idea, the evidence behind it and how it would be delivered, evaluated and costed. Community organisations use it as a base when a funding round opens, adapting it quickly into an application. The writing guide stresses that it should read as one consistent story and should not resemble a university essay. Chapter 01 · The Community Sector and the Grant Prospectus
- How long should the evidence section be?
- The writing guide suggests no more than three to four pages. Within that space, show why the program is needed and what tackling the issue would gain, what research says about ways of tackling it, and, where it helps, how well evidence supports programs already running. Dot points are acceptable if they do not reduce readability. Chapter 02 · Evidence Base, Program Team and Partnerships
- Do we have to address every factor behind the problem?
- No. Tutorial 1 says a program does not need to address all the factors, and that segmenting by location or population subgroup is acceptable. The caution is not to go so narrow that the program loses its impact. Focus on what will make the biggest difference, and draw on existing national or international programs only where they suit the Australian context. Chapter 03 · Design Thinking and the Theory of Change
- How many aims should a program have?
- Tutorial 3 says most programs have one overarching aim. Programs that tackle complex issues may have more than one, but no aim should rely on another being achieved first. The aim can be redrafted right up to the deadline, as long as it stays tightly linked to the long-term outcomes. Chapter 04 · Aims, Activities and Outcomes
- Can we use a program logic template from the internet?
- The writing guide asks teams to use the PYB300 template, keeping its columns and headings even if you redesign its appearance. It warns that industry uses many variations of program logic, so follow the guidance given in the workshop and tutorial rather than a model found online. Chapter 05 · Program Logic Models
- How long should the service model be?
- The writing guide suggests a one-page diagram and a written explanation of no more than one to one and a half pages. A Week 6 note adds that the explanation can be quite short if the diagram already contains text and the design is fairly simple. The picture and the words should work together, and the image has to be sharp. Chapter 06 · Service Models and Client Journey Maps
- How many evaluation questions does the prospectus need?
- The unit's pages differ. According to the writing guide and the grant FAQ, each evaluation type needs two questions: a headline question plus a single subsidiary one. The Tutorial 5 slides ask for one headline and two subsidiary questions per section and say only the first two subsidiary questions are marked. Confirm the current requirement with your tutor. Chapter 07 · Process and Outcome Evaluation Plans
- How detailed should the GANTT chart descriptions be?
- Brief, but informative enough for an implementing team or funding body to understand what each time block covers, with a clear link to the program description, logic and service model. If two elements need planning at different times, show them as separate rows. Very brief notes under the chart are allowed, but the chart itself should carry most of the plan. Chapter 08 · Implementation Plans and Budget Assumptions
- What earns the full 4% in a tutorial?
- The criteria sheet's top band requires consistent collaboration and efforts to engage others, clear integration of relevant behavioural science concepts such as design thinking or cultural safety, a clear justification of how that knowledge contributed to the team's work, and an artefact that aligns with your participation. Part marks are rarely awarded and only after consultation with the unit coordinator. Chapter 09 · Teamwork Skills and the Professional Portfolio
- Can I use the same example for more than one criterion?
- The exam FAQ allows the same role or example if it genuinely fits each criterion, but each response must be written separately and its actions, results and learning tailored to that criterion. Using different experiences is encouraged, for instance the team project in one answer, a job in the next and volunteering in the last. Chapter 10 · Selection Criteria and the STARL Model
How to study for the exam
Treat the semester as evidence collection for the examination. Each portfolio tutorial, team meeting and prospectus section is a situation you may later describe in a STARL response, so keep a short log as you go: what the team faced, what you personally did and why, what changed, and what you learned.
For the prospectus, write the aim and the long-term outcome first and check every later section against them, because the writing guide's standard is one consistent story. In tutorials, contribute visibly and be ready to explain the week's output in one sentence with one behavioural science concept, since that is what the criteria sheet rewards.
From Week 10, rewatch the selection criteria workshop, collect five criteria from real behavioural science job advertisements, and write one response a day on paper, timing yourself at about thirty minutes. Check each draft against the exam page's tips: a stranger can follow the situation, the actions carry reasons, the result is specific and tied to your action, and the learning echoes the criterion.
Your AI Psychology tutor for PYB300
Stuck on a hard PYB300 question? Sia is AskSia’s AI Psychology tutor — ask any PYB300 Behavioural Science and Contemporary Challenges question and get a clear, step-by-step explanation grounded in how the course is actually taught and assessed. Read this whole study guide free, then take your hardest questions to Sia.
