|
|
Volume
3:
No. 1, January 2006
TOOLS & TECHNIQUES
Transforming a Master of Public Health Program to Address Public Health Practice Needs
Lynn D. Woodhouse, EdD, MEd, MPH, CHES, Alberto C. Cardelle, PhD, MPH, Steven W. Godin, PhD, MPH, CHES, Steven E. Shive, PhD, MPH, MA, CHES, Tonya L. Williams, Elizabeth A. Brensinger, MPH, Adenike C. Bitto, MDDS, DrPH, MPH, CHES
Suggested citation for this article: Woodhouse LD, Cardelle AC, Godin SW, Shive SE, Williams TL, Brensinger EA, et al. Transforming a Master of Public Health program to address public health practice needs. Prev Chronic Dis [serial online] 2006 Jan [date cited]. Available from: URL:
http://www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2006/
jan/05_0099.htm.
Abstract
The future of the constantly changing public health profession is tied to the
development of practice skills through competency-based training. In this
article, we describe a program change in the Master of Public Health program at
East Stroudsburg University in northeastern Pennsylvania. The first goal of the
program transition was to ensure that all program elements included the relevant
vision, values, mission, goals, and objectives. The second goal was to use
continuous data input and evaluation to incorporate opportunities for flexible
assessments. The change process helped the university faculty define the
program's vision and fostered an environment of community collaboration that
guides training for public health professionals.
Back to top
Introduction
Public health is an interdisciplinary profession undergoing dynamic but sometimes conflicting changes.
The future of public health can be enhanced by emphasizing the development of practice skills (1-5).
To increase the effectiveness of the public health profession and progress toward the goal of having the healthiest possible population, various adaptable approaches for improving graduate public health training and the skills of the public health workforce continue to emerge (4,6-9). It is important that emerging approaches to public health training support the development of competency-based
training grounded in curriculum models (2). It is equally important that the training programs support the broad vision of ensuring social justice and promoting
the elimination of health disparities.
East Stroudsburg University (ESU) is one of 14 institutions in the
Pennsylvania State System of Higher Learning. Faculty members in ESU’s accredited Master of Public Health (MPH) program have a documented history
of improving the quality of its curriculum (7). The recent program change described in this article provides a potential model for refocusing graduate public health programs on community health and highlighting community-health education and
practice. Given the need for quality assurance, the emphasis on outcomes, and the competition for social jurisdiction among overlapping professions (8), this model of change may help other programs work toward similar goals.
Back to top
The Change Process
To ensure that the accredited MPH program at ESU continued to meet the public health needs of our communities and region
(northeastern Pennsylvania) in a rapidly changing environment, faculty members who taught required public health courses (the ESU MPH Public Health Faculty Council) in 2003 began developing an adaptable model for change. With input from students, graduates, and community public health professionals, we
began a multistage, interactive, community-focused process to transform our graduate public health education training program.
The new curriculum was approved in fall 2004.
The program transition was based on a feedback system that highlighted the need for change at every program level. The first goal was to ensure that all program elements incorporated the appropriate program vision, values, mission, goals, and objectives, or VVMGO. The faculty members decided that the program VVMGO should focus on social justice and community health from an ecological
perspective rather than focus on promoting program success (3,10,11). The second goal was to incorporate opportunities for flexible assessments through continuous data input and evaluation at every level. We envisioned a process that would blend the adaptability needed to use data
with our efforts to keep the program focused on community health.
The figure shows the continual feedback process. The faculty began the process in 2003 with point 1; however, other graduate programs could begin using the model at any entry point.
Figure. Feedback loop for the initial and continual development processes for program vision, values, mission, goals, and objectives (VVMGO); student competencies; and the curriculum learning objectives and assessments linked to student competencies. The model was adapted from iterations of planning materials used from 2003 to 2005. COL indicates Council on Linkages Between Academia and
Public Health Practice. [A text description of this
figure is also available.]
During the 2-year process, five national initiatives affecting the public health workforce influenced our activities: 1) The Institute of Medicine (IOM) report, “Who Will Keep the Public Healthy? Educating the Public Health Workforce for the 21st Century,” which emphasizes practice experience, the ecological model, and expanding the core curriculum of public health (3); 2) the
impact of a more than 10-year dialogue about developing a process for credentialing the public health workforce (2,12); 3) the development of multiple sets of public health competencies from many stakeholders (2,3,13-16); 4) the existing graduate roles and competencies for health education (16,17); and 5) the current and future requirements for public health program accreditation, including the
Council on Education for Public Health (CEPH) accreditation criteria and efforts to blend the MPH in health education concentration and the health education approval and accreditation processes at the graduate and undergraduate levels (18,19).
Four interactive stages of development emerged from an ongoing strategic planning process. The first stage, based on a synthesis of the previously mentioned materials and an examination of regional needs, involved developing a revised draft proposing new program VVMGO. Once approved by the faculty, the draft of the program VVMGO was used to guide the second stage. (A complete list of the
revised ESU MPH program VVMGO is available from www.esu.edu/mph*.)
The second stage involved developing a list of student competencies that were grounded in the ecological model (3,11) and organized into 10 domains. These competencies were compiled after an interactive process involving students, graduates, community stakeholders, employers, community advisors, and faculty members (Figure, points 1 to 4). (A complete list of the revised ESU MPH
program student competencies is available from www.esu.edu/mph*.) The domains and competencies that emerged are primarily a combination of competency lists from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Public Health Prevention Service, the Council on Linkages Between Academia and Public Health Practice, the Columbia University School of Nursing, and
the Joint Committee for the Development of Graduate-Level Preparation Standards, as well as competencies from many general or discipline-specific approaches provided in the references of the 2003 IOM report and on the CDC Web site (2,3). These competency frameworks were continually synthesized,
considering content knowledge and skill development required in each framework.
Using a matrix or chart as a guide, the third stage included an examination of each course and required
program activity to determine the relevance of selected competencies for the program curriculum. While focusing on the VVMGO,
the fourth stage involved examining each relevant competency to determine whether it was a current focus of the program and if so, how it was being assessed, or whether it should become a focus and if so, how it should be emphasized.
In August and September 2003, the two written drafts were shared with students, graduates, and community public health professionals. The drafts were accompanied by a cover letter describing our interactive process and requesting input, validation, or both (Figure, point 5). Participants ranked the importance of goals, objectives, and competencies and suggested changes, validated the
draft, or both. We allowed this feedback to be anonymous (although many people signed their submissions), and the information was returned in our envelope.
Aided by mailed-in information and data from 4 years of program evaluation findings (2001–2004), including student and graduate surveys about curriculum value and outcomes of the program, exit-interview summaries, and internship preceptor interviews, we began the process of revising the curriculum. The revision focused on the courses, student assessments, and program requirements, with
the goal of ensuring that graduates who completed the program would have the identified competencies (Figure, point 6). Learning objectives for several courses were changed, experiential learning was expanded, and new courses were added.
Back to top
Integrated Evaluation Processes
To ensure that program changes were monitored effectively, a modified logic model was created to illustrate the relationships among the revised curriculum requirements, revised course learning objectives, and the program’s VVMGO and student competencies
(Table). The model was developed to help plan the processes for and implementation of the new evaluation, and its development will
help us monitor the program’s outcomes and allow the faculty to revise the evaluation of the program as needed (Figure, point 7). Creating a visual representation of the interactive nature of the program helped the faculty embrace the idea that program success in all areas is necessary to enhance community health and community health practice.
As part of a CEPH reaccreditation self-study and site visits in spring and fall 2004, meetings were conducted with community advisors, stakeholders, students, graduates, and community public health professionals to
obtain additional input into and final validation of the proposed changes. In addition, the first round of evaluation data using the new processes enhanced this assessment (Figure,
point 8). Although the revised VVMGO, competencies, curriculum, and evaluation plan have only been implemented for a year, the evaluation ― including a revised student and graduate survey, revised outcome measures, and a greater emphasis on community stakeholder input ― has been providing preliminary information. Some successes have been revealed, as have areas that need more
emphasis, such as environmental health, in which we need to expand experiences
and internship opportunities.
Back to top
Value of the Process
An important product of this holistic process of program change is the impact on the faculty council. Because the change process was grounded in strategic planning, it helped us define what the faculty and the program should be able to accomplish. It also fostered a culture — a shared vision — of community collaboration that guides the training for public health education practice,
applied social behavioral science research, and population-based initiatives emerging from the program’s students, graduates, and faculty members (9,20-23). This
vision may be atypical for some graduate public health training institutions, but
we consider it an important component of a high-quality graduate public health training experience (22).
Many alternative approaches can be used to ensure that the VVMGO of a graduate public health training program support and guide the students, graduates, and faculty members and facilitate community efforts to enhance the health of the public. The ESU MPH program model process was successful for
the MPH program. In the future, the process will serve as a quality-control mechanism for the evolution
of public health worker certification or credentialing. The next step is to use the process to ensure that the ESU undergraduate community-health and health-services programs are effectively linked to the graduate program and can meet public health workforce needs by graduating students with core public health skills, health-services skills, community-health practice and education skills, or all
of these. The emerging potential for undergraduate public health program accreditation makes this step essential.
Back to top
Author Information
Corresponding Author: Lynn D. Woodhouse, EdD, MEd, MPH, CHES, Professor and MPH Program Director, East Stroudsburg University, 200 Prospect St, East Stroudsburg, PA 18301. Telephone: 570-422-3702. E-mail: cwoodhouse@po-box.esu.edu or
woodhouseld@comcast.net.
Author Affiliations: Alberto C. Cardelle, PhD, MPH, Associate Professor, Chair, and Director, Health Services Undergraduate Program, Health Department; Steven W. Godin, PhD, MPH, CHES, Professor and Director of Community Health Undergraduate Program, Health Department; Steven E. Shive, PhD, MPH, MA, CHES, Assistant Professor, Health Department; Tonya L. Williams, Administrative Assistant,
Health Department; Adenike C. Bitto, MDDS, DrPH, MPH, CHES, Associate Professor,
Health Department, East Stroudsburg University, East Stroudsburg, Pa; Elizabeth A. Brensinger, MPH, Adjunct
Assistant Professor, Member, East Stroudsburg University Master of Public Health Community Advisory Board, East Stroudsburg University, East Stroudsburg, Pa,
and Consultant, RedRoad
Enterprises, New Tripoli, Pa.
Back to top
References
- Amodeo AR.
Commentary:
developing and retaining a public health workforce for the 21st century: readiness for a paradigm shift to community-based public health. J Public
Health Manag Pract 2003;9(6):500-3.
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Strategy 2: Identify
competencies/develop curriculum [Internet]. Atlanta (GA): Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention, Office of Workforce Policy and Planning. Available
from: URL:
http://www.phppo.cdc.gov/owpp/WDI_Identify.asp.
- Gebbie K, Rosenstock L, Hernandez LM, editors. Who will keep the public healthy? Educating
public health professionals for the 21st century. Washington (DC): Institute
of Medicine, National Academies Press; 2003.
- Tilson H, Gebbie KM.
The public health workforce. Annu Rev Public Health 2004;25:341-56.
- Thacker SB.
How do we ensure the quality of the public health workforce? Prev Chronic Dis
[serial online] 2005 Apr.
- Cioffi JP, Lichtveld MY, Tilson H.
A research agenda for public health workforce development. J Public Health Manag Pract 2004;10(3):186-92.
- Livingood W, Woodhouse L, Underwood C, Shive E, Waring B. Integrating individual and program credentialing:
the East Stroudsburg University Experience. J Health Educ 1995: 26(2):104-7.
- Livingood WC, Woodhouse LD, Godin S, Eickmeier J, Cosgrove W, Howard M. Credentialing and competition for social jurisdiction. J Health Educ 1993;24:282-4.
- Woodhouse LD, Auld ME, Livingood WC, Mulligan LA. CEPH accredited MPH programs with
health education concentrations: a resource for strengthening the public health
workforce. Health Promot Pract. Forthcoming.
- Stokols D.
Translating social ecological theory into guidelines for community health promotion. Am J
Health Promot 1996;10(4):282-98.
- Brownson RC, Baker E, Leet T, Gillespie, KN. Evidence based public health. New York: Oxford University Press; 2003.
- Livingood WC, Woodhouse LD, Godin S.
The feasibility and desirability of public health credentialing: a survey of
public health leaders. Am J Public Health 1995;85(6):765-70.
- Public Health Foundation. Core public health competencies lists [Internet].
Washington (DC): Council on Linkages. Available from: URL:
http://www.trainingfinder.org/competencies/background.htm*.
- Council on Linkages Between Academia and Public Health Practice. Linkage
activites [Internet]. Washington (DC): Council on Linkages Between Academia
and Public Health Practice. Available from: URL: http://www.phf.org/Link/LA.htm*.
- Association of Schools of Public Health [homepage on the Internet].
Washington (DC): Association of Schools of Public Health. Available from: URL: http://www.asph.org*.
- National Commission for Health Education Credentialing, Society for Public
Health Education, and American Association for Health Education. A competency
based framework for graduate-level health educators. Allentown (PA): National Commission for Health Education Credentialing; 1999.
- Livingood WC, Auld ME.
The credentialing of a population-based health profession:
lessons learned from health education certification. J Public Health Manag Pract 2001;7(4):38-45.
- Council on Education for Public Health. Accreditation criteria [Internet].
Washington (DC): Council on Education for Public Health. Available from: URL:
http://www.ceph.org/i4a/pages/Index.cfm?pageid=3350*.
- National Transition Task Force on Accreditation in Health Education. Health Education Accreditation Task Force
recommendations [Internet]. Washington (DC): National Transition Task Force on
Accreditation in Health Education, Society for Public Health Education. Available from: URL:
http://www.healthedaccred.org*.
- Lichtveld MY, Cioffi JP, Baker EL Jr, Bailey SB, Gebbie K, Henderson JV, et al.
Partnership for front-line success:
a call for a national action agenda on workforce development. J Public Health Manag Pract 2001;7(4):1-7.
- Bailey S.
Training the public health practitioner. J Public Health Manag
Pract 2003;9(2):87-8.
- Potter MA, Eggleston M.
Supporting academic public health practice:
a survey of organizational structures in public health schools. J Public Health Manag
Pract 2003;9(2):165-70.
- Cioffi JP, Lichtveld MY, Tilson H.
A research agenda for public health workforce development. J Public Health Manag Pract 2004;10(3):186-92.
Back to top
|
|
