Syllabus

Schedule

Course Dates

Week 1: May 8 – May 15
Week 2: May 15 – May 22
Week 3: May 22 – May 29
Week 4: May 29 – Jun 5
Week 5: Jun 5 – Jun 12
Week 6: Jun 12 – Jun 19
Week 7: Jun 19 – Jun 26
Week 8: Jun 26 – Jun 30

Each week opens on Wednesday at 12:01 AM Eastern Time. 

Week 1: Introduction to Policy and the Structures of Government

Learning Outcomes

• Describe the relationship between policy and politics
• Describe examples of differing, possibly paradoxical, policy views or underlying values of professions, organizations, or individuals
• Identify examples of policy stemming from one or more of the three branches of a co-equal government

Learning Activities

Acknowledgment of Academic Engagement Quiz

Week 1 Discussion

Initial Post:

Describe your understanding of the interface between policy and politics. What role does scientific evidence have in policy discussions? What role does it have in politics? Using Stone’s Introduction and Chapter 1 discussion, provide one example of a policy “paradox” in your field. 

Response Post:

Respond to two (2) of your classmates’ examples by identifying some opposing, possibly paradoxical, views within or outside of your field.  To further the discussion, provide policy examples of your own from different branches of our co-equal federal or state governments. Identify the policy and which branch of government it initially stems from. Do you have any personal or professional view of this policy or its impact on people or communities? Has it been a successful policy or not? Explain the basis for your views and cite any reliable, credible evidence.

Week 2: Policy Analysis: Purpose, Audiences, Components, and Format

Learning Outcomes

• Identify societal issues that would benefit from policy solutions
• Describe how different audiences interpret the need for policy solutions
• Describe the role of evidence in policy-making
• Apply awareness of cultural values and practices to the design or implementation of public health policies

Learning Activities

Week 2 Discussion

Stone writes (pg 381) “What people care about and fight about are interpretations of personhood, identity, economic welfare, war, and the proper relationship between religion and government. What communities decide about when they make policy is meaning, not matter. And science can’t settle questions of meaning.”

Initial Post:

Creating policy can oftentimes be driven by emotion. Evidence may or may not be compelling enough to change someone’s mind or help shape policy. Based on the readings this week, why does evidence sometimes get lost or discarded when creating policy? Share an example of an issue where evidence may not change a person’s mind and why a policy might be made from “meaning, not matter”.

Response Posts:

Respond to two (2) of your classmates with further questions, constructive criticism, and/or connections to your own perspective on how different professions and different stakeholders view societal issues and concerns that require governmental involvement. What are some of the health equity implications of differing values, views, and perspectives of culturally different beliefs and practices?

Week 3: Define the Policy Problem

Learning Outcomes

• Describe the policy problem from your own profession’s perspective
• Clearly articulate a specific policy problem in writing
• Discuss the different policy problem perspectives of your own and other professions

Learning Activities

Small Group Discussion: Problem Statement

Remember, the “policy problem” is NOT obesity, so please do not frame your issue as responses to our nation’s obesity problem. Your focus must be on potential problems or issues with the proposed BMI screening policy as outlined in the policy scenario.

Initial Post:

• Use the information in the scenario and supporting external sources to write +/- 500 words defining the policy problem from the perspective of your own discipline. Keep in mind that your problem must be defined in ways that the use of public resources is authorized, makes sense, and is likely to be effective (see Bardach p. 2). Be sure to:
  • Articulate the problem concisely and clearly
  • Frame the problem as one for which a public policy solution is warranted, appropriate, and likely to be effective
  • Avoid vagueness, generalities, rhetoric, and cliché
• Provide preliminary information about what evidence will likely be available to support your definition and interpretation of the problem
• Submit your policy problem statement in the Discussion Forum

Response Posts: 

Respond to 2 of your groupmates’ submissions. Provide constructive feedback on some or all of the guidelines for the problem statement (i.e. is the policy problem clearly and concisely articulated? If the problem as framed one that can be addressed by public intervention [vs private]? Is the policy problem specific enough?). 

Please note that the policy at issue is the proposed BMI screening policy. While BMI screening might be an upstream approach to addressing obesity over the longer term, this assignment should not be interpreted to mean that the policy “problem” is obesity in general. This assignment is requesting that you consider issues, concerns, benefits, and risks with the proposed BMI policy itself from your particular professional perspective. When you are invited to speak at any of the public forms (local, state, federal) on this proposed policy, what is it that you might want the policymakers to know and consider in their decision? For instance, if you are a public health professional, you might be particularly concerned about how this screening policy impacts sub-populations such as low-income communities or racially and culturally diverse communities. If you are a social worker, you might focus on a contemporaneous risk assessment for peer experiences of bullying and victimization.

Week 4: Describe the Policy Context and Landscape

Learning Outcomes

• Identify support for your policy problem in the scientific or grey literature
• Evaluate and summarize evidence to describe or support your definition of the policy problem
• Consider the viewpoints of other professions in your description of the policy problem

Learning Activities

Small Group Discussion: Problem Summary

Initial Post:

• Research any available trusted data or other reliable information that supports your updated definition of the policy problem, which includes the perspective of other disciplines and the impact or consequences of failing to address the issue with a policy intervention. Consider your primary objective for defining the problem; is it clearly stated and supported by your evidence? Have you used evidence ethically and responsibly, avoiding misrepresentation of available data and scientific evidence? Keep in mind what you have learned from your interprofessional groupmates about the description of the problem and include relevant evidence that reflects the perspective of disciplines, if it is helpful for your approach.
• Prepare a +/- 750-word summary of the data and information, including any charts or graphs depicting the data, and a brief summary of the evidence base, including relevant citations. If your policy recommendations are likely to require significant outlay of funds, be sure to include at least some preliminary financial data, or likely fiscal impact.

Response Posts: 

Respond to 2 of your groupmates’ submissions. Using the concept of “robustness” from the Shaxson article, is your groupmates’ evidence “robust”? Have they provided reliable, clear evidence from trusted sources to support the problem? Have they described potential impact or consequences (of acting or failing to act) in a realistic, credible way without hyperbole? Have they considered or anticipated the views, impact, consequences on other professions or other stakeholders? Have they addressed any possible financial or resource impact? Can you identify ways in which working in interprofessional teams supports the robustness of evidence describing the policy problem? For each response post, title your post as “Response to [student’s name].”

When you read your groupmates’ feedback on your initial post, keep track of any suggestions you may want to implement when you finalize your policy analysis in Week 7.

Week 5: Identify your policy options and alternatives

Learning Outcomes

• Identify various policy options to address policy problem
• Identify how perspectives of other professions might inform the policy
• Evaluate peer policy options and provide substantive feedback
• Analyze (or assess) the potential consequences (positive, negative, or unintended) of policy options
• Apply ethical principles of policy advocacy

Learning Activities

Small Group Discussion: Policy Alternatives

As you consider policy alternatives, first remember that the policy problem is not obesity; you should be focused entirely on the BMI screening proposal.

Next, consider what you learned from Deborah Stone’s readings about the policy paradoxes that exist when you account for the various perspectives of stakeholders that will be impacted by the implementation of the policy. What adjustments would you make to the policy proposal that might address some of those differing impacts?

Please review some of the earlier chapters in Stone (e.g., Chapters 2 and 5) and make sure that some of your evaluative criteria reflect the likely values that are important to some of the stakeholders. Policy analyses frequently require that analysts move from high level concepts to practical, on the ground considerations; this is a good time to practice your ability to do so in a cohesive manner. Think expansively! Here are some ideas to get your policy wheels turning.

Initial Post:

Create a list of four policy alternatives that are likely to address your policy problem, keeping in mind that focusing on different aspects of the problem might lead you to a diverse set of policy alternatives (which is fine).
Briefly explain the basis or reason(s) behind your choice of alternatives (i.e. why you think this is an appropriate approach to solve your policy problem).
Considering what you have learned from colleagues in the other professions, explain the likely impact of the policy options on individuals, populations, and/or communities (as appropriate to your issue). Be sure to address any foreseeable unintended consequences or possible negative impact.
Submit to the Discussion Topic (should be +/- 1000-1100 words, or +/- 200 words for each policy alternative).

Response Posts: 

Respond to 2 of your groupmates’ submissions. Do their policy alternatives make sense on their face? What questions do their policy alternatives bring up for you? What barriers can you identify? Do any of the policy alternatives interfere with the interests of other disciplines? Are the policy options consistent with ethical principles of advocating for one or more of the options? 

Week 6: Select and Apply Your Evaluation Criteria

Learning Outcomes

• Evaluate policy options according to various relevant criteria (e.g. feasibility, effectiveness)
• Evaluate policies for their impact on health and social equity
• Anticipate the likely concerns of policy making governing body in preparation for presenting testimony
• Analyze peer policy option evaluations for gaps and provide substantive feedback

Learning Activities

Small Group Discussion: Evaluation of Policy Options

Initial Post: 

Identify three (3) evaluative criteria (e.g. efficiency, cost-effectiveness) and more fully evaluate three (3) of your policy alternatives according to those evaluative criteria.
There are a number of ways to approach policy analysis. You may find it helpful to use a table, such as in this template. Here is another example of how you might use this template to organize your evaluation criteria for a smoking cessation policy.
Write +/- 300 words on each policy alternative, taking into account new knowledge and/or perspective from your peers. Identify possible opposing views and describe how you might respond to them in a hearing setting. Anticipate the likely concerns of the governing body.
Be sure to evaluate your policy options for their impact on the health and social equity of individuals, communities, and/ or populations.
Submit your statements in the Discussion Topic.

Response Posts:

Respond to 2 of your groupmates’ submissions. Provide substantive, constructive feedback on whether they have addressed the most likely concerns of a governing body. Are there any gaps in their evaluations of their proposed policy intervention(s)? Have they anticipated likely opposing views? Have they considered the impact of the policy on the health and social equity of various individuals, communities, or populations?

Week 7: Make Policy Recommendations and Final Policy Analysis

Learning Outcomes

• Synthesize recommended policy options in concise, professional written analysis
• Incorporate advocacy and persuasive principles into recommendations
• Predict and address likely concerns of governing body
• Compile and integrate components of policy analysis into final written paper
• Apply awareness of cultural values and practices to policy recommendations

Learning Activities

Final Policy Analysis Paper

Submit your final policy analysis paper, properly formatted and with appropriate references and citations.

This final policy analysis paper integrates your previous paper sections in prior assignments in a seamless document and incorporating previous feedback from your instructor and your peers. It will also include your final policy recommendations for your target stakeholder audience. 

Your final recommendations should take into account evaluative criteria identified as significant to policymakers as well as those factors that are important to the target population (e.g. cultural values or practices; health, social risks, or educational risks, privacy issues, etc).

Be sure to incorporate new learning and perspectives acquired through your weeks of discussions with your groupmates. While this paper builds on all the previous work you have done in this course, it should reflect the feedback you have received from your instructor and colleagues. Your final product should synthesize perspectives of other professions but be clearly written from the viewpoint of your own profession and the values and goals that matter most.

Suggested word count: +/- 3000 – 3500 words

Week 8: Legislative Testimony and Reflections on Interprofessional Collaboration

Learning Outcomes

• Deliver persuasive oral testimony before governing body to advocate for policies that will improve health and well-being in diverse populations
• Respond effectively and appropriately to audience questions
• Reflect on interprofessional experiences
• Identify successes and challenges in interprofessional collaboration

Learning Activities

Week 8 Discussion

Initial Post:

You will create a 2-3 minute video presenting your oral testimony. To prepare for your video, you must first write a script of your remarks. Rehearse your testimony and edit your script as necessary to fit your remarks into the 2-3 minute limit. Your testimony should be persuasive, advocating for attention to the problem you have identified and for the policy solution options you have evaluated as the most likely to have beneficial impact. Be mindful of your audience and tailor your remarks accordingly. Be specific in what you are asking the governing body to do or the next steps that must be taken. Be sure to make a compelling argument without distorting the facts, the impact, or the nature of the problem at issue. The testimony should progress from a concise statement of the problem in logical order to your final proposed policy recommendations.

Be sure to demonstrate your awareness of different values and practices with regard to food, nutrition, weight, body image, and other culturally meaningful intersections with BMI.

Response Posts:

Provide feedback to two classmates. What parts of the testimony are most compelling and persuasive? What suggestions do you have for improvement? What types of questions do you think they will receive from the target audience? Does the testimony unfold in logical order?

Final Reflection

Prepare a +/- 500-word reflection on your interprofessional collaborative experiences.

During this class, you had the opportunity to work closely with a group of colleagues from diverse educational, professional, and personal backgrounds.  Reflecting on this experience:

• Discuss at least one (1) of the interprofessional competencies from each of the four domains and provide at least one (1) specific example for each competency of how, or the circumstances in which, you practiced that competency within your group.
• Describe the competencies that were particularly challenging for you or for others in your group. In what ways? Be specific, and respectful, in explaining what you found challenging about these competencies.
• What did you learn from your groupmates and how did the experience in this course change the way you might approach professional collaborations in the future?
• As you reflect back on your interactions with your groupmates in this course, is there anything you would do differently? 

Student Resources

Online Student Support

Your Student Support Specialist is a resource for you. Please don't hesitate to contact them for assistance, including, but not limited to course planning, current problems or issues in a course, technology concerns, or personal emergencies.

Questions? Visit the Student Support Public Health page

UNE Libraries:

• Library Access for all students: Your library login ID and password are the same as the ones you use to log into Blackboard/Brightspace.
• Public Health Databases: https://library.une.edu/library-materials/find/research-by-subject/public-health/
• Library Tutorial: Find an article
• Library Questions: Ask a librarian or phone library staff at (207) 602-2361 or (207) 221-4330.

UNE Student Academic Success Center

UNE's Student Academic Success Center (SASC) offers a range of free online services to support your academic achievement. Writing support, ESOL support, study strategy and learning style consultations, as well as downloadable resources, are available to all matriculating students. The SASC also offers tutoring for GPH 712 Epidemiology, GPH 716 Biostatistics, GPH 717 Applied Epidemiology, GPH 718 Biostatistics II, and GPH 719 Research Methods. To make an appointment for any of these services, go to une.tutortrac.com. For more information and to view and download writing and studying resources, please visit:

• UNE Student Academic Success Center

Information Technology Services (ITS)

• ITS Contact: Toll Free Help Desk 24 hours/7 days per week at 1-877-518-4673

Accommodations

Any student who would like to request, or ask any questions regarding, academic adjustments or accommodations must contact the Student Access Center at (207) 221-4438 or pcstudentaccess@une.edu. Student Access Center staff will evaluate the student's documentation and determine eligibility of accommodation(s) through the Student Access Center registration procedure.

Policies

Note on citation style: Students taking this course who are not enrolled in the Master of Public Health or Master of Science in Applied Nutrition programs may follow the APA citation style instead of AMA style. 

Notice: In this course, the general Late Policy noted below may not apply for all assignments or class discussions.  This is a course where interaction between students is not only encouraged, but a required learning outcome of the course as students are dependent on receiving feedback from classmates before proceeding with their work.  Please read the due dates within the course carefully and note when late submissions will not be accepted. The extended time is suspended for some weeks.  As in all classes, there is no late submission in week 8 due to the course end.

AMA Writing Style Statement

The American Medical Association Manual (AMA) of Style, 11th edition is the required writing format for this course. Additional support for academic writing and AMA format is provided throughout the coursework as well as at the UNE Portal for Online Students.

Online resources: AMA Style Guide

Turnitin Originality Check and Plagiarism Detection Tool

The College of Professional Studies uses Turnitin to help deter plagiarism and to foster the proper attribution of sources. Turnitin provides comparative reports for submitted assignments that reflect similarities in other written works. This can include, but is not limited to, previously submitted assignments, internet articles, research journals, and academic databases.

Make sure to cite your sources appropriately as well as use your own words in synthesizing information from published literature. Webinars and workshops, included early in your coursework, will help guide best practices in APA citation and academic writing.

You can learn more about Turnitin in the Turnitin Student quick start guide.

Technology Requirements

Please review the technical requirements for UNE Online Graduate Programs: Technical Requirements

Course Evaluation Policy

Course surveys are one of the most important tools that University of New England uses for evaluating the quality of your education, and for providing meaningful feedback to instructors on their teaching. In order to assure that the feedback is both comprehensive and precise, we need to receive it from each student for each course. Evaluation access is distributed via UNE email at the beginning of the last week of the course.

Late Policy

Students are responsible for submitting work by the date indicated in Brightspace.

Quizzes and Tests: Quizzes and tests must be completed by the due date. They will not be accepted after the due date.

Assignments: Unless otherwise specified, assignments will be accepted up to 3 days late; however, there is a 10% grade reduction (from the total points) for the late submission. After three days the assignment will not be accepted.

Discussion posts: If the initial post is submitted late, but still within the discussion board week, there will be a 10% grade reduction from the total discussion grade (e.g., a 3 point discussion will be reduced by 0.3 points). Any posts submitted after the end of the Discussion Board week will not be graded.

Please make every effort ahead of time to contact your instructor and your student support specialist if you are not able to meet an assignment deadline. Arrangements for extenuating circumstances may be considered by faculty.

Student Handbook Online - Policies and Procedures

The policies contained within this document apply to all students in the College of Graduate and Professional Studies. It is each student's responsibility to know the contents of this handbook.

Student Handbook

UNE Course Withdrawal

Please contact your student support specialist if you are considering dropping or withdrawing from a course. The last day to drop for 100% tuition refund is the 2nd day of the course. Financial Aid charges may still apply. Students using Financial Aid should contact the Financial Aid Office prior to withdrawing from a course.

Academic Integrity

The University of New England values academic integrity in all aspects of the educational experience. Academic dishonesty in any form undermines this standard and devalues the original contributions of others. It is the responsibility of all members of the University community to actively uphold the integrity of the academy; failure to act, for any reason, is not acceptable. For information about plagiarism and academic misconduct, please visit https://www.une.edu/studentlife/plagiarism.

Academic dishonesty includes, but is not limited to the following:

1. Cheating, copying, or the offering or receiving of unauthorized assistance or information.
2. Fabrication or falsification of data, results, or sources for papers or reports.
3. Action which destroys or alters the work of another student.
4. Multiple submissions of the same paper or report for assignments in more than one course without permission of each instructor.
5. Plagiarism, the appropriation of records, research, materials, ideas, or the language of other persons or writers and the submission of them as one's own.

Charges of academic dishonesty will be reviewed by the Program Director. Penalties for students found responsible for violations may depend upon the seriousness and circumstances of the violation, the degree of premeditation involved, and/or the student’s previous record of violations.  Appeal of a decision may be made to the Dean whose decision will be final.  Student appeals will take place through the grievance process outlined in the student handbook.