Syllabus

Schedule

Course Schedule:

Each week opens on Wednesday at 12:01 AM Eastern Time. Each week closes on Wednesday at 11:59 pm ET, with the exception of Week 8, which ends on Sunday. 

• Week 1 Jan 8 – Jan 15
• Week 2 Jan 15 – Jan 22
• Week 3 Jan 22 – Jan 29
• Week 4 Jan 29 – Feb 5
• Week 5 Feb 5 – Feb 12
• Week 6 Feb 12 – Feb 19
• Week 7 Feb 19 – Feb 26
• Week 8 Feb 26 – Mar 1 (Sunday)

Weekly Schedule:

The assignment/discussion descriptions mentioned below are summaries. Please make sure to review the full assignment prompts in Blackboard. There may be additional readings/videos that are not mentioned in this weekly summary, make sure to carefully review the modules in Blackboard.

Week 1: Health Behavior in Context & Evaluating the Evidence

Course Introduction (video)

Weekly Outcomes:

• Identify factors affecting population health relative to a specific healthcare issue.
• Search databases and critically analyze peer-reviewed literature
• Synthesize and incorporate scientific evidence into professional writing

Videos/Readings:

• Textbook Section 1: Overview, pp. 1-2.
• Textbook Chapter 1: Health Behavior in the Context of the “New” Public Health, pp. 3-24.
• Textbook Chapter 2: How Theory Informs Health Promotion and Public Health Practice, pp. 25-40.
• Mokdad AH, Marks JS, Stroup DF, Gerberding JL. Actual Causes of Death in the United States, 2000. JAMA. 2004; 291:1238-1245.
• Kovalchick S, Mills JA. How to Read an Academic Article.  Powerpoint Presentation. https://www.iup.edu/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=177848

Lectures: 

• Chapter 1: Health Behavior in the Context of the “New” Public Health 
• Chapter 2: How Theory Informs Health Promotion and Public Health Practice
• Finding and Writing About Evidence 

Additional Resources:

• How to read a scientific paper
• Johnson NB, Hayes LD, Brown K, Hoo EC, Ethier KA. CDC National Health Report: Leading Causes of Morbidity and Mortality and Associated Behavioral Risk and Protective Factors – United States, 2005-2013. MMWR. 2014; 63(Suppl):1-27.
• National Cancer Institute. Theory at a Glance: Application to Health Promotion and Health Behavior. 2005. Washington, D.C.: National Institutes of Health.

Assignments

• Whole Class Discussion: Introductions (ungraded)

Introduce yourself to your peers and your instructor. Describe your interest in Social & Behavioral Health. How do you think the theories and models discussed in this course will help you better understand public health?

• Whole Class Discussion: Evaluating the Mokdad article

Read the Mokdad et al. paper using the strategies discussed this week.

Initial Post: Discuss the following (Note: No response post is required for this board, but be sure to read your colleagues’ perspectives):

– What did the authors do well in the writing of the article?

– What makes this an effective article (if it is effective)?

– How would you recommend the authors revise or edit their article to improve readability?

– What value does this article have for you as a reader and public health professional?

– This article has been cited in more than 6,000 publications. Write a sentence citing this article that you could use to support your argument that it is important to focus on a behavioral risk factor related to your group’s health condition. (Do not quote directly from the article.)

• Group Discussion: Finding and Writing About Evidence 

Select a recent article that presents evidence of the link between your health condition and one or more modifiable behavioral or social determinants of health.

Initial Post: Describe the search process you used to identify the article, include the database or search engine and search terms used. Briefly summarize the main finding(s) of the study (do not describe the study in full), and then answer the following questions:

– What did the authors do well in the writing of the article?  

– What makes this an effective article (if it is effective)?

– How could this article be revised to improve the article?

– What value does this article have for you as a reader and public health professional?

Response Posts: Select one of the articles presented by your colleagues (try to choose one that does not already have a response). Read their article and explain where you agree and/or differ with their analysis of the article. End your post with a one to two sentence synthesis of the main findings from the two articles (your article and your colleague’s article).

For your second response post, reflect on the experiences this week of evaluating these articles. Discuss how you and your group can apply this experience to improve your own writing.

Week 2: Engaging the Community in Health Promotion

Weekly Outcomes: 

• Apply awareness of cultural values and practices to the design or implementation of public health policies or programs
• Propose strategies to identify stakeholders and build coalitions and partnerships for influencing public health outcomes

Videos/Readings:

• Textbook: Chapter 3 The PRECEDE-PROCEED Planning Model, pp. 41-56.
• Duran B, Wallerstein N, Avila MM, Belone L, Minkler M, Foley K. Chapter 2: Developing and Maintaining Partnerships with Communities. in Israel BA, Eng E, Schulz AJ, Parker EA, eds. Methods for Community-Based Participatory Research for Health, 2nd ed. 2013.  pp 43-68. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
• Caldwell WB, Reyes AG, Rowe Z, Weinert J, Israel B. Community Partner Perspectives on Benefits, Challenges, Facilitating Factors, and Lessons Learned from Community-Based Participatory Research Partnerships in Detroit. Progress in Community Health Partnerships. 2015;9.2:299-311.
• Addison CC, Campbell Jenkins BW, Odom D, et al. Building Collaborative Health Promotion Partnerships: The Jackson Heart Study. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2016(13):25. doi:10.3390/ijerph13010025.

Lectures:

• Chapter 3: Planning Models
• Community-Based Partnerships

Additional Resources for those who wish to explore further the role of CBPR in Health Promotion, Health Equity, and Research:

• The Detroit Community-Academic Urban Research Center
  http://www.detroiturc.org
• Jackson Heart Study https://www.jacksonheartstudy.org/
• Johns Hopkins CBPR Health Equity Course Panel & Question Session
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2YE1RTd4hM
• Community-Based Participatory Research in Detroit, Michigan – Dr. Barbara Israel
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7XgNQjaxtQg
• Community-Based Participatory Research and Health Equity – Dr. Nina Wallerstein
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMXFCe2RU9E
• Kieffer EC, Willis SK, Odoms-Young AM, et al. Reducing disparities in diabetes among African-American and Latino residents of Detroit: the essential role of community planning focus groups. Ethnicity & disease. 2004;14:S27-37.

Assignments

• Whole Class Discussion: Engaging the Community

Identify a community that you will be working with for this project.  You do not have to identify specific partners of your coalition, but you should be able to briefly describe your community (city, county, or other geographic location).  This will allow you to ground your proposal within the demographic and environmental factors unique to your community that may influence your intervention proposal.

Initial Post: Title your initial post with your health issue and community (e.g., Diabetes prevention in Wyoming County, WV).  Briefly describe your community, including information regarding the physical environment (rural/urban, unique characteristics) and demographics (race/ethnicity, SES, etc.)

Based on the readings and lectures this week, describe how you would identify stakeholders within your community and begin to build partnerships.  How will you include the needs and perspectives of multiple members within the community coalition? Be specific in the strategies you propose to both identify and include a variety of stakeholders in your coalition.

Response Posts (minimum of two response posts engaging with others in the discussion to address the following points): Read through your colleagues’ posts. Using specific examples, discuss how awareness of cultural values and practices should be incorporated into the design and implementation of your coalitions’ public health interventions. Consider why community involvement and understanding cultural values and practices is important to include in the planning process. How could lack of community involvement hinder the success of an intervention?

• Week 2 Quiz

Week 3: Value Expectancy & Fear Appeals

Weekly Outcomes: 

• Identify determinants of health for a specific healthcare issue
• Map determinants of health for a specific condition and population to the socioecological model

Readings/Videos:

• Textbook Chapter 4: Value-Expectancy Theories, pp. 59-72.
• Textbook Chapter 5: Models Based on Perceived Threat and Fear Appeals, pp. 73-93.
• Carmack CC, Lewis-Moss RK.  Examining the Theory of Planned Behavior Applied to Condom Use: The Effect-Indicator vs. Causal-Indicator Models. J Prim Prev. 2009; 30(6): 659–676.
• Askelson NM, Chi DL, Momany ET, Kuthy RA, Ortiz C, Hanson JD, Damiano JD. Encouraging early preventive dental visits for preschool-aged children enrolled in Medicaid: Using the Extended Parallel Process Model to conduct formative research. J Public Health Dent. 2014 January ; 74(1): 64–70.
• Askelson NM, Chi DL, Momany ET, Kuthy RA, Carter KD, Field K, Damiano JD. The Importance of Efficacy: Using the Extended Parallel Process Model to Examine Factors Related to Preschool-Age Children Enrolled in Medicaid Receiving Preventive Dental Visits. Health Ed & Beh. 2015; 42(6): 805–813.

Lectures:

• Chapter 4: Value-Expectancy Theories
• Chapter 5: Models Based on Perceived Threat and Fear Appeals

Assignments

• Group Discussion: Modifiable Determinants of Health

When designing a theory-based health intervention, it is important to focus first on the modifiable determinants of health, and not go into the planning phase with a predetermined intervention.  This week you will be evaluating the evidence to determine the focus of your intervention.

Initial Post: Identify the determinants of health-related to your health issue, using peer-reviewed health literature to support. Most health issues are influenced by multiple determinants.  In your discussion, consider both determinants of health risk and health protection behavior as you write a well-organized and concise description of the data linking social and behavioral factors related to your health issue.  Your post should provide a clear summary of the evidence linking your health issue to behavioral and social determinants.

Response Posts: Discuss how the determinants of health identified by your group relate to the socioecological model.  Consider also the relative changeability and importance of each of these health-promoting behaviors or conditions.

In your second post, discuss how the changeability and importance may differ depending on the population and structure of your communities. Apply this consideration to your community and make an argument, based on evidence, for which modifiable determinants of health you will focus on for your community.

Week 4: Stage Models, Social Cognitive Theory & Health Communication

Weekly Outcomes: 

• Search databases and critically analyze peer-reviewed interventions to address a specific health issue
• Synthesize and incorporate scientific evidence into professional writing

Readings/Videos:

• Textbook: Chapter 6: Stage Models for Health Promotion, pp. 94-115.
• Textbook: Chapter 7: Social Cognitive Theory Applied to Health Behavior, pp. 116-136.
• Textbook: Chapter 8: Health Communication: Theory, Social Marketing & Tailoring, pp. 137-159.
• Merkx A, Ausems M, de Vries R, Nieuwenhuijze MJ.  Come On! Using intervention mapping to help healthy pregnant women achieve healthy weight gain. Public Health Nutrition, 2017:1-15. DOI: 10.1017/S136898001700027

Lectures:

• Chapter 6: Stage Models for Health Promotion
• Chapter 7: Social Cognitive Theory Applied to Health Behavior
• Chapter 8: Health Communication: Theory, Social Marketing & Tailoring

Assignments:

• Assignment 1: Evaluation of Interventions

Use PubMed to search the peer-reviewed literature to identify at least 5 articles that present evaluations of the effectiveness of interventions used to address the modifiable determinants of health you have identified as the target of your intervention.

In a table, list:

– the reference by title

– the health issue addressed

– modifiable determinant(s) of health (what the intervention is trying to change)

– specific theoretical constructs identified

– if the authors do not specify theoretical constructs or do not fully address theory, use an asterisk to indicate that you are identifying the applicable constructs

– theory or theories used (note if no theory was discussed by the authors)

Below the table, provide a 300-500 word review of these interventions.  Include in your discussion, an evaluation of whether the interventions were effective, and based on your review of the literature, which theory or theories are most relevant to addressing your health issue.  This should not be a summary of each study, rather a synthesis of what interventions have been used, how they relate to theory and your conclusion of which theory is most relevant to your intervention development.  Remember in three weeks you will be submitting your final report with recommendations based in part on this analysis. The interventions should all be included in your references using proper AMA style.

Create a PubMed clipboard document with abstracts for your 5 references and submit as a separate Word document for your instructor to review. 

• Week 4 Quiz

Week 5: Beyond an Individual Focus on Health Behaviors

Weekly Outcomes: 

• Research and select among communication strategies for healthcare interventions
• Evaluate the use of technological applications in health interventions
• Describe the importance of cultural competence in communicating public health content
• Discuss the role of ethics in designing health messages and interventions

Readings/Videos

• Textbook: Chapter 9: Ecological and Structural Approaches to Improving Public Health, pp 160-179
• Textbook, Chapter 10: Social Network Theory, pp. 180-196.
• Textbook, Chapter 11: Diffusion of Innovations Theory, pp. 197-213.

Lectures:

• Chapter 9: Ecological and Structural Approaches to Improving Public Health
• Chapter 10: Social Network Theory
• Chapter 11: Diffusion of Innovations Theory

Additional Resources: 

Readings on ethics:

– Principles of the Ethical Practice of Public Health 

– Arigo D, Pagoto S, Carter-Harris L, Lillie SE, Nebeker C. Using social media for health research: Methodological and ethical considerations for recruitment and intervention delivery. Digital Health 4: 1-15. DOI: 10.1177/2055207618771757.

– Puhl R, Luedicke J, Peterson JL. Public Reactions to Obesity-Related Health Campaigns: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Am J Prev Med 2013; 45(1): 36–48.

– Carter SM, Rychetnik L, Lloyd B, Kerridge IH, Baur L, Bauman A, Hooker C, Zask A. Evidence, ethics, and values: a framework for health promotion.  Am J Public Health. 2011(3);465-472.

The following articles provide examples of technological applications used to promote healthcare, such as social media platforms, podcasts, fitbits, and smartphone apps, among others.

– Korda H, Itani Z. Harnessing Social Media for Health Promotion and Behavior Change.  Health Promot Pract. 2013;14(1):15-23.

– Bushar JA, Fishman J, Garfinkel D, Pirretti A. Enrolling Underserved Women in Health Programs: Results From Text4baby Outreach Campaigns.Health Promot Pract. 2018;epub.  doi: 10.1177/1524839918763589.

– Cao B, Gupta S, Wang J, et al. Social Media Interventions to Promote HIV Testing, Linkage, Adherence, and Retention: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Med Internet Res.  2017;19(11):e394. doi: 10.2196/jmir.7997.

– (An example from the 1950s you may find interesting) https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/features/call-to-arms-how-lessons-from-history-could-reduce-the-immunisation-gap 

Assignments:

• Whole Class Discussion: Use of Technological Applications in Health Promotion

This week you will continue to review potential interventions. As we read last week and this week, social media and technological applications offer potential strategies for engaging people and delivering health interventions. They may be used either alone or with other strategies, or they may not be appropriate for a particular situation. As with all health promotion, ethics must be considered in intervention development and implementation.

Initial Post: Identify and share an example of a technological application used in an intervention that relates to your groups’ health issue and/or modifiable determinants of health that you have identified. If there is a visual representation of the intervention, please include it or a link to it in your initial post. Include at least one peer-reviewed reference related to the intervention’s implementation and evaluation.

Describe how this technological application was used to promote health. Your post should briefly describe the intervention and include your analysis of whether this example is a successful strategy, explaining clearly why or why not. Use the theories we have studied to support your analysis. Your analysis of effectiveness may differ from the published reference; just make sure to support your analysis either way. Explain why you would or would not recommend the use of a technological application to address your health issue with your community.

Response Posts: Read through your colleagues’ posts, and respond to the following prompts:

– Select at least one of your colleague’s examples. Did the message identified by your colleague present a culturally competent message? If so, how? If not, how could the message have been improved? Discuss the importance of cultural competence in communicating public health content.
– Select at least one different example shared in your group, and discuss the role that ethics should play in our work as we design health messages and interventions. Was ethics clearly considered in the design of the messages that your colleague and you selected? Refer to specifics about the studies to support your position. How can you ensure that ethics is considered in the intervention you will propose to your coalition?

Week 6: Intervention Mapping

Weekly Outcomes:

• Create change objectives for a specific modifiable determinant of health
• Select intervention methods to target this determinant of health

Readings/Videos :

• Textbook Chapter 12: Translating Research to Practice: Putting “What Works” to Work, pp. 217-240.
• Textbook Chapter 13: Learning to Combine Theories: An Introduction to Intervention Mapping, pp. 241-252.
• Kok G, Gottliebb NH, Peters GJY, et. al. A taxonomy of behaviour change methods: an Intervention Mapping approach. Health Psychology Rev. 2016(10): 297–312. DOI: 10.1080/17437199.2015.1077155.
• Tables and Figure for A Taxonomy of Behavior Change Methods; an Intervention Mapping Approach

Case Study referred to in the lectures:

– Highfield L, Bartholomew LK, Hartman MA, Ford MM, Balihe P. Grounding evidence-based approaches to cancer prevention in the community: a case study of mammography barriers in underserved African American women. Health Promot Pract. 2014; 15(6):904-14. doi: 10.1177/1524839914534685. 

– Highfield L, Hartman MA, Mullen PD, Rodriguez SA, Fernandez ME, Bartholomew LK. Intervention Mapping to Adapt Evidence-Based Interventions for Use in Practice: Increasing Mammography among African American Women. Biomed Res Int. 2015:160103. doi: 10.1155/2015/160103. 

– Highfield L, Hartman MA, Bartholomew LK, Balihe P, Ausborn VA. Evaluation of the Effectiveness and Implementation of an Adapted Evidence-Based Mammography Intervention for African American Women. Biomed Res Int. 2015:240240. doi: 10.1155/2015/240240. 

– Highfield L, Rajan SS, Valerio MA, Walton G, Fernandez ME, Bartholomew LK. A non-randomized controlled stepped wedge trial to evaluate the effectiveness of a multi-level mammography intervention in improving appointment adherence in underserved women. Implement Sci. 2015; 10:143. doi: 10.1186/s13012-015-0334-x.

Lectures: 

• Chapter 12: Translating Research to Practice: Putting “What Works” to Work
• Chapter 13: Learning to Combine Theories: An Introduction to Intervention Mapping, pp. 241-252. 

Additional Resources:

• Merkx, A., Ausems, M., de Vries, R., & Nieuwenhuijze, M. J. (2017). Come On! Using intervention mapping to help healthy pregnant women achieve healthy weight gain. Public Health Nutrition, 1-15. DOI: 10.1017/S1368980017000271
• Bartholomew Eldredge LK, Markham CM, Ruiter RAC, Fernandez ME, Kok G, Parcel GS. Planning Health Promotion Programs: An Intervention Mapping Approach, 4th ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2016.

Assignments: 

• Group Discussion: Performance and Change Objectives

Throughout the course, you have been working with your group to explore the literature related to your health issue.  You have identified the determinants of health and selected the focus most important to your community. You have reviewed intervention studies, including the use of technological applications in health promotion, and made a recommendation for which theory is most relevant to your intervention development.  This week you will be using this information to develop specific change objectives.

Initial Post: Choose a personal behavior and identify two performance objectives, identify theoretical constructs that would be relevant to the specific objective, and create relevant change objectives. The articles you evaluated for Assignment 1 will help you in this process.  The readings this week will be important to review, as developing performance and change objectives is a step in the Intervention Mapping process.

Refer to the examples for the structure, but do not limit yourself to the constructs identified there. Your table should reflect the theory that you have chosen as the focus for your intervention, and should include the performance objective, the personal determinants (these will relate to the theoretical constructs of the theory you have identified), and the change objective related to both (what needs to change related to the personal determinant for the individual to achieve the performance objective).  

Present these in a table, and explain the table in detail using peer-reviewed references to support.  

Response Posts (minimum of two response posts engaging with others in the discussion to address the following points): Read your colleagues discussions of their change objectives and relevant theories and theoretical constructs. Discuss how the Kok et. al. article and taxonomies, as well as your reviews of intervention literature, can be used to identify the methods you will recommend for your intervention. Use specific examples from the literature and your discussions.  What value do you feel taxonomies such as these could provide in health promotion?

• Week 6 Quiz

Week 7: Measurement and Evaluation

Weekly Outcomes:

• Select communication strategies for different audiences and sectors
• Communicate audience-appropriate public health content in a written format
• Develop a report reviewing the evidence and recommending a theory-based intervention
• Explain how to evaluate the effect of a theory-based intervention

Readings/Videos:

• Textbook: Chapter 14 Measurement & Design Related to Theoretically Based Health Promotion, Research, and Practice, pp. 253-280.
• Textbook: Chapter 15 Evaluating Theory-Based Public Health Program: Linking Principles to Practice, pp. 281-300.
• Evans WD, Abroms LC, Poropatich R, Nielsen PE, Wallace JL. Mobile health evaluation methods: the Text4baby case study. J Health Commun. 2012;17 Suppl 1:22-9

Lectures:

• Chapter 14: Measurement and Design Related to Theoretically-Based Health Promotion Research and Practice
• Chapter 15: Evaluating Theory-Based Public Health Programs: Linking Principles to Practice 

Assignments:

• Assignment 2: Report to the Coalition

Prepare a final report to your community coalition based on the information you have gathered and discussed during the class.  Incorporate the feedback you have received from your instructor and your team to refine your report and make your final recommendation.  Your report should be formatted in a logical and easy to read manner and addresses the items below.

Your final report should include:

1. Discussion of the behavioral and environmental risk factors for the health issue, including
   • Why you recommend focusing on the determinant(s) you selected
2. Review of relevant theory-based interventions to address this determinant,  including
   • The potential applicability of technological-based applications
3. Discussion of how theory relates to modifying health behavior, including
   • The specific theory you recommend using in your intervention
4. Your final recommendation
   • Describe your proposed theory-based intervention based on the evidence you have presented
   • Include a brief discussion of how you will measure the effect of your intervention, identifying outcome and impact evaluations
5. References

The report should be 4-6 pages, double-spaced, using 12-point Times New Roman font.  You may present the information in the order that will most clearly support your recommendation, but your report must cover each of the items listed above. (See the rubric for information on how the report will be graded.) Remember that this is a report to a community group made up of people from a variety of educational backgrounds.  You should write in clear, professional language and define terms that may not be clear to someone not in the public health field. References should be in AMA styles on a separate page; do not include in page count.  

Week 8: Presenting Evidence-Based Intervention Proposals

Week 8 Overview (video)

Weekly Outcomes: 

• Select communication strategies for different audiences and sectors
• Communicate audience-appropriate public health content through oral presentation
• Provide professional and constructive critique to peers

Resources for completing this week’s assignment:

– Better Presentations, University of New England

– Designing and Writing an Effective Presentation, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health

– How to Convert Your Paper into a Presentation, Duke University Writing Studio

– Recording a Presentation

– Uploading Presentation to YouTube

– Sharing Your Video

– How to Edit Closed Captioning in YouTube

Assignments: 

• Assignment 3: Oral Presentation to Coalition (submitted to the Discussion Board)

Note: You will submit the URL for your recorded oral presentation to the Discussion Board. No response posts are required, but be sure to view your colleagues’ videos.

Using the information you prepared for your written report, prepare and record a 5-8 minute slideshow presentation for your community coalition that summarizes the evidence to support your recommendation, and outlines for the coalition the intervention your recommend.  Include what outcomes you expect to see, and how you will measure those.

Use the materials this week to develop an engaging presentation that clearly presents the evidence and your recommendation.  Your presentation should anticipate questions that coalition members may have. 

Just as you would have to show up on time for a community presentation, you must submit your video on time, by Friday night, so that your colleagues will have time to review it and provide you with feedback before the end of the course.

To ensure that your video is accessible to all, make sure that your video is closed-captioned using the instructions provided in this week’s course materials. After you have recorded your presentation and uploaded your video to YouTube, submit the link to your video as your initial post for this week’s discussion board. Make sure that your video is set as unlisted, rather than public or private.

• Assignment 4: Peer Feedback & Self Reflection

Providing constructive feedback is an important professional skill. This assignment is an opportunity for you and your colleagues to receive multiple perspectives on your presentation. You will provide and receive constructive comments on how your presentations might be perceived by your coalitions.  

Peer Review: You will be assigned to review presentations from three colleagues, one from each of the other health topic groups. Watch your colleagues’ presentations, and provide each of them with a review of their presentation. As you complete your peer feedback, consider the language you use to express your evaluation. You should be providing positive feedback that will help your colleague understand how the audience heard their presentation. Your feedback should be approximately 50-250 words.

Address the following points for each presentation, using specific details from the presentation to support:

1. Did they clearly communicate their proposal and why they recommend the intervention that they do?
2. Was the explanation of the theory guiding the intervention clear?
3. Were the presentation and visuals clear?

Your feedback should include at least one specific positive aspect of the presentation and one suggestion for improvement. Include one question the coalition may have asked after viewing the presentation.

Reflection: After watching and providing feedback on your colleagues’ presentations, watch and review your own presentation. You should address the same points for your presentation and include at least one specific positive aspect of your presentation and one suggestion for improvement that you can incorporate into your next presentation.

End with a paragraph reflecting on the process of presenting your recommendations in a written report to the coalition and orally in a presentation. What did you learn while preparing and presenting your written and oral report, and how will you apply this to your future public health work?

Important Submission Guidelines: You will submit these three peer reviews and reflection as four separate documents. The three peer evaluations should be saved as PDF files with titles that include the presenter’s full name and your initials, e.g., “Presenter Name – SKW.pdf”. Your reflection should be submitted as a separate document entitled “Reflection”. The feedback you receive from your peers will be attached to your graded Assignment 4.

• Week 8 Quiz: Final Assessment

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

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.