Table of Contents

Chronological History of the MPH Program at Armstrong Atlantic State University 2List of Electronic Reference Folders/Files………………………………………….. 4Glossary of Terms…………………………………………………………………… 5

1.0 The Public Health Program………………………………………………….. 71.1 Mission………………………………………………………………………. 71.2 Evaluation……………………………………………………………………. 121.3 Institutional Environment……………………………………………………. 211.4 Organization and Administration……………………………………………. 351.5 Governance…………………………………………………………………... 391.6 Fiscal Resources……………………………………………………………... 481.7 Faculty and Other Resources………………………………………………... 521.8 Diversity……………………………………………………………………… 612.0 Instructional Programs……………………………………………………….. 792.1 Degree Offerings……………………………………………………………... 792.2 Program Length……………………………………………………………… 812.3 Public Health Core Knowledge……………………………………………… 822.4 Practical Skills……………………………………………………………….. 842.5 Culminating Experience……………………………………………………... 892.6 Required Competencies……………………………………………………… 922.7 Assessment Procedures………………………………………………………. 982.8 Bachelor’s Degrees in Public Health………………………………………… 1032.9 Academic Degrees…………………………………………………………… 1032.10 Doctoral Degrees…………………………………………………………….. 1032.11 Joint Degrees…………………………………………………………………. 1032.12 Distance Education or Executive Degree Program…………………………... 1033.0 Creation, Application and Advancement of Knowledge…………………….. 1043.1 Research……………………………………………………………………… 1043.2 Service……………………………………………………………………….. 1223.3 Workforce Development……………………………………………………... 1334.0 Faculty, Staff and Students…………………………………………………... 1364.1 Faculty Qualifications………………………………………………………... 1364.2 Faculty Policies and Procedures……………………………………………... 1514.3 Student Recruitment and Admissions………………………………………... 1584.4 Advising and Career Counseling…………………………………………….. 164

Addendum A 171

1

Chronological History of the MPH Program at Armstrong Atlantic State University

Armstrong Atlantic State University (AASU) is a unit of the University System of Georgia. AASU is located in Savannah, Georgia. As of fall, 2012 AASU had approximately 7,400 students of which 6,731 were undergraduates and 708 were graduate students. As of spring, 2013, AASU has over 300 full-time faculty members. The university offers 28 bachelor’s degree programs and 14 master’s degree programs through its College of Liberal Arts, College of Education, College of Health Professions, and College of Science and Technology. The institution was founded in 1935 as Armstrong Junior College and became a unit of the University System of Georgia, in 1959. Senior college status was conferred to Armstrong State College in 1964 after which both baccalaureate and master’s degrees were authorized. In 1996, the institution gained university status and its new name, Armstrong Atlantic State University.

The precursor to the MPH Program at Armstrong Atlantic State University, the Master of Health Science, was approved by the Board of Regents (BOR) of the University System of Georgia (USG) in 1981. At that time, Armstrong State College (ASC) was one of the three Regional Health Professions Education Centers in the University System designated by the University System Board of Regents (Medical College of Georgia, Georgia State University, Armstrong State College). The Master of Health Science (MHS) degree allowed students to choose an emphasis area of study in either health education or health services administration. In 1990, the Department of Health Science, on the recommendations of its advisory committee and input from the community began deliberate faculty acquisition and thorough restructuring of its curriculum. The MHS program based its redesigned emphasis areas in health promotion/education and health services administration on institutions enjoying excellent national reputations in public health and health services administration. The MHS program experienced phenomenal growth (748% increase in quarter hours generated from 1990 -1996, AASU Data Digest).

From 1990-1997, the Department of Health Science existed as a dichotomy with two distinctly separate faculty specializations and produced students prepared in either public/community health or health services administration. Therein lay the dilemma; because the student’s academic preparation was a major rather than a degree designation, there was often confusion as to the exact academic preparation of the student, thus resulting in reduced marketability of the program as well as the student. The faculty proposed the degree re-designations to better meet and serve student demands, to facilitate program accreditation, and to better define an educational experience which more accurately reflected the fields of Public Health and Health Services Administration.

As a result of a successful history of program delivery (as the MHS with an emphasis area in health/promotion education), community support, well established collaborative relationships with other system institutions and a positive report from the consultant from the Accrediting Council on Education for Public Health (CEPH), the Master of Public Health degree received a priority one status from AASU in the institution’s strategic plan for new programs

2

In early 1997, the MHS, with input from its advisory committee, the faculty members of the Health Science Department (this designation was later changed to Health Sciences Department) presented a proposal and needs assessment to the BOR requesting a re-designation of the MHS degree with an emphasis in health promotion/education to the Master of Public Health (MPH) degree and the MHS with an emphasis in health services administration to the Master of Health Services Administration (MHSA) degree. This change enabled Armstrong Atlantic State University to improve its existing programs in the direction that would better achieve a goal central to the 1998 proposed mission of Armstrong Atlantic State University and its School of Health Professions, namely (a) “to promote academic excellence and provide appropriate access to its programs. . ..in Health Professions . . .and to form partnerships with other institutions in the university system” and (b) ensure that academic needs are not duplicated elsewhere.

The BOR approved the request to establish the MPH degree (40 semester hours) at AASU in December 10, 1997 (note: the total hours in the program of study for the MPH was increased to 42 semester hours and subsequently 45 semester hours).

In 1999, the MPH Program at AASU submitted its proposal to begin its accreditation process to CEPH. AASU was notified on June 30, 1999 that CEPH had approved the request to begin the accreditation process and that the self-study must be submitted prior to June 2001.

On September 29th, 2000, the MPH Program at AASU submitted its initial Self-Study to CEPH. The initial site visit was scheduled for October 2000. The result of the site visit was full initial accreditation of 5 years.

In October 2005, the MPH Program at AASU submitted a self-study for re-accreditation to CEPH. A site visit was scheduled for April 2006. On October 16 th 2006, the CEPH Board of Councilors accredited the program for the maximum seven year term.

The MPH Program is located in the Department of Health Sciences which is located organizationally in the College of Health Professions. In addition to the MPH Program, there are three additional programs: the Bachelor of Health Science, the Master of Health Services Administration and the Master of Science in Sports Medicine. There are also two certificate programs, Gerontology (graduate and undergraduate) and Strength and Conditioning (graduate only). There are currently 5 core faculty members and 16 in the total faculty complement. As of spring 2013 there were 64 students enrolled in the MPH Program.

Since 2006, the MPH Program has thrived increasing in faculty complement, collaborative community partnerships and producing well prepared graduates to enter the public health workforce.

3

List of Electronic Reference Folders/Files

The following information is provided in a separate format (via memory stick) to support the Final Self-Study:

MPH Administration ACOPH Meeting Minutes 12.13.11 Armstrong Graduate Catalog 2012-13 Childhood Obesity in Chatham County – 2012 Community Report Complete List of Grants Constituent Letter for Comments eFACE Questions MOU List (as of 6.9.13) MPH Recruitment Brochure Public Health Workforce Needs Assessment 2011

MPH Advisory Committee MPH Advisory Committee Aug 09-Aug 11 MPH Advisory Committee Spring 2013

MPH Courses Capstone Course_PUBH 7500 (folder) MPH Course Syllabi (folder) Practicum Course_PUBH 7675 (folder)

MPH Faculty MPH Faculty CVs (folder) MPH Faculty Meeting Minutes (folder) Department of Health Sciences_Tenure & Promotion Policy Faculty Handbook (as of May 2012) Graduate Faculty Status Associate & Full Application Graduate Faculty Status Temporary Application

MPH Students Figure 1.7.b_Learning Commons Floor Plan MPH Practicum Guide (prior to Fall 2013) MPH Student Handbook (as of Fall 2013) MPH Student Handbook (prior to Fall 2013) MPH Student Self Evaluation Survey – Data MPH Student Self Evaluation Survey – Initial Assessment Tool MPH Student Self Evaluation Survey – Final Assessment Tool

4

Glossary of Terms

Abbreviation Definition

AA/EOE Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity EmployerAAHE American Association for Health EducationAAMI African American Male InitiativeAASU Armstrong Atlantic State UniversityACOPH Administrative Committee on Public HealthAFE Annual Faculty EvaluationAHEC Areal Health Information CentersAMA American Medical AssociationAPAR Annual Professional Activities ReportAPHA American Public Health AssociationASPH Associated Schools of Public HealthBHS Bachelor of Health ScienceBOR Board of RegentsCAMINO College Access Mentoring Information and Outreach ProgramCDC Centers for Disease Control and PreventionCEPH Council on Education for Public HealthCEU Continuing Education UnitCHES Certified Health Education SpecialistCINAHL Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health LiteratureCME Continuing Medical EducationCOHP College of Health ProfessionsCPH Certified in Public HealthCV Curriculum VitaDrPH Doctor of Public HealthEdD Doctor of EducationeFACE Electronic Faculty and Course EvaluationFACE Faculty and Course EvaluationFPE Faculty Peer EvaluationFTE Full-time EmployeeGA GeorgiaGA Graduate AssistantshipGAF Graduate Affairs CommitteeGAIN Georgia Network for Medical InformationGALILEO Georgia Library Learning OnlineGIL GALILEO Interconnected LibrariesGPA Grade Point AverageGPHA Georgia Public Health AssociationGRE Graduate Record ExaminationsGSCC Graduate Student Coordinating CouncilHBCU Historically Black College or University

5

Abbreviation Definition

HC Head CountHHS Health and Human ServicesHOLA Hispanic Outreach and LeadershipHRSA Health Resources and Services AdministrationHS Health ScienceIRB Institutional Review BoardJSTOR Journal StorageLEED Leadership in Energy and Environmental DesignLGBTQ Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and QueerMAT Miller’s Analogy TestMD Medical DoctorMEDLINE Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval SystemMHS Master of Health ScienceMHSA Master of Health Services AdministrationMOU Memo of UnderstandingMOVE Men of Vision and ExcellenceMPA Master of Public AdministrationMPAB MPH Program Advisory BoardMPH Master of Public HealthMSSM Master of Science Sports MedicineNCHEC National Commission for Health Education CredentialingPhD Doctor of PhilosophyPIER Pirates Impacting and Evaluating RecruitmentPROF Peer Review Outcome FormPUBH Public HealthQEP Quality Enhancement PlanSACS Southern Association of Colleges and SchoolsSDS Scholarships for Disadvantaged StudentsSFR Student/Faculty RatioSOPHE Society of Public Health EducationSSC Self-Study Steering CommitteeSSU Savannah State UniversityT&P Tenure and PromotionUSG University System of GeorgiaVP Vice President

6

1.0 The Public Health Program1.1 Mission. The program shall have a clearly formulated and publicly stated mission

with supporting goals, objectives and values.

1.1.a. A clear and concise mission statement for the program as a whole.

The mission of the MPH program at Armstrong Atlantic State University is to support and enhance public health for the Georgia coastal region through workforce development, research and community service.

The mission supports the programmatic vision: To be the principal center of public health education, information and advocacy in the Georgia coastal region.

1.1.b. A statement of values that guides the program.

The MPH program embraces values that align with the values of Armstrong Atlantic State University:

We value public health education that is student-focused, transformative, experiential and rigorous, leading to student success.

We value balance among teaching, mentoring and scholarship to support and enhance public health for the Georgia coastal region.

We value an environment of mutual trust and collegiality to support and enhance public health among our local constituents.

We value and respect diversity. We value ethical behavior and accountability to support high standards of

performance by the public health workforce within our local community. We value civic engagement through outreach and service to support and enhance

public health for the Georgia coastal region.

1.1.c. One or more goal statements for each major function through which the program intends to attain its mission, including at a minimum, instruction, research and service.

Instruction

GOAL 1: To prepare, encourage, and recognize academic achievements of public health students in order to create effective public health professionals.

Research

GOAL 2: To enhance the body of knowledge in public health through academic and applied research.

7

Service

GOAL 3: To provide leadership, expertise, and assistance in public health education and promotion that responds to changing community health needs.

1.1.d. A set of measurable objectives with quantifiable indicators related to each goal statement as provided in Criterion 1.1.c. In some cases, qualitative indicators may be used as appropriate.

Goals Objectives Indicators1. To prepare, encourage, and recognize academic achievements of public health students in order to create effective public health professionals.

1.1. MPH graduates will demonstrate the ability to integrate and apply all core competencies.

1.1. 90% of MPH Graduates will complete the capstone course PUBH 7500 Planning and Evaluation with a grade of B or better.

1.2. Program will maintain affiliation with at least one active chapter of health related honors society.

1.2. Number of honor societies with which the MPH is affiliated.

1.3. Program will select students to receive awards for academic achievement at least once a year.

1.3. Number of awards earned by MPH students each year.

1.4. The program will maintain an 80% degree completion rate.

1.4. % of graduates who complete the degree within the allowable time period (7 years).

1.5. All graduates will report increased self-efficacy in public health programmatic competencies.

1.5. % students with increase in scores for initial/final self-assessment of programmatic competencies.

2. To enhance the body of knowledge in public health through academic and applied research.

2.1. 50% of faculty will submit grants/contracts for funding of research (annually).

2.1. Number of grants/contracts submitted for funding for service activities expressed as a percentage of MPH faculty complement.

2.2. 75% of faculty will present refereed or invited scholarly presentations at state, regional, national or international scientific meetings and/or professional conferences (annually).

2.2. Number of refereed or invited scholarly presentations at state, regional, national or international scientific meetings and/or professional conferences expressed as a percentage of MPH faculty complement.

2.3. 25% of faculty will author or co-author publications in a refereed journal or non-

2.3. Number of publications as author or co-author in an appropriate area of expertise in

8

Goals Objectives Indicatorsrefereed publication disseminated at the state, regional, national, or international level (annually).

a refereed journal or non-refereed publication that is disseminated at the state, regional, national, or international level expressed as a percentage of MPH faculty complement.

2.4 100% of faculty will satisfy scholarship requirements to maintain university graduate faculty status (annually).

2.4 % of faculty with graduate faculty status.

3. To provide leadership, expertise, and assistance in public health education and promotion that responds to changing community health needs.

3.1. The program will maintain an advisory council that comprises representatives from nonprofit, public, and for-profit agencies with a concern for local public health issues (annually).

3.1. Roster of current MPH Advisory Council membership.

3.2. 50% of faculty will serve in a significant consulting capacity in their area of expertise that supports local, state, national, and/or international agencies or organizations (annually).

3.2. Proportion of MPH faculty complement who serve in a significant consulting capacity in their area of expertise that supports local, state, national, and/or international agencies or organizations.

3.3. 75% of faculty will maintain membership in national, regional, and/or state professional organizations (annually).

3.3. % of faculty reporting membership in national, regional, and/or state professional organizations in annual APAR.

3.4. 100% of faculty will satisfy service requirements to maintain university graduate faculty status (annually).

3.4. % of faculty with graduate faculty status.

1.1.e. Description of the manner through which the mission, values, goals and objectives were developed, including a description of how various specific stakeholder groups were involved in their development.

The former MPH mission, goals, and objectives were developed in 1998 and revised in 2006 and were based on Council on Education for Public Health (CEPH) criteria, as well as the Standards for the Preparation of Graduate-Level Health Educators published by the American Association for Health Education and the Society for Public Health Education.

9

The MPH Committee of the Whole, along with MPH graduate student Chris Newman, met in early fall 2012 and reviewed the former mission, goals and objectives and updated/developed a draft of new mission statement, goals and objectives based upon Competency-Based Framework for Health Educators (2006), Association of Schools of Public Health competencies, and Council of Linkages between Academia and Public Health Practice domains that more clearly reflected the current status of the MPH Program. The MPH Advisory Committee composed of alumni and professional practitioners were sent draft copies of the new mission, goals and objectives and asked to provide input in establishing direction for the program and its curriculum. After receiving input from the MPH Advisory Committee, the final draft of the mission, goals and objectives was written and published.

1.1.f. Description of how the mission, values, goals and objectives are made available to the program’s constituent groups, including the general public, and how they are routinely reviewed and revised to ensure relevance.

The MPH mission, values, goals, and objectives are made available to the program’s constituent groups through a variety of communication resources, including the MPH Student Handbook (see Resource File). (http://www.armstrong.edu/Health_Professions/Health_Sciences/healthsciences_master_of_public_health). The MPH Advisory Committee was sent a copy of the new mission, goals and objectives. The mission, goals and objectives are also published on the MPH website. They are included in the MPH self-study which is published on the MPH website.

The mission, values, goals and objectives are reviewed on an annual basis at MPH faculty strategic planning retreat in January. Revisions to the program mission, values, goals and objectives, if deemed necessary, are made and continue through the same protocol described above for approval. The MPH faculty members (the Committee of the Whole) with one or more MPH students complete the initial annual review and produce a new draft if deemed appropriate. The draft document with changes, if any, is sent electronically to the MPH Advisory Committee members for input. After receiving input from the MPH Advisory Committee, the final draft is completed and communicated in the various sites mentioned above.

1.1.g. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: The MPH program has a clear and concise mission statement, a statement of values that guides the program, three goal statements for the major functions of

10

instruction, research and service, and a set of measurable objectives with quantifiable indicators related to each goal. The mission, values, goals and objectives are readily available to the program’s constituent groups, and are routinely reviewed and revised to ensure relevance.

Weaknesses: None.

Future Plans: The MPH program will continue to evaluate progress toward the stated mission, values, goals and objectives, and make changes as necessary.

11

1.2 Evaluation. The program will have an explicit process for monitoring and evaluating its overall efforts against its mission, goals and objectives; for assessing the program’s effectiveness in serving its various constituencies; and for using evaluation results in ongoing planning and decision making to achieve its mission. As part of the evaluation process, the program must conduct an analytical self-study that analyzes performance against the accreditation criteria defined in this document.

1.2.a. Description of the evaluation processes used to monitor progress against objectives defined in Criterion 1.1.d, including identification of the data systems and responsible parties associated with each objective and with the evaluation process as a whole. If these are common across all objectives, they need to be described only once. If systems and responsible parties vary by objective or topic area, sufficient information must be provided to identify the systems and responsible party for each.

ASSESSMENT METHODS

1.1 % percent of graduates with a grade of “B” or better in capstone course.Data System: End of term grade report for PUBH 7500Responsible Party Data Collection: Instructor of record for PUBH 7500 will report data to MPH Coordinator.Assessment Responsibility: MPH Coordinator

1.2 Number of honor societies on campus that award honors to MPH students for awards.

Data System: List of number of honor societies affiliated with the MPH ProgramResponsible Party Data Collection: MPH CoordinatorAssessment Responsibility: MPH Coordinator

1.3 Number of awards earned by MPH students each year.Data System: List of number of awards received by MPH students each yearResponsible Party Data Collection: MPH CoordinatorAssessment Responsibility: MPH Coordinator

1.4. % of graduates who complete degree within allowable time period (7 years)Data System: Yearly data of MPH graduatesResponsible Party Data Collection: MPH Coordinator will request data from Office of Institutional ResearchAssessment Responsibility: MPH Coordinator

1.5. % of graduates with increase in scores for initial/final assessment of programmatic competenciesData System: Yearly assessment of MPH Student Initial/Final Self-Assessment

12

Responsible Party Data Collection: MPH Coordinator (initial) & instructor of record for PUBH 7500 (final)Assessment Responsibility: MPH Coordinator/MPH Faculty at yearly retreat

2.1. Number of grants/contracts submitted for funding for research activities expressed as a percentage of MPH faculty complement.Data System: MPH Faculty APARS Responsible Party Data Collection: HS Department head to MPH Coordinator Assessment Responsibility: MPH Coordinator

2.2. Number of refereed or invited scholarly presentations at state, regional, national or international scientific meetings and/or professional conferences expressed as a percentage of MPH faculty complement.Data System: MPH Faculty APARS Responsible Party Data Collection: HS Department head to MPH Coordinator Assessment Responsibility: MPH Coordinator

2.3. Number of publications as author or co-author in an appropriate area of expertise in a refereed journal or non-refereed publication that is disseminated at the state, regional, international or international level. Data System: MPH Faculty APARS Responsible Party Data Collection: HS Department head to MPH Coordinator Assessment Responsibility: MPH Coordinator

2.4 % of faculty with graduate faculty statusData System: Graduate Faculty Coordinating Council list of Graduate Faculty Responsible Party Data Collection: MPH Faculty to MPH Coordinator Assessment Responsibility: MPH Coordinator

3.1. Roster of current MPH Advisory Council membership.Data System: Annual list of MPH Advisory Council MembersResponsible Party Data Collection: MPH Coordinator Assessment Responsibility: MPH Coordinator

3.2. % of faculty reporting technical assistance, leadership or consulting to public-related organizations in GA coastal region in annual APAR.Data System: MPH Faculty APARS Responsible Party Data Collection: HS Department head to MPH Coordinator Assessment Responsibility: MPH Coordinator

3.3. % of faculty reporting membership in national, regional and/or state professional organizations in annual APAR.Data System: MPH Faculty APARS Responsible Party Data Collection: HS Department head to MPH Coordinator Assessment Responsibility: MPH Coordinator

13

3.4. % of faculty with graduate faculty status.Data System: Graduate Faculty Coordinating Council list of Graduate Faculty Responsible Party Data Collection: MPH Faculty to MPH Coordinator Assessment Responsibility: MPH Coordinator

1.2.b. Description of how the results of the evaluation processes described in Criterion 1.2.a are monitored, analyzed, communicated and regularly used by managers responsible for enhancing the quality of programs and activities.

It is the responsibility of the MPH Coordinator to oversee all information derived from evaluation processes described in Criterion 1.2.a. The assessment data are collected, monitored, analyzed, communicated, archived and regularly employed by the MPH Program Coordinator, in conjunction with the Health Sciences Department Head and input from MPH faculty, students, and MPH Advisory Committee to enhance the quality of programs and activities (see assessment schedule, Table 1.2.b below). The information is discussed in MPH faculty meetings, MPH curriculum committee meetings, and MPH Advisory Committee meetings. Examples of programmatic changes due to assessment are: objective 1.5 was added in spring 2012 as a result of discovering that objective 1.1 (performance in the capstone course) did not yield a broad enough perspective of the students’ perspective of their own professional growth; objectives 2.1-2.3 were developed in 2010 and implemented in 2011 as a result of difficulty in making an objective assessment of faculty performance in scholarship. Until fall 2013, the program relied on the instructor of record to evaluate the student’s ability to demonstrate and apply all core competencies (objective 1.1). As of fall 2013 all total faculty will attend the student presentations in the capstone course and will have input to the student’s performance in that to enhance the assessment reliability for objective 1.1.

Table 1.2.b: Data Collection Schedule for Assessment of Outcome Measures* Ja

nuar

y

Febr

uary

Mar

ch

Apr

il

May

June

July

Aug

ust

Sept

embe

r

Oct

ober

Nov

embe

r

Dec

embe

r

1.1: % percent of graduates with a grade of “B” or better in capstone course. X X

1.2: Number of honor societies that award honors to MPH students for awards. X

1.3: Number of awards earned by MPH students each year. X X

1.4: % of graduates who complete degree within allowable time period (7 years) X X

1.5: % of graduates with increase in scores for initial/final assessment of programmatic competencies

X

2.1: # of grants/contracts submitted for funding research activities X

14

Table 1.2.b: Data Collection Schedule for Assessment of Outcome Measures* Ja

nuar

y

Febr

uary

Mar

ch

Apr

il

May

June

July

Aug

ust

Sept

embe

r

Oct

ober

Nov

embe

r

Dec

embe

r

2.2: # of refereed or invited scholarly presentations at state, regional, national, or international scientific meetings/conferences

X

2.3: # of publications as author or co-author in an appropriate area of expertise in refereed journal or non-refereed publication that is disseminated at the state, regional, national or international level.

X

2.4: % of faculty with graduate faculty status X3.1: Roster of current MPH Advisory Council membership X

3.2: % of faculty reporting technical assistance, leadership or consulting to public-related organizations in GA coastal region in annual APAR.

X

3.3. % of faculty reporting membership in national, regional and/or state professional organizations in annual APAR.

X

3.4. % of faculty with graduate faculty status. X

Data Collection Schedule for Additional Programmatic Assessments* Ja

nuar

y

Febr

uary

Mar

ch

Apr

il

May

June

July

Aug

ust

Sept

embe

r

Oct

ober

Nov

embe

r

Dec

embe

r

MPH Student Exit Questionnaire (part of PUBH 7675 Practicum requirements) X X X

eFACE course evaluations X X XMPH Practicum Student Evaluation of Site and Site Supervisor X X X

MPH Practicum Site Supervisor Evaluation of Student X X X

MPH Alumni Survey XMPH Mission, Goals and Objectives X*Beginning in January 2014, all data will be reviewed by MPH primary faculty during annual MPH Program Strategic Planning Retreat, which will occur in January of each subsequent year. Results will be used for future programmatic improvements.

1.2.c. Data regarding the program’s performance on each measurable objective described in Criterion 1.1.d must be provided for each of the last three years. To the extent that these data duplicate those required under other criteria (e.g., 1.6, 2.7, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 4.1, 4.3, or 4.4), the program should parenthetically identify the criteria where the data also appear.

15

Table 1.2.c. Outcome Measures for AASU MPH Program

Outcome Measure

Target Year 12010

Year 22011

Year 32012

Year 4 as of 6/2013

Objective 1.1: All graduates will demonstrate the ability to integrate and apply all core competencies.1.1. % percent of graduates with a grade of “B” or better in capstone course.

90% Met (100%)

Met (100%)

Met (100%)

Met(100%)

Objective 1.2: Program will maintain affiliation with at least one active chapter of public health related honors society.1.2. Number of honor societies on campus that award honors to MPH students for awards.

1 or more Met(Delta

Omega, Alpha Eta, Phi

Kappa Phi, and Omicron Delta Kappa)

Met (Delta Omega, Alpha Eta, Phi Kappa Phi, and Omicron Delta

Kappa)

Met (Delta Omega, Alpha

Eta, Phi Kappa Phi, and Omicron Delta Kappa)

Met (Delta

Omega, Alpha Eta, Phi Kappa Phi, and Omicron

Delta Kappa)Objective 1.3: Program will select students to receive awards for academic achievement at least once a year.1.3 Number of awards earned by MPH students each year.

3 or more Met3 Alpha Eta

3 Delta Omega

Met3 Alpha Eta

3 Delta Omega

Met4 Alpha Eta

3 Delta Omega

Met3 Alpha Eta

3 Delta Omega

Objective 1.4: The program will maintain an 80% degree completion rate.1.4. % of graduates who complete degree within allowable time period (7 years)

80% Met(100%)

Met(100%)

Met(100%)

Met(100%)

Objective 1.5: All graduates will report increased self-efficacy in public health programmatic competencies.*

1.5. % of graduates with

increase in scores for initial/final assessment of programmatic competencies.

100% N/A N/A In Progress (*See note at end of table)

In Progress (*See note at end of table)

Objective 2.1: 50% of faculty will submit grants/contracts for funding of research (annually).2.1. Number of grants/contracts submitted for funding for research activities expressed as a percentage of MPH faculty

30% Met 53.5%(7/13)

Met76.9%(10/13)

Met50.0%(8/16)

Not Met Yet13%

(2/16)

16

Table 1.2.c. Outcome Measures for AASU MPH Program

Outcome Measure

Target Year 12010

Year 22011

Year 32012

Year 4 as of 6/2013

complement.

Objective 2.2: 75% of faculty will present refereed or invited scholarly presentations at state, regional, national or international scientific meetings and/or professional conference (annually).2.2. Number of refereed or invited scholarly presentations at state, regional, national or international scientific meetings and/or professional conferences expressed as a percentage of MPH faculty complement.

75% Met 107.7%(14/13)

Met 92.3%(12/13)

Met 100%

(16/16)

Not Met Yet50%

(8/16)

Objective 2.3: 25% of faculty will author or co-author publications in a refereed journal or non-refereed publication disseminated at the state, regional, national or international level (annually).2.3. Number of publications as author or co-author in an appropriate area of expertise in a refereed journal or non-refereed publication that is disseminated at the state, regional, national or international level.

25% Not Met23.1%(3/13)

Met30.8%(4/13)

Met68.8%(11/16)

Met31%

(5/16)

Objective 2.4: 100% of faculty will satisfy Scholarship requirements to maintain university graduate faculty status (annually).2.4. % of faculty with graduate faculty status.

100% Met100%

(13/13)

Met100%

(13/13)

Met100%

(16/16)

Met100%16/16

Objective 3.1: The program will maintain an advisory council that comprises representatives from nonprofit, public and for-profit agencies with a concern for local public health issues (annually).3.1. Roster of current MPH Advisory Council membership.

Annual membership

roster

Met (Refer to Resource File for roster)

Met (Refer to Resource File for roster)

Met (Refer to Resource File for

roster)

Met(Refer to

Resource File for roster)

17

Table 1.2.c. Outcome Measures for AASU MPH Program

Outcome Measure

Target Year 12010

Year 22011

Year 32012

Year 4 as of 6/2013

Objective 3.2: 75% of faculty will provide technical assistance, leadership or consulting to public-related organizations in the Georgia coastal region at least once every year (annually).3.2. % of faculty reporting technical assistance, leadership or consulting to public-related organizations in GA coastal region in annual APAR.

50% Met 100%

(13/13)

Met92.3%(12/13)

Met87.5%(14/16)

Met75%

(12/16)

Objective 3.3: 75% of faculty will maintain membership in national, regional and/or state professional organization (annually).3.3. % of faculty reporting membership in national, regional and/or state professional organizations in annual APAR.

75% Met100%

(13/13)

Met100%

(13/13)

Met100%

(16/16)

Met100%

(16/16)

Objective 3.4: 100% of faculty will satisfy service requirements to maintain university graduate faculty status (annually).3.4. % of faculty with graduate faculty status.

100% Met100%

(13/13)

Met100%

(13/13)

Met100%

(16/16)

Met100%

(16/16)*Objective 1.5: The Initial & Final Self-Assessment Evaluations began in Spring 2012; therefore, a full set of data is not yet available for students. Refer to Reference File for data collected up to present.

Current program assessment is as follows: data collection - specific MPH total faculty are assigned data collection for each objective; e.g., the Health Sciences Department Chair has ready access to data that that assesses faculty performance criteria (Objectives 2.1-2.4 and 3.2-3.4). Advisory Council data (Objective 3.1) is assessed by the MPH Coordinator. Data collection pertaining student focused objectives are assigned to specific MPH total faculty (Objectives 1.1-1.5). All data is submitted to the MPH Coordinator for analysis and storage which includes raw data in locked file data and password protected electronic data.

MPH Program Assessment of the above objectives has been done in an ad hoc fashion in the past. As a result of this self-study, a more organized plan for annual review for all program assessments will be instituted in January 2014. Please refer to section 1.2.b. (Future Plans) for a detailed summary of the format for the annual program assessment.

18

1.2.d. Description of the manner in which the self-study document was developed, including effective opportunities for input by important program constituents, including institutional officers, administrative staff, faculty, students, alumni and representatives of the public health community.

The Department of Health Sciences began the self-study process in early fall 2012. All of the programs major constituent groups, administration, faculty, graduate students, MPH Advisory Committee, health professionals, internship preceptors and alumni have had the opportunity to participate in this self-study.

As of late spring 2012, bi-monthly meetings were scheduled, and additional ad hoc individual and group meetings were scheduled as needed. The MPH faculty reviewed the criteria for accreditation and criteria writing assignments were selected. Deadline criteria drafts were established and weekly meetings were instituted in spring 2013 for program faculty and student representatives to review drafts of criteria. MPH Advisory Committee members were emailed drafts for review. The participants in the self-study recommended programmatic changes to the MPH faculty. The first draft was completed April 2013. This draft was shared with the Dean of Health Professions and the AASU Provost. In July 2013, third party comments were solicited on the MPH website http://www.armstrong.edu/Health_Professions/Health_Sciences/healthsciences_master_of_public_health and the MPH LinkedIn group page http://www.linkedin.com/groups/Armstrong-Master-Public-Health-4754771. The name and mailing address for CEPH was included in the notice and respondents were directed to send comments to CEPH. The final draft is due for delivery to CEPH on August 12, 2013.

1.2.e. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met, and an analysis of the program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met with commentary.

The commentary pertains to Objectives 1.5 and 2.3. Objective 1.5 states that all graduates will report increased self-efficacy in public health programmatic competencies. This evaluation measure was operationalized for the first time in May 2012; therefore, the first MPH students who participated in the initial assessment have not completed their program of study, and thus have not yet completed a final assessment. Objective 2.3 pertains to number of publications by faculty as author or co-author in an appropriate area of expertise in a refereed journal or non-refereed publication that is disseminated at the state, regional, national or international level; this criterion was not met for 2010; however, it was subsequently met for 2011 and 2012, demonstrating progress.

Strengths: The MPH program has an explicit process for monitoring and evaluating its overall efforts against its mission, goals and objectives. Results are utilized in ongoing planning and decision making to achieve its mission.

19

Weaknesses: One key measure that evaluates student progression and increase in self-efficacy in public health programmatic competencies is still in an early phase of data collection. Data will continue to be collected each semester, and as soon as the cohort that began in May 2012 completes their program of study, a complete cycle of data will be available for analysis and inclusion in the program’s ongoing self-assessment.

Future Plans: The MPH program will continue to evaluate progress toward the stated mission, values, goals and objectives, and make changes as necessary.

20

1.3 Institutional Environment. The program shall be an integral part of an accredited institution of higher education.

1.3.a. A brief description of the institution in which the program is located, and the names of accrediting bodies (other than CEPH) to which the institution responds.

The University System of Georgia The Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia was created in 1931 as a part of a reorganization of Georgia’s state government. With this act, public higher education in Georgia was unified for the first time under a single governing and management authority. The governor appoints members to the Board, who each serve seven years. Today the Board of Regents is composed of 18 members, five of whom are appointed from the state-at-large, and one from each of the 13 congressional districts. The Board elects a chancellor who serves as its chief executive officer and the chief administrative officer of the University System.

The Board oversees the 35 colleges and universities that comprise the University System of Georgia, Skidaway Institute of Oceanography and The Georgia Public Library System. These institutions enroll approximately 318,000 students and employ approximately 41,680 faculty and staff members to provide teaching and related services to students and the communities in which they are located.

Armstrong Atlantic State University (AASU) is a unit of the University System of Georgia. AASU is located in Savannah, Georgia. As of fall, 2012 AASU had approximately 7,400 students of which 6,731 were undergraduates and 708 were graduate students. As of spring, 2013, AASU has over 300 full-time faculty members. The university offers 28 bachelor’s degree programs and 14 master’s degree programs through its College of Liberal Arts, College of Education, College of Health Professions, and College of Science and Technology. The institution was founded in 1935 as Armstrong Junior College and became a unit of the University System of Georgia, in 1959. Senior college status was conferred to Armstrong State College in 1964 after which both baccalaureate and master’s degrees were authorized. In 1996, the institution gained university status and its new name, Armstrong Atlantic State University.

College of Health Professions Mission:Improve the health and wellness of our culturally diverse communities by educating students to become team-oriented, evidence-focused and compassionate healthcare professionals.

College of Health Professions Vision 2020In 2020 the College of Health Professions at Armstrong is a thriving, sustainable, and community-based hub of integrated healthcare education, health promotion, and service. The college is widely recognized as a leader in innovative, interdisciplinary education.

21

Our recognition is based on the following accomplishments and realities: The college’s state-of-the-art facilities and advanced technologies prepare graduates for the

healthcare environment of the future Outstanding faculty excel at bringing applied research and professional healthcare experience

directly into the learning process Graduates demonstrate comprehensive disciplinary knowledge and skill, as well as an ability

to function in a complex, team-oriented healthcare system Strategic community partnerships provide learning laboratories for our students and faculty The college and our partners collaborate to identify, confront and solve current healthcare

issues while working to prevent the problems of tomorrowhttp://www.armstrong.edu/Health_professions/deans_office/chp_our_vision_mission

Accreditation and Affiliation Armstrong Atlantic State University is fully accredited by the Commission on Colleges of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) to award associate, baccalaureate, masters, and doctorate degrees.

Various academic programs currently have special accreditation by the following other than CEPH: Chemistry – American Chemical Society Committee on Professional Training Communicative Disorders – American Speech, Language and Hearing Association. Computer Science – Computing Accreditation Commission of the Accreditation Board for

Engineering and Technology Dental Hygiene – Commission on Dental Accreditation of the American dental Association Medical Technology – National Accrediting Agency for Clinical Laboratory Sciences Music – National Association of Schools of Music Nursing (Baccalaureate and master’s Degree) – Commission of Collegiate Education in Nursing Physical Therapy – Accreditation in Physical Therapy Education Radiologic Sciences – Joint Review Committee on Education in Radiologic Technology Respiratory Therapy – Committee on Accreditation of Allied Health Educational Programs Teacher Education – National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education and the Georgia

Professional Standards Commission Health Services Administration - Commission on Accreditation of Health Management Education

1.3.b. One or more organizational charts of the university indicating the program’s relationship to the other components of the institution, including reporting lines and clearly depicting how the program reports to or is supervised by other component of the institution.

22

23

24

1.3.c. Description of the program’s involvement and role in the following:

Budgeting and resource allocation, including budget negotiations, indirect cost recoveries, distribution of tuition and fees and support for fund-raising.

The budget and resource allocation is determined in the following manner:

Each department head with input from faculty and program coordinators, presents an annual budget request to the college dean.

The college dean in turn prioritizes the budget requests of the departments in the college and presents priorities to the university president, provost/academic vice president and vice president for business and finance.

The president recommends the university’s budget to the Board of Regents for the University System of Georgia.

The Board of Regents recommends to the general assembly and the governor the annual funding level for the state-supported institutions of higher education.

The general assembly determines the budget for the University System of Georgia.

Indirect cost recoveries: The University has a negotiated indirect cost rate agreement with the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).  It is a fixed final predetermined rate.  The on-campus rate is 48%.  The off-campus rate is 24.50%.  The rate is valid through June 30, 2015.  

Personnel recruitment, selection and advancement, including faculty and staff:

Armstrong, the College of Health Professions, and the Department of Health Sciences are bound by the policies of the University System of Georgia for faculty recruitment, selection and advancement.

Faculty recruitment:

When filling a full-time faculty position, the academic unit head appoints a search committee. Members of the Search Committee meet with Human Resources to insure that they perform their duties according to Affirmative Action guidelines and university policy. In accordance with the policies of the University System of Georgia, all application materials and committee actions (including written records) are subject to the Open Records Act.

1. The Search Committee in conjunction with the department head prepares a position description and has the position description approved by the dean.

2. The Search Committee in conjunction with the department head prepares an advertisement including the following information: department in which the position is located, rank, status (10-month/12-month), qualifications (required and preferred), experience (required and preferred), application deadline (at least 30 days after initial posting in the Applicant Clearinghouse of the University System of Georgia, AA/EOE Statement).

3. The Search Committee or department head forwards the position advertisement to the dean.

25

4. Once approved, the dean forwards the position advertisement to the Office for Academic Affairs for approval and placement in advertising outlets appropriate for the discipline including, but not limited to, national clearing houses for academic position announcements, minority publications, appropriate institutions where new or recent doctoral students were graduated, and the Applicant Clearinghouse of the University System of Georgia.

5. If the position advertisement is not approved at any level, it will be remanded to the Search and Screening Committee with suggested revisions.

6. The Search Committee screens applicants and identify a qualified pool of applicants for the position.

7. The Search Committee selects a group of potential interviewees. The list of names will be forwarded to the department head and dean.

8. The Search Committee arranges interviews with approved applicants. Interviews should include, but are not limited to: faculty, unit head, and dean. Interviews with the provost and vice president for academic affairs are optional.

9. The Search Committee recommends to the department head a list of interviewees with descriptions of the interviewees’ strengths and weaknesses for the position.

10. The unit head forwards his/her recommendation and the faculty recommendation, with voting record attached, through appropriate channels.

Board of Regents’ Policy Manual, Academic Affairs, 3.2.2 Election of Faculties

Faculty Advancement:

Faculty personnel actions include decisions regarding tenure, promotions, retention, and salaries. In each case, decisions are based on the needs of the university, the individual’s history of evaluations, and the minimum requirements outlined below. Under the terms of a normal faculty appointment, there should be evidence of accomplishment in teaching, scholarship, service, and professional development. Because of the different missions of the departments/programs, the weighing of teaching, scholarship, service, and professional development may vary from department to department. However, it is essential that each department maintain a primary and active commitment to teaching, which remains the primary criterion in actions relating to tenure, retention, promotion, and salary.

At the time of initial appointment, each appointee is informed of the merit system of the university. The system rewards only faculty of demonstrated abilities and achievements based on established university criteria. The performance of each faculty member in a department is reviewed annually and the past year’s performance judged according to the evaluative scale used within each college. An outstanding contribution in a single area of activity may result in a decrease in the other areas, but in no case will a reward for merit be given if the continuing performance of the faculty member is not judged satisfactory in teaching. The annual evaluation is communicated to the individual faculty member and included in the faculty member’s official file. Retention throughout a probationary period of service is by itself insufficient to guarantee the success of a candidacy for tenure.

26

Each college has a promotion and tenure committee. Decisions involving tenure and promotion are based primarily on the cumulative record of teaching, scholarship, service and professional development. Standards of judgment for such actions shall be consistent with those specified in university criteria, published by each college’s tenure and promotion committee, and printed in departmental statements.

Board of Regents’ Policy Manual, Personnel, 8.3 Additional Policies for Faculty

Tenure:

Tenure embraces both rights and duties. It is a pledge of professional academic performance by the professor who holds it to the institution that grants it. It protects a professor from arbitrary dismissal.

Criteria Relating to Tenure:

In order to be considered for tenure, a faculty member must have completed a satisfactory probationary period of at least five years of full-time service at the rank of assistant professor or higher. The five-year period must be continuous except that a maximum of two years' interruption because of leave of absence or of part-time service may be permitted, provided, however, that no probationary credit for the period of an interruption shall be allowed. A maximum of three years' credit toward the minimum probationary period may be allowed for service at other institutions in tenure-track positions or for full-time service at the rank of instructor at Armstrong Atlantic State University. Such credit for prior service may be requested by the individual and is defined in writing by the president at the time of the initial appointment at the rank of assistant professor or higher or at the time of promotion from instructor to assistant professor. Evidence of noteworthy teaching, scholarship, service and professional development produced during the credited years is considered in the tenure review.

A candidate for tenure must not only meet the designated minimum period of service, but also must meet what are, at that time, seen as the long range needs of the university and must show a history of evaluations that merits the award of tenure. A history of weak evaluations may lead to the denial of tenure. Retention throughout a probationary period of service is by itself insufficient to guarantee the success of a candidacy for tenure.

Procedures Relating to Tenure Candidacies for tenure should be initiated by the written request of the candidate to the department head or, in the case of a department head, to the appropriate dean. In the absence of an application by the candidate, such application may be initiated by the department head for a faculty member or by the college dean for a department head. The department head must solicit an assessment of the candidate’s application for tenure through ballots and commentary from departmental colleagues. Each department (or college if that is lowest level of review) must have on file with the dean of the college and with the provost and vice president for academic affairs a plan for ascertaining departmental peer review of tenure or promotion applications, pre-tenure reviews, or post-tenure reviews. The department head makes the initial recommendation to the dean.

27

The application is then sent to the dean of the college who forwards it to the college's promotion and tenure committee. Each promotion and tenure committee serves in an advisory capacity and makes recommendations to the respective dean based on the college’s promotion and tenure documents. Criteria used by the committee must be in writing and must be consistent with the criteria and procedures contained in these regulations. The dean of each college, after receiving recommendations from the respective promotion and tenure committee, forwards them with his or her own recommendations to the provost and vice president for academic affairs. The provost and vice president for academic affairs may call a consultative meeting with the deans before forwarding his or her recommendations to the president. Individuals who are awarded tenure by the president shall be notified in writing of that award.

At the beginning of the fall semester the Office for Academic Affairs distributes to deans and department heads a list of deadlines for when documents for evaluations, reviews, tenure, promotion, and non-retention decisions must be received by the provost and vice president for academic affairs. Deans, in consultation with their department heads, set department and college deadlines for submitting and processing these documents on the deadlines set by the Office for Academic Affairs.

Generally, tenure applications are submitted and processed at the department and college levels in the fall semester and submitted to the provost and vice president for academic affairs early in the spring semester.

Candidates whose applications for tenure are rejected may pursue a formal administrative appeal. Full-time faculty hired on a tenure-track may not serve more than seven years without the granting of tenure.Board of Regents’ Policy Manual, Personnel, 8.3.7 Tenure and Criteria for Tenure

Pre-tenure Review:

All non-tenured faculty members in tenure-track positions must be reviewed during their third year (including probationary credit). This review will be used to determine if satisfactory progress is being made toward tenure and, if not, to determine appropriate faculty development activities and other remedies as indicated. Pre-tenure review also serves as the mechanism for retention for the fifth year.

Criteria Relating to Pre-tenure Review:

Each department and college uses its criteria for annual evaluation and tenure and promotion, and the College’s tenure criteria for the pre-tenure review. The college criteria are an amplification of the university’s tenure criteria. Departmental tenure and promotion criteria may be an amplification of the respective college’s criteria. While teaching effectiveness will be the most important factor in the evaluation, scholarship, service and professional development will also be evaluated. Future needs of the department must also be considered. If conditions in the department have changed since initial employment, the department head may recommend a redirection of the faculty member’s efforts.

28

Procedures Relating to Pre-tenure Review:

As a part of the retention recommendation during the faculty member’s third year, the retention procedure is expanded to include the pre-tenure review. If a faculty member has probationary credit towards tenure, pre-tenure review will be conducted during the year in which he or she would achieve three years toward tenure. A new faculty member awarded three years of probationary credit toward tenure is considered to have achieved a rating of Satisfactory Progress toward Tenure for purposes of the pre-tenure review at the time of hire. A faculty member who receives two years of probationary credit is reviewed during his or her first year; a faculty member who receives one year of credit is reviewed in his or her second year. The pre-tenure review will include peer reaction at the departmental level, performance evaluation using the departmental annual evaluation criteria, and evaluation using the college tenure criteria.

The department head, who solicits an assessment of the candidate’s progress toward tenure through ballots and commentary from tenured departmental colleagues, makes the initial review. The review results are transmitted in writing to the dean of the college (who may for recommendations from the college promotion and tenure committee) and then to the provost and vice president for academic affairs. The department head selects one of the following ratings as an outcome of the review: satisfactory progress toward tenure, satisfactory with recommendations, improvement needed, or unsatisfactory. A satisfactory review does not constitute a guarantee of tenure.

A rating of satisfactory progress toward tenure indicates that the candidate is meeting expectations in teaching, scholarship, service, and professional development. A rating of satisfactory with recommendations indicates that the candidate’s performance is promising, that recommendations for needed faculty development can be completed within one year, and that achievement of a rating of satisfactory progress toward tenure is likely after the completion of faculty development.

A rating of improvement needed indicates that there are serious reservations about the faculty member’s performance, and measures are needed to address substantive deficits. The pre-tenure review must be repeated the following year if this rating is assigned. A rating of unsatisfactory indicates that the candidate is not expected to be retained and will likely receive a notification of non-retention.

Post-tenure Review:

The university has an obligation to each faculty member to ensure that his or her effectiveness continues after the tenure decision has been made. With tenure, the faculty member pledges continued quality academic performance on the one hand, and the university pledges to offer the faculty member opportunities to continue to develop professionally on the other. It is against this backdrop that post-tenure review is framed. Post-tenure review exists to give tenured faculty information on performance effectiveness and to identify opportunities for development in a fashion consistent with the ever-changing needs of the institution.

29

In those rare cases where performance is not satisfactory and does not improve as a result of a development plan, post-tenure review may look to an intervention designed to protect the public interest.

All faculty, excluding those who hold administrative rank at the department head level or above (those holding administrative rank are evaluated through administrative rather than post-tenure review), will be reviewed under the Procedures Relating to Post-tenure Review during the fifth year after the year in which tenure is awarded by the Board of Regents and every five years thereafter. If a faculty member is promoted in rank during the five-year period, the post-tenure review will occur during the fifth year after the year in which the promotion becomes effective. A successful promotion review will serve in lieu of a post-tenure review.

Criteria Relating to Post-tenure Review:

Teaching effectiveness will be the single most important factor in all evaluations. Scholarship, service, professional development and the role of each faculty member within the department, college, and university will also be considered in the post-tenure review evaluation.

Each college or department further defines the criteria for post-tenure review, but these provisions must be in writing, widely published, and approved by the provost and vice president for academic affairs.

Procedures Relating to Post-tenure Review:

At the beginning of each year, the provost and vice president for academic affairs will provide each academic dean with a list of faculty who must undergo post-tenure review during the current academic year. Generally, by December the faculty member shall prepare a portfolio containing, at the very least, an updated vita, all Annual Faculty Evaluations since the last post-tenure review or tenure review, all Annual Professional Activity Reports (APARs) since the last post-tenure review or tenure review, and an assessment or narrative from the faculty member being reviewed as to his or her role in the institution and examples of specific measures that faculty member is taking to fulfill that role. Individual colleges or departments may specify other materials that should be included in the portfolio, and the candidate may provide additional materials relevant to his or her discipline.

Each college and department shall develop and use a faculty peer evaluation system for post-tenure review. Each department shall have on file with the college dean and the provost and vice president for academic affairs, a faculty peer evaluation process, specific to post-tenure review that involves consideration of the post-tenure review portfolio. In departments where the number of tenured faculty is three or fewer, the dean may involve a limited number of tenured faculty members from a department having a similar mission in the peer review process. However, in such cases, the candidate will be informed as to the identity of these extra-departmental reviewers. No faculty member may participate in the post-tenure peer review process unless he or she is willing to certify that he or she has reviewed the portfolio.

30

After reviewing the portfolio and the results of peer review, the department head will complete the Peer Review Outcome Form (PROF).

The department shall forward the PROF and supporting documentation to the dean of the respective college. The dean may seek the opinion of the college promotion and tenure committee on the post-tenure progress of the faculty member. The dean summarizes the college’s promotion and tenure committee’s opinion and comment on the faculty member’s post-tenure work to the provost and vice president for academic affairs.

Outcome of Post-Tenure Review:

Satisfactory: The faculty member is performing effectively as a teacher and is making satisfactory contributions, appropriate to a senior faculty member, in either scholarship or service. Individual departments/programs may have specific service or scholarship expectations for individual faculty members because of the particular position held by the faculty member. This point should be addressed in the review.

If a faculty member is found to be "satisfactory," the department head may wish to commend the faculty member and even suggest specific development activities that he or she feels would be helpful.

Satisfactory with Recommendations: The faculty member is performing satisfactorily in teaching and service or scholarship, but the department head may believe that enhancement of performance in one or more areas will avoid future problems. In this area, the department head and faculty member should agree on a faculty development plan. Recommendations for redirection of a faculty member's efforts to adjust to changes in the academic program will be made in writing and through a personal interview with the department head.

Improvement Needed: This category is to be used for the purpose of establishing a faculty development plan for a faculty member who is performing satisfactorily in instruction, but whose contributions in neither scholarship nor service is adequate. This category is also to be used when a redirection in faculty effort is required by changes in the academic program.

A faculty member who receives an "improvement needed" must meet with the department head to construct a development program. The department head shall be obliged to consider the progress of the faculty member as part of subsequent annual evaluations. The department head must state in the annual evaluation whether or not adequate improvement is taking place, review the development plan, and discuss the evaluation with the faculty member. Failure on the part of a faculty member to remedy the difficulties identified by the time of the next post-tenure review will necessitate the receipt of "unsatisfactory" in the subsequent post-tenure review.

Unsatisfactory: A faculty member will receive an "unsatisfactory" in any case where teaching performance is deemed to be less than satisfactory. A faculty member will also receive an "unsatisfactory" if, in the judgment of the department head, a faculty member has failed to respond successfully to a development plan resulting from an "improvement needed" in the previous review.

31

Any tenured faculty member receiving an “unsatisfactory” will meet simultaneously with both the department head and the dean. The result of this meeting will be a comprehensive development plan designed by the dean in consultation with the department head and faculty member. After a period of one year, the department head and dean will again meet with the faculty member to assess progress. Lack of improvement will result in no pay increase in all future contracts until the “unsatisfactory” rating is removed. Other intervention strategies may be employed for unsatisfactory performance with the written approval of the provost and vice president for academic affairs. Continued failure to improve an “unsatisfactory” rating will result in the application of more rigorous strategies, including in appropriate cases, revocation of tenure.

Annual Evaluation with Post-Tenure Review:

Post-tenure review will substitute for the annual evaluation in the year in which it is conducted.

Board of Regents’ Policy Manual, Personnel, 8.3.54 Post-Tenure Review for Tenured Faculty and Administrators.

Department of Health Sciences [MPH] Tenure and Promotion Committee

Composition of the Tenure and Promotion Committee

The committee will be composed of one faculty member from each program within the Department.

Term of service is two years. The Department Head may serve on the committee.

Appointment to the Tenure and Promotion Committee.

Appointed faculty must hold tenure in their respective program. A non-tenured member may sit on the committee only if no tenured faculty from that Department is eligible.

The department faculty, with the approval of the Department Head, will determine the method of selection to serve on this committee.

Functions of the Committee

The committee will review the guidelines and make recommendations to the Department Head regarding suggested revisions to Department of Health Sciences' Guidelines for Promotion and Tenure.

The committee will review the application materials of candidates for tenure and for promotion and make its recommendation to the Department Head.

The committee will utilize established Department criteria for tenure and promotion recommendations.

32

Chair of the Committee

The committee will elect a chairperson who will serve for a term of one academic year. The chair may be re-elected for a second one-year term.

The chair will be responsible for:

Ensuring receipt of application materials for tenure and promotion Distributing information concerning applications to committee members Ensuring the smooth transition of committees from year to year Scheduling and overseeing meetings of the committee Maintaining accurate records of all proceedings Forwarding all recommendations of the committee to the Department Head who forward

the recommendations to the Dean of Health Professions

Vote of the Committee Votes should be by secret ballot. The results of each vote, along with any comments describing suggestions for the

candidate, will be included in the recommendation of the committee to the Department Head.

See Resource File for Department of Health Sciences [MPH] Guidelines for Tenure and Promotion and Format for Submission of Tenure and Promotion Portfolios.

1.3.d. If a collaborative program, descriptions of all participating institutions and delineation of their relationships to the program.

N/A

1.3.e. If a collaborative program, a copy of the formal written agreement that established the rights and obligations of the participating universities in regard to the program’s operation.

N/A

1.3.f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This Criterion is met.

Strengths: The University is fully accredited, and the MPH program is well integrated into the administrative and academic structure. There are clear and effective processes and relationships are in place to enable the MPH Program to secure the resources it needs to fulfill its mission

Weaknesses: None

33

Future Plans: The MPH Program will strive to maintain its good standing with all units in the University.

34

1.4 Organization and Administration. The program shall provide an organizational setting conducive to public health learning, research and service. The organizational setting shall facilitate interdisciplinary communication, cooperation and collaboration that contribute to achieving program’s public health mission. The organizational structure shall effectively support the work of the program’s constituents.

1.4.a. One or more organizational charts delineating the administrative organization of the program, indicting relationships among its internal components.

The MPH Program is located in the Department of Health Sciences which is located organizationally in the College of Health Professions. In addition to the MPH Program, there are three additional programs: the Bachelor of Health Science, the Master of Health Services Administration and the Master of Science in Sports Medicine. There are also two certificate programs, Gerontology (graduate and undergraduate) and Strength and Conditioning (graduate only).

1.4.b. Description of the manner in which interdisciplinary coordination, cooperation and collaboration occur and support public health learning, research and service.

The MPH Program Coordinator reports directly to the Health Sciences Department Head who in turn reports directly to Dean of the College of Health Professions. The MPH faculty, office staff, and program graduate assistants report to the Coordinator. Specific roles and responsibilities are as follows:

35

MPH Program Coordinator

The MPH Program Coordinator is responsible for the oversight of all curriculum, fiscal, and personnel matters necessary to support the MPH Program. More specific responsibilities include student recruitment, admissions and retention, recruitment and evaluation of faculty, and program governance. Decisions involving curriculum, faculty recruitment, faculty evaluation, and student affairs clearly are central to the role and function of faculty; thus decisions regarding such are shared by faculty and the Program Coordinator.

The administrative duties of the Program Coordinator constitute a 25% FTE load. For the other 75%, the Coordinator also teaches nine credit hours per semester and participates in research and service activities. As with other teaching faculty, reduction in teaching can be made for inordinate research or service activity.

MPH Faculty

All MPH faculty members have a 12-credit hour or 18 contact hour teaching load per semester (or 24 credit hours per academic year). MPH faculty also provide academic advising to MPH students, serve on Program, College, and University committees, and participate in research and professional service activities. Faculty members who assume additional inordinate research or service activity are allowed teaching reductions on an ad hoc basis.

MPH Graduate Assistant(s)

Each graduate degree program at AASU is assigned one graduate assistant. Additional graduate assistants may be assigned if funding permits. MPH graduate assistant(s) provide support to MPH faculty in research and service activities. Although each graduate assistant is assigned primarily to a particular faculty member, all GAs are expected to assist any MPH faculty member when the need arises.

Interdisciplinary Collaboration:

The department heads and program directors of the COHP meet monthly with the college dean (who chairs the meeting), assistant to the dean of the college, and appropriate invited guests to discuss college and university issues and to make decisions on college policies and procedures. Each of the department heads and the program coordinator hold departmental and program meetings to share the information and solicit faculty input from the COHP meeting. To conduct the business of the college, the COHP also maintains the following standing committees: Recruitment/Retention, Interdisciplinary, Education Technology, Continuing Education, Health and Safety, Curriculum and Tenure and Promotion. Each COHP department has representation on each of these committees.

The COHP programs are housed physically in several locations. Nursing, Medical Laboratory Sciences, and Respiratory Therapy are housed in Ashmore Hall. Physical Therapy,

36

Communication Science and Disorders, and Radiologic Sciences are housed in University Hall and Health Sciences is housed in Solms Hall.

Interdisciplinary activity is highly encouraged between universities, between colleges and between programs by the Chancellor of the University System of Georgia, the President of AASU, the AASU college deans and the department heads. Examples of interdisciplinary coordination, cooperation and collaboration include:

The gerontology certificate is an interdisciplinary effort composed of courses from Public Health, Medicine, and Psychology; certificate electives can be chosen from appropriate courses in many more disciplines. Moreover, the Georgia Gerontological Consortium (of which AASU is a member) offers courses via distance learning to member institutions;

The graduate epidemiology course taught by the MPH Program is required for MHSA students. The graduate biostatistics course taught by the MPH Program is required for Nurse Practitioner

students. The course, Foundations of Public Health, Concepts and Administration is required for MHSA

and MPH students; MPH, MSSM, and MHSA students may take selected courses from any of the three programs as

electives. The graduate public administration program (MPA) at Savannah State University and the MPH

program at AASU offer selected courses that may be taken as electives by students in either program.

The College of Health Professions offers the following inter-professional collaborative: students from all COHP programs may participate in a case study where they are assigned to interdisciplinary groups to develop care plans for a virtual patient.

Faculty from Health Sciences, Physical Education and Physical Therapy teach courses in the Sports Medicine Program (MSSM).

The MPH and MHSA programs at AASU and Georgia Southern University collaborate in the following ways: transferability of specified courses, offering courses via distance learning, and serving on practicum committees.

The MPH faculty members are involved in numerous collaborative projects in various communities. Detailed descriptions of these endeavors appear in Criterion 3.1b and Criterion 3.2c.

1.4.c. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: The program environment promotes an interdisciplinary public health community that allows the program to carry out its instructional, research and service functions. All Armstrong employees are required to, upon hire, to complete an Ethics Training Course and on

37

an annual basis, complete the Ethics Policy Recertification Course. All MPH faculty members have current Ethics Policy certification. Interprofessional collaboration is promoted and supported.

Weaknesses: AASU does not differentiate between graduate and undergraduate teaching loads. Faculty teaching loads are heavy and are an obstacle to meeting service and scholarship expectations.

Future Plans: The MPH Program will continue to seek opportunities for interdisciplinary collaboration. The MPH Program representatives will continue to work for recognition of a differentiation between undergraduate and graduate teaching loads.

38

1.5 Governance. The program administration and faculty shall have clearly defined rights and responsibilities concerning program governance and academic policies. Students shall where appropriate, have participatory roles in the conduct of program evaluation procedures, policy setting and decision making.

1.5.a. A list of standing and important ad hoc committees, with a statement of charge, composition and current membership for each.

MPH Committee of the Whole

Charge: The MPH Committee of the Whole is charged with addressing all general issues concerning the program including curriculum development and academic standards and policies.

Composition: Due to program size, MPH faculty members meet as a whole Therefore there are very few ad hoc committees required. Faculty members include: Sandy Streater, Ed.D., Richard St. Pierre, Ed.D., (Retired December 2012), Nandi Marshall Dr.P.H. (Replaced Dr. St. Pierre in fall 2013), Leigh Rich, Ph.D., David Adams, Ph.D., and Sara Plaspohl, Dr.P.H. An MPH student serves on this committee and has a vote when appropriate. The student representative is chosen by the MPH Coordinator.

Ad Hoc MPH Assessment/Self-Study Steering Committee (SSC)

Charge: The MPH Self Study Steering Committee plans and oversees the comprehensive self-study process (conducted throughout 2012-present) and coordinates the writing of the self-study document.

Composition: The Self Study Steering Committee is chaired by the MPH Program Coordinator and also includes the COHP Dean (ex-officio), four additional MPH faculty members (faculty members include: Sandy Streater, Ed.D., Richard St. Pierre, Ed.D.. retired December 2012), Leigh Rich, Ph.D., David Adams, Ph.D., Linda Wright, Ph.D., and Sara Plaspohl, Dr.P.H.), one MPH advisory committee member, and one MPH student representative. The student representative is chosen by the MPH Coordinator and has a vote when appropriate.

Ad Hoc MPH (HS) Tenure and Promotion Committee

Charge: The MPH (HS) T&P Committee oversees the tenure and promotion process on an as needed basis. The committee members will discuss candidates for promotion and/or tenure and vote by secret ballot. The results of each vote, along with any comments describing suggestions re the candidate, will be included in the recommendation of the committee to the Department Head.

Composition: The MPH (HS) T & P Committee shall be composed of all tenured HS faculty members. In matters of promotion, associate faculty members may vote only on

39

promotions to associate, professors may vote only on promotion to professor. MPH tenured faculty members include: Sandy Streater, Ed.D., Richard St. Pierre, Ed.D., Leigh Rich, Ph.D., David Adams, Ph.D., Joey Crosby, Ph.D., Rod McAdams, Ph.D., Robert LeFavi, Ph.D., Andy Bosak, Ph.D., Janet Buelow, Ph.D., Bryan Riemann, Ph.D., and Linda Wright, Ph.D.

Ad Hoc MPH Search CommitteesCharge: The committee will review faculty candidates, determine who is invited for campus interviews and forward all recommendations of the committee to the Department Head who forwards the recommendations to the Dean of Health Professions.

Composition: The department faculty, with the approval of the Department Head, will determine the method of selection to serve on this committee. Faculty members include: Sandy Streater, EdD, Richard St. Pierre, EdD, Leigh Rich, Ph.D., David Adams, Ph.D., Linda Wright Ph.D., and Sara Plaspohl, Dr.PH. An MPH student serves on this committee. The student representative is chosen by the MPH Coordinator and has a vote.

1.5.b. Identification of how the following functions are addressed within the program’s committees and organizational structure:

General program policy development

Armstrong departments are structured so that the department chair has ultimate responsibility for all decisions related to the programs in the department including the MPH program. The policies and procedures of the program are designed and delivered by the MPH Graduate Faculty. The MPH program is led by the MPH Program Coordinator. Note: Dr. Michael Mink was named MPH Program Coordinator in 2006 and served in that position until July 2010. He accepted a position at another university – upon his departure, Dr. Streater, department head and former MPH Coordinator, reassumed the position of Coordinator of the MPH program. Since the MPH program budget is part of the overall budget of the Health Sciences Department in which the program resides; the MPH Program Coordinator, with input from the MPH faculty, staff and advisory committee, proposes prioritized budget requests for the next fiscal year, based on the previous year’s expenses, and submits it to the HS Department Head (Currently the HS Department Head and the MPH Coordinator are one and the same. A new MPH Coordinator will be named in 2014) who submits this request to the COHP dean.

Additional duties of the MPH program coordinator include:

Oversee the development and production of MPH program accreditation documents (CEPH and SACS);

Market MPH degree locally and in external sites Assure representation of MPH degree when called upon

40

Direct Regents’ assessments for MPH program Coordinate AASU library holdings for MPH program Establish, visit and maintain agreements with practica/internship sites in the Savannah area and

elsewhere Serve as chair and schedule meetings for the MPH Advisory Committee Supervise and evaluate designated MPH graduate assistant(s) Oversee maintenance of MPH database(s) Coordinate scheduling of course offerings Maintain student academic records, graduation applications and programs of study for MPH

students Advise MPH students

The MPH Coordinator serves as the MPH representative on the Armstrong Graduate Affairs Committee (GAF) and attends monthly and called meetings.

Graduate Affairs Committee Mission

The Graduate Affairs Committee, serving as the official representative of the Graduate Faculty, and acting under the oversight of the President, will exercise jurisdiction over all matters related to graduate-level programming at Armstrong Atlantic State University.

The committee will:

1. Act on behalf of the Graduate Faculty except as specified elsewhere in the Bylaws; 2. Develop, review, and keep current all policies and procedures affecting graduate-level recruitment, admissions, progression through programs, retention, and graduation; 3. Approve the list of graduate students for fall and spring commencements; 4. Receive reports from the Graduate Student Coordinating Council; 5. Establish and maintain the following committees, and receive and act upon their recommendations:

Graduate Faculty Status Committee Graduate Student Appeals Committee Graduate Curriculum Committee

The GAF reports its actions to the Armstrong Faculty Senate regarding all matters related to graduate school programming from its various subcommittees.

Planning and evaluation

The HS faculty members (including the MPH faculty) meet on a regular basis (approximately one time per month) throughout the semester. Additional MPH program meetings are held as needed. During these meetings, all faculty members participate in discussions of plans for the Program. The MPH Program Coordinator and the faculty in the MPH program are responsible for planning and evaluating all activities related to the MPH program. Planning in the program is based on the

41

missions of the program, department, the college, and the university. Additional input is given by the MPH Advisory Committee (for an expanded description of program evaluation see criterion 1.2.).

Budget and resource allocationThe MPH budget is subsumed within the Health Sciences Department budget (see section 1.6.b). The MPH Coordinator reports directly to the Health Sciences Department Head who reports directly to the Dean of Health Professions for management of the department budget and resource allocation, according to University budgeting procedures. The MPH Coordinator discusses Program needs with MPH faculty members who have an opportunity to generate ideas or requests regarding resource needs. The coordinator also receives input from the MPH student exit assessments as well as from the MPH Advisory Committee.

Student recruitment, admission and award of degreesWhile working in concert with the policies of the COHP and AASU, the MPH program administers its own student recruitment plans and activities, including the distribution of program materials. Specific recruitment policies are based on proven methods of recruiting students with diverse backgrounds, with the potential to be leaders as public health professionals, and with the academic preparation to be successful in the program. The MPH Program is represented at many recruitment events by the COHP Coordinator of Recruitment. Additional recruitment methods are discussed in section 1.8.a.

The MPH faculty members also develop admission criteria. Armstrong Atlantic State University is responsible for awarding of degrees after approval by the Graduate Affairs Committee. However, the MPH faculty and Program Director are responsible to ensure and inform the Graduate Program that students have met Program requirements for graduation.

Faculty recruitment, retention, promotion and tenureAs mentioned in Criterion 1.3.c., requests for new faculty lines are made to the Health Sciences Department Head by the MPH Program Coordinator. The Health Sciences Department Head communicates this need to the Dean of Health Professions and the Dean negotiates with the Provost for centrally funded new or redirected positions. When vacancies exist, a Search Committee is established and charged with the development of a recruitment plan that is approved by the University’s Human Resources Office..Membership on the Search Committee may include MPH faculty members (including the Program Coordinator), MPH students, as well as Program alumni or other outside constituents. The Search Committee Chair provides a summary and recommendation of the search to the Head of the Health Sciences Department who communicates this recommendation to the Dean of Health Professions who is responsible for negotiating salary and other hiring terms with the Provost.

42

Faculty retention, promotion and tenure, follow the Department of Health Sciences [MPH] Guidelines for Promotion and Tenure (see Resource File) that align with the college of Health Professions and University promotion and tenure guidelines as presented in the Armstrong Atlantic State University Faculty Handbook. (http://www.armstrong.edu/images/academic_affairs/Faculty_Handbook.pdf)

Annual Faculty Evaluations

Annual faculty evaluations of tenure-track faculty and promotion reviews follow the faculty members submitting the Annual Professional Activity Report (APAR) to the Head of the Health Science Department. The department head prepares the Annual Faculty Evaluations (AFE’s) which is sent to the college dean for review.

The Dean makes his evaluation and recommendation, and sends a list of all required actions with appropriate documentation, to the Provost. For tenure and promotion, the Dean forwards his recommendations along with all previous recommendations to the Provost who makes the final recommendation to the President of the university.

Academic standards and policies, including curriculum developmentThe MPH Program Coordinator is responsible for ensuring that the Program maintains quality academic standards that align with fair and ethical policies of the University. The MPH Faculty is chaired by the Program Coordinator and monitors, reviews and, if necessary, votes on changes to program policy and curriculum.

Research and service expectation and policiesThe MPH Coordinator and ultimately the Department Head is responsible for ensuring the research and service expectations and policies are in line with the MPH Program mission, goals and objectives. The MPH Faculty plays an important role in this responsibility, and assists in this process by establishing outcome measures and related targets for the Program’s research and service goals and objectives, as well as helping to collect data on faculty and student research and service activities (see sections 3.1 and 3.2). These research and service expectations were developed by the MPH Faculty and were endorsed by all MPH faculty members.

1.5.c. A copy of the bylaws or other policy documents that determines the rights and obligations of administers faculty and students in governance of the program, if applicable.

The University System of Georgia Policy Manual clearly states the right of faculty and students rights in governance. For faculty this can be found at: http://www.usg.edu/policymanual/section8/C245For students, Regents policies re rights in governance can be found at:http://www.usg.edu/policymanual/section4

43

AASU administrator and faculty rights and privileges are discussed in the AASU Faculty Handbook and can be found at: http://www.armstrong.edu/images/academic_affairs/Faculty_Handbook.pdf

The AASU Faculty Senate addresses issues that directly and peripherally affect faculty rights in program governance and can be found in the Senate Constitution and Bylaws at:http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/faculty_senate/senate_constitution_bylaws

The Graduate Student Coordinating Council is the representative body for AASU graduate students. A member of the council attends the Graduate Affairs meetings. Graduate students are also appointed to specific standing committees of the Graduate Affairs Committee. This representation does give the student direct and peripheral right in governance. The website for the Graduate Coordinating Council can be found at:http://www.armstrong.edu/Students/activities_and_orgs/student_affairs_graduate_student_coordinating_council

Additional discussion of student rights and privileges in governance can be found in the AASU Graduate Catalog at:http://www.armstrong.edu/images/academic_affairs/current_graduate_catalog.pdf

1.5.d. Identification of program faculty who hold membership on university committees, through which faculty contribute to the university.

The following MPH faculty members hold membership on many department, college and university committees. A listing of current committee memberships includes:

Leigh RichAASU Faculty Senate, Senator (for Health Sciences), Member of Senate Steering Committee, Member of Senate Elections Committee, MPH Curriculum/Reaccreditation Committee, MHSA Curriculum/Reaccreditation Committee, COHP Interdisciplinary Committee, AASU Graduate Faculty, AASU Academic Calendar Committee, AASU Gender and Women’s Studies Council and Chair of the Robert I. Strozier Faculty Lecture Series.

Sara PlaspohlArmstrong Tobacco Policy Committee, MPH Advisory Committee, MPH Curriculum & Reaccreditation Committee, COHP Continuing Education Planning Committee for “Americans with Disabilities Act: Then and Now” One-Day Workshop by Steve Milam, JD, AASU Common Read Committee, AASU Graduate Faculty, AASU Institutional Review Board, Graduate Curriculum Committee, MPH Faculty Search Committee, and AASU Makin’ Maroon Green.

Rod McAdamsMember, MHSA Strategic Planning Committee, MHSA Curriculum Committee, MHSA Advisory

44

Board, MHSA Accreditation Committee, MPH Accreditation Committee, AASU Honors Advisory Committee AASU Parking Appeals Committee, COHP Educational Technology Committee, MHSA faculty search committee, MPH faculty search committee, and MSSM faculty search committee.

Linda WrightEducational Technology Committee and Senate Educational Technology Committee.

Andy BosakCOHP Strategic Planning Committee, and Serving as “Host” for an International Student at AASU.

Janet BuelowMember, AASU Graduate Council Member, SACS Faculty Credentials Committee , AASU Faculty Sponsor for the Institute of Healthcare Improvement Savannah Chapter, Chair of Interdisciplinary Healthcare Taskforce, and MHSA Search Committee.

David AdamsMPH Curriculum Committee, MPH Accreditation Committee, MPH Faculty Search Committee, COHP Curriculum Committee, COHP Appeals Committee, AASU Honors Committee, and AASU Appeals Committee.

Bob LeFaviFaculty Senate, President Chair, MSSM Search Committee, President’s Executive Staff, QEP Steering Committee, QEP Budget Committee, SACS Task Force, SACS Leadership Team, Senate Steering Committee, and Faculty Lecture Series Committee, Co-Chair.

Bryan RiemannSenator, Department of Health Sciences, Member, Senate Planning and Budget Committee, Member, Graduate Affairs Committee, Member, College of Health Professions Research and Scholarship Committee, and Chair, Department of Rehabilitation Chair Search Committee.

Sandy StreaterAASU Academic Affairs Council AASU, Alternate Dispute Resolution Committee, AASU Morris K. Udall Representative, AASU Graduate Faculty Affairs Committee, AASU Graduate Faculty, Chair, Graduate student Appeals Committee, AASU Graduate Faculty Ad Hoc Committee on Student Advancement, AASU Liberal Studies Committee, COHP Deans Search Committee, COHP Interdisciplinary Healthcare Committee, Chair Health Sciences Curriculum Committee, Chair Health Sciences Faculty Evaluation Committee, Health Sciences Liaison to the Committee for International Programs and Activities, Health Sciences MPH Advisory Committee, Member Health Sciences MHSA Advisory Committee, Member Health Sciences MPH Self Study Committee, Health Sciences MSSM Advisory Committee Member.

45

1.5.e. Description of student roles in governance including any formal student organizations.

Students are represented on the MPH Advisory Council. This group makes recommendations concerning departmental curriculum issues, policies and overall departmental functioning. Students are also represented on MPH faculty search committees.

Students have input into program policies and issues through the Graduate Student Coordinating Council (GSCC). There are several purposes of this council: “to represent the graduate student body in all matters concerning academics, welfare, administration, and services; to assist graduate students by providing professional development activities that make them more employable; to promote closer graduate student-faculty-administration relations; and to work with the School of Graduate Studies, the Division of Student Affairs, and other campus offices to promote greater recognition of graduate education on and off the campus” (see Resource File – AASU Graduate Catalog, p44). The MPH program has a representative on the GSCC. Additionally, the chair or a designee of this organization presents reports at the Graduate Coordinating Council and Graduate Faculty meetings.

The assistant to the vice president for Academic Affairs/Provost, who oversees the office of graduate studies, may appoint a student to any standing committee of the Graduate Coordinating Council. This student may discuss issues at the meetings but may not offer motions or vote (see Resource File, AASU Faculty Handbook).

All graduate students in the Health Sciences Department can belong to the Health Sciences Student Association. This organization was chosen in lieu of an MPH organization by the students, feeling that an association with their colleagues in the Master of Health Services Administration, Master of Science in Sports Medicine and the undergraduate Bachelor of Health Science students would be enriched by its diversity and strengthened by their numbers. This organization gives Health Sciences students an opportunity to network at social events and to coordinate service projects. The MPH Coordinator is the faculty representative for this organization.

Some selected activities the Health Sciences Graduate Student Association has participated in: Celebrate AASU Day, participating in Light the Night and raising over $1,000 for Leukemia and Lymphoma research, sponsoring a team and raising funds for the breast cancer walk-a-thon, and sponsoring a team and raising funds for the Diabetes walk-a-thon.

46

1.5.f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and analysis of the program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relation to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: The faculty and students have clearly defined rights that allow them to participate in program governance where appropriate.

Weaknesses: None

Future Plans: The Program will strive to be more inclusive to insure student participation in Program governance.

47

1.6 Fiscal Resources. The program shall have financial resources adequate to fulfill its stated mission and goals, and its instructional, research and service objectives.

1.6.a. Description of the budgetary and allocation processes, including all sources of funding supportive of the instruction, research and service activities. This description should include, as appropriate, discussion about legislative appropriations, formula for funds distribution, tuition generation and retention, gifts, grants and contracts, indirect cost recovery, taxes or levies imposed by the university or other entity within the university, and other policies that impact the fiscal resources available to the program.

The budget allocation process for all AASU programs is initiated in early spring and ends in early summer. The MPH program budget is part of the overall budget of the Health Sciences Department in which the program resides. The MPH Program Coordinator, with input from the MPH faculty and staff, proposes prioritized budget requests for the next fiscal year, based on the previous year’s expenses, and submits it to the HS Department Head who submits this request to the COHP dean. The COHP dean reviews the proposed budget requests of all COPH programs, makes modifications based on the previous year’s revenues and expenses, prioritizes all program budget requests, and presents the proposed prioritized COHP budget requests to the AASU Provost for review and discussion. The preliminary proposed budget requests for all AASU programs is then presented to the AASU President and Vice President for Business and Finance for preliminary approval. Final approval of the proposed AASU budget is ultimately the responsibility of the full Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia which is dependent on funding from the Georgia State Legislature.

Tuition revenues from all AASU programs go the university; the university allocates budgets to the programs based on their needs.

1.6,b. A clearly formulated program budget statement, showing sources of all available funds and expenditures by major categories, since the last accreditation visit or for the last five years, whichever is longer. If the program does not have a separate budget, it must present an estimate of available funds and expenditures by major category and explain the basis of the estimate. This information must be presented in a table format as appropriate to the program.

48

Template 1.6.1 Sources of Funds and Expenditures by Major Category

Table 1.6.b. Sources of Funds and Expenditures by Major Category, 2008 to 20122008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Source of Funds

Course Fees N/A N/A $3,782 $2,614 $4,150

State Appropriation - - - - -

University Funds $426,113 $464,399 $473,974 $475,860 $498,020

Grants/Contracts $62,284 $22,094 $40,020 $4,298 $11,224

Indirect Cost Recovery - - 732 - -

Endowment/Gifts - - - - -

Total $488,397 $486,493 $518,328 $475,860 $543,394

Expenditures

Faculty Salaries & Benefits

$409,670 $403,344 $406,380 $394,784 $457,579

Staff Salaries & Benefits

$53,319 $65,852 $66,306 $65,281 $66,421

Operations $17,667 $15,896 $21,699 $10,932 $13,634

Travel $7,741 $1,401 $2,943 $4,863 $5,760

Student Support N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

University Tax N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Total $488,397 $486,493 $518,328 $475,860 $543,394

Source: AASU Office of Business and Finance.Note: We are only able to access budget statements for the past five years as budgets are archived after five years.

The MPH budget is subsumed in the Department of Health Sciences Department Budget. The percentage of the HS budget expenditures that is allocated to the MPH Program is based on FTE salaries and is 34%. The percentage of income for travel is based on FTE faculty, the percentage of Grants/Contracts are approximately 56%; and

49

University funds 34% (source AASU Office of Business and Finance). Inconsistencies in faculty/staff salaries and other expenditures are due, in part, to mandatory furloughs and fluctuations due to budget cutbacks. For example, in 2010 3 furlough days were mandated. In 2011, one Health Sciences faculty member (not one of the primary MPH faculty members) became ill and retired in early fall 2011 which is reflected in lower faculty salaries and benefits for that year. A new faculty line (not one of the primary MPH faculty members) was added which is reflected in the increase in 2012 faculty salaries and benefits. All University operations budgets were cut significantly between 2010 and 2011. Per the AASU Business Office, the MPH Program and the Health Sciences Department are not considered a student support department, but are, by definition an instructional department. Therefore, no student support funds are listed.

1.6.c. If the program is a collaborative one sponsored by two or more universities, the budget statement must make clear the financial contributions of each sponsoring university to the overall program budget. This should be accompanied by a description of how tuition and other income is shared, including indirect cost returns for research generated by public health program faculty who may have their primary appointment elsewhere.

N/A

1.6.d. Identification of measurable objectives by which the program assesses the adequacy of its fiscal resources, along with data regarding the program’s performance against those measures for each of the last three years.

Table 1.6.d. Outcome Measures for Adequacy of Program Fiscal ResourcesOutcome measure Target 2010 2011 2012Institutional Expenses/all FTE MPH Students**

$120,000 $127,877 $134,525 $168,809

Average amount of scholarship funds available for students†

$20,000 $64,995 $23,345 $240,000

MPH Budget>25% of the total HS Budget

34% 30% 34%

** Source: Office of budget and Finance AASU.

† Scholarship funds for MPH students include funds from the Scholarships for Disadvantaged Students (SDS). Dr. Streater, Coordinator of the MPH Program, in conjunction with the Grants and Sponsored Research Office and the College of Health Professions Dean’s Office, competed for and was awarded Scholarships For Disadvantaged Students (Grant Award T08HP25216-01-00) in the amount of $240,000/year for the years 2012-2015. Qualified students may receive up to $15,000 per year or $7,500 per semester based on financial need.

1.6.e. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met with commentary.

Strengths: The MPH program is supported by the University and the College of Health Professions, enabling it to develop and grow. Current staff, equipment and services to support

50

educational activities of the program are in place, functional and appropriately financed. Scholarship funding for MPH students far exceeds goals.

Weaknesses: None currently although additional resources are always welcome.

Future Plans: The MPH Program will continue to closely monitor its fiscal resources and keep an open channel of communication with the COHP Dean regarding its fiscal needs.

51

1.7 Faculty and Other Resources. The program shall have personnel and other resources adequate to fulfill its stated mission and goals, and its instructional, research and service objectives.

1.7.a. A concise statement or chart defining the number (headcount) of primary faculty employed by the program for each of the last three years, organized by concentration.

Template 1.7.a. Primary Faculty by Core Knowledge Area (schools) or Specialty/Concentration Area (programs) for the last three years

Note: Core MPH faculty are those who commit at least 51% of their time to the MPH program; they are required to teach at least two MPH courses per term, advise and mentor MPH students, conduct and/or be involved in research, participate in service to the university and the community, and aid in the administration of the program. (These data are based on calendar years).

Table 1.7.a. Headcount of Primary Faculty As of August 2013

2010 2011 2012 2013

Core Area/Specialty #1 5 5 5 5

1.7.b. A table delineating the number of faculty, students and SFRs, organized by concentration, for each of the last three years (calendar years or academic years) prior to the site visit. Data must be presented in a table format (see CEPH Data Template 1.7.2) and include at least the following information: a) headcount of primary faculty, b) FTE conversion of faculty based on % time devoted to public health instruction, research and service, c) headcount of other faculty involved in the program (adjunct, part-time, secondary appointments, etc.), d) FTE conversion of other faculty based on estimate of % time commitment, e) total headcount of primary faculty plus other (non-primary) faculty, f) total FTE of primary and other (non-primary) faculty, g) headcount of students by department or program area, h) FTE conversion of students, based on definition of full-time as nine or more credits per semester, i) student FTE divided by primary faculty FTE and j) student FTE divided by total faculty FTE, including other faculty. All programs must provide data for a), b) and i) and may provide data for c), d) and j) depending on whether the program intends to include the contributions of other faculty in its FTE calculations.

52

Template 1.7.b. Faculty, Students and Student/Faculty Ratios by Department (schools) or Specialty/Concentration Area (programs)

Table 1.7.b. Faculty, Students and Student/Faculty Ratios by Department or Specialty AreaHC Primary Faculty

FTE PrimaryFaculty

HC Other Faculty

FTE OtherFaculty

HC Total Faculty

FTE TotalFaculty

HC Students

FTE Students

SFR by PrimaryFaculty FTE

SFR by TotalFaculty FTE

2013 as of 6/1/13

5 4.5 13 4.3 18 8.8 64 54 12:1 6.14:1

2012 5 4.5 12 4 17 8.5 65 53 11.78:1 6.24:1

2011 5 4.5 11 3.67 16 8.17 50 44 9.78 5.39

2010 5 4.5 11 3.67 16 8.17 41 34 9.78 5.39

* Note: FTE = total full-time faculty + total part-time faculty/3 (AASU definition). FTE enrolment is calculated as total full-time enrollment plus the sum of the credit hours taken by part-time students divided by 9 (AASU definition).

The MPH Program experienced a large pool of very qualified applicants in 2012 (n=84). Anticipating a large graduation in fall 2012 (n=10) and spring 2013 (n=18), we accepted a larger than usual number of students (n=51) which resulted in a larger number of admissions (n=26). This increased the 2012 SFR by primary faculty to slightly over 10:1 target, but the 2012 SFR by the total faculty complement remained within our goal of 10:1. The current SFR (summer 2013) for primary faculty is 5.33 (n=24) this SFR is typical for summer enrollments and does not include admissions for fall 2013. Fall 2013 projected enrollment is well within the SFR 10:1 target for both primary and total faculty. These data are based on calendar years.

1.7.c. A concise statement or chart concerning the headcount and FTE of non-faculty, non-student personnel (administration and staff) who support the program.

Table 1.7.c. Administrative Staff that support the MPH ProgramStaff Person Title % Effort Contribution

Tracy MiddletonAdministrative Assistant to the Health Sciences Department

25%

Administrative assistant to the Head of Health Sciences. Coordinates all activities, processes and procedures associated with the MPH program.

Sylvia Flynn(retired December 2012)Dianne Coleman**,

Part-time secretary (30 hours) 30% Coordinates: MPH programs’ course evaluations, text book acquisition, MPH data base.

53

Staff Person Title % Effort Contribution(disabled African American, hired to replace Flynn April 2013)

Jill Bell*Director, Graduate Enrollment Services

10%Coordinates admissions and student progression for all AASU graduate programs.

Tasha White*,**Staff Assistant – Graduate Enrollment Services

10% Supports the Graduate Director

Kristin StoutReference Librarian dedicated to MPH

10%Coordinates student research activities in Lane Library.

Corine Ackerson-Jones*, **

Coordinator of Recruitment and Retention COHP

5%Assists with recruitment of MPH students at recruitment fairs, etc.

Liz Wilson* Director of Career Services 5%Assists MPH students with resumes and job searches

* University staff, not in the MPH budget

** = minority staff member

1.7.d. Description of the space available to the program for various purposes (offices, classrooms, common space for student use, etc.), by location.

Since fall 2003, the Department of Health Sciences has been housed in Solms Hall (completely renovated in 2002-2003) on the Armstrong Atlantic State University campus.

The HS/MPH facility includes: Nine faculty offices, (nine in Solms Hall and one in Ashmore Hall (103-118 sq. ft.) One larger office in Solms shared by two faculty members (191 sq. ft.) One Department Head's office (217 sq. ft.) One secretarial cubical (112 sq. ft.) One reception area (282 sq. ft.) Part-time secretary cubical area shared with work study students (169 sq. ft.) One conference room (356 sq. ft.) Three dedicated classrooms: Solms 202 (684 sp. ft.), 203 (567 sq. ft.), 216(918 sq. ft.), with

additional classrooms available by reservation One unisex rest room with handicap access (54 sq. ft.) One break room with sink, microwave, and refrigerator. (63 sq. ft.)

The facilities and equipment potentially available to MPH students and faculty are competitive with that of other benchmark institutions of similar size. Not all teaching facilities, including access to computer laboratories, lecture halls and regular classrooms are considered adequate at this time. Faculty office space is now filled to capacity. In fact, two new faculty hires for fall 2013 currently do not yet have designated office space. Any program growth will require additional office space outside the current Health Sciences Suite or relocation of the department

54

to a larger suite. In order to accommodate the two new faculty hires for fall 2013, the HS Conference will be converted to an office on one of the new hires and the other new hire will share an office with another HS faculty member.

Currently there is no common space for any students in the Health Sciences Suite. Students do have access to common spaces in the Lane Library and the Student Union.

(Note: It was recently announced that the HS Department will be relocated to an new site as of January 1, 2014, see 1.7.j. Addendum for a complete description of the new HS suite).

1.7.e. A concise description of the laboratory space and description of the kind, quantity and special features or special equipment.

N/A

1.7.f. A concise statement concerning the amount, location and types of computer facilities and resources for students, faculty, administration and staff.

Each faculty member, as well as the staff, in the Department of Health Sciences, is issued a personal computer (choice of desktop or laptop) in his/her office upon hire. These computers are directly linked to the campus-wide network and the Internet through the AASU server. Hardware and software upgrades are provided by AASU’s Computer and Information Services department on a regular basis. Computer technicians are available to address any computer-based problems faculty may have. The Health Sciences department has four laptops for faculty use by reservation.

Campus-wide common community computer labs are available to MPH students. Locations and number of computer stations include:

Lane Library - 125 stations Solms Hall Room 104 - 60 stations University Hall Room 112 - 42 stations Science Center - 48 stations

1.7.g. A concise description of library/information resources available for program use, including a description of library capacity to provide digital (electronic) content, access mechanisms, training opportunities and document-delivery services.

The Lane Library provides excellent reference librarians to facilitate student library utilization and research. Carols and group study rooms are available for students by reservation. There is

55

also a classroom available for student/faculty presentations. The library also contains a hundred computers for student use.

Print and Media Materials:

The Library’s collection includes monographs, ebooks, reference materials, bound volumes, current print journals, electronic journals, videocassettes, DVDs, and CD-ROMs that strongly support the MPH program. Lane Library’s budget allocation for the MPH program is adequate.

Print, ebook, and media titles directly related to public health……………4,000 Related titles which indirectly support the field of public health………..16,152 Health Sciences print journal titles related to public health………………….18 Related print journals which indirectly support the field of public health…. 59 Electronic journals related to public health ……………………..………….252

Online Database Resources:GALILEO (Georgia Library Learning Online), the University System of Georgia’s cooperative, Web-based virtual library, provides access to multiple information resources including databases that index thousands of periodicals and scholarly journals. A number of GALILEO databases may be useful for public health research, including EBSCO Academic Source Complete, Proquest Research Library, Proquest Nursing & Allied Health, MEDLINE Full Text, CINAHL, EBSCO Health Source Nursing/Academic Edition, PsycINFO, PsycArticles, and LexisNexis Academic.

Additional Lane Library databases (e.g., Web of Science, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, JSTOR, ) are accessible to current MPH students and faculty who conduct scholarly research both on and off-campus.

In addition to indexing and abstracting thousands of journals, many Lane Library and GALILEO databases offer “full text” (complete) articles. Scholarly and popular journal literature in these databases can be downloaded, e-mailed, or printed at the convenience of the MPH student or faculty member.

Materials From Other Institutions:

Through GIL Express, the University System of Georgia (USG) cooperative book delivery request system, Armstrong faculty and students have access to monographs held in University System of Georgia libraries, and Lane Library’s interlibrary loan system can obtain books and photocopied journal articles from libraries nationwide. Both library services are provided at no charge to MPH students and faculty members.

In addition to AASU’s Library holdings, students in the MPH program have ready access to libraries at Memorial Health University Medical Center and St. Joseph’s/Candler Hospital, as well as access to other regional and public libraries. Finally, MPH graduate students have access

56

to the GAIN (Georgia Interactive Network for Medical Information) database of journal articles through the AHEC (Area Health Information Centers) network.

1.7.h. A concise statement of any other resources not mentioned above, if applicable.

AASU Learning Commons

Armstrong will open a new Learning Commons adjacent to the library in the spring of 2013. The Commons arose from a need for more library space, specifically space for students to work collaboratively in areas designed to promote learning. At 15,000 gross square feet, the Commons will have seating for 284 students and will include 10 study rooms equipped with large panel computer screens, 25 PC and 25 Mac desktop computers in the building’s open areas, Wi-Fi throughout the building, and a mix of seating arrangements. One of the study rooms will double as a presentation practice room, and flexible seating around wall-mounted display panels will allow for creating of group presentation spaces as needed. An experimental technologies room will include sound and video recording and editing equipment, a plotter, and a large touch-panel computer with videoconferencing capabilities. Three Agati multi-media group collaboration tables with embedded touch-controlled computers and large secondary display screens are sure to attract students. A “pink-noise” sound masking system, efficient acoustical finishes, and ceiling-mounted directional speakers in group areas will help create an environment with minimized distractions. (See Resource File for map of floor plan of the Learning Commons on the AASU campus).

The building is designed to be operable by a small number of staff so that it can stay open well into the early morning hours or open 24 hours a day if need be. Library staff, including reference librarians, will be on hand to assist students. The building’s location adjacent to the library, the student union, the food court, and the principal walkway between the living and academic areas of the campus place it in the center of student activity. The building will feature a green roof, photovoltaic roof panels, sustainable materials, and other features designed to earn LEED certification at the Gold or possibly the Platinum level.

1.7.i. Identification of measurable objectives through which the program assesses the adequacy of its resources, along with data regarding the program’s performance against those measures for each of the last three years.

Outcome measure

Source Target 2010 2011 2012 2013 as of 6/1/13

Support Staff for MPH Program (HS budget only)

Human Resources

>1.5 FTE in HS Budget

1.5 1.75 1.75 1.75

Student perception of MPH Student 80% responses 85% 85.2% 100%TBA

57

Outcome measure

Source Target 2010 2011 2012 2013 as of 6/1/13

adequacy of computing resources

Exit Questionnaire

rank good to excellent

Student perception of adequacy of physical environment and facilities

MPH Student Exit Questionnaire

80% responses rank good to excellent

90% 86.6% 100%TBA

Student perception of adequacy of Library Resources

MPH Student Exit Questionnaire

80% responses rank good to excellent

81% 80% 100% TBA

FTE Student/Faculty Ratio (FTE) Core and Secondary faculty

Office of Institutional Review

<10:1 4.72:1 6.11:1 7.36:1 6.02:1

1.7.j. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met with commentary.

Strengths: The AASU Learning Commons will provide state of the art resources (meeting rooms and computer labs) for MPH students. Library resources are excellent. AASU has placed a high priority to establish a new College of Health Professions building within the next five years. As a result of the MPH Student Exit Questionnaire, MPH faculty noticed that although student perceptions of the adequacy of library, computing facilities, and physical environment resources met our goals, the scores improved significantly after we included additional information regarding these resources to the new MPH students orientation.

Weaknesses: Not all teaching facilities are considered adequate and easily accessible at this time. The facilities and equipment available to MPH students and faculty are competitive with that of other benchmark institutions of similar size, but availability is not consistent. There is no available space in the HS suite for MPH students to meet. There is no space in Solms Hall for part-time faculty to meet with students. Health Sciences Department physical resources (office space and student meeting rooms) are inadequate. Although the financial resources are considered adequate at this time, redirection of a non-core Health Sciences Faculty member line to the MPH Program is essential if any additional growth is to occur in the program

The current Health Sciences suite, Solms 201 is now filled to capacity and is not adequate to meet existing or future needs for the department. In fact, two full time faculty members who will be hired fall 2013 will have no assigned offices and one full time faculty member is currently housed outside of Solms Hall. Program growth necessitates additional office space outside the current Health Sciences Suite or departmental relocation to a larger suite. A redirection of a non-core Health Faculty line will be essential with any program growth.

58

Future Plans: The MPH Coordinator will maintain an open dialog with the Dean of Health Professions to obtain more physical resources (i.e. faculty office space). As of June 2013 the Health Sciences Department was told it would be moving into a larger suite in University Hall. This suite contains 16 faculty offices and has small workrooms and computer resources for students (see resource file for a more complete discussion of the new MPH facility).

Addendum: Update to criteria 1.7

Prior to Dr. Richard St. Pierre’s retirement in December 2012, search for his replacement was approved and was initiated in early fall 2012 in hopes to have his position filled in January 2013. Two offers for this position were made but not accepted for start dates in January 2013 or August 2013. The search was reopened in February 2013, new candidates were interviewed. Dr. Nandi Marshall MPH, DrPH accepted the position. Dr. Marshall will begin her position as a primary faculty member in the MPH program August 5, 2013. This hire will keep the headcount of primary MPH faculty at 5 and FTE at 4.5.

Additionally, Dr. Andrea Thomas, MBA, MPH, FACHE will be joining the Health Sciences Department as a primary faculty member in the Master of Health Services Administration (MHSA) Program August 5, 2013. In addition to teaching in the MHSA Program, Dr. Thomas will be available to teach course(s) for the MPH Program. This hire will make the FTE for Other Faculty be 4.3 and the SFR for the total faculty be 6.14:1.

The Department of Health Sciences will be relocated to University Hall in December 2013. The faculty offices and secretarial work space adjoin a classroom suite. This arrangement will allow faculty and the secretaries to consult readily with one another and provide students with easy access to faculty.

The suite has two large classrooms dedicated for lectures and one traditional classroom. Two 100 square foot discussion rooms will be available for use by student for studying or by faculty when needed for small group discussions or private conversations.

A small student computer lab has 3 computers that are connected to a system printer. These computers all have Microsoft office suite and SPSS 19 among other software.

The informal learning center (lounge) is a 200 square foot space that is equipped with 2 microwaves, a refrigerator, table and chairs, couch, coffee pot and toaster. This area will also house the students’ mailboxes. The lounge can be used by students as a place where they can eat, relax, and discuss coursework in a more informal setting.

A storage room will house all the records for the program. This room has a lockable door; records are stored in two lockable filing cabinets. These filing cabinets may only be accessed by the department secretary or faculty. A locked bin can be used to store sensitive materials for offsite shredding.

59

When larger classrooms are needed for student meetings, guest lectures or other activities, faculty and staff may reserve rooms elsewhere on campus.

Each total faculty member will be provided with a 108 square foot office, furnished with an L shaped desk, a desk chair, a guest chair, 2 book cases and a filing cabinet. Each faculty is given the choice of a Mac computer or a PC, desk top or laptop. All faculty members have individual printers as well as being networked to the Department photocopy center. The Department Head will have a 168 square foot office, furnished with a U-shaped desk, 2 filing cabinets, 3 book cases, an office chair, and two guest chairs. The computer in this office is also connected to the network. All offices are equipped with phones. These spaces are adequate for teaching, private conferences – in short, for all faculty needs.

The needs of the adjunct faculty are met on an individual basis. Each associated faculty member will have access to the conference room for individual conference, advising, and meeting with other faculty. There is an additional suite of four offices which can be used by adjunct faculty.

There is a break room, work room/kitchen and conference room. The conference room can be used for associated faculty, for faculty meetings, for interviews and for small group discussions. Scheduled use of the conference room will be coordinated by the departmental senior secretary.

The secretaries of the Health Sciences Department will share a common area of 440 square feet. This space is located adjacent to the department head’s offices and precedes entry to all faculty offices. The secretary will have a large L-shaped desk, a desk chair, a guest chair, 1 book case, and 2 lockable filing cabinets. Both secretaries will have computers and desk printers which are also networked to the photocopy center. The secretarial space is also adjacent to the faculty work room, and will offer ready access to a typewriter, fax machine, scanners, and large printer/fax/email/photocopy system machine.

Space allotted will be adequate for the department faculty, staff and students.

60

1.8 Diversity. The program shall demonstrate a commitment to diversity and shall show evidence an ongoing practice of cultural competence in learning, research and service practices.

1.8.a. A written plan and/or policies demonstrating systematic incorporation of diversity within the program. Required elements include the following:

1.8.a.i. Description of the program’s under-represented populations, including a rationale for the designation.

Underrepresented populations for AASU and the MPH Program are Hispanic/Latino students and African American students. The African American population in Chatham County, Georgia is 40.2% while the enrollment of African American students at Armstrong is 23.3%. The Hispanic/Latino population of Chatham County is 5.7% and the enrollment of Hispanic/Latino students at Armstrong is 7%. Several initiatives have been undertaken by AASU to increase the above two populations: The African American Male Initiative (AAMI), the Goizueta Initiative, and Complete College Georgia.

1.8.a.ii. A list of goals for achieving diversity and cultural competence within the program, and a description of how diversity-related goals are consistent with the university’s mission, strategic plan and other initiatives on diversity, as applicable.

The mission of AASU is “Armstrong is teaching-centered and student-focused, providing diverse learning experiences and professional programs grounded in the liberal arts”. A stated value is: “We value and respect diversity”. http://www.armstrong.edu/About/armstrong_facts/mission_statement

A core value of the AASU Office of Student affairs is SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT. We foster cultural literacy and personal relationships founded on the principles of compassion, civility and diversity. And two stated strategies are: DIVERSITY RECRUITMENT & PROGAMMING: Create an environment on campus that attracts Hispanic/Latino students to enroll at the University and within 15 years AASU could become the first Hispanic Serving Institution (HIS) in the State of Georgia. And Provide opportunities for students to engage in activities that fully promote their cultural contribution to the global society. Celebrate various cultural heritage months (African American Heritage Month, Native American Heritage Month) and other days of importance.http://www.armstrong.edu/images/student_affairs/SAstrategicplan.pdf

The Mission of the College of Health Professions is to “Improve the health and wellness of our culturally diverse communities by educating students to become team-oriented, evidence-focused and compassionate healthcare professionals.”http://www.armstrong.edu/Health_professions/deans_office/chp_our_vision_mission

61

A Stated Goal of Complete College Georgia, an initiative sponsored by the University system of Georgia is to improve access for traditionally underserved groups. http://www.armstrong.edu/images/Armstrong%20Atlantic%20State%20University-Complete%20College%20Georgia.pdf

The Mission of the Office of Multicultural Affairs is “To foster a culturally inclusive living and learning environment in which differences as well as similarities are respected, recognized, and revered in an effort to develop both civic and social responsibility within our Armstrong and surrounding communities; to encourage student empowerment and both personal and professional development.” http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/multiculturalaffairs/multiculturalaffairs_mission

The university gives a great deal of latitude to the individual colleges and programs to develop their own unique goals for achieving diversity and cultural competence.

MPH Program Goals for achieving and maintaining diversity and cultural competence: The MPH Program will maintain an enrollment of diverse students that is representative of the service area. All MPH faculty members will complete the Safe Space Training by January 1, 2014. The MPH program will be represented at all appropriate minority recruitment events by faculty and/or staff. The MPH Program will recruit a diverse field of external speakers to present in classes. The MPH Program will reorganize its Advisory Committee to include more minority

members. The MPH Program will increase the number of minority, MPH part-time faculty. The MPH Program will increase the number of minority MPH practicum site supervisors.

These goals are documented in the MPH website:http://www.armstrong.edu/Health_Professions/Health_Sciences/healthsciences_master_of_public_health?AASUSTID=cf50200ce56fd1a29117d036291b02b7

1.8.a.iii. Policies that support a climate free of harassment and discrimination and that value the contributions of all forms of diversity; the program should also document its commitment to maintaining/using these policies.

In its commitment to diversity, the MPH Program is bound by and agrees with the policies of the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, Armstrong Atlantic State University, and the College of Health Professions. The MPH Program has also developed stand-alone policies to enhance program diversity.

62

The Affirmative Action Policy of Armstrong Atlantic State University states that “Armstrong Atlantic State University is an equal employment opportunity/affirmative action institution. In accordance with the policy of the Board of Regents, the university stipulates that there shall be no discrimination based upon race, ethnicity, sex, sexual orientation, religion, creed, national origin, age, or handicap of employees in their appointment, promotion, retention, remuneration, or any other condition of employment”.

The university provides a full range of education and training programs to promote awareness and prevention of harassment. Education and training programs also include education about the university's harassment policy, as well as training for responsible personnel in conducting investigations, management and implementation of the complaint procedure.Information regarding this policy is provided during student orientation, during employee orientation, and to all individuals who volunteer in various positions on campus. Copies of the policy will be readily available in all departments and units of the university. In addition, the policy is posted on the university's website.http://www.armstrong.edu/images/academic_affairs/Faculty_Handbook.pdf

“As a government contractor, Armstrong Atlantic State University is also committed to taking affirmative action to hire and advance minorities and women as well as qualified individuals with disabilities and covered veterans”.http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/human_resources/human_resources_employee_handbook#q1

All Armstrong employees are required to, upon hire, to complete an Ethics Training Course and on an annual basis, complete the Ethics Policy Recertification Course. All MPH faculty members have current Ethics Policy certification.

The Health Sciences Department and the MPH Program adopted the tenants of the AASU Mandala Movement in 1998 and continue to adhere to the spirit of the mission and goals of that movement. The program strives to create persons who are Cultural Diversity Ambassador of Change. The mission of the Mandala Movement is to foster an environment that supports and celebrates diversity, actively encourages fairness, and provides a positive leaning, living and working experience for everyone. The Goals of the Movement are to: Provide opportunities for increasing self-awareness; encourage appreciation of values found in diversity; and create an environment that supports positive change. New MPH students are introduced to these tenants at MPH orientation.

Additionally, the MPH program has adopted a goal for each faculty member to complete the training for a Safe Space by January 1, 2014. Safe Space is a campus-wide initiative offering a visible message of inclusion, acceptance, and support to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) people in the university community. Faculty who complete the workshop are

63

able to recognize appropriate and inclusive language regarding sex, gender, and sexual orientation; identify challenges specific to LGBT students; name federal, state, local, and Armstrong policies that concern the LGBT community; identify biases around issues of sex, gender, and sexual orientation; describe strategies to support LGBT students and to respond to anti-LGBT behavior; and identify resources for LGBT individuals on campus, in the community, and online. http://www.armstrong.edu/Initiatives/safe_space/safe_space_welcome.

1.8.a.iv. Policies that support a climate for working and learning in a diverse setting.

The AASU mission states that “Armstrong is teaching-centered and student-focused, providing diverse learning experiences and professional programs grounded in the liberal arts”.

One of the AASU values states “We value and respect diversity”. Another stated value is “We value an environment of mutual trust and collegiality that builds an inclusive community”.

The Mission, Vision, and Values statements are prominently displayed on the University's website . http://www.armstrong.edu/About/armstrong_facts/about_strategic_plan .

AASU supports an Office of Multicultural Affairs. This office provides supportive services to ethnic minority students at Armstrong and works closely with Office of International Education and with Hispanic Leadership & Outreach in providing comprehensive cultural programming and support services. Armstrong's Office of Multicultural Affairs serves as a resource for Armstrong students, providing programs and inviting guest speakers to make presentations that target diversity, cultural competence, and education. In addition, this office serves as the primary sponsor of programming for African American History Month, the International Fair and Native American History Month and Women and History Month. http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/multiculturalaffairs/multiculturalaffairs_welcome.

The MPH Program adheres to the policies of Armstrong Atlantic State University. It is the policy of AASU that all employees shall have the opportunity to work in an atmosphere and environment free from any form of harassment or retaliation based on race, color, religion, gender, sex, national origin, age, or disability. Such forms of harassment or retaliation constitute discrimination under various state and federal laws and will not be tolerated by the university. As is dictated by the US Equal Opportunity Employment Commission. http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/practices/harassment.cfm.

Harassment is defined as verbal or physical conduct that denigrates or shows hostility or aversion toward an individual because of their race, color, religion, gender, sex, national origin, age, or disability or that of their relatives, friends, or associates, and that:

has the purpose or effect of creating an intimidating, hostile or offensive working environment

has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual's work performance

64

otherwise adversely affects an individual's employment opportunitieshttp://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/human_resources/human_resources_employee_handbook#q1.

1.8.a.v. Policies and plans to develop review and maintain curricula and other opportunities including service learning that address and build competency in diversity and cultural considerations.

MPH Program Technical Standards

All MPH students are introduced to the Technical Standards for the MPH Program and the Department of Health Sciences at the MPH Orientation. These technical standards are core performance that reflects the Program’s commitment to the standards that are necessary to operate effectively and humanely in a diverse society and to obtain employment in the degree fields. They are evaluated by the student’s practicum site supervisors as well as program faculty.

1. It is essential that the student must behave in a professional manner. The student must not, in any fashion, cause disruption to the department, faculty, fellow students or clients. Furthermore, the student must have the ability to behave in an ethical manner, have the ability to demonstrate good judgment, maturity, sensitivity, emotional stability and establish effective harmonious relationships with faculty, fellow student and clients.

2. It is essential that the student have the sensitivity and interpersonal skills sufficient to interact with individuals, families and groups. Student will be evaluated using tools such as classroom performance and practicum evaluation, utilized by site and faculty supervisor, on the basis of their ability to appropriately adapt their manner of interaction with clients from a variety of social, emotional, cultural and intellectual backgrounds.

3. It is essential that the students must have communication abilities sufficient for interaction with others in verbal and written form. It is essential that the student be able to appropriately adjust presentation/communication style to a level that is compatible with the communication abilities of colleagues and clients.

The MPH Program has MOUs with many excellent sites for practica that build competency in diversity and cultural considerations. A representative list of practica sites includes: St Joseph/Candler Health Center – African American Health Information resource Center, St Mary’s (Hispanic Medical Home), J.C. Lewis (Predominately African American Medical Home), Community Health Mission (Minority Medical Home), Curtis Cooper Health Center (Predominantly African American Medical Home), Coastal Health District Department of Health Promotion, Girls on the Run (organization to enhance disadvantaged adolescent girls self-esteem through running programs), Planned Parenthood, Chatham County Board of Education, Liberty County Health Department, and Union Mission (homeless shelter).

65

In 2010, the MPH Program added content to several courses in order to build competency in diversity and cultural considerations. This course content is examined and or updated each year (see section 1.8.b.)

1.8.a.vi. Policies and plans to recruit, develop, promote and retain a diverse faculty.

The MPH Programs ascribes and is bound to all University System of Georgia and Armstrong Atlantic State University Policies to recruit, promote, and retain a diverse faculty (see section 1.3c).

The University, the College of Health Professions, and the Program value diversity in its faculty, staff, and student body. Each welcomes applications from a diverse pool of candidates and subscribes to inclusive excellence. A stated value in the recently adopted Armstrong Strategic Plan is “We value and respect diversity”. http://www.armstrong.edu/About/armstrong_facts/about_strategic_plan.

Section 107.1.1 of the AASU Faculty handbook states: “Armstrong Atlantic State University is an equal employment opportunity/affirmative action institution. The university stipulates that there shall be no discrimination based upon race, ethnicity, sex, sexual orientation, religion, creed, national origin, age, or handicap of employees in their appointment, promotion, retention, remuneration, or any other condition of employment.” Armstrong Atlantic State University, Employee Handbook http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/human_resources/human_resources_policies_procedures

This commitment to equal opportunity employment is also stated in the Board of Regents Manual.8.2.1 Equal Employment Opportunity http://www.usg.edu/policymanual/section8/policy/8.2_general_policies_for_all_personnel/#p8.2.1_equal_employment_opportunity.

Armstrong Atlantic State University takes positive action in an effort to identify, to recruit, and to employ qualified women and members of minority groups. Subsequent promotions and salary increases are based solely on the quality of performance of the individual in his or her position. Armstrong Atlantic State University, Employee Handbook http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/human_resources/human_resources_policies_procedures

Armstrong has an Affirmative Action Program, which sets forth the policies, practices and procedures Armstrong is committed to applying to ensure that its policy of non-discrimination and affirmative action for qualified individuals is accomplished. Per the AASU Employee Handbook, this policy is available upon request at the Human Resources Department. http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/human_resources/human_resources_equal_employment_opportunity_affirmative_action?

66

AASUSTID=cdb796b6eb78353dd03e7d1c7c538954&AASUSTID=898a3369526934d3f05b83c44b6af6a9.

The University is an EEOC employer. According to the AASU Employee Handbook, "University policy is to employ those persons who are best qualified based on ability, skill, experience, training, character, and physical condition, regardless of race, color, sex, or creed. The university provides working conditions, salaries, and benefits that will attract and retain competent employees."

The AASU Human Resources Department advertises all faculty positions in the following sites: Armstrong Website, SavannahHelpWanted.com, HigherEdJobs.com, InsideHigherEd.com, LatinosInHigherEd.com, Savannah Tribune, The Savannah Herald, Department of Labor, Hero2Hired, and Indeed.com. Additionally, all position announcements are sent to Affirmative Action Sites (via email).

Faculty Development and Retention:

AASU Faculty Development OfficeThe AASU Faculty Development Office makes resources and activities available for new and established faculty. A Faculty Development web site has been designed to inform AASU faculty about programs, services, and resources that promote teaching effectiveness, support scholarly projects, and encourage professional involvement in community activities. http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/faculty_development/faculty_development_welcome.

Through the AASU Faculty Development Office, funding is available to faculty on a competitive basis. Faculty can apply for these funds by submitting proposals for teaching and learning grants or for research and scholarship grants. Additional information on grant funding sources can be found on the faculty development committee also offers faculty development activities. http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/faculty_development/faculty_development_grant_writing_resources.

The Faculty Development office also offers resources to new faculty to support their progress towards tenure and promotion. http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/faculty_development/faculty_development_new_faculty

All new faculty hires are encouraged to take advantage of teaching resources located on the Faculty Development website. Resources include: Academic Writing Boot camp, Faculty Development Seminars, Communities, and Roundtables, Using Mid-Term Evaluations to Promote Student Learning, Podcasting Resources, The Teaching Commons AT&T Blue Web'n, Virtual Resource Site for Teaching with Technology , The Visible Knowledge Project , Blended Learning , The Journal , Educational Technology Committee Blog @ AASU USG Faculty, Development Topics on iTunes U, Technology & Teaching.

67

Web Resources are made available on the website and include: Getting Smart: 50 Educational Podcasts You Should Check Out,The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching,The National Teaching & Learning Forum,Professional & Organizational Development,World Lecture Hall, Merlot, Free-Ed.net,Center for Research on Learning & Teaching,Center for Teaching Effectiveness, Derek Bok Center for Teaching & Learning,Resources for Enhancing Education at Carnegie Mellon, HORIZON

There is also information available on Website Development: The HTML Writers Guild, Tips & Tools for New Web Makers,Web Developer's Virtual Library: Beginner's Page, Webweaver. http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/faculty_development/faculty_development_teaching_resources.

The Office of International Education provides support for faculty exchanges with partner universities and helps establish new study abroad programs. The Office of International Education also assists with bringing international faculty to the AASU campus for lectures and to teach in our exchange programs. http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/International/intl_welcome.

All Health Sciences faculty are eligible for travel funds from within the department that can be used for travel to conferences, research, etc. Currently the faculty may receive up to $850 per year from this fund. Conference registration fees are not included in the $850; they are taken from a separate source. Faculty can apply to the College of Health Professions for discretionary funding through the Dean of the College of Health Professions to supplement funds from other sources. The Dean considers each need individually.

The department set up the Department of Health Sciences Foundation. This source of funding enables MPH faculty to apply for research funds, additional travel funds, buy-out funding, and mini grant funds. The awarding of these funds is on an ad hoc basis.

1.8.a.vii. Policies and plans to recruit develop and retain a diverse staff.

The AASU Human Resources Department advertises all staff positions in the following sites: Armstrong Website, SavannahHelpWanted.com, HigherEdJobs.com, InsideHigherEd.com, LatinosInHigherEd.com, Savannah Tribune, The Savannah Herald, Department of Labor, Hero2Hired, and Indeed.com. Additionally, all position announcements are sent to Affirmative Action Sites (via email).

Staff positions at AASU are graded positions and not structured for promotions. Staff members are notified of open positions and may apply if interested.

68

AASU, the COHP and the Department of Health Sciences is committed to equal opportunity employment and is bound by the policies of the Board of Regents Manual.8.2.1 Equal Employment Opportunity (see section 1.8.a.iii and 1.8.a.iv)http://www.usg.edu/policymanual/section8/policy/8.2_general_policies_for_all_personnel/#p8.2.1_equal_employment_opportunity.

Armstrong Atlantic State University takes positive action in an effort to identify, to recruit, and to employ qualified women and members of minority groups. Subsequent promotions and salary increases are based solely on the quality of performance of the individual in his or her position. Armstrong Atlantic State University, Employee Handbook http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/human_resources/human_resources_policies_procedures

Armstrong has an Affirmative Action Program, which sets forth the policies, practices and procedures Armstrong is committed to applying to ensure that its policy of non-discrimination and affirmative action for qualified individuals is accomplished. Per the AASU Employee Handbook, this policy is available upon request at the Human Resources Department. http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/human_resources/human_resources_equal_employment_opportunity_affirmative_action?AASUSTID=cdb796b6eb78353dd03e7d1c7c538954&AASUSTID=898a3369526934d3f05b83c44b6af6a9.

The University is an EEOC employer. According to the AASU Employee Handbook, "University policy is to employ those persons who are best qualified based on ability, skill, experience, training, character, and physical condition, regardless of race, color, sex, or creed. The university provides working conditions, salaries, and benefits that will attract and retain competent employees."

The Department of Health Sciences recently partnered with the Georgia Vocational Rehabilitation Agency and agreed to contact this agency when staff positions become available. The AASU Office of Human Resources offers the following professional development opportunities for staff: Building a Better U, Lunch & Learn, No Wrong Door - Exceptional Customer Service. http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/human_resources/human_resources_welcome

Tuition assistance is available to staff which allows them to pursue degrees within the University System of Georgia tuition for free. Furthermore, Health Sciences Foundation funds are available for faculty development on an ad hoc basis.

69

1.8.a.viii. Policies and plans to recruit, admit, retain and graduate a diverse student body.

Students are actively recruited from among undergraduate and graduate students from the various University System of Georgia universities as well as outside of Georgia. In addition, our program tries to recruit persons already working in the public health sector, members of community-based organizations, and clinical professionals (MDs, Physician Assistants, and Nurses), ideally from ethnically/racially diverse underserved populations, who are interested in alleviating health disparities and serving the health needs of underserved urban populations in southeast Georgia.

The program staff, and periodically, MPH students participate in various recruitment activities both on and off campus. In addition, recruiters from the AASU Admissions and Recruitment Office, the AASU Graduate Office, and the COHP Dean’s Office have been provided materials to distribute to students, as they meet with a variety of college juniors and seniors. Faculty who attend local, state, national and international conferences are also given program brochures to be distributed to interested persons. As the program receives requests for information, the Graduate Office and/or the MPH Coordinator immediately respond by emailing a program brochure and instructions to access the MPH Graduate Application website. As applications are received, acknowledgement letters and e-mail messages are sent to inform applicants of their application status. Efforts are made to meet with prospective applicants in person or by phone prior to the MPH Orientation if possible.

The African American Male Initiative is supported by the Men of Vision and Excellence (MOVE) Project which began in 2008, and strives to enhance the admission, retention and progression of African American males via financial support and a strong mentoring. Representatives from the MPH Program attend recruitment and informational sessions to present information on the MPH Program and careers in public health.

Complete College Georgia is a system initiative to improve access for traditionally underserved groups. Funding for student and staff positions are available through this initiative.

Armstrong also provides targeted informational materials both in print and online designed for distinct populations such as Hispanic students, focusing specifically on programs and/or services for which these specific populations may have an interest. The Hispanic Outreach and Leadership at Armstrong (HOLA) program at Armstrong provides admissions and advisement information in Spanish for non-native English speakers program

The Goizueta Initiative addresses the following issues: lack of financial aid for qualified Hispanic/Latino students; low “accepted” to “admitted” enrollment yields of Hispanic/Latino students; and low percentages of full-time enrollment of Hispanic/Latino students. Hispanic Outreach programs are directed by Ms. Melody Rodriguez; this office provides guidance on an

70

array of topics, from information about financial aid processes for incoming students to academic development and leadership opportunities. The Hispanic Outreach and Leadership at Armstrong (HOLA), office exists to assist Hispanic students at Armstrong, from enrollment to graduation. MPH faculty members collaborate with Ms. Rodriguez and have made presentations to the HOLA Club as well as attending the CAMINO Program Training informing the students re public health as a major, job opportunities and funding opportunities which attempts to increase the percentage of Latino students matriculating through AASU.

For the past four years, the MPH Program in conjunction with the AASU College of Health Professions has applied for a HRSA Grant for financially needy students from disadvantaged background as has been funded for multiple years (see section 1.6.d). Up to $15,000 can be awarded to MPH students who qualify.

The MPH faculty members are being trained to be certified as a Safe Space by the Gay-Straight Alliance. Safe Space is a three-hour workshop to raise awareness and knowledge of LGBTQ issues and suggest ways to serve as an ally to LGBTQ individuals. Following the workshop, participants receive a Safe Space decal to display in their workspace, indicating to the campus community that they are knowledgeable and supportive allies.

Safe Space Learning Outcomes: Recognize appropriate and inclusive language regarding sex, gender, and sexual

orientation. Identify challenges specific to LGBTQ students. Name federal, state, local, and Armstrong policies that concern the LGBTQ community. Identify biases around issues of sex, gender, and sexual orientation. Describe strategies to support LGBTQ students and to respond to anti-LGBTQ behavior. Identify resources for LGBTQ individuals on campus, in the community, and online.

In order to increase MPH enrollment, it is necessary to get unrepresented populations enrolled in undergraduate programs. The MPH Program has joined a COHP initiative which will offer a summer camp to attract high-achieving students from disadvantaged and minority backgrounds. The camp, free of cost to students, is being funded by a grant from Wal-Mart, the Hodge Foundation and from alumni donors. The camp will introduce high achieving students to career options in the health professions.

MPH Students are introduced to the AASU Counseling Services at their orientation and are encouraged to utilize resources regarding Substance Abuse, Eating Disorders, Smoking Cessation, Sexual Aggression, Prevention, and important Mental Health information. MPH Faculty can access the counseling center to obtain information on Identifying and Referring the Distressed Student and the Georgia Crisis and Access Line. For Students, Counseling Center Resources include: Life Esteem, Georgia Crisis and Access Line, Eating

71

Disorders, ADDA - National Attention Deficit Disorder Association, Psych web, Screening for Mental Health, Inc., Outside the Classroom (alcohol info), Depression Screening, Georgia Treatment Center, A merican Cancer Society , and Rape Crisis Center of the Coastal Empire.

1.8.a.ix. Regular evaluation of the effectiveness of the above-listed measures.

Per the Equal Opportunity Employment policy, mandatory periodic reviews by administrators and faculty committees are conducted to ensure that the equal employment and equal opportunity objectives of the institution are receiving adequate attention and emphasis. In the establishment of recruitment pools, in the selection of candidates to be interviewed for a position, and in the final offer of employment, each dean must follow guidelines designed to ensure that notice of the availability of the position has reached as wide a range of qualified individuals as possible and that the best qualified applicant is offered the position.

Armstrong Atlantic State University, Employee Handbook http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/human_resources/human_resources_policies_procedures

HRSA Grants are reviewed twice a year internally and once a year externally. Internal review takes place in the COHP Dean’s Office as well as the AASU Grants and Sponsored Research Office.

MPH faculty members are reviewed annually and recommendations are made to counter any deficits if any. There is also a faculty pre-tenure review and post-tenure review.

Each term, retention reports are required by the Dean of Health Professions in order to monitor changes in program enrollment.

1.8.b. Evidence that shows that the plan or policies are being implemented. Examples may include mission/goals/objectives that reference diversity or cultural competence, syllabi and other course materials, lists of student experiences demonstrating diverse settings, records and statistics on faculty, staff and student recruitment, admission and retention.

See criterion 1.8.a.ii.

The African American Male Initiative is supported by the Men of Vision and Excellence (MOVE) project which began in 2012 and strives to enhance the admission, retention and progression of African American males via financial support and a strong mentoring program. Complete College Georgia is a system wide initiative to improve access for traditionally underserved groups. The Goizueta Initiative addresses the following issues: lack of financial aid for qualified Hispanic/Latino students; low “accepted” to “admitted” enrollment of Hispanic/Latino students; and low percentages of full-time enrollment of Hispanic/Latino

72

students The MPH program adopted the goals of increasing the numbers of African American and Hispanic/Latino students in the program. The MPH program has become an active participant in these initiatives via presentations and mentoring sessions to undergraduate participants in these programs.

The MPH Program in conjunction with the College of Health Professions submitted HRSA grants that have been funded for several years. The HRSA grant for disadvantaged students of 2012 was awarded funds for disadvantaged MPH students for $240,000/year for the next four years.

The MPH Program has been represented at the following minority recruitment events:

Megagenises is a program designed to promote a college-going culture by providing college and career information to all students and parents. This event was last held at Johnson High School February 2013.

The MPH Program was represented at the following recruitment fairs: Morehouse School of Medicine, Georgia College and State University, University of Georgia, Georgia Southern University, Hispanic Go Steam Fair in Atlanta, GA, Savannah State University. Information re the Scholarships for Disadvantaged Students was made available to interested attendees. According to Anna Walker, Assistant Director of the AASU Office of Admissions for Recruitment, her office covers around 400 events a year across the state of Georgia as well as some out of state recruitment events.

In 2010, the MPH Program added content to several courses in order to build competency in diversity and cultural considerations. This course content is reflected in the course syllabi and is reviewed/updated each year:

PUBH 6050 Health Communication

Topics covered in this course include (but are not limited to): The Meaning of Meaning; Embodied Narratives of Health and Illness; Idioms of Distress: Cultural Meanings of Health and Illness; Marked Communication; and Somatization and Nonverbal Communication.

Students read two main textbooks:

Kleinman, A. (1988). The illness narratives: Suffering, healing, and the human condition. New York: Basic Books.

o This book includes chapters and narratives about: Personal and Social Meanings of Illness; Conflicting Explanatory Models; Neurasthenia: Weakness and Exhaustion; and The Social Context of Chronicity.

Gladwell, M. (2005). Blink! The power of thinking without thinking. New York: Little, Brown and Company.

73

In addition to the two required textbooks, students also purchase a supplemental reader.  In this reader packet are several articles that relate to cultural competence and/or diversity issues with regard to public health, health, and disease.  These include:

Bohannan, L. (1999). Shakespeare in the bush. In J. Spradley & D. W. McCurdy (Eds.), Conformity and conflict: Readings in cultural anthropology (10th ed., pp. 35–44). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Farmer, P. (1999). Infections and inequalities: The modern plagues. Berkeley: University of California Press.  (Students read Chapter 3, "Invisible Women," which focuses on structural violence and the the lives of three women from Harlem, rural Haiti and India who are living with HIV.) 

Scrimshaw, S. C. M., Zambrana, R. E., & Dunkel-Schetter, C. (1997). Issues in Latino women’s health: Myths and challenges. In S. B. Ruzek, V. L. Olesen, & A. E. Clarke (Eds.), Women’s health: Complexities and differences (pp. 329–347). Columbus: Ohio State University Press.

Tannen, D. (1991, June 19). Teachers’ classroom strategies should recognize that men and women use language differently. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 37(40), B1, B3.

Tannen, D. (1993, June 20). Marked women, unmarked men. The New York Times Magazine, 18, 52, 54.

Tannen, D. (1999). Conversation style: Talking on the job. In J. Spradley & D. W. McCurdy (Eds.), Conformity and conflict: Readings in cultural anthropology (10th ed., pp. 70–78). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Tannen, D. (2005, March 15). The feminine technique: Men attack problems. Maybe women understand there’s a better way. The Los Angeles Times, p. 11.

Thomson, D. S. (1999). The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis: Words shaped by worlds. In J. Spradley & D. W. McCurdy (Eds.), Conformity and conflict: Readings in cultural anthropology (10th ed., pp. 79–91). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

PUBH 6150 Theory in Health Education

Two textbooks are required in this course:

Health Behavior and Health Education, Glanz, Rimer, & Lewis (Eds.)

Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity, Erving Goffman (1963)

Whether the students use the 3rd or 4th edition of the Health Behavior and Health Education text, they are provided with and required to read Chapter 21 from the 3rd edition, "Applying Theory to Culturally Diverse and Unique Populations" (by Ken Resnicow, Ron Braithwaite, Colleen DiIorio, and Karen Glanz).

74

PUBH 7600 Special Topics: Leadership and Ethics

Two of the four required textbooks in this course relate to understanding structural violence from both a historical and current/future perspective within the United States and globally:

Three Generations, No Imbeciles: Eugenics, the Supreme Court, and Buck v. Bell, Paul Lombardo (2010)

The Red Market: On the Trail of the World's Organ Brokers, Bone Thieves, Blood Farmers, and Child Traffickers, Scott Carney (2011), which focuses on the exploitation of peoples and bodily tissues throughout the world and particularly in India, Eastern Europe, and China.

In 2010, the MPH program in collaboration with the Public Administration Program at Savannah State University competed for and was awarded a small grant which enabled faculty from both institutions to offer a for credit course to students from both institutions on the Affordable Health Care Act in Spring 2011. Twenty-eight students from Armstrong and Savannah State University enrolled in and completed this course.

The MPH Advisory Committee membership was restructured to include more minority members. Formerly, the MPH Advisory Committee had at most, 20% minority members. The committee is now 50% minority.

Guest Lecturers Courses (standing guest lectures):

Cristina Gibson, “Tick-borne Disease Epidemiology-Zoonotic and Arthropod-Borne Disease,” PUBH 7110 – Epidemiology, (Philippine)

Ken Sajwan, “Intro to Toxicology” PUBH 7150 - Environmental Health, (East Indian) Elizabeth Desnoyers-Colas, “Communication Models” PUBH 6050 -Health Communications

(African American) Maya Clark, PUBH 6050 -Health Communications “Models of Communication”, (African

American) Seema Csukas, PUBH 7720 – ”Community Mobilization re Maternal Child Health”, Theory

in Health Education (Middle Eastern)

Invited Guest Speakers past three years (Special Occasions) who are minorities : Aretha Jones, Medical Homes for Underserved Populations. PUBH 7600 Special Topics

(African American) Robert Bush, Attorney, Affordable Health Care Act. PUBH 7600 Special Topics (Gay Male) Bouphone Chanthavong, MPH, Chatham County Mosquito Control. PUBH 6200 Methods of

Health Promotion (Laotian) Hilton Fordham, MPH, J.C. Lewis Center. PUBH 6200 Methods of Health Promotion

(African American) Cristina Gibson, MPH, Coastal Health District. PUBH 6200 Methods of Health Promotion

(Philippine)

75

Patricia Sharpe, MSN, MHSA, Memorial Health University Medical Center. PUBH 6200 Methods of Health Promotion (African American)

Regular practica site supervisors who are minorities: Miriam Urizar, Community Health Center of Savannah (Hispanic) Cristina Gibson, Chatham County HD (Philippine) Ella Williamson, African American Men’s Health Initiative, (African American) Tamala Fulton, Employee Wellness Coordinator, Chatham County (African American) Hilton Fordham, Human Resources, J.C. Lewis Center, (African American) Bouphone Chanthavong, Chatham County Mosquito Control (Laotian) Erika Tate, CEO and President, bluknowledge (African American)

Additionally, the AASU MPH program has a continuing agreement with Savannah State University (SSU), — a historically Black college— that enables students from both institutions to take elective courses interchangeably in the MPH program at AASU and the MPA program at SSU.

The SSU courses that AASU has adopted into the MPH curriculum are:

PADM 6830 – History, Scope, and Practice of Public AdministrationPADM 6833 – Management of Human ResourcesPADM 6837 – Intergovernmental RelationsPADM 6838 – Introduction to Public PolicyPADM 6858 – Seminar in Cultural DiversityAASU Graduate Catalog pp142-143; http://www.armstrong.edu/images/academic_affairs/current_graduate_catalog.pdf

1.8.c. Description of how the diversity plan or policies were developed, including an explanation of the constituent groups involved.

Faculty (from the MPH Program and Health Sciences Department), staff and students were involved during the development of goals for promoting diversity. The MPH Program is bound by University System of Georgia and Armstrong Atlantic policies. The stand-alone goals were developed by MPH faculty complement with input from students and the MPH Advisory Committee.

1.8.d. Description of how the plan or policies are monitored, how the plan is used by the program and how often the plan is reviewed.

The policies and plans are monitored by the MPH faculty and the MPH advisory committee and are reviewed on a yearly basis. Changes are made as necessary.

76

1.8.e. Identification of measurable objectives by which the program may evaluate its success in achieving a diverse complement of faculty, staff and students, along with data regarding the performance of the program against those measures for each of the last three years. At a minimum, the program must include four objectives, at least two of which relate to race/ethnicity. Measurable objectives must align with the program’s definition of under-represented populations in Criterion 1.8.a.

Template 1.8.e. Summary Data for Faculty, Students and/or Staff As of 6/1/2013

Category/Definition Method of Collection

Data Source Target 2010 2011 2012 2013

Students – African American

Self-Report Admission Form

(voluntary self-report)

30% 31.7% 36% 36.9% 38.2%

Faculty – Diverse Background

Self-Report Self-Report 20% 15.4% 14.3% 23.5% 23.5%

Students – Hispanic/Latino

Self-Report Admission Form

(voluntary self-report)

5% 5% 4.9% 6.2% 7.7%

Students – First Generation College

Self-Report Admissions Office

20% n=12 (29%)

n=13 (26%)

N=16 (25%)

N=16(30%)

Staff – From Diverse Backgrounds

Self-Report Self-Report 20% 29% 29% 29%* 42.9%

Note: The Hispanic population in Chatham County is currently ~6.8%; The African American population in Chatham County is currently 40.2%. The current total Hispanic enrollment at Armstrong is 6.3%, graduate enrollment is .1%. The current total African American enrollment at Armstrong is 23.3%, graduate enrollment is 2.2%.

*Note: a new HS staff member was hired April 2013, an African American female. The diversity of the staff increased from 29% to 42.9%.

1.8.f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: The University System of Georgia, Armstrong Atlantic State University and College of Health Professions have published plans and/or policies that promote diversity. The MPH Program is bound by and upholds these plans and policies. The MPH program has formulated additional plans, policies, and goals that promote diversity. The MPH Program has worked hard

77

to achieve and maintain a diverse student enrollment. MPH plans policies and goals promote diversity. As of April 2013 the diversity of the staff will increase from 29% to 42.9%

Weaknesses: Diversity among faculty members has increased, but we have only met the stated goal of 20% since 2012.

Future Plans: The MPH Program will continue its plans to increase diversity in students, particularly Hispanic/Latino students. The Program will also continue its efforts to enhance the diversity of its faculty.

78

2.0 Instructional Programs

2.1 Degree Offerings. The program shall offer instructional programs reflecting its stated mission and goals, leading to the Master of Public Health (MPH) or equivalent professional master’s degree. The program may offer a generalist MPH degree and/or an MPH with areas of specialization. The program, depending on how it defines the unit of accreditation, may offer other degrees, if consistent with its mission and resources.

2.1.a. An instructional matrix presenting all of the program’s degree programs and areas of specialization, including bachelor’s, master’s and doctoral degrees, as appropriate. If multiple areas of specialization are available, these should be included. The matrix should distinguish between professional and academic degrees for all graduate degrees offered and should identify any programs that are offered in distance learning or other formats. Non-degree programs, such as certificates or continuing education, should not be included in the matrix.

Table 2.1.a. Instructional Matrix – Degrees & SpecializationsAcademic Professional

Masters Degree

Community Health Education MPH

2.1.b. The bulletin or other official publication, which describes all degree programs listed in the instructional matrix, including a list of required courses and their course descriptions. The bulletin or other official publication may be online, with appropriate links noted.

The Armstrong Atlantic State University 2012-2013 Graduate Catalog vol 18, pp 65-66, describes the MPH Program of Study. The course descriptions can be found on pp149-151. This document can be found on-line:

http://www.armstrong.edu/images/academic_affairs/current_graduate_catalog.pdf

2.1.c. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: The MPH Program offers an instructional program reflecting its stated mission and goals, leading to the Master of Public Health (MPH).

79

Weaknesses: None

Future Plans: The MPH Program will continue to offer a quality program that reflects its mission and goals.

80

2.2 Program Length. An MPH degree program or equivalent professional master’s degree must be at least 42 semester-credit units in length.

2.2.a. Definition of a credit with regard to classroom/contact hours.

AASU utilizes semester hours. One semester hour = 750 minutes of classroom instruction.

2.2.b. Information about the minimum degree requirements for all professional public health master’s degree curricula shown in the instructional matrix. If the program or university uses a unit of academic credit or an academic term different from the standard semester or quarter, this difference should be explained and an equivalency presented in a table or narrative.

Master of Public Health (MPH) – Community Health Education…………45 Semester Hours

The program requires 27 credit hours related to the five core areas of public health, 9 credit hours of electives, 3 credit hours for the field experience (practicum), 3 hours for the capstone project, and 3 hours for the Leadership/Ethics course.

2.2.c. Information about the number of professional public health master’s degrees awarded for fewer than 42 semester credit units, or equivalent, over each of the last three years. A summary of the reasons should be included.

N/A

2.2.d Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: The MPH Program is the appropriate length (i.e. credits).

Weaknesses: None

Future Plans: The MPH program will maintain a curriculum that meets CEPH criteria.

81

2.3 Public Health Core Knowledge. All graduate professional public health degree students must complete sufficient coursework to attain depth and breadth in the five core areas of public health knowledge.

The areas of knowledge basic to public health include the following:

Biostatistics – collection, storage, retrieval, analysis and interpretation of health data; design and analysis of health-related surveys and experiments; and concepts and practice of statistical data analysis;

Epidemiology – distributions and determinants of disease, disabilities and death in human populations; the characteristics and dynamics of human populations; and the natural history of disease and the biologic basis of health;

Environmental health sciences – environmental factors including biological, physical and chemical factors that affect the health of a community;

Health services administration – planning, organization, administration, management, evaluation and policy analysis of health and public health programs; and

Social and behavioral sciences – concepts and methods of social and behavioral sciences relevant to the identification and solution of public health problems.

2.3.a. Identification of the means by which the program assures that all graduate professional public health degree students have fundamental competence in the areas of knowledge basic to public health. If this means is common across the program, it need be described only once. If it varies by degree or specialty area, sufficient information must be provided to assess compliance by each.

All MPH students are required to take 15 credit hours specific to the 5 core areas of knowledge basic to public health. The 5 courses are identified in Table 2.3.a. Syllabi for these core courses (as well as for courses noted in Table 2.1.b) are available in the Resource File.

Table 2.3.a. Required Courses Addressing Public Health Core Knowledge Areas for MPH Degree

Core Knowledge Area Course Number & Title Credits

Biostatistics PUBH 6000 Biostatistics 3

Epidemiology PUBH 6100 Epidemiology 3

Environmental Health Sciences PUBH 6125 Environmental Health Issues 3

Social & Behavioral Sciences PUBH 6150 Theory in Health Education 3

82

Table 2.3.a. Required Courses Addressing Public Health Core Knowledge Areas for MPH Degree

Health Services Administration MHSA 6000 Health Care Financing and Delivery Systems

3

2.3.b. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: The MPH program requires successful completion of courses in each of the five core areas of public health knowledge.

Weaknesses: None

Future Plans: The MPH program will maintain the requirement for students to take 15 credit hours specific to the 5 core areas of knowledge basic to public health, per CEPH criteria.

83

2.4 Practical Skills. All graduate professional public health degree students must develop skills in basic public health concepts and demonstrate the application of these concepts through a practice experience that is relevant to students’ areas of specialization.

The required program of study for all MPH students assures that students will be exposed to the concepts and knowledge needed in community health education. Because students are required to maintain a 3.0 GPA throughout their program, they will have had to apply themselves to their course of study. The practicum experience is an opportunity to apply the classroom learning, validate it in a practical setting and communicate it verbally and in written form. The comprehensive assessment is the ultimate opportunity for students to apply and integrate information learned in the areas of public health and community health education in a comprehensive manner within accepted parameters.

2.4.a. Description of the program’s policies and procedures regarding practice placements.

The practicum is generally undertaken during one of the last two semesters prior to graduation. Because of this, students have completed the majority of their coursework by the time they reach their practicum. The purpose of the practicum experience is to give students the opportunity to apply the knowledge and skills that they have gained during their coursework.

Each MPH student must successfully complete a minimum of 150 hours of practicum as part of the degree requirement. Prior to the semester the practicum is to be taken, the student must select a practicum director from eligible faculty. Eligible faculty members are those MPH faculty with full or associate graduate faculty status at AASU or, in some cases, a faculty who has received permission to direct a practicum at the request of the MPH Coordinator.

The practicum director and student will decide upon the frequency of collaboration between the student and the practicum director.

Students are expected to spend a minimum of ten hours a week "on site” if appropriate. All practica may not fit this format. If there is any question about time requirements for a practicum, they are addressed with the practicum director. Upon written approval of the practicum, the practicum director will signal the acceptance of the practicum as conforming to the appropriate format, content mastery, and standards set by the MPH program.

If human subjects are involved in the practicum and approval is needed to achieve the objectives of the practicum, the student must submit a request for Internal Review Board (IRB) approval. The IRB, a federally mandated board that monitors the use of human

84

and animal subjects in research, meets monthly. Protocols requiring full board review are due by noon ten working days before the IRB meeting each month.

Selection of sites

Students are encouraged to select a practicum site, which will allow them to gain experience and apply knowledge in an area of public health, which is of special interest to them. Once a site is chosen by the student, he or she meets with the practicum faculty supervisor to determine eligibility of the site and to discuss potential objectives for the practicum. These objectives are more fully developed with the practicum site supervisor and submitted to the practicum Advisor for approval. Students may complete their practicum at their place of employment with the understanding that the practicum activities are not part of the student’s current job description and with the approval of the practicum faculty supervisor. It is up to the practicum site if the student will receive payment for practicum hours spent on site.

Methods for approving preceptorsThe site supervisor may be selected by the student or the practicum faculty supervisor (with approval of the practicum site administration). The site supervisor must be approved by the MPH coordinator with input from the practicum faculty supervisor prior to the start of the practicum. In addition, the site must have a current MOU with the program. These MOUs are maintained in the College of Health Professions Dean’s Office for all programs in the College. The site supervisor of the practicum committee has the responsibility to:

o determine that the practicum objectives are feasibleo inform the student of institutional policies and procedures as they relate to the

use of human and animal subjects for research proposeso contact the faculty director if any concerns regarding the student’s

performance should ariseo develop the work site scheduleo assist in the evaluation of the student’s performance

Opportunities for orientation and support for preceptors

New preceptors are provided with orientation materials via excerpts from the MPH Handabook/Practicum Guidelines (see Resource File). The preceptor will sign and receive a copy of the MPH Practicum Responsibilities Form. He/she will assist the student in completing the Practicum Site and Supervisor Information Form, Practicum Objectives and Work Schedule Form, and Ethical Guidelines Contract. In addition, each faculty advisor is available on an ongoing basis to meet with the preceptor via direct and electronic telecommunication.

85

Approaches for faculty supervision of students

The MPH Student chooses his/her faculty supervisor for the practicum. The frequency of meetings between the faculty director and the student is determined on an individual basis. The site supervisor undertakes the daily supervision of the student. Regular meetings between the faculty advisor and the student keep the faculty apprised of the progress of the practicum.

Means of evaluating student performance

The practicum is presented in a written format as well as an oral format. The requirements for the written format are similar to those of a thesis. The MPH Practicum Guidelines (see Resource File) provides a detailed set of practica criteria for the student. The practicum director should be consulted for any deviation from this format.

Students are evaluated based on their achievement of practicum objectives, written (written objectives are evaluated by the faculty practicum supervisor)and oral presentation (the oral presentation is evaluated by MPH faculty), site supervisor evaluations (accomplished by the site supervisor at the conclusion of the practicum), and ability to address issues related to their practicum at the conclusion of the oral presentation. Evaluation rubrics are included in the MH Practicum Guidelines. (see Resource File).

Means of evaluating practice placement sites and preceptor qualifications

MPH students can choose a practicum site and site supervisor from an existing approved list of practicum sites/site supervisors or a new site/supervisor can be recommended by the student or an MPH faculty member. When a new site is recommended, the MPH Coordinator contacts the site and discusses MPH practicum requirements with the nominated site supervisor or site administrator. If the site/site supervisor is deemed acceptable and is willing to mentor MPH practicum students, the MPH Coordinator submits a request for an MOU to the office of the Dean of Health professions. When the formal MOU has been completed, it is added to the list of current MOUs for clinical and practicum sites and maintained in the office of the Dean of Health Professions. To further evaluate the sites/site supervisors, each MPH Practicum student is required to complete an assessment of the practicum site and site supervisor at the conclusion of the practicum. Student concerns re the site/site supervisor are monitored by the MPH Coordinator. Minor concerns are addressed between the site and the MPH Coordinator. If a pattern of significant student concerns develops, it can lead to a site/site supervisor being eliminated as an acceptable practicum site.

86

Criteria for waiving, altering or reducing the experience, if applicable.

Because the practicum is such an integral experience in the MPH program, waivers are not given for this experience. All students must successfully complete the practicum in order to graduate.

2.4.b. Identification of agencies and preceptors used for practice experiences for students, by specialty area, for the last two academic years.

The following sites are approved for practice experiences for MPH students, per MOU agreement. Refer to Reference File for additional details regarding the sites.

ACCESS Network Inc.Anytime FitnessAppling Health Care SystemBaptist Medical CentersBay Pinesbluknowledge LLCBryan County Health & RehabilitationCandler County HospitalChatham County Health DepartmentChatham County Board of Public EducationChatham County GovernmentChatham County Mosquito ControlChildspring InternationalCoastal Health District (includes 8 county health departments)Community Health MissionD-1 Sports Training & TherapyDuval County Health DepartmentEffingham HospitalPhoebe Putney Memorial HospitalPiedmont HealthcarePlanned Parenthood of GARape Crisis CenterRecovery PlaceRon Alt – Master Addiction CounselorSavannah CommonsSavannah Rehab & Nursing CenterSavannah Specialty Care Center

Fort Stewart-4IBCT Fitness CenterGateway Behavioral Health ServicesGeorgia Health Sciences Health SystemGirls on the RunGrady Memorial HospitalHealthSouth CorporationHodge Memorial Daycare CenterHospice SavannahInnovative Therapy Concepts LLCJC Lewis Healthcare SystemLedesma Sports MedicineLiberty Regional Medical CenterMedical University Hospital AuthorityMemorial University Medical CenterMedical University of SCNaval Hospital Beaufort SCNortheast Georgia Health SystemOconee Regional Medical CenterOptim HealthcareSavannah Volunteer Dental ClinicShepherd CenterSouthCoast Medical GroupSoutheast Georgia Health SystemSouthern Regional Medical CenterSt. Joseph’s/Candler Health SystemSt. Mary’s Health Care SystemStrategic Healthcare PartnersUnited Hospice of Savannah

2.4.c. Data on the number of students receiving a waiver of the practice experience for each of the last three years.

This criterion is not applicable (refer to Criterion 2.4).

2.4.d. Data on the number of preventive medicine, occupational medicine, aerospace medicine and general preventive medicine and public health residents

87

completing the academic program for each of the last three years, along with information on their practicum rotations.

This criterion is not applicable.

2.4.e. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: The required program of study for all MPH students assures that they will be exposed to the concepts and knowledge needed in community health education. The practicum experience is an opportunity to apply the classroom learning, validate it in a practical setting and communicate it verbally and in written form. Practicum sites identified in table 2.4.b. with which the university has formal agreements, are diverse and offer the students excellent opportunities to apply public health concepts. The program has excellent relationships with site supervisors who serve as mentors for the students. The comprehensive assessment is the ultimate opportunity for students to apply and integrate information learned in the areas of public health and community health education in a comprehensive manner within accepted parameters. The MPH Alumni survey results report that for the Years 2010-2012 100% of the responders rated the value of the practicum experience as good or excellent.

Weaknesses: None.

Future Plans: The MPH program will continue to assess the effectiveness of the practicum experience via feedback collected during each student’s experience, including the student’s Self Evaluation, the Supervisor Evaluation of the Practicum Student, the MPH Practicum Student Evaluation of the Site and the MPH Student Exit Questionnaire (refer to Resource File). Results will be used to further strengthen the practicum experience and the overall program of study as needed.

88

2.5 Culminating Experience. All graduate professional degree programs identified in the instructional matrix shall assure that each student demonstrates skills and integration of knowledge through a culminating experience.

2.5.a. Identification of the culminating experience required for each professional public health degree program. If this is common across the program’s professional degree programs, it must be described only once. If it varies by degree or specialty area, sufficient information must be provided to assess compliance by each.

All MPH students must successfully pass 5 pre-requisite core courses, including MHSA 6000 Finance/Delivery, PUBH 6000 /Biostatistics, PUBH 6100 Epidemiology, PUBH 6150 Theory in Health Education, and PUBH 6175 Research Methods, prior to enrolling in the program’s capstone course, PUBH 7500 Public Health Planning and Evaluation. As new students begin the MPH program each semester, they are advised at orientation to prioritize the 5 pre-requisite courses early in their program of study in order to be prepared to take PUBH 7500 during their last or next to last semester prior to graduation. Faculty advisors work with their advisees on an ongoing basis to oversee appropriate course sequencing in order to prevent delays in graduation due to not having completed the pre-requisites in a timely manner. Refer to the New MPH Handbook (in Resource File) for recommended course sequencing schedule.

All MPH students are required to successfully PUBH 7500 Public Health Planning and Evaluation. This course requires the student to apply public health concepts from all previous core courses as they plan and evaluate a public health program, including needs assessment, behavioral and educational assessment, administrative assessment, writing of measurable and realistic objectives, and process, impact and evaluation methods.

The primary course project is the development of a health promotion program proposal using the PRECEDE/PROCEED planning model as a guide. The project facilitates the learning of PRECEDE/PROCEED as a health promotion and education planning model, learning and applying the process of public health program proposal development, development of grant writing skills, and the opportunity to present the final plan, with peer review. The final proposal functions as a comprehensive capstone assessment for the MPH degree because it requires the application of a full complement of core public health core competencies and skills. The final proposal (paper) is evaluated by the course instructor, utilizing a grading rubric (refer to Resource File). The final proposal presentation is evaluated by both the course instructor and peer review from all students in the class, utilizing a grading rubric (refer to Resource File).

Refer to Table 2.5.a in Resource File for larger version of the schematic illustration planning model below.

89

Table 2.5.a. Application of core public health concepts for capstone project

Note: Courses in yellow font are pre-reqs for PUBH 7500; remaining courses in white font are required for MPH program of study but are not pre-reqs for PUBH 7500. A more readable version of this schematic is in the Resource File.

2.5.b. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met with commentary.

Strengths: The capstone project enables students to demonstrate skills and integrate core public health knowledge from all previous MPH core courses as they plan, evaluate, and present a public health program that includes a needs assessment, behavioral and educational assessment, administrative assessment, measurable and realistic objectives, and process, impact and evaluation methods.

Weaknesses: Historically the capstone project has been assessed by the course instructor, with peer review contributions for presentation of the final plan. Other MPH faculty members have not had the opportunity to participate in the evaluation process.

90

Future Plans: The MPH program of study will continue to utilize PUBH 7500 as the capstone project. Beginning in Fall 2013, all MPH faculty will be included in the evaluation of each student’s final plan by attending the presentation session and completing a grading rubric (refer to Reference File) that will be utilized in final grade calculation for the project. This will foster a more robust assessment of the capstone project.

91

2.6 Required Competencies. For each degree program and area of specialization within each program identified in the instructional matrix, there shall be clearly stated competencies that guide the development of degree programs. The program must identify competencies for graduate professional, academic and baccalaureate public health degree programs. Additionally, the program must identify competencies for specializations within the degree programs at all levels (bachelor’s, master’s and doctoral).

2.6.a. Identification of a set of competencies that all graduate professional public health degree students and baccalaureate public health degree students, regardless of concentration, major or specialty area, must attain. There should be one set for each graduate professional public health degree and baccalaureate public health degree offered by the program (eg, one set each for BSPH, MPH and DrPH).

The MPH degree program requires a set of basic core public health competencies that all students must achieve upon successful completion of all MPH core courses. The basic core competencies are based on competencies prescribed by the Competency-Based Framework for Health Educators (2006), Association of Schools of Public Health, and the Council on Linkages between Academia and Public Health Practice (2010). Students demonstrate their competence in the five areas basic to public health through passing the five core courses. The core competencies are further strengthened through additional required courses and successful completion of the practicum field experience and capstone project. The MPH program core competencies are as follows:

BiostatisticsIdentify and apply appropriate statistical methods to analyze and describe a public health problem.

Environmental HealthUnderstand the relationship between environmental factors and community health; discuss remediation for environmental health problems.

EpidemiologyUse epidemiologic methods to analyze patterns of disease and injury; discuss application to address problems.

Health Services AdministrationDemonstrate the ability to apply principles of leadership, policy development, budgeting, and program management in the planning, implementation, and evaluation of health programs for individuals and populations.

92

Social and Behavioral SciencesAddress behavioral, social, and cultural factors that impact individual and population health and health disparities over the life span.

2.6.b. Identification of a set of competencies for each concentration, major or specialization (depending on the terminology used by the program) identified in the instructional matrix, including professional and academic graduate degree curricula and baccalaureate public health degree curricula.

The Armstrong MPH program has only one track of concentration in Community Health Promotion. There are no other concentrations, majors or areas of specialization. All MPH students are required to complete the same program of study. In addition to the basic core competencies identified in Section 2.6.a, the MPH program has established other public health-related competencies required of all students prior to graduating. These additional competencies are based on competencies prescribed by the Competency-Based Framework for Health Educators (2006), Association of Schools of Public Health, and the Council on Linkages between Academia and Public Health Practice (2010). Students demonstrate their competence in these additional competencies through successful completion of all MPH core and required courses. Competence is further strengthened through successful completion of the practicum field experience and capstone project. The additional program competencies are as follows:

Communication Convey public health information using a variety of approaches.

Analytic/Assessment Identify and utilize public health data to assess health status of populations.

Administration and Management Describe organizational structures, functions, and authorities of local, state, and federal public health agencies.

Community Culture and Diversity Recognize the role of cultural, social, and behavioral factors in the accessibility, availability, acceptability, and delivery of public health services.

Basic Public Health Sciences SkillsDescribe scientific evidence related to a public health issue, concern, or intervention.

93

Policy Development and Program PlanningGather information that will inform policy decisions, and describe implications of policy options.

Leadership and EthicsParticipate with stakeholders in identifying key public health values and a shared public health vision as guiding principles for community action.

2.6.c. A matrix that identifies the learning experiences (e.g,. specific course or activity within a course, practicum, culminating experience or other degree requirement) by which the competencies defined in Criteria 2.6.a and 2.6.b are met. If these are common across the program, a single matrix for each degree will suffice. If they vary, sufficient information must be provided to assess compliance by each degree or specialty area. See CEPH Data Template 2.6.1.

Table 2.6.c.i. Identification of Learning Experiences by which Core Competencies are met (Core courses in bold font; Course titles noted at bottom of table)

Core Competency

MH

SA 6

000

PUB

H 6

000

PUB

H 6

050

PUB

H 6

100

PUB

H 6

125

PUB

H 6

150

PUB

H 6

175

PUB

H 6

200

PUB

H 7

250

PUB

H 7

500

PUB

H 7

600

PUB

H 7

675

BiostatisticsIdentify and apply appropriate statistical methods to analyze and describe a public health problem.

P R R R R R R R

Environmental HealthUnderstand the relationship between environmental factors and community health; discuss remediation for environmental health problems.

R R P R R R

EpidemiologyUse epidemiologic methods to analyze patterns of disease and injury; discuss application to address problems.

R P R R R R

Health Services AdministrationDemonstrate the ability to apply principles of leadership, policy development, budgeting, and program management in the planning, implementation, and evaluation of health programs for individuals and populations.

P R R R

Social and Behavioral SciencesAddress behavioral, social, and cultural factors that impact individual and population health and health disparities over the life span.

P R R R

P=Primary, R=Reinforcing

94

MHSA 6000 Finance/Delivery PUBH 6175 Research MethodsPUBH 6000 Biostatistics PUBH 6200 Methods of Health PromotionPUBH 6050 Health Communication PUBH 7250 Health/Illness ContinuumPUBH 6100 Epidemiology PUBH 7500 Public Health Planning & Evaluation (capstone)PUBH 6125 Environmental Health Issues PUBH 7600 Special Topics: Leadership & EthicsPUBH6150 Theory in Health Education PUBH 7675 Public Health Practicum

Table 2.6.c.ii. Identification of Learning Experiences by which Additional Competencies are met (Core courses in bold font; Course titles noted at bottom of table)

Additional Competency

MH

SA 6

000

PUB

H 6

000

PUB

H 6

050

PUB

H 6

100

PUB

H 6

125

PUB

H 6

150

PUB

H 6

175

PUB

H 6

200

PUB

H 7

250

PUB

H 7

500

PUB

H 7

600

PUB

H 7

675

Communication Convey public health information using a variety of approaches.

R P R R R R R R R

Analytic/Assessment Identify and utilize public health data to assess health status of populations.

R P R R R R R R R R R

Administration and Management Describe organizational structures, functions, and authorities of local, state, and federal public health agencies.

P R R R R R R

Community Culture and Diversity Recognize the role of cultural, social, and behavioral factors in the accessibility, availability, acceptability, and delivery of public health services.

R R R P R R R R R

Basic Public Health Sciences SkillsDescribe scientific evidence related to a public health issue, concern, or intervention.

R R R R R P R R R R R

Policy Development and Program PlanningGather information that will inform policy decisions, and describe implications of policy options.

P R R R R R R

Leadership and EthicsParticipate with stakeholders in identifying key public health values and a shared public health vision as guiding principles for community action.

R R R R R P R

P=Primary, R=Reinforcing

MHSA 6000 Finance/Delivery PUBH 6175 Research MethodsPUBH 6000 Biostatistics PUBH 6200 Methods of Health PromotionPUBH 6050 Health Communication PUBH 7250 Health/Illness ContinuumPUBH 6100 Epidemiology PUBH 7500 Public Health Planning & Evaluation (capstone)PUBH 6125 Environmental Health Issues PUBH 7600 Special Topics: Leadership & EthicsPUBH6150 Theory in Health Education PUBH 7675 Public Health Practicum

95

2.6.d. Analysis of the completed matrix included in Criterion 2.6.c. If changes have been made in the curricula as a result of the observations and analysis, such changes should be described.

The completed matrices included in Criterion 2.6.c demonstrate a comprehensive approach to incorporate all basic core and additional competencies into the MPH program of study. Recent curricula changes have included the addition of PUBH 7600 Special Topics in Public Health Leadership and Ethics and PUBH 7250 Health/Illness Continuum to broaden curriculum content. These two new required courses replaced PUBH 8861 Public Health Management and a second Practicum course.

2.6.e. Description of the manner in which competencies are developed, used and made available to students.

In 2010 MPH Faculty had their initial meeting to review and upgrade competencies. The Armstrong MPH competencies are based on competencies prescribed by the Competency-Based Framework for Health Educators (2006), Association of Schools of Public Health, and the Council on Linkages between Academia and Public Health Practice (2010). They are interwoven into the framework of MPH core courses that all students are required to complete. MPH faculty members, primary and other faculty reviewed competencies from the above mentioned organizations. Competencies were matched to the course(s) in the MPH Program of Study. The MPH Advisory Committee (with MPH student representation) reviewed the competencies and provided feedback to the MPH faculty. A second round of meetings took place where the faculty prioritized the competencies for each course and deleted competencies that were redundant or received low priority. In 2012 and 2013 the competencies and the MPH Program of Study were again reviewed as a function of the CEPH Self-Study. As a result, the competencies were again prioritized and matched with the MPH courses, then sent to the MPH Advisory Committee for feedback. The competencies were refined to the version seen in this self-study.

Students may access information pertaining to the competencies via the MPH Student Handbook, MPH program webpage, and course syllabi (see Resource File).

2.6.f. Description of the manner in which the program periodically assesses changing practice or research needs and uses this information to establish the competencies for its educational programs.

A formal review occurs on a two-year cycle, with input from sources including but not limited to student course evaluations, student exit interviews, practicum site supervisor evaluations, MPH faculty input, and suggestions by the MPH Advisory Committee. In addition to these sources, a variety of national sources are used to assess the changing

96

needs of public health practice: Council on Linkages Objectives and Strategies and Core Competencies for Public Health Professionals, American Schools of Public Health.

As mentioned earlier in 2.6.d, recent curricula changes have included the replacement of two courses, PUBH 8861 Public Health Management and a second Practicum course, with the addition of PUBH 7600 Special Topics in Public Health Leadership and Ethics and PUBH 7250 Health/Illness Continuum to broaden curriculum content, based upon feedback obtained from the above-mentioned sources. In addition, starting Fall Semester 2013, the practicum experience (PUBH 7675) will increase the minimum number of site contact hours from 150 to 225 to expand the field learning experience for students and will utilize a revised scoring rubric for the presentation requirement (refer to MPH Student Handbook in Resource File for details).

During the summer of 2013, the Council on Linkages began soliciting input from the public health community on the Core Competencies for Public Health Professionals to determine whether revisions are needed to keep pace with changes in the field of public health. The MPH program coordinator and faculty are following this initiative, and will assess any recommended changes as appropriate for the program in the future, with input from MPH faculty, students, and the MPH Advisory Committee.

2.6.g. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: The Armstrong MPH program has a clear set of five basic core and seven additional competencies that are interwoven throughout the twelve required courses, providing a fundamental and comprehensive framework that is grounded in public health skills and knowledge. The course content and the learning objectives ensure that students have a strong foundation in Public Health with an emphasis in Community Health Education. The competencies are consistent with the mission and goals of the MPH Program. Additionally, there is strong agreement between the emphasis areas of CEPH and the MPH program at AASU. The faculty members are committed to on-going excellence in the MPH program and instituting changes as needed.

Weaknesses: None

Future Plans: The MPH program will continue to monitor changing practice and research needs per input from key stakeholders, including faculty, students, and alumni. Feedback will be utilized to further strengthen and enhance program quality.

97

2.7 Assessment Procedures. There shall be procedures for assessing and documenting the extent to which each student has demonstrated achievement of the competencies defined for his or her degree program and area of concentration.

2.7.a. Identification of a set of competencies that all graduate professional public health degree students and baccalaureate public health degree students, regardless of concentration, major or specialty area, must attain. There should be one set for each graduate professional public health degree and baccalaureate public health degree offered by the program (eg, one set each for BSPH, MPH and DrPH).

Note: Refer to Addendum A on page 171.

2.7.b. Identification of outcomes that serve as measures by which the program will evaluate student achievement in each program, and presentation of data assessing the program’s performance against those measures for each of the last three years. Outcome measures must include degree completion and job placement rates for all degrees included in the unit of accreditation (including bachelor’s, master’s and doctoral degrees) for each of the last three years.

The successful completion of the core courses in the MPH program at a level of, at least, 3.0/4.0 cumulative grade point average assures that the student has been exposed to all criteria addressed in the learning objectives. Also, students must successfully complete a practicum experience and report.

The practicum course, PUBH 7675, is required courses for all MPH students. This course gives students the opportunity to synthesize and apply their learning experiences. During this experience students are able to practice a number of skills that may include information search and retrieval, data collection, application of research methodologies and data analysis, and the ability to determine results and discuss them comprehensively. This opportunity allows for a thorough evaluation of the competency of each student.

If degree completion rates in the maximum time period allowed for degree completion are less than the thresholds defined in this criterion’s interpretive language, an explanation must be provided. If job placement (including pursuit of additional education), within 12 months following award of the degree, includes fewer than 80% of graduates at any level who can be located, an explanation must be provided.

The normal time period for degree completion is seven years. There have been 88 graduates of this MPH program since 2006, and nearly 100 percent of all MPH students have completed the degree in seven years or less. Degree completion rates are satisfactory . See Table 2.7.1 for degree completion rate. Degree completion rates for 2006-2007 are lower as this was the year we announced that the on-line program would

98

be discontinued in 2010. A significant number of students dropped out of the program as they felt they could not complete it or transferred to another program.

Table 2.7.1 Degree completion

Table 2.7.1. Students in MPH Degree, By Cohorts Entering Between 2006-07 and 2012-13

Cohort of Students 2006-07

2007-08

2008-09

2009-10

2010-11

2011-12

2012-13*

2006-07 # Students entered 27# Students withdrew, dropped, etc. 4# Students graduated 0Cumulative graduation rate 0.0%

2007-08 # Students continuing at beginning of this school year

23 36

# Students withdrew, dropped, etc. 8 2# Students graduated 1 0Cumulative graduation rate 3.7% 0.0%

2008-09 # Students continuing at beginning of this school year

14 34 20

# Students withdrew, dropped, etc. 2 1 3# Students graduated 5 10 0Cumulative graduation rate 22.2% 27.8% 0.0%

2009-10 # Students continuing at beginning of this school year

7 23 17 6

# Students withdrew, dropped, etc. 0 3 1 1# Students graduated 3 16 6 0Cumulative graduation rate 33.3% 72.2% 30.0% 0.0%

2010-11 # Students continuing at beginning of this school year

4 4 10 15 23

# Students withdrew, dropped, etc. 0 0 1 3 0# Students graduated 1 1 5 5 0Cumulative graduation rate 37.0% 75.0% 55.0% 31.3% 0.0%

2011-12 # Students continuing at beginning of this school year

3 3 4 7 23 32

# Students withdrew, dropped, etc. 0 0 0 0 1 2# Students graduated 0 1 3 5 8 0Cumulative graduation rate 37.0% 77.8% 70.0% 62.5% 34.8% 0.0%

2012-13*

# Students continuing at beginning of this school year

3 2 1 2 14 30 12

# Students withdrew, dropped, etc. 0 0 0 0 0 1 0# Students graduated 3* 2* 0* 2* 11* 0 0Cumulative graduation rate 48.1% 83.3% 70.0% 75.0% 82.6% 0.0% 0.0%

Table is based on an allowable time to graduation of seven years; add or delete rows and columns as appropriate.Student cohorts should be tracked vertically down each column. *Anticipated graduation Spring 2013.

99

Table 2.7.2 Graduates’ Employment

Table 2.7.2.a. Destination of Graduates by Employment Type in 2010 (n=25)Gov’t Non-

ProfitHealth Care

Private Practice

University Research

Proprietary Further Education

Non-Health Related

Not Employed

9 (47%) 2 (10%) 1 (<1%) 1 (<1%) 3 (15%) 0 (0%) 1 (<1%) 2 (10%) 6 (31%)

Table 2.7.2.b Destination of Graduates by Employment Type in 2011 (n=28)

Employed 50%

Continuing education/training (not employed) 10%**

Actively seeking employment/further education 10%**

Not seeking employment (not employed and not continuing education/training, by choice) 3%

Unknown 25%

Total 100%

**Results were obtained via the MPH Alumni Survey for MPH students who graduated in the 2010-2011 academic year.

Table 2.7.2.c Destination of Graduates by Employment Type in 2012 (n=18)

Employed 61%

Continuing education/training (not employed) 17%**

Actively seeking employment/further education 11%**

Not seeking employment (not employed and not continuing education/training, by choice) 0%

Unknown 11%

Total 100%

**Results were obtained via the MPH Alumni Survey for MPH students who graduated in the 2011-2012 academic year. Of the students responding to the alumni survey, 11% (n=2) were actively seeking employment. Seventeen percent (n=3) are continuing their education pursuing the doctoral degree. The alumni survey for graduates 2013 will be distributed in early 2014.

2.7.c. An explanation of the methods used to collect job placement data and of graduates’ response rates to these data collection efforts. The program must list the number of graduates from each degree program and the number of respondents to the graduate survey or other means of collecting employment data.

100

Job placement data was collected via electronic survey administered once per year in January for the previous year (i.e., included May, August, and December graduates for the previous year).

2.7.d. In fields for which there is certification of professional competence and data are available from the certifying agency, data on the performance of the program’s graduates on these national examinations for each of the last three years.

MPH students are encouraged to take certification exams such as CHES and CPH; however, since this is not a program requirement, data is not collected on this indicator.

2.7.e. Data and analysis regarding the ability of the program’s graduates to perform competencies in an employment setting, including information from periodic assessments of alumni, employers and other relevant stakeholders. Methods for such assessment may include key informant interviews, surveys, focus groups and documented discussions.

On the Alumni Survey, students are asked for permission to contact their supervisors. This has not been effective due to the low return rate on the alumni surveys and the employer surveys. Therefore, additional methodologies have been put in place to obtain feedback to assess our graduates’ ability to perform competencies in an employment setting. The MPH advisory committee members are often employers of our MPH graduates. They give input at meetings as well as on practicum site supervisor evaluations. All MPH practicum site supervisors complete an evaluation of the student’s performance on site.

2.7.f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met with commentary.

Strengths: All MPH graduates must successfully complete the core courses in the MPH program with at least a 3.0 GPA, assuring exposure to all criteria addressed in the learning objectives. In addition, all graduates must successfully complete a practicum experience and a capstone project, demonstrating competency in the learning objectives.

Weaknesses: The commentary pertains primarily to the low response for the alumni survey. Due to the low response rate, responses may not be reflective of all MPH graduates. Assessment of graduates’ performance and ability to perform competencies after graduation is more difficult to measure. In an effort to increase the return rate the alumni survey was converted to an electronic format which is delivered to the alumnus via email. Still, the electronic survey process does not yield a high response from graduates, so responses may not be representative for all graduates.

101

Future plans: The MPH program will continue to assess student achievement utilizing established performance outcomes. A more aggressive follow-up (as possible) for alumni surveys may boost response rates, yielding representative feedback from the graduates as well as for the employers of the graduates.

102

2.8. Bachelor’s Degrees in Public Health.N/A

2.9 Academic Degrees. If the program also offers curricula for graduate academic degrees, students pursuing them shall obtain a broad introduction to public health, as well as an understanding about how their discipline-based specialization contributes to achieving the goals of public health. N/A

2.10 Doctoral Degrees. The Program may offer doctoral degree programs, if consistent with its mission and resources.N/A

2.11 Joint Degrees. If the program offers join degree programs, the required curriculum for the professional public health degree shall be equivalent to that required for a separate public health degree.N/A

2.12. Distance Education of Executive Degree programs.N/A

103

3.0 Creation, Application and Advancement of Knowledge

3.1 Research: The program shall pursue an active research program, consistent with its mission, though which its faculty and students contribute to the knowledge base of the public health disciplines, including research directed at improving the practice of public health.

3.1.a. Description of the program’s research activities, including policies, procedures and practices that support research and scholarly activities.

Research activities in the MPH program are undertaken by the department’s faculty and students with support from the university administration. Faculty members are expected to conduct research in their respective public health fields, and students must show a mastery of research abilities in order to complete the MPH program. Faculty research effectiveness is not equated with amassing dollar amounts, journal articles, or presentations; rather, success is measured by the faculty member’s participation in scholarly activities that help the MPH program meet its research goals and that contribute to the program’s positive impact upon our service area.

For faculty and students, the institutional approval process is a necessary step that must be taken before applying for research funding (AASU Faculty Handbook, http://www.armstrong.edu/images/academic_affairs/Faculty_Handbook.pdf Resource File). Completion of a two-page form entitled “Approval to Submit Proposal for External Funding” is required by the university (see Contracts Manual, Resource File, http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/grants/grants_contracts_manual). All faculty and students also are required to complete the National Institutes of Health’s online “Protecting Human Research Participants” training module prior to conducting a research project.

As explained above, faculty members in the MPH program have access to specific funds dedicated to faculty teaching and research through the AASU Faculty Development Committee, in conjunction with the AASU Research and Scholarship Committee, which awards AASU faculty grants for teaching, research, and scholarship projects. These awards generally range up to $2,500. Even though AASU provides these small grants for scholarly endeavors, departmental travel budgets and operational budgets have been significantly cut in the past four years. On a positive note, the Grants Office does regularly send information on grant opportunities in public health to MPH faculty and MPH faculty members get some support from the COHP Dean, who can provide some course relief for faculty who have received a grant.

The Master of Public Health degree at Armstrong specializes in Community Health Education. Its mission of the MPH program at Armstrong Atlantic State University is to support and enhance public health for the Georgia Coastal Region through workforce development, research, and community service. This is consistent with the proposed mission of the College of Health Professions (to improve the health and wellness of our culturally diverse communities by educating team-oriented, evidence-focused, and compassionate health care professionals) as well

104

as Armstrong’s mission as stated in the AASU Strategic Plan (to be teaching-centered and student-focused, providing diverse learning experiences and professional programs grounded in the liberal arts). Moreover, the mission of the MPH program is congruent with AASU Strategic Goals; Armstrong will impart the skills and habits of mind to motivated students that help them realize their potential as productive citizens of the world and Armstrong will build upon and strengthen its foundational commitment to teaching, ensuring that transformative student learning occurs inside and outside the classroom.

The following systems presently are in place to facilitate research in the MPH program:

For faculty and students, the Institutional Approval process is a necessary step that must be taken before applying for research funding. Completion of a two-page form entitled "Approval to Submit Proposal for External Funding" is required by the university (Contracts Manual- see Resource File http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/grants/grants_contracts_manual).

Persons conducting research involving human subjects in the MPH program have an ethical as well as professional obligation to ensure the safety, protection and rights of participants. It is the intent of Armstrong Atlantic State University through the IRB to assist those engaged in human subject research to conduct their research along ethical guidelines reflecting professional and community standards.

All research in the MPH program must have Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval if it involves human subjects in any way. IRB “approval" simply means that the IRB rules that the potential risks to human subjects are, in its opinion, acceptable. It does not mean that a project has departmental or institutional approval and the proper procedures for obtaining such approval should be followed. NIH certification is required for students and faculty who are involved with research.

Faculty members in the MPH program have access to specific funds dedicated to faculty research through the AASU Grants Office. The Research and Teaching Grants Committee awards AASU Faculty Grants for research and scholarship projects. These awards are generally for up to $2,500 and are published by the Committee in the annual report entitled Excellence in Research and Scholarship, a publication highlighting research and scholarship activity on campus. The Regents also make monies available through their Faculty Research Grants.

Students in the MPH program have access to specific funds dedicated to student research through the AASU School of Graduate Studies Coordinating Council (GSCC) . With faculty advisor approval, MPH students apply for funding which is decided upon by the GSCC. No restrictions exist on the status of the MPH student in the application process. Additional student funding may be made available from the discretionary funds of the Dean of Health Professions and the V.P. for Academic Affairs.

105

3.1.b. Description of current research activities undertaken in collaboration with local, state, national or international health agencies and community-based organizations. Formal research agreements with such agencies should be identified.

Each college within the university determines its faculty’s criteria for annual performance reviews. Programs can develop additional policies that meet or exceed college policies. Each college’s criteria are consistent with those of the other colleges, but none are identical. In the College of Health Professions, each graduate faculty member is expected to have a record of ongoing scholarly activity. Usually, this results in a peer-reviewed publication. However, it may also result in scholarly activity of another sort. The extent to which a faculty member meets his or her research expectations is described in his or her Annual Performance and Academic Review (APAR) and subsequently reflected in the faculty member’s annual evaluation (AFE).

Faculty are encouraged to integrate students into their research activities. In addition, the quality and quantity of faculty research are significant factors in whether or not a faculty member receives tenure and/or promotion. Currently, MPH faculty are engaged in a wide variety of research projects related to their given fields of expertise. The COHP maintains current MOUs with community-based organizations in which MPH faculty conduct their research.

The following is a comprehensive list of faculty publications and presentations:

Publications

Peer-Reviewed Articles (2010-2013)

Plaspohl, S., Dixon, B., Streater, S., Hausauer, E., Newman, C. & Vogel, R. (2013). Impact of School Flu

Vaccine Program on Student Absences. The Journal of School Nursing, Sage Publications (on-

line) April. 30, 2013, DOI: 10.1177/1059840513487750 2013.

Simmons, J., &Rich, L., (2013). Feminism ain’t funny: Woman as ‘fun-killer’, mother as monster in the

American sitcom. Advances in Journalism and Communication, 1(1). Doi:

10.4236/ajc.2013.11001.

daCruz, J., & Rich, L., (2013 under review). Misleading metaphors and marginalization: Risks, ethics,

and public health imperatives of HIV and prisoners in Brazil. International Social Science

Review.

Luczak, J., Bosak, A., Riemann, B., (2013) Shoulder muscle activation of novice and experienced weight

lifters during dumbbell press exercises. Journal of Sports Medicine; Article ID 612650.

Riemann, B., Congleton, A., Ward, R., Davies, G., (2013) Biomechanical Comparison of Forward and Lateral Lunges at Varying Step Lengths. Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2013;53(2): 130-138.

106

Buelow, J., McAdams, R., Riemann, B.L. (2012) What Do Healthcare Management Students Think About Interprofessional Teams and How Do They Compare to Their Clinical Peers? Journal of Health Administration Education 2012:29(2):99-120.

Plaspohl, S., Parrillo, A., Vogel, R., Tedders, S., & Epstein, A. (2012). An Assessment of America’s Tobacco-Free Colleges and Universities. Journal of American College Health, Volume 60 (2), 162-167.

Rich, L. E. (2012). The Church of Scientology: A history of a new religion. [Review of the book The Church of Scientology: A history of a new religion by Hugh B. Urban.] Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 9(4). doi: 10.1007/s11673-012-9409-4.

Rich, L. E. (2012). Eggsploitation. [Review of the film Eggsploitation directed by Justin Baird and Jennifer Lahl and written by Jennifer Lahl and Evan C. Rosa.] Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 9(1), 105–107. doi: 10.1007/s11673-011-9337-8.

Rich, L. E., & Simmons, J. (2011). Heidegger and ‘House’: The twofold task in working out the question of American medicine. Film and Philosophy, 15, 49–69.

Tran, D; SM Edenfield; K Coulton; D Adams, (2010) “Anxiolytic Intervention Preference of Dental Practitioners in the Savannah, Chatham County, Area: A Pilot Study,’ Journal of Dental Hygiene (Summer 2010): 123-128.

Buelow, J. R., McAdams, R., Adams, A., & Rich, L. E. (2010). Interdisciplinary teamwork: Student differences and teaching implications. The American Journal of Health Sciences, 1(1), 11–22.

Non-Peer Reviewed Articles

Rich, L. E. (2013). Cloning. In M. Brennan (Ed.), A-Z of death and dying: Social, cultural and medical aspects (pp. forthcoming). Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.

Rich, L. E. (2013). Cryonics. In M. Brennan (Ed.), A-Z of death and dying: Social, cultural and medical aspects (pp. forthcoming). Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.

Rich, L. E. (2013). Immortality (including life preservation). In M. Brennan (Ed.), A-Z of death and dying: Social, cultural and medical aspects (pp. forthcoming). Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.

Rich, L. E., & Ashby, M. A. (2013). "Speak what we feel, not what we ought to say": Moral distress and bioethics. Journal of Bioethicallinquiry, 10(3), pages and doi forthcoming.

Ashby, M.A., & Rich, L. E. (2013). Eating people is wrong ... or how we decide morally what to eat. Journal of Bioethicallnquiry, 10(2), 129-131. doi: 10.1007/s11673-013-9444-9

Rich, L. E., & Ashby, M.A. (2013). From personal misfortune to public liability: The ethics, limits, and politics of public health saving ourselves from ourselves. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry,10(1), 1-5. doi: 10.1007/s11673-013-9427-x

107

Ashby, M. A., & Rich, L. E. (2012). Editorial: Signposts in a familiar land? A second (or third or fourth) look at lingering bioethical concerns. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 9(2), 119–124. doi: 10.1007/s11673-012-9371-1

Ashby, M. A., & Rich, L. E. (2012). Editorial: Cases and culture: The benefits and risks of narrating “life as lived.” Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 9(4). doi: 10.1007/s11673-012-9408-5

Rich, L. E., Ashby, M. A., & Méthot, P.-O. (2012). Editorial: Rethinking the body and its boundaries. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 9(1), 1–6. doi: 10.1007/s11673-011-9353-8

Rich, L. E., & Ashby, M. A. (2012). Editorial: Today’s ‘Sexmission’: Bioethics and the quest for greater understanding of sexual and gender diversity. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 9(3), 229–233. doi: 10.1007/s11673-012-9385-8

Ashby, M. A., & Rich, L. E. (2011). Editorial: Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 8(2), 109–111.

Ashby, M. A., & Rich, L. E. (2011). Editorial: Discussing difference and dealing with desolation and despair. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 8(4), 315–317.

Rich, L. E., & Ashby, M. A. (2011). Editorial. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 8(3), 221–224.

Simmons, J., & Rich, L. E. (2010). Heidegger and ‘House’: The twofold task in working out the question of American medicine. House M.D. Professional Magazine, 1(2), 25–47.

Non-Peer Reviewed Book Chapters

Rich, L. E. (2013). Cloning. In M. Brennan (Ed.), A–Z of death and dying: Social, cultural and medical aspects (forthcoming). Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.

Rich, L. E. (2013). Cryonics. In M. Brennan (Ed.), A–Z of death and dying: Social, cultural and medical aspects (forthcoming). Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.

Rich, L. E. (2013). Immortality (including life preservation). In M. Brennan (Ed.), A–Z of death and dying: Social, cultural and medical aspects (forthcoming). Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.

Peer-Reviewed Books

D Adams. (accepted 2013) Infectious Disease Epidemiology in Public Health Practice (John Wiley, forthcoming, 2014).

108

Presentations (2010– through June 1, 2013)

Peer-Reviewed International

DaCruz, J., & Rich, L., (2013). Misleading metaphors and marginalization: Risks, ethics, and public health imperatives of HIV and prisoners in Brazil. Paper presented at the Americans Council’s 16th Annual Conference on the Americas, Atlanta, GA, February 2013)

M Reams, D Adams, and S Plaspohl (2011) “Reflections of Australian Military Chaplains in Southeast Asia, 1962-1972,” Annual Meeting of the International Society of Traumatic Stress Studies, Baltimore, MD, November 2011.

Reams M., Adams, D., Plaspohl, S. (2010) Reflections of Australian Military Chaplains in Southeast Asia, 1962-1972. International Society of Traumatic Stress Studies, Baltimore, MD, 2010.

Invited International

Rich, L. E. (2012, June). Risk, intent, and P3Ps: Bodies and body boundaries in the age of biotechnology. Paper presented at the Philosophy of Medicine and Humanistic Health Research Group at Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.

Peer-Reviewed National

Plaspohl, S. (2013). Reporting Conflict of Interest. Invited speaker at the National Association of IRB Leaders Annual Conference, Atlanta, GA, May 9, 2013.

Plaspohl, S., & Dixon, B., (2013). Lessons Learned: Impact and Benefits of School-Located Influenza Vaccine program on reducing Student Absenteeism. Accepted for presentation at 2013 National Association of City and County Health organizations Conference, Dallas, TX, July 12, 2013.

Plaspohl, S., & Dixon, B. (2013) Community Partnership to Promote Influenza prevention and academic Success Among Elementary School Students. Accepted for presentation at 2013 American Public Health Association Annual Conference, Boston, MA, November 4, 2013.

Adams, D., Adedokun, A. (2012) Hepatitis Mortality among US Troops in SE Asia: The Role of the Medevac, 1965-1975. American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, Atlanta, GA, November 2012.

Chanthavong, B., Adams, D. (2012) Evaluation of Arbovirus Surveillance Protocols as Predictors of Chikungunya Virus Re-Emergence. American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, Atlanta, GA. November 2012.

109

Adams, D, A Adedokun, M Osman, (2012) “Medevacs as Reservoirs of Hepatitis Infection in Vietnam, 1965-1973,” Annual Meeting of the American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, Atlanta, GA, November 2012.

Plaspohl, S., O’Mallon, M., Taggart, H., & Bacon, J. (2012). Western Students Meet Eastern Medicine: Impact of Study Abroad Experience on Perceptions of Chinese Culture and Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM). Poster presentation exhibited in “Alternative and Complementary Health Practices” session at 2012 American Public Health Association Annual Conference, San Francisco, CA, October 28, 2012.

Plaspohl, S. (2012). Changes in the Air: Insight from Key Stakeholders at Tobacco-Free Colleges. Summit on Tobacco Policy, National Center for Tobacco Policy Annual Conference, Kansas City, MO, October 5, 2012.

Plaspohl, S. (2012). Creating Our Tobacco-Free Campus: No Butts About It! Summit on Tobacco Policy, National Center for Tobacco Policy Annual Conference Kansas City, MO, October 5, 2012.

Plaspohl, S.,& O’Mallon, M. (2012). Western Students Meet Eastern Medicine: Lessons Learned from a Study-Abroad Trip to China. American College Health Association’s Annual Meeting, “College Health: Architects of Change”, Chicago, IL, May 29, 2012.

Chanthavong, B., and D Adams, (2012) “Evaluation of Arbovirus Surveillance Protocols As Predictors of Chikungunya Virus Re-Emergence,” Annual Meeting of the American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, Atlanta, GA, November 2012.

Adams, D, Plaspohl, S, Reams, M, & Hardy, D. (2011). Dying With Their Boots Off: Non-Traumatic Deaths Among American Troops in Vietnam, 1960-1975. Poster presentation exhibited at American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 60th Annual Meeting, Philadelphia, PA, December 5, 2011.

Adams, D., Plaspohl S., Reams, M., Hardy., D. (2011) Dying with Their Boots Off: Non-Traumatic Mortality among US Service Personnel in Vietnam, 1960-1965. American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, Philadelphia, PA, December 2011.

McAdams, R., Adams, A., & Buelow, J. (2011) Association of University Programs in Health Administration Annual Meeting. Presentation/Workshop: Moving From Static Case Studies to Dynamic Interactive Simulations. With Alice Adams and Janet Buelow. Charleston, SC. June 2011.

Plaspohl, S. (2011). An Assessment of America’s Tobacco-Free Colleges and Universities: Policies,Procedures, Practices, and Adherence to ACHA’s 2009 Guidelines and Recommendations. American College Health Association 2011 Annual Meeting, Phoenix, AZ, June 3, 2011.

110

Plaspohl, S. (2011). Lessons Learned from Tobacco-Free U.S. Colleges and Universities. Poster presentation exhibited in “Tobacco Free U: College Aged and Young Adults” session at 2011 American Public Health Association Annual Conference, Washington, DC, October 31, 2011.

Reams, M., Adams, D., & Plaspohl, S. (2011). Reflections of Australian Military Chaplains in Southeast Asia, 1962-1972: A Case Study in Oral History. Poster presentation exhibited at International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies 27th Annual Meeting, Baltimore, MD, November 5, 2011.

Rich, L. E. (2010). Supervisor but no super genius: Gender, race, and ratiocination in American television. Poster session presented at the meeting of the American Public Health Association, Denver, CO.

McAdams, R., B Reimann, and D Adams (2010). “Do Environmental Factors Relate to Critical Access Hospital Profitability?" Annual Meeting of the National Rural Health Association, Savannah, GA, May 2010.

Edwards, K., Limbaugh, G.K., Riemann, B.L. (2010) Kinematic Analysis of Heel Raise Exercise with Three Foot Positions. 2010 Annual Meeting of the American College of Sports Medicine, (poster), Baltimore, MD, June 3, 2010, Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 2010;42(5):S352.

McAdams, R., Riemann, B.L. (2010) Do Environmental Factors Related to Critical Access Hospital Profitability? National Rural Health Association’s 32nd Annual Conference (poster), Savannah, GA. May 18, 2010.

Adams, D, & Plaspohl, S (2010). Dust-Off: Predictors of American Medevac Losses during the Vietnam War. Poster presentation exhibited at American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 59 th Annual Meeting, Atlanta, GA, November 3-7, 2010.

Rich, L. E., Mink, M., & Streater, S. (2010). The painful lessons of online learning: An unwitting case-control study of two graduate programs. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Association of University Professors, Washington, DC.

Invited National

Plaspohl, S. (2012). An Assessment of America’s Tobacco-Free Colleges and Universities. Invited keynote speaker for presentation at American Lung Association Minnesota, Tobacco-Free Campus: A Leap for Health! Earle Brown Heritage Center, Minneapolis, MN, March 27, 2012.

Plaspohl, S. (2012). Institutional Conflict of Interest. Invited speaker for presentation at National Association of IRB Leaders Annual Conference, Atlanta, GA, May 10, 2012.

Plaspohl, S. (2012). IRB Member Educational Retreat. East Texas Medical Center, Tyler, Texas, November 8, 2012.

Plaspohl, S. (2011). Undergoing an FDA Inspection. National Association of IRB Leaders Annual Conference, Atlanta, GA, April 28, 2011.

111

Plaspohl, S. (2011). Tobacco-Free is No Panacea. Inside Higher Ed: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/06/06/health_educators_discuss_tobacco_free_college_and_university_policy_compliance_at_acha_conference. Web coverage, including interview, regarding 6/3/11 ACHA presentation, published June 6, 2011.

Plaspohl, S. (2011). Tobacco-Free Campuses. Radio interview #821 on College Connection, Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education, broadcast June 25, 2011 to 13 radio stations in Oklahoma and Texas. http://www.okhighered.org/college-connection/audio.shtml

McAdams, R. (2010) National Rural Health Association Annual Meeting. Poster Presentation: Identification of Critical Success Factors for Project Management in Critical Access Hospitals. With Janet Buelow, Alice Adams and Joey Crosby. Savannah, GA, June 2010.

McAdams, R. (2010) National Rural Health Association Annual Meeting. Poster Presentation: Do Environmental Factors Relate to Critical Access Hospital Profitability? With Bryan Riemann and David Adams. Savannah, GA. June 2010.

McAdams, R. (2010) American Association of Schools of Health Professions Annual Meeting. Poster Presentation: Learning Interdisciplinary Teamwork Using Online and Workshop Experience. With Janet Buelow and Richard St. Pierre. Charlotte, NC. October 2010.

Patterson, T., Duff, L., Holbert, T., & Plaspohl, S. (2010). Tobacco-Free Hospitals Panel, Center of Excellence for Tobacco-Free Campus Policy, 7th Annual Tobacco-Free Campus Workshop, Springfield, MO, May 27, 2010.

Plaspohl, S. (2010). An Assessment of America’s Tobacco-Free Colleges and Universities: Policies, Procedures, Practices, and Adherence to ACHA’s 2009 Guidelines and Recommendations. Center of Excellence for Tobacco-Free Campus Policy, 7th Annual Tobacco-Free Campus Workshop, Springfield, MO, May 26, 2010.

Riemann, B.L. (2010) Interpreting common statistical procedures reported in the Journal of Athletic Training. 2010 N.A.T.A. Annual Meeting- Workshop. Philadelphia, PA, June 26, 2010.

Peer-Reviewed Regional

Wimer, G., Good, J., Baird, W., Riemann, B., (2013) Effect of wearing a cooling vest on thermoregulation and run interval performance in the heat. 2013 Southeast American College of Sports Medicine Annual Meeting (poster), Greenville, SC, Februdary6 15, 2013.

Rich, L. E. (2011, March). Supervisor but no supersleuth: Gender, race, and ratiocination in American television. Paper presented at the meeting of the Southeast Women’s Studies Association, Atlanta, GA.

Peer-Reviewed State

Plaspohl, S., Dixon, B., Streater, S., Hausauer, E., & Newman, C. (2013). Do School Flu Vaccine Programs Impact Student Absenteeism? Georgia Public Health Association Annual Conference, Atlanta, GA, April 22, 2013.

112

Wilson, N., &Plaspohl, S., (2013) Demography of Pediatric Patients at Dental Clinics. Georgia Pubic Health Association Annual Conference, Atlanta, GA, April, 22, 2013.

Johnstone, E., Rich, L., Plaspohl, S. Alvarado, C., Sams, A., & Bruce, D. (2013). The Percentage of University Students With and Without Insurance Coverage at an Urban Public Institution. Georgia Public Health Association Pre-Conference, Atlanta, GA April, 1, 2013.

Mitchell, R., Plaspohl, S., & Rich, L. (2012). Combating the Freshman 15: The Effects of Weight Perception on Weight Loss in College Freshmen. Georgia Public Health Association Annual Conference, “Building Healthy Communities in GA: Academic and Practice Partnerships”, Atlanta, GA, April 12, 2012.

Plaspohl, S. (2012). Lessons Learned: Transitioning to a 100% Tobacco-Free University Campus. Georgia Public Health Association Annual Conference, “Building Healthy Communities in GA: Academic and Practice Partnerships”, Atlanta, GA, April 12, 2012.

Plaspohl, S. (2011). Lessons Learned from Georgia’s Tobacco-Free Colleges. Georgia Public Health Association 82nd Annual Conference, Atlanta, GA, April 13, 2011.

Invited State

Dixon, B., & Plaspohl, S. (2012). School-Located Influenza Vaccination Programs (SLIV): Impact on Absenteeism. Georgia School-Based Flu Stakeholders Meeting, Atlanta, GA, September 26, 2012.

Dixon, B., Plaspohl, S., Streater, S., Hausauer, B., & Newman, C. (2012). School-Located Influenza Vaccination Programs (SLIV): Impact on Absenteeism. Georgia Public Health Immunization Coordinators & Public Nurses, Macon, GA, September 14, 2012.

Mangrum, M. J., Hasic, M., Moultrie, R., Racine, D., Butler, S., Salazar, A. M., Sawi, A. E., & Rich, L. E. (2010, May). Collaboration between law enforcement, victims, and non-government organizations. Invited panelist at the Southern District of Georgia U.S. Attorney’s Office Human Trafficking: Identification, Investigation, and Prosecution training, Statesboro, GA.

Peer-Reviewed Local

Hardy, D., & Plaspohl, S. (2012). Nursing Home Study on Infection Control Policies and Culture of Patient Safety among Residents living with Diabetes Mellitus. Student Research Symposium, Armstrong Atlantic State University, April 26, 2012.

Mitchell, R., Plaspohl, S., & Rich, L. (2012). Combating the Freshman 15: The Effects of Weight Perception on Weight Loss in College Freshmen. Student Research Symposium, Armstrong Atlantic State University, April 26, 2012.

Taggart, H., Plaspohl, S., & O’Mallon, M. (2011). Robert I. Strozier Faculty Lecture Series: Western Students Meet Eastern Medicine, Student Union Ogeechee Theatre, Armstrong Atlantic State University, Savannah, GA, September 28, 2011.

113

Invited Local

Plaspohl, S., & Newman, C. (2012). School-Located Influenza Vaccination Programs (SLIV): Impact on Absenteeism. Effingham County Board of Education Superintendent’s Office, October 8, 2012.

Crosby, J., & McAdams, R. (2011) Faculty Forum Lecture entitled: “Not Your Father’s Medicare: The Future of the Social Safety Net for Older Adults and the Disabled.” November 30, 2011.

Plaspohl, S. (2011). An Assessment of America’s Tobacco-Free Colleges and Universities: Policies, Procedures, Practices, and Adherence to ACHA’s 2009 Guidelines and Recommendations. Coastal Health District Public Health Ambassador Program, Savannah, GA, September 29, 2011.

Plaspohl, S. (2011). An Assessment of America’s Tobacco-Free Colleges and Universities: Policies, Procedures, Practices, and Adherence to ACHA’s 2009 Guidelines and Recommendations. Coastal Health District Public Health Ambassador Program, Savannah, GA, July 11, 2011

Plaspohl, S. (2010). Human Subject Protections and IRB: Getting Friendly with the Research Process for Nurse Residents, Memorial Health University Medical Center, Savannah, GA, December 10, 2010.

Plaspohl, S. (2010). Tobacco-Free Colleges and Universities: Trends & Lessons Learned, Armstrong Atlantic State University Faculty Senate, Savannah, GA, November 15, 2010.

Plaspohl, S. (2010). Institutional Review Boards, Research Infrastructure in Minority Institutions (RIMI) Seminar Series, Savannah State University, Savannah, GA, September 29, 2010.

Plaspohl, S. (2010). Residents’ JUMP START for Research, Human Subject Protections and Informed Consent Process, Memorial Health University Medical Center, Savannah, GA, August 19, 2010.

Plaspohl, S. (2010). Residents’ JUMP START for Research, Human Subject Protections and Informed Consent Process, Memorial Health University Medical Center, Savannah, GA, July 16, 2010.

Rich, L. E. (2012, October). Political Smackdown 2012. Member of panel of questioners (representing health care) at the Inkwell and Student Government Association debate, Savannah, GA.

Rich, L. E. (2012, March). Miss Representation. Invited speaker to introduce the film and lead the question and discussion session following the screening for Armstrong Atlantic State University’s Gender and Women’s Studies Program, Savannah, GA.

Rich, L. E. (2011, July). Risk and intent: An ethical, legal, and social analysis of body boundaries in the age of biotechnology. Paper presented at the Foundation Brocher, Geneva, Switzerland.

Rich, L. E. (2011, June). Supervisor but no supersleuth: Gender, race, and ratiocination in American television. Paper presented at the Kansas City University of Medicine and Biosciences, Kansas City, MO.

Rich, L. E. (2011, May). Kashrut law and culture boundaries. Scholar-in-residence presentation for Congregation Agudith Achim, Savannah, GA.

114

Rich, L. E. (2011, May). To what extent does my body belong to me? Scholar-in-residence presentation for Congregation Agudith Achim, Savannah, GA.

Rich, L. E. (2010, September and October). Cultural competence in the medical setting. Invited speaker for St. Joseph’s/Candler Cultural Competence and Health Outcomes workshops, Savannah, GA.

Yount, L., Simmons, J., Skees, M., & Rich, L. E. (2010, April). Philosophical Exchanges: ‘Examined Lives’ screening and discussion. Invited panelist at this event funded by an Armstrong Atlantic State University-Savannah State University Collaborative Teaching and Research Grant, Savannah, GA.

3.1.c A list of current research activity of all primary and secondary faculty identified in Criteria 4.1.a and 4.1.b., including amount and source of funds, for each of the last three years. These data must be presented in table format and include at least the following: a) principal investigator and faculty member’s role (if not PI), b) project name, c) period of funding, d) source of funding, e) amount of total award, f) amount of current year’s award, g) whether research is community based and h) whether research provides for student involvement. Distinguish projects attributed to primary faculty from those attributed to other faculty by using bold text, color or shading. Only research funding should be reported here; extramural funding for service or training grants should be reported in Template 3.2.2 (funded service) and Template 3.3.1 (funded training/workforce development).

During the past three years, MPH faculty and students have been actively involved in community-based research activities that impact the residents of the Savannah–Chatham County area as well as South Georgia. All grants funded, not funded, and pending are reported below (see Table 3.1.c.).

Table 3.1.c. Research Activity

Project Name

Principal

Invest.

FundSource

Fund Period Start/End

Amt. Total Awd

Amt. 2010

Amt. 2011

Amt. 2012

Amt.2013 as of 6/1/13

Comm.Based

StudentPartici-pation

Physiological and Hormonal Levels of isoflavone-protein formula on athletes

R Lefavi Cytodyne. Tech.

2011-2013

$30,000

$10,000

$10,000

$10,000 N Y

Flexible Work-Schedule

L. Denton, S. Plaspohl,

AMA 2011-2013

$10,000

$3,333 $6,666 Y Y

115

Table 3.1.c. Research Activity

Project Name

Principal

Invest.

FundSource

Fund Period Start/End

Amt. Total Awd

Amt. 2010

Amt. 2011

Amt. 2012

Amt.2013 as of 6/1/13

Comm.Based

StudentPartici-pation

Options: Finding Feasible Solutions to Keep Women Physicians in the Workplace

L. Rich

Tobacco Use Prevention Needs Assessment for Long County, Georgia

C. Pasa-Gibson, M. Mink, L. Rich, and B. Reimann

CDC 2009-2010

$15,000

$15,000 Y Y

Effect of Massage Therapy on the Self-Identified Concerns And Well-Being of Patients with Breast, Gynecologic, Lung, or Colorectal Cancer

G. Petruzzi, J. Currin, L. Rich, and S. Plaspohl

Georgia Cancer Coalition/Georgia Cancer Alliance

2011-2013

$50,000

$50,000 Y Y

An Assessment of America’s Tobacco-Free Colleges and Universities: Policies, Procedures. Practices and Adherence to ACHA’s 2009 Guidelines and Recommendations

S. Plaspohl Jiann-Ping Hsu College of Public Health

2010 $300 $300 N/A N/A Y Y

Relationship Between School-Located

S. Plaspohl AASU 2012 $1,865 N/A N/A $1,500 $385 Y Y

116

Table 3.1.c. Research Activity

Project Name

Principal

Invest.

FundSource

Fund Period Start/End

Amt. Total Awd

Amt. 2010

Amt. 2011

Amt. 2012

Amt.2013 as of 6/1/13

Comm.Based

StudentPartici-pation

Influenza Vaccination (SLIV) Programs and Student AbsenteeismReflections of Australian Military Chaplains who Served in Southeast Asia, 1962-1972: A Case Study in Oral History

M. Reams, D. Adams, S. Plaspohl

AASU 2011 $1,000 N/A $1,000 N/A N Y

Stupendous Whole: Body Boundaries in the Age of Technology

L. Rich Foun-dation Brocher

2011 5831 2915.50 2915.50

N/A N N

A Triple-Blinded Placebo Controlled Clinical Trial Evaluating the Effects of (Undisclosed Product) on Balance and Muscular Strength and Endurance in Healthy Adults

B. Reimann, G. Davies

Private Sponsor (Propriet.)

2011 $79,245

N/A $79,245

N/A N Y

Health Care Reform Seminar

S. Streater &, N. Oretzki

AASU and Savannah State University

2011 $2,500 N/A $2,500 N/A Y Y

Free to Breath Clean Air on Campus

S. Plaspohl N/A 2011 Not Funded

Not Funded

Not Funded

Not Funded

Not Funded

Not Funded

117

Table 3.1.c. Research Activity

Project Name

Principal

Invest.

FundSource

Fund Period Start/End

Amt. Total Awd

Amt. 2010

Amt. 2011

Amt. 2012

Amt.2013 as of 6/1/13

Comm.Based

StudentPartici-pation

The “Secret of Life”? Popular Perceptions of Genetics and Related Biotechnology

L. Rich N/A 2011 Not Funded

Not Funded

Not Funded

Not Funded

Not Funded

Not Funded

Supervisor but no Supersleuth: Gender, Race, and Ratiocination in American Television

L. Rich N/A 2013 Not Funded

Not Funded

Not Funded

Not Funded

Note: For all grants listed above, annual disbursement of funds equals Total Funds/Years of Funds. Shading = primary MPH Faculty, Shading = additional MPH Faculty..

3.1.d. Identification of measures by which the program may evaluate the success of its research activities, along with data regarding the program’s performance against those measures for each of the last three years. For example, programs may track dollar amounts of research funding, significance of findings (e.g., citation references), extent of research translation (e.g., adoption by policy or statute), dissemination (e.g., publications in peer-reviewed publications, presentations at professional meetings) and other indicators.

Each College within the university determines its faculty’s criteria for annual performance reviews. Each College’s criteria are consistent with those of the other Colleges, but none is identical. In the College of Health Professions, each graduate faculty member is expected to have a record of on-going scholarly activity. Usually, this results in a peer-reviewed publication. However, it may also result in scholarly activity of another sort. These research goals and objectives are determined prior to each year by the Department Chair and each faculty member. The extent to which a faculty member meets his/her goal for research is described in his/her Annual Professional Activities Report (APAR), and subsequently reflected in his/her annual evaluation (see Table 3.1d).

In addition, the quality and quantity of faculty research is a significant factor in whether or not a faculty member receives tenure and is promoted. Faculty who are successful in research endeavors are often highlighted on the University’s webpage.

118

3.1.d. Identification of measures by which the program may evaluate the success of its research activities

Table 3.1.d. Outcome Measures for Judging the Qualifications of MPH Faculty Complement As of 6/1/13

Outcome Measure Target 2010 2011 2012 2013

Number* of grants or contracts submitted for funding for research and/or service activities expressed as a percentage of the MPH faculty complement. .(annually)

30% 53.5% (7/13) 76.9% (10/13) 50.0% (8/16) 13.0% (2/16)

Number* of refereed or invited scholarly presentations at state, regional, national, or international scientific meetings and/or professional conferences expressed as a percentage of the MPH faculty complement. (annually)

75% 107.7% (14/13) 92.3% (12/13) 100% (16/16) 50.0% (8/16)

Number* of publications (as author or co-author) in an appropriate area of expertise in a refereed journal or a non-refereed publication that is disseminated at the state, regional, national, or international level expressed as a percentage of the MPH faculty complement. .(annually)

25% 23.1% (3/13) 30.8% (4/13) 68.8% (11/16) 31.0% 95/16)

*Note: Outcome measures for numbers of grants, presentations, and publications are calculated using MPH total faculty (n=5) only. For a complete list, see Resource File.

3.1.e. Description of Student Involvement in Research.

All MPH students are expected to be involved in some form of experimental or applied research both within specific graduate courses and as a separate part of their MPH curriculum. Each graduate student also must successfully complete a practicum in the community. After the completion of the practicum, the student must present this research in written and oral formats. Faculty members meet every semester to evaluate the nature of the MPH research projects. The MPH program has recently begun to hold roundtable discussions that give students and faculty an opportunity to, among other things, become familiar with common research interests. Students are encouraged to work with faculty on research projects.

The Master of Public Health program provides an array of research opportunities in which students can participate. First, MPH students are often involved in research projects in their curriculum or with faculty mentors (see Table 3.1.e. Second, Graduate Assistants are regularly involved in faculty research as part of their job. Third, some MPH students select gerontological courses, in which practica and research projects are often a part. Finally, each MPH student must choose a practicum for himself/herself. MPH students present their research in their oral defenses, faculty forums, University research symposiums, and Public Health meetings.

119

Table 3.1.e. Student involvement in Research As of 6/1/13

Student Faculty Project 2010 2011 2012 2013

Melissa Reams

David Adams

Dying with Their Boots Off: Non-Traumatic Mortality among US Service Personnel in Vietnam,

1960-1965

N Y N

Melissa Reams

David Adams

Reflections of Australian Military Chaplains in Southeast Asia,

1962-1972: A Case Study in Oral History

N Y N

DeShannonHardy

David Adams

Dying with Their Boots Off: Non-Traumatic Mortality among US Service Personnel in Vietnam,

1960-1965

N Y N

Ade Adedokun

David Adams

Medevacs as Reservoirs of Hepatitis Infection in Vietnam,

1965-1973

N N Y

Bounphone Chanthavong

David Adams

Evaluation of Arbovirus Surveillance Protocols as

Predictors of Chikungunya Virus Re-Emergence

N N Y

DeShannon Hardy

Sara Plaspohl

Nursing Home Study of Infection Control Policies and Culture of Patient Safety among Residents Living with Diabetes Mellitus

N Y N

Rachel Mitchell

Sara Plaspohl

and Leigh Rich

Combating the Freshman 15: The Effects of Weight Perception on

Weight Loss in College Freshmen

N Y N

Chris Newman

Sara Plaspohl

and Sandy Streater

Relationship between School-Located Influenza Vaccine (SLIV)

Programs and Student Absenteeism

N Y Y

Jessica Bacon

Sara Plaspohl

Western Students Meet Eastern Medicine: Impact of Study

Abroad Experience on Perceptions of Chinese Culture and Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM).  Poster

presentation exhibited in “Alternative and Complementary

Health Practices”

N Y N

Jane Mackenzie

Leigh Rich

Public Health Media Center Research

N Y N

Edward Johnstone, Jr.

Leigh Rich and

Sara Plaspohl

The Percentage of University Students With and Without Health Insurance Coverage at an Urban

Public Institution

N N N Y

Jennifer Beryl Brooks

Sara Plaspohl

Perinatal Case Management for Public Health Nurses

N N N Y

Nancy Lyn Sara Demography of Pediatric Patients N N N Y

120

Table 3.1.e. Student involvement in Research As of 6/1/13

Student Faculty Project 2010 2011 2012 2013Wilson Plaspohl at Dental Clinic

3.1.f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criteria is met.

Strengths: Faculty members are actively involved in research projects at a variety of levels that range from local to international. Moreover, students and faculty have been able to collaborate on a number of research projects.

Weaknesses: The mission of AASU emphasizes teaching over research. As such, faculty teaching loads are heavy, 4/4, and can impede scholarly activity.

Future Plans: The MPH program should continue to seek collaborative research partnerships that address eliminating health disparities associated with minority status.

121

3.2 Service: The program shall pursue active service activities, consistent with its mission, through which faculty and students contribute to the advancement of public health practice.

3.2.a. Description of the program’s service activities, including policies, procedures and practices that support service. If the program has formal contracts or agreements with external agencies, these should be noted.

The mission of the MPH program at Armstrong Atlantic State University is to enhance the quality of human health status and public health practice through community-based health promotion and education initiatives, workforce development, and scholarly activities that are responsive to the behavioral, ecological and dynamic determinants of health. Formal contracts (i.e., MOUs) are maintained with a variety of local and state agencies and organizations.

This mission is consistent with the mission of the College of Health Professions and Armstrong Atlantic State University. Faculty members in the Department of Health Sciences view the service component of the MPH program as a critical element of its mission. AASU, the College of Health Professions and the Department of Health Sciences have specific policies, procedures and practices in place to support and recognize faculty service activities. For example, teaching, scholarly activities and service activities are evaluated and used for promotion, tenure and retention, the annual faculty evaluation (AFE), and the Annual Professional Activities Report (APAR).

Faculty in the Department of Health Sciences have developed partnerships and collaborative working relationships with different organizations such as governmental agencies, non-profit organizations, educational institutions, and the private sector (Faculty CV's - see Resource File).

The College of Health Professions maintains numerous formal contracts (i.e., MOUs) with external official and voluntary agencies for practicum sites (see Resource File).

The faculty members of the Department of Health Sciences have been very active providing consultation, leadership and service to the community and the university. For more detailed information, (see Faculty CVs in the Resource File). Activities should reflect the needs (as identified by the MPH Program Advisory Board) of local organizations. The department's faculty and students have consistently engaged in numerous service activities that benefit the university, the community, and the profession of Public Health.

3.2.b. Description of the emphasis given to community and professional service activities in the promotion and tenure process.

One of the priorities of the MPH program is to provide expertise and assistance to community based health activities and organizations. The program faculty are also actively engaged in service to the University through committees, project volunteerism and student organizations.

122

They are expected to engage in community service, service which is evaluated annually in APARs, AFEs, and Tenure/Promotion.

The MPH program maintains close ties with a variety of community organizations with which Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) exist to facilitate these relationships. Community service represents an integral part of the Annual Performance and Review and Tenure and Promotion process. Students and faculty actively engage in activities such as the Graduate Student Coordinating Council, Health Science Student Association, Armstrong Day, allied health honor societies (e.g., Delta Omega) Gerontology Mentoring Conference, etc.). Faculty community service is expected and evaluated accordingly.

3.2.c. A list of the program’s current service activities, including identification of the community, organization, agency or body for which the service was provided and the nature of the activity, over the last three years. See CEPH Data Template 3.2.1. Projects presented in Criterion 3.1 should not be replicated here without distinction. Funded service activities may be reported in a separate table; see CEPH Template 3.2.2. Extramural funding for research or training/continuing education grants should be reported in Template 3.1.1 (research) or Template 3.3.1 (funded workforce development), respectively.

Community service represents an integral part of the Annual Professional Activities Report and Tenure and Promotion process. The MPH faculty engage in a wide range of local, state, national, international service activities (see Table 3.2c). The following materials highlight service projects that contribute to the HS, COHP and AASU strategic plans, values and strategic goals:

Table 3.2.c. Service Activities

Faculty Member

Role Organization Activity or Project

Year(s)

Sandy Streater Board of Directors J. C. Lewis Health Center

Board of Directors 2010-Present

Sandy Streater Community Advisory Board Member

Savannah State University

RIMI Grant ($4 million) National Center for Minority Health Disparities

2010-Present

Sandy Streater Advisory Committee The Community Health Partnership (in conjunction with Savannah Business Group

Advisory Committee 2010-Present

Sandy Streater Advisory Board Member

Health Care Georgia - Partner Up For Public Health – Georgia Division of Public Health – Strategic Partner

Advisory Board Member

2010-Present

Sandy Streater Member Partners in Health Member 2010-Present

123

Table 3.2.c. Service Activities

Faculty Member

Role Organization Activity or Project

Year(s)

Sandy Streater Member Core Area 1 ASPH Undergraduate Public Health Learning Outcomes Project – resource Learning Group

Member 2010-Present

Sandy Streater Member St. Jose/Candler African American Men’s Health Initiative – Council

Member 2010-Present

Sandy Streater Advisory Committee AMERIGROUP Community Care

Advisory Committee Member

2010-Present

Sandy Streater Advisory Board Chair

Therapeutic Foster Care Committee, Coastal Harbor Health Systems

Advisory Board Member

2010-Present

Sandy Streater Member Greater Savannah Coalition on Aging

Member 2010-Present

Sandy Streater Advisory Committee SAFE Kids Savannah Advisory Committee 2010-Present

Sandy Streater Consultant Savannah Business Group

Consultant 2010-Present

Sandy Streater Consultant Chatham County Safety Net Planning Council

Consultant 2010-Present

Sandy Streater Consultant Savannah Teen Maze Consultant 2010-Present

Sandy Streater Member USG Board of Regents, Administrative Committee on Public Health (ACOPH)

Member 2010-Present

Sandy Streater Member American Public Health Association

Sandy Streater Member Society for Public Health Education

Member 2010-Present

Sandy Streater Advisory Board Member

Partner Up! for Public Health Advisory Board

Advisory Board Member

2012

Sandy Streater Member NCHEC (National Commission for Health Education Credentialing) Ethics Initiative

Member 2012

David Adams Member NCHEC (National Commission for Health Education Credentialing) Ethics

Member 2012

124

Table 3.2.c. Service Activities

Faculty Member

Role Organization Activity or Project

Year(s)

Initiative

David Adams Member American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene

Member 2010-Present

David Adams Peer Reviewer The Annals of Pharmacology

Peer Reviewer 2010-Present

David Adams Peer Reviewer Clinical Infectious Diseases

Peer Reviewer 2010-Present

David Adams Peer Reviewer Eco-Health Peer Reviewer 2010-Present

David Adams Peer Reviewer Annals of Family Medicine

Peer Reviewer 2010-Present

David Adams Peer Reviewer Journal of Traumatic Stress Studies

Peer Reviewer 2010-Present

David Adams Member American Public Health Association

Member 2010-Present

David Adams Volunteer Good Samaritan Clinic Volunteer 2010- Present

David Adams Science Fair Judge Georgetown Elementary School

Judge 2010-Present

David Adams DARE Parade Mascot,

Georgetown Elementary School

Volunteer 2010-Present

David Adams Science Fair Judge Savannah Ogeechee Regional Science and Engineering Fair

Judge 2010-Present

David Adams Member Bioethics Committee, St Joseph/Candler Hospital

Member 2010-Present

David Adams Member Bioethics Subcommittee, St Joseph Candler Hospital

Member 2010-Present

David Adams Member Hospice Subcommittee, St. Joseph Candler Hospital

Member 2011-Present

David Adams Member POLST Subcommittee, St. Joseph’s Candler Hospital

Member 2012-Present

David Adams Member POLST Committee, St. Joseph Candler Hospital

Member 2012-Present

David Adams Member General Institutional Review Board, Memorial Health University Medical Center

Member 2010-Present

David Adams Member Community Outreach Member 2010

125

Table 3.2.c. Service Activities

Faculty Member

Role Organization Activity or Project

Year(s)

Committee, Memorial University Medical Center

David Adams Consultant Ashtree Organization Consultant 2012

David Adams Board Member Prevention Credentialing Consortium of Georgia (PCCG)

Board Member 2010-Present

David Adams Member American Friends of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine

Member 2010-Present

David Adams Editorial Board and Reviewer

Food and Public Health

Peer Reviewer 2010-Present

David Adams Editorial Board and Reviewer

Journal of Applied Sociology

Peer Reviewer 2010-Present

David Adams Editorial Board and Reviewer

Sociological Research Peer Reviewer 2010-Present

David Adams Editorial Board and Reviewer

Public Health Research

Editorial Board 2012-Present

Leigh Rich Editor in Chief Journal of Bioethical Inquiry

Editor in Chief 2012 – Present

Leigh Rich Co-Editor in Chief Journal of Bioethical Inquiry

Co-Editor in Chief 2011-2012

Leigh Rich Member International Advisory Board Journal of Medical Law and Ethics

Member 2011-Present

Leigh Rich General Member Planned Parenthood Advisory Council

Member 2009-Present

Leigh Rich Planning Committee Member

Savannah Area GIS – Annual GIS Day

Member 2010-July 2011

Sara Plaspohl Member Community Immunization Coalition, Savannah, GA

Member 2012-Present

Sara Plaspohl Member Chatham County Safety Net Coalition, Savannah, GA

Member 2012-Present

126

Table 3.2.c. Service Activities

Faculty Member

Role Organization Activity or Project

Year(s)

Sara Plaspohl Distinguished Judge Research Day activities, Memorial Health University Medical Center, Savannah, GA

Member 2012

Sara Plaspohl Distinguished Judge Research Day activities, Memorial Health University Medical Center, Savannah, GA

Member 2011

Sara Plaspohl Community Member Memorial Health University Medical Center General Institutional Review Board,

Member 2011-Present

Sara Plaspohl Community Member Memorial Health University Medical Center Oncology Institutional Review Board,

Member 2011-Present

Sara Plaspohl Board of Directors Community Health Mission, Savannah, GA

Member 2010-2011

Sara Plaspohl Abstract Reviewer Submissions for Georgia Public Health Association Annual Conference

Member 2013

Sara Plaspohl Team member Council for Education on Public Health accreditation site visit for Missouri State University

Member 2012

Sara Plaspohl Abstract Reviewer 2012 American College Health Association Annual Meeting

Member 2011-2012

Sara Plaspohl Team member Council for Education on Public Health accreditation site visit for Charles R. Drew University of Medicine and Science

Member 2011

Sara Plaspohl Textbook Reviewer Jones & Bartlett Publishers, Essentials of Human Disease1st Edition

Member 2011

Sara Plaspohl Textbook Reviewer Jones & Bartlett Publishers, An Introduction to Human Disease: Pathology

Member 2010

127

Table 3.2.c. Service Activities

Faculty Member

Role Organization Activity or Project

Year(s)

and Pathophysiology Correlations,8th Edition

Sara Plaspohl Textbook Reviewer Jones & Bartlett Publishers, Field Epidemiology in Public Health Practice

Member 2010

Sara Plaspohl Member National Association of IRB Managers (NAIM) Certification Committee

Member 2010

Sara Plaspohl Site visit accreditation team member

Council on Education for Public Health

Member 2012

Richard St. Pierre Board of Trustees Southeast Georgia Cancer Alliance

Board of Trustees 2011-2012

Richard St. Pierre Executive Committee

Southeast GeorgiaCancer Alliance

Executive Committee

2010-2012

Richard St. Pierre Membership Committee

Southeast GeorgiaCancer Alliance

Committee Chair 2010

Richard St. Pierre Member Savannah Chapter of the National Kidney Foundation

Task Force Member 2010-2012

Richard St. Pierre Member Coastal Georgia Area on Aging

Community Liaison 2010-2012

Richard St. Pierre Member Operation Stroke, American Heart Association

Coordinated Speaker’s Bureau

2011

Richard St. Pierre Member Georgia Regional Development Center

Membership Committee

2010

Richard St. Pierre Advisor College Students Against Cancer

Faculty Advisor 2011-2012

Community service represents an integral part of the Annual Professional Activities Report and Tenure and Promotion process. The MPH faculty engages in a wide range of local, state, national, and international service activities. The following materials highlight service projects that contribute to the HS, COHP and AASU strategic plans, values and strategic goals:

Local Community Service:

At the local level, the Department of Health Science has provided service to the following organizations: J. C. Lewis Health Center, Savannah State University, St. Joseph/Candler African

128

American Men’s Health Initiative – Council, Chatham County Safety Net Planning Council, Administrative Committee on Public Health (ACOPH), Good Samaritan Clinic, Georgetown Elementary School, Savannah Ogeechee Regional Science and Engineering Fair, Bioethics Committee, St Joseph/Candler Hospital, Bioethics Subcommittee, St Joseph Candler Hospital, Hospice Subcommittee, St. Joseph Candler Hospital, POLST Subcommittee, St. Joseph’s Candler Hospital, POLST Committee, St. Joseph Candler Hospital, General Institutional Review Board, Memorial Health University Medical Center, Community Outreach Committee, Memorial University Medical Center, Ashtree Organization, Planned Parenthood Advisory Council, Savannah Area GIS – Annual GIS Day, Community Immunization Coalition, Chatham County Safety Net Coalition, Research Day activities, Memorial Health University Medical Center, Savannah, GA, Memorial Health University Medical Center General Institutional Review Board, Memorial Health University Medical Center Oncology Institutional Review Board, Community Health Mission, Savannah, GA.

Statewide Service:

At the state level, faculty and students have been involved in the following: Georgia Public Health Association; Prevention Credentialing Consortium of Georgia, Northeast Kansas Hospital Network Consultant, USG Board of Regents Administrative Committee on Public Health, Health Care Georgia - Partner Up For Public Health – Georgia Division of Public Health – Strategic Partner.

National Service:

American Public Health Association; American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene; Society for Public Health Education; The Annals of Pharmacology, Clinical Infectious Diseases, Annals of Family Medicine, Journal of Applied Sociology, Sociological Research, Public Health Research.

International Service:

American Friends of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (member); Journal of Bioethical Inquiry (Editor in Chief); World Health Organization’s Regional Office for Europe and its Country Relations and Corporate Communication Web Team (intern)

3.2.d. Identification of the measures by which the program may evaluate the success of its service program, along with data regarding the program's performance against those measures over the last year.

The following outcome measures have been developed to evaluate faculty participation in community service activities. AASU, the College of Health Professions and the Department of Health Sciences have specific policies, procedures and practices in place to support and

129

recognize faculty service activities. This information is part of the consideration for promotion, tenure and retention. AASU, the College of Health Professions and the Department of Health Sciences service contributions at the local, state and national level have been acknowledged in several formats including media releases, awards and citations (see Table 3.2d).

Table 3.2.d. Outcome Measures for judging the success of the MPH service expectations

As of 6/1/13

Outcome Measure Objective 2010 2011 2012 2013     MPH faculty will provide leadership, expertise, and assistance in public health education and promotion that responds to changing community health needs.

     The program will maintain an advisory council that comprises representatives from nonprofit, public, and for-profit agencies with a concern for local public health issues.

Met :100%

The program maintains an advisory council that comprises representatives from nonprofit, public, and for-profit agencies with a concern for local public health issues.

Met: 100%

The program maintains an advisory council that comprises representatives from nonprofit, public, and for-profit agencies with a concern for local public health issues.

Met: 100%

The program maintains an advisory council that comprises representatives from nonprofit, public, and for-profit agencies with a concern for local public health issues.

Met: 100%

The program maintains an advisory council that comprises representatives from nonprofit, public, and for-profit agencies with a concern for local public health issues.

     MPH faculty will serve in a significant consulting capacity in their area of expertise that supports local, state, national, and/or international agencies or organizations.         

     50% of MPH faculty will serve in a significant consulting capacity in their area of expertise that supports local, state, national, and/or international agencies or organizations.           

Met: 100% (5/5) of MPH faculty serve in a significant consulting capacity in their area of expertise that supports local, state, national, and/or international agencies or organizations.

Met: 100% (5/5) of MPH faculty serve in a significant consulting capacity in their area of expertise that supports local, state, national, and/or international agencies or organizations.

Met: 100% (5/5) of MPH faculty serve in a significant consulting capacity in their area of expertise that supports local, state, national, and/or international agencies or organizations.

Met: 100% (5/5) of MPH faculty serve in a significant consulting capacity in their area of expertise that supports local, state, national, and/or international agencies or organizations

     MPH faculty will maintain membership in national, regional, and/or state professional organizations. 

     75% of faculty will maintain membership in national, regional, and/or state professional organizations. 

Met: 100% (5/5) of faculty maintain membership in national, regional, and/or state professional organizations.           

Met: 100% (5/5) of faculty maintain membership in national, regional, and/or state professional organizations.           

Met: 100% (5/5) of faculty maintain membership in national, regional, and/or state professional organizations.           

Met: 100% (5/5) of faculty maintain membership in national, regional, and/or state professional organizations

     MPH faculty will satisfy service requirements to maintain graduate faculty status

     100% of faculty will satisfy service requirements to maintain university graduate faculty status.

Met 100% of faculty satisfy service requirements to maintain university graduate faculty status.

Met 100% of faculty satisfy service requirements to maintain university graduate faculty status.

Met 100% of faculty satisfy service requirements to maintain university graduate faculty status.

Met 100% of faculty satisfy service requirements to maintain university graduate faculty status

*Note:  Outcome measures for service activity are calculated using MPH total faculty (n=5) only

130

3.2.e. Description of student involvement in service, outside of those activities associated with the required practice experience and previously described in Criterion 2.4.

All students are encouraged to become involved in service projects in the community. Some students become engaged in service activity on a voluntary basis entirely while others become involved as a result of class assignments or through faculty service activity (see Table 3.2e). A representative list of student service activity for the past three years follows: Obesity in Chatham County, St. Mary’s Health Center, Good Samaritan Health Center, Teen Maze, Ashtree Organization.

Table 3.2.e. Student Involvement in Faculty Service As of 6/1/13

Student/Faculty Project 2010 2011 2012 2013

Carol Gerrin/David Adams

Ashtree Organization Data Analysis

N N Y Y

Dana Huffman/David Adams

Ashtree Organization Data Analysis

N N YY

Laura Cahill/David Adams

Good Samaritan Clinic

N Y NN

Holly Arena/David Adams

Good Samaritan Clinic N Y N

N

Melissa Reams/Leigh Rich Center for Public

Health Media and Research

N N YY

Kayla Knight/Sandy Streater Coastal Health

District Adolescent Health and Youth Development Program

N N YY

Chris Newman/Sandy Streater

Childhood Obesity in Chatham County

N Y Y Y

131

3.2.f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and analysis of the program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criteria is met.

Strengths: The department's faculty members have consistently engaged in a wide range of service activities that benefit the university, the community, and the profession of Public Health. Moreover, students have participated in these activities as appropriate. The MPH practicum experience gives students the opportunity for hands-on experience of specific health aspects in a public health environment. During the MPH practicum, students are also exposed to different working environments related to public health.

Weaknesses: None

Future Plans: MPH faculty and students should continue to maintain close ties with community-based organizations that are engaged in public health activities.

132

3.3 Workforce Development: The program shall engage in activities other than its offering of degree programs that support the professional development of the public health workforce.

3.3.a. Description of the ways in which the program periodically assesses the continuing education needs of the community or communities it intends to serve. The assessment may include primary or secondary data collection or data sources.

The MPH Advisory Committee, which consists of faculty, students, and community stakeholders reviews community-based workforce development needs, e.g., collaboration with Savannah State University (an HBCU institution), and the Partner Up! For Public Health Campaign, etc. The MPH Program coordinator serves as a member on the Community Advisory Board for the Savannah State University, National Institutes of Health, Research Infrastructure in Minority Institutions (RIMI) Grant, which assesses programs that deal with minority public health issues.

For the past five years, the MPH Coordinator has served on the Board of Advisors for Partner Up! for Public Health Campaign which is a non-governmental source of information about public health in Georgia which is supported by the Healthcare Georgia Foundation. The Campaign’s primary platform for this year is ‘Connecting the Dots: Community Health & Economic Vitality”. Partner Up holds regular meetings, conference calls, and email correspondence to communicate the organization’s objectives and the assessment of said objectives.

The MPH program also works closely with ACOPH (Administrative Committee on Public Health). ACOPH consists of a consortium of all programs and schools of Public Health in the University System of Georgia. The Public Health Programs/Schools represented in this consortium are: Armstrong Atlantic State University, Fort Valley State University, The Regents University of Georgia (formerly the Medical College of Georgia), Georgia Southern University, Georgia State University, and The University of Georgia. ACOPH holds regular meetings and/or conference calls in which consortium members share information and provide feedback on activities sponsored by each consortium member.

The MPH program at AASU has worked closely with the University of Georgia’s School of Public Health, Workforce Development Center. The Workforce Development Center which is funded partially with a grant that all ACOPH consortium members supported has sponsored summer internships for Armstrong MPH Students as well as public health students from other ACOPH consortium institutions. The University of Georgia conducted a workforce needs assessment for the state of Georgia on behalf of all the ACOPH institutions. Emory University Rollins School of Public Health was also a partner in this needs assessment (see Resource File).

3.3.b. A list of the continuing education programs, other than certificate programs, offered by the program, including number of participants served, for each of the last three years. Funded training/continuing education activities may be reported in a separate table.

133

The program has sponsored and/ or collaborated with community-based educational efforts as listed in Table 3.3b below:

Table 3.3.b. Continuing Education InitiativesProgram Attendance Year(s)

The Americans with Disability Act: Then and Now ~50 2012

AASU Smoking Cessation Classes 20 2010-2013

Chatham County Obesity Report ~100 2012

Center for Public Health Media Research Seminar: The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks

55 2010-2012

Center for Public Health Media Research Seminar: Screening of Not Yet Rain

35 2012

Long County Smoking Cessation Project ~50 2010-2011

Affordable Care Act Seminar with Savannah State University and AASU

26 2012

Youth Risk Behavior Survey ~50 2010

Public Health Ambassador Program 15 2010-2013

Human Trafficking Awareness Partnership ~200 2011

GIS Faculty Workshop ~30 2011

Red Cross Caring Conference 52 2010

3.3.c. Description of certificate programs or other non-degree offerings of the programs, including enrollment data for each of the last three years.

Prior to 2010, a Graduate Certificate in Public Health was offered. In 2010, the year in which the On-Line MPH Program was discontinued, the Graduate Certificate in Public Health was also discontinued. Plans are presently in place to reintroduce the Graduate Certificate in Public Health by January 2014.

3.3.d. Description of the Program’s Practices, Policies, Procedures, and Evaluation that Support Continuing Education and Workforce Development Strategies.

The guiding policy for the MPH Program to support continuing education and workforce development is the MPH Mission Statement which states, the “The mission of the MPH program at Armstrong Atlantic State University is to support and enhance public health for the Georgia coastal region t hrough workforce development, research and community service.”

134

The MPH program looks for appropriate opportunities to collaborate with other institutions and organizations. The MPH Coordinator is a member of the Administrative Committee on Public Health (ACOPH) for the University System of Georgia units that offer the public health degree. ACOPH completes a public workforce needs assessment for the state of Georgia. This needs assessment helps units determine which continuing education/workforce development strategies are needed. Several workforce development initiatives have occurred as collaboration between units, for example, summer intern programs for graduate students are awarded and students go into underserved communities to assist public health workers in expanding their capabilities.

3.3.e. A list of other educational institutions or public health practice organizations, if any, with which the program collaborates to offer continuing education.

The MPH collaborates actively with the following local, regional, and state organizations, e.g., Savannah State University, American Red Cross, Long County Health Department, Coastal Health District, ACOPH, Chatham County Safety Net, etc. (See Table 3.3b above).

3.3.f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met with commentary.

Strengths: The department's faculty members have consistently engaged in a wide range of workforce development initiatives that benefit the university, the community, and the profession of Public Health. Moreover, students have participated in these activities as appropriate.

Weaknesses: At the present time, AASU does not have an established department of continuing education which does not facilitate the MPH Program offering formal CEU or CME opportunities that generate revenue.

Future Plans: The MPH Program will take steps to reintroduce the Public Health Certificate by January 2014. The MPH Program will continue to looks for opportunities to collaborate with other institutions and organizations for CE and workforce development.

135

4.0 Faculty, Staff and Students

4.1 Faculty Qualifications: The program shall have a clearly defined faculty which, by virtue of its distribution, multidisciplinary nature, educational preparation, practice experience and research and teaching competence, is able to fully support the program’s mission, goals and objectives.

There are five faculty members in the AASU Department of Health Sciences who are primarily assigned to the MPH program (although Dr. Sandy Streater’s assignment to the program, due to his duties as chair of the department, is apportioned at 50 percent, thus making for a total of 4.5 faculty members). Two additional faculty members in the Department of Health Sciences teach at least one required MPH course as well as elective courses. Five other Health Sciences faculty members have expertise in areas related to public health and contribute to the MPH program by teaching electives. Five members in the community serve as part-time faculty who predominantly teach electives in the MPH program (and occasionally a required course) and also often serve as public health practicum site supervisors.

Table 4.1 Faculty MembersPrimary MPH Faculty

Primary assignment in the MPH program

David Adams Ph.D. August 2001–Present

Sara Plaspohl Dr.P.H. August 2010–July 2011 (temporary); August 2011–Present (tenure-track)

Leigh Rich Ph.D. August 2005–Present

Richard St. Pierre Ed.D. August 1999–December 2012 (retired)

Sandy Streater Ed.D. August 1988–Present (MPH assignment time apportioned at 50 percent)

Nandi Marshall Dr.P.H. August 2013

Additional Health Sciences Department Faculty

Primary assignment in a program other than MPH but teach a core course or elective course used by MPH students

Alice Adams Ph.D. August 2003–December 2012 (retired)

Andy Bosak Ph.D. August–December 2012 (temporary); January 2013–Present (tenure-track)

Janet Buelow Ph.D., R.N. January 2007–Present

Robert LeFavi Ph.D., C.S.C.S. August 1993–Present

Rod McAdams Ph.D. August 2001–Present (teaches one MPH core course twice a year)

Bryan Riemann Ph.D., A.T.C. August 2006–Present

Linda Wright Ph.D. August 1995–Present (will retire in December 2013)

136

Michael Mink Ph.D. August 2005-2010

Andrea Thomas Ph.D. August 2013

Part-Time Faculty

Teach either a core course or an elective course in the MPH program

Ron Alt M.H.S. 1996-Present

Betty Dixon Dr.P.H. 2012-Present

Paula Reynolds M.D., Ph.D. 2007-2012

Linda Samuel Ph.D. 2012-Present

Erika Tate Ph.D. 2012-Present

137

138

4.1.a. A table showing primary faculty who support the degree programs offered by the program. It should present data effective at the beginning of the academic year in which the self-study is submitted to CEPH and should be updated at the beginning of the site visit.

Table 4.1.a. Primary Faculty Supporting the MPH Program

NameTitle/

Academic Rank

Tenure Status or

Classification

FTE or % Time

to Progra

m

Gender

Race DegreesInstitutions

Where Degrees Were Earned

Disciplines in Which Degrees Were Earned

Courses Taught Research Interests

David Adams Associate Professor

Tenured 96% M C B.A.M.A.Ph.D.M.P.H.M.Sc.

Emory UWashington U (St. L)U of FloridaOhio State UU of London (LSHTM)

HistoryHistoryHistory/Medical SociologyEpidemiologyInfectious Diseases

Epidemiology Environmental Health Health/Illness

Continuum International Health Advanced

Epidemiology Zoonotic/Vector

Diseases MPH Practicum

EpidemiologyInfectious DiseasesEnvironmental HealthInternational Health

Sara Plaspohl Assistant Professor

Tenure-Track

96% F C A.S.B.S.M.H.S.Dr.P.H.

Armstrong State UArmstrong State UGeorgia Southern UGeorgia Southern U

Dental HygieneDental Hygiene EducationHealth SciencesPublic Health

Biostatistics Research Methods Health Promotion

Mthds Planning and

Evaluation Nutrition MPH Practicum

IRB PolicyTobacco PolicyBiostatisticsProgram PlanningResearch MethodsImmunizations aPrimary Prevention

Leigh Rich Associate Professor

Tenured 96% F C B.A.M.A.Ph.D.

U of ColoradoU of ArizonaU of Colorado

Cultural AnthropologyCultural/Medical AnthropologyHealth/Behavioral Sciences

Health Communication Theory in Health Educ Research Methods Leadership and Ethics Women/Minority

Health C Read Women’s

Health Manag/Biomedical

Ethics MPH Practicum

BioethicsHealth and LawGender, Race and

MediaMedia AnalysisQualitative Data

AnalysisTelemedicine

Sandy Streater ProfessorHS Dept ChairMPH Coord

Tenured 55% M C B.A.M.Ed.Ed.D.

U of South CarolinaU of South CarolinaU of South Carolina

English LiteratureAudiologyHealth Promotion/Education

Nutrition MPH Practicum

Adolescent Health Behav

Health PromotionPrimary Prevention

139

Table 4.1.a. Primary Faculty Supporting the MPH Program

NameTitle/

Academic Rank

Tenure Status or

Classification

FTE or % Time

to Progra

m

Gender

Race DegreesInstitutions

Where Degrees Were Earned

Disciplines in Which Degrees Were Earned

Courses Taught Research Interests

Nandi Thomas(hired August 5th

2013)

Assistant Professor

Tenure Track

96% F AA B.A.MPHDr.PH

Spellman CollegeEast Stroudsburg Univ.Georgia SouthernUniversity

Religious StudiesPublic HealthPublic Health

Theory and Public Health

Planning Sexuality

Community Health Education

4.1.b. Summary data on the qualifications of other program faculty (adjunct, part-time, secondary appointments, etc.). Data should be provided in table format.

140

Table 4.1.b. Other Faculty Used to Support the MPH Program (adjunct, part-time, secondary appointments, etc.)

NameTitle/

Academic Rank

Title & Current Employer

FTE or %

Time to Progra

m

Gender

Race DegreesInstitutions Where

Degrees Were Earned

Disciplines in Which Degrees Were Earned

Courses Taught Research Interests

Ron Alt Part-Time Instructor

Master Addiction Counselor ALTernatives

.06% M C B.S.M.H.S.

AASUAASU

PsychologyHealth Science

Strats for the Prevention of Chemical Dependency

Substance Use Prevention

Drug-Free Workplaces

Alice Adams(Retired 2012)

Assistant ProfessorTenured

AASUHealth SciencesMHSA Program

9% F C A.B.M.B.A.M.S.H.A.Ph.D.

Duke UTulane UU Alabama (Birm)U Alabama (Birm)

Political ScienceBusiness AdministrationHealth AdministrationHealth Administration

Org Theory and Behavior

Leadership Seminar

LeadershipOrganizational IdentityClient Satisfaction

Andy Bosak Assistant ProfessorTenure-Track

AASUHealth SciencesMSSM Program

9% M C B.S.M.S.Ph.D.

W Kentucky UW Kentucky UU Alabama

Exercise ScienceExercise ScienceHuman Perf/Kinesiology

Physical Activity and Aging Across the Lifespan

Human Growth and Development

MPH Practicum

Health/Human Performance

Exercise as Medicine

Janet Buelow Associate ProfessorTenured

AASUHealth SciencesMHSA Program

9% F C B.S.M.S.N.M.P.H.Ph.D.

Loma Linda ULoma Linda UU Illinois ChicagoU Illinois Chicago

NursingNursingPublic Health/Health AdminPublic Health/Health Admin

Organization Theory/Organizational Behavior

Human Resources Mgmt

Long-Term CareCollaborative Hospital

ManagementHealth of Older AdultsInter-Professional

TrainingBetty Dixon Part-Time

InstructorNursing and Clinical DirectorCoastal Health District 9-1

.12% F C B.S.N.M.H.S.A.Dr.P.H.

Valdosta State UAASUGeorgia Southern U

NursingHealth AdministrationPublic Health

Leadership Seminar Organizational Theory Women/Minority

Health

Perinatal Case MgmtSchool-Based HealthVaccinationScoliosis

Robert LeFavi ProfessorTenured

AASUHealth SciencesMSSM Program

18% M H B.S.M.B.A.Ph.D.

U of FloridaNova UAuburn U

Health EducationBusiness AdministrationHealth/Human Performance

Health/Human Perform

Comp/Alt Health Practice

Health Prom in Worksite

Spirituality and Health

Health/Human Performance

Comp/Alt Health Practices

Rod McAdams

Associate Professor

AASUHealth Sciences

48% M C B.A.M.A.

Emporia State UU of Kansas

Political SciencePlanning and Policy

HC Finance/Delivery Sys

Rural HealthPublic Financing

141

Table 4.1.b. Other Faculty Used to Support the MPH Program (adjunct, part-time, secondary appointments, etc.)

NameTitle/

Academic Rank

Title & Current Employer

FTE or %

Time to Progra

m

Gender

Race DegreesInstitutions Where

Degrees Were Earned

Disciplines in Which Degrees Were Earned

Courses Taught Research Interests

Tenured MHSA Program

Ph.D. U of Kansas American Studies Human Resources Mgmt

Manag/Biomedical Ethics

Access to CareTelemedicine Health Policy

Paula Reynolds

Part-Time Instructor

SafetyNet Exec DirectorCoastal Health D

.12% F C B.S.M.D.M.P.H.

Emory UMedical College GAMercer U

BiologyMedicinePublic Health

Women/Minority Health

Epidemiology of Cancer

Health Care Disparities

Bryan Riemann

Associate ProfessorTenured

AASUHealth SciencesMSSM Program

9% M C B.S.M.A.Ph.D.

West Chester UUNC–Chapel HillU of Pittsburgh

Athletic TrainingSports MedicineSports Medicine

Biostatistics Biomechanics of Obesity

Postural ControlNeuromuscular Control

of Joint StabilityLinda Samuel Part-Time

InstructorAssistant Professor of Social Work Savannah State University

.12% F AA B.S.M.S.W.Ph.D.Grad.Cert.

South Carolina St UU of South CarolinaClark Atlanta UU of Georgia

Social WelfareSocial WorkSocial WorkGerontology

Survey of Gerontology Medical Social WorkAgingRural HealthHealth Disparities

Erika Tate Part-Time Instructor

CEO/Presidentbluknowledge

.06% F AA Sc.B.M.A.Ph.D.

Brown UU of Cal BerkeleyU of Cal Berkeley

EE/Computer EngineerMath, Science, TechMath, Science, Tech

Health Promotions Mthds

Community Organization

Capacity BuildingLinda Wright Professor

TenuredAASUHealth Sciences

27% F C B.S.M.S.Ph.D.

East New Mexico UAASUTexas Tech U

PsychologyPhysical TherapyExperiment Psychology

Health and Human Development

Biostatistics

Health/Human Development

Gerontology

Andrea Thomas(hired Aug. 2013)

Assistant Professor(Temporary)

AASU Health Sciences MHSA Program

9% F AA D.H.S.MBAMPHBS

Nova S. EasternNova S. EasternFlorida InternationalHoward College

Health ScienceHealth AdministrationHealth AdministrationBiology

Marketing Organizational

Behavior PH Administration

Health ManagementHealth Administration

4.1.c. Description of the manner in which the faculty complement integrates perspectives from the field of practice, including information on appointment tracks for practitioners, if used by the program. Faculty with significant experience outside of that which is typically associated with an academic career should also be identified.

Faculty members serving AASU’s MPH program as well as the Department of Health Sciences have a broad range of expertise and interests (see Tables 4.1.1 and 4.1.2 on the previous pages), including both conducting academic research and scholarship and engaging in public health practice and community service. The program’s faculty complement has been trained in a broad array of disciplines that are associated with the interdisciplinary field of public health, and several have worked or continue to work as public health professionals or in industries related to public health. The faculty complement as a whole covers overlapping portions of the spectrum of public health perspectives and fields of practice. For example:

Dr. Sandy Streater is Chair of the Department of Health Sciences and the Graduate Coordinator for the Master of Public Health program at AASU. He is a Certified Health Education Specialist (CHES).  His research interests include community needs assessment, program planning implementation and evaluation, and adolescent health behaviors.  He has expertise in health and human performance, theory in health education, public health planning and evaluation, nutrition, health care concepts and delivery systems, and research methods.  He has a record of attaining extramural funding in the areas of public health education, experiential learning, public service evaluation of HIV services, nutrition, and human performance.  In the PUBH 5550 Nutrition and PUBH 7675 Public Health Practicum courses, he shares his expertise in nutrition and community needs assessments with his students, including projects in which he is involved such as the Chatham County HIV Services Needs Assessment, the Chatham County Study on Ethnicity and Health Care Seeking Behaviors, China’s Health Care System, and Teenage Health Risk Behaviors.  He recently developed a course on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, which was offered to students at AASU and Savannah State University as well as members of the community at large. He is currently involved with the assessment of the efficacy of school-based flu inoculation programs.

Dr. David Adams is a tenured associate professor in the Department of Health Sciences and a core MPH faculty member. His research interests include global health and the historical and contemporary epidemiology of infectious diseases. In 2009, he completed an external M.Sc. degree in Infectious Disease Epidemiology via the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine from which he applies concepts and content in a variety of courses (e.g., PUBH 6100 Epidemiology, PUBH 7260 Advanced Epidemiology, PUBH 5560 Introduction to International Health, and PUBH 7675 Public Health Practicum). He is currently completing a textbook, Infectious Disease Epidemiology in Public Health Practice, for John Wiley and Sons to be published in 2014.

142

Dr. Sara Plaspohl is a tenure-track assistant professor in the Department of Health Sciences and a core MPH faculty member. She is a Certified Health Education Specialist (CHES), Certified IRB Manager (CIM), and Certified IRB Professional (CIP).  Her current research interests include college campus tobacco policy, influenza immunizations, college student health, primary prevention, research ethics, and human subject protections.  She teaches PUBH 6175 Research Methods, PUBH 6000 Biostatistics, PUBH 6200 Methods of Health Promotion, and PUBH 7500 Public Health Planning and Evaluation, as well as supervises public health practicum experiences.  Her previous professional experience as a Research Ethics Officer at Memorial University Medical Center enriches classroom discussion and serves as a networking resource for connecting students with practicum opportunities throughout the local community.  She also maintains a faculty appointment as Assistant Professor of Community Medicine for Mercer University School of Medicine.

Dr. Leigh E. Rich is a tenured associate professor in the Department of Health Sciences and a core MPH faculty member. She is trained as a cultural and medical anthropologist, with an emphasis in public health, health communication, bioethics, and the law. She graduated from an interdisciplinary Health and Behavioral Sciences program that emphasizes mixed-methods health-related research integrating theory from the humanities and the natural, social, and behavioral sciences. Since January 2011, she has served as co-editor in chief and, since March 2012, as editor in chief of the Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, an international, peer-reviewed publication born in Australasia, with a growing presence in North America, Europe, and other parts of the globe. She is co-founder and co-director of the fledging Center for Public Health Media and Research, whose mission is to examine the media’s influence on cultural discourse and health behaviors and to develop media as tools for education and policy change. Because of her interests in bioethics, health communication, and public health, she was a visiting researcher at the Brocher Foundation in Geneva, Switzerland, in Summer 2011; she was an intern for the Country Relations and Corporate Communication Web Team at the World Health Organization’s Regional Office for Europe in Copenhagen, Denmark, in Summer 2012; and she was a visiting researcher at the Institut für Bio- und Medizinethik (Institute for Biomedical Ethics) at the University of Basel in Basel, Switzerland, in Summer 2013. She also has worked as qualitative research consultant for five grant projects associated with Memorial University Medical Center and the Georgia Coastal Health District and is a co-founder of Savannah Working Against Human Trafficking. Prior to joining AASU’s MPH program, she taught two anthropology courses in Moscow, Russia; completed a cultural anthropology field experience course in Dorf Tirol, Italy; worked as a graduate assistant for the Center for Research in the Health and Behavioral Sciences, the CDC’s Community Guide to Prevention, the University of Colorado School of Medicine, the Arizona Program for Nicotine and Tobacco Research, and the National Jewish Medical Center; worked as a part- and/or full-time journalist for several publications in the United States and Russia; and served as the vice president of the Colorado Press Women. Her interdisciplinary approach and background as a longtime cultural, health, and political

143

reporter and editor provide a classroom that emphasizes integrating academic fields and communication skills.

Dr. Richard St. Pierre joined the Department of Health Sciences in 1999 and is a non-tenure-track full professor (retired as of December 2012). He holds two degrees in Health Education as well as an EdD. in Counseling. He brings a wide range of expertise to the courses he teaches in the MPH program, including PUBH 5500 Survey of Gerontology, PUBH 5510 Healthy Aging, and PUBH 7675 Public Health Practicum. His research interests include aging and health, international health, and smoking behavior, and he has a record of attaining extramural funding in these areas. He has worked with high-risk youth in community settings and has established health education programs in an international context. These experiences have provided him with insight into the factors influencing success and the failure of health education programming efforts.

Dr. Alice Adams is a tenured assistant professor in the Department of Health Sciences (retired December 2012) who has taught both core and elective courses in the MPH program as well as a regular workshop on proper applications of Excel for the analysis and presentation of health-related data for all Health Sciences students. In her courses, she incorporates her research interests in organizational identity, leadership in high-reliability organizations, and mediation and collaboration among health professionals. This is accomplished by incorporating relevant readings into the syllabus; relating findings or experiences from her research efforts in class discussions and lectures; developing interactive, experiential, or film-based exercises and cases based on research topics; and inviting research collaborators to speak to students in class. Her research interests also include access to health services. She provides opportunities for students to participate in these research projects, including survey design, data collection, data analysis, and report creation.

Dr. Andy Bosak is a tenure-track assistant professor in the Department of Health Sciences who oversees MPH practica, as appropriate, and teaches courses in Sports Medicine that MPH students may use as electives.

Dr. Janet Buelow a tenured full professor in the Department of Health Sciences who teaches courses in Health Administration that MPH students may use as electives (e.g., MHSA 6650 Human Resources Management in Health Care and MHSA 6100 Organization Theory/Organizational Behavior).

Dr. Robert LeFavi is a tenured full professor in the Department of Health Sciences who teaches courses in both Public Health and Sports Medicine that MPH students may use as electives (e.g., PUBH 6225 Health Promotion in the Worksite, PUBH 7300 Spirituality and Health Issues, PUBH 7350 Selected Topics in Complementary and Alternative Health Practices, SMED 5090 Nutritional Issues in Sports Medicine, SMED 5555 Physical Activity in Disease Prevention/Treatment, and SMED 5600 Healthy Weight Management and Body Composition). 

144

He is CHES-certified and holds an M.B.A. in Business Administration and a Ph.D. from Auburn University in Health and Human Performance.  In his PUBH 6225 course that focuses on worksite wellness programs, students visit corporate wellness sites and write a business plan for the development of worksite program.  In the PUBH 7350 course, students hear from complementary health practitioners themselves about the inclusion of their therapies in standard health care practices.  He also uses his own experience as an ordained Anglican priest in the spirituality module of this course and in the PUBH 7300 course. His background in human performance informs his course material in both SMED 5555 and SMED 5600.

Dr. Rod McAdams is a tenured associate professor in the Department of Health Sciences who teaches one core MPH course twice a year, MHSA 6000 Health Care Financing and Delivery Systems, as well as an elective course, MHSA 6850 Managerial and Biomedical Ethics. His research interests include rural health, policy, public financing of health care, access issues, and telemedicine. In the MHSA 6000 course, he includes references to projects and grants in which he is involved (e.g., a Robert Wood Johnson Foundation study on county-level funding and tax support for hospitals, public health, emergency medical services, mental health, and long-term care services) and he requires students to interview practicing health and public health professionals about their training and experiences in our current health care system.

Dr. Bryan Riemann, Ph.D., ATC, FNATA, is a tenured associate professor in the Department of Health Sciences who regularly teaches one core MPH course, PUBH 6000 Biostatistics, as well as courses in Sports Medicine that MPH students may use as electives. He also currently serves as the Coordinator of the Master of Science in Sports Medicine Program and Director of the Biodynamics and Human Performance Center at Armstrong Atlantic State University. He earned a bachelor’s degree in Athletic Training from West Chester University, a master’s degree in Sports Medicine from the University of North Carolina–Chapel Hill, and a doctoral degree in Sports Medicine from the University of Pittsburgh. He has conducted research in various areas surrounding functional joint stability, postural control, and the biomechanics of exercise and therapeutic exercise. Additional research interests include providing scientific evidence to support exercise prescription, the efficacy of clinical orthopedic rehabilitation procedures, and the role of proprioception in functional joint stability. His work has won several manuscript awards and has appeared in numerous international and national sports medicine journals and textbooks. In April 2010, he was awarded the Kristina C. Brockmeier Faculty Award for Teaching and, in June 2011, he was named a Fellow of the National Athletic Trainers’ Association.

Dr. Linda Wright is a tenured full professor in the Department of Health Sciences who regularly teaches one elective MPH course, PUBH 5580 Health and Human Development. She has a Ph.D. in Experimental Psychology with a major in Lifespan Development and a minor in Statistics. In PUBH 5580, students identify, research, and discuss real world health and prevention issues over the lifespan. Students develop Fact Sheets and Research Updates on the issues they identify and also participate in discussions of the issues about which their classmates

145

have written. Graduate students write research proposals to further the knowledge about a health issue at one phase of the lifespan. As a graduate student, Dr. Wright published eleven research articles in Psychology. She then did five years of postdoctoral research in Developmental Neurobiology and continued this work during her tenure at Boston University School of Medicine, with fifteen additional publications. While teaching at Armstrong, she earned a master’s degree in Physical Therapy and has published five articles in this field. She currently also teaches human anatomy, kinesiology, and neuroscience in the Doctor of Physical Therapy program.

Mr. Ron Alt is a part-time instructor in the Department of Health Sciences who regularly teaches one elective MPH course, PUBH 5565 Strategies for the Prevention of Chemical Dependency. He has a master’s degree in Health Science Education from Armstrong Atlantic State University and has worked in the substance abuse field for the past 35 years.  He is presently owner and operator of ALTernatives, a drug-free workplace training and counseling business. He also works within the criminal justice system performing clinical evaluations for DUI and other drug offenders. As a Master Addiction Counselor under NAADAC, he also delivers individual counseling and interventions to substance abusers.  After graduating with his master’s degree in 1990, he operated the Housing Authority of Savannah’s Drug Elimination Program for 18 years.  He also implemented and coordinated an Intensive Residential Substance Abuse Treatment Program for two years at the height of the “crack epidemic. Mr. Alt often serves as a consultant in the field of substance abuse prevention and treatment and has received numerous awards, especially for his work in prevention.

Dr. Betty Dixon is a part-time instructor in the Department of Health Sciences who teaches three courses in both Public Health and Health Administration that MPH students may use as electives: PUBH 5570 Women’s and Minority Health Issues, MHSA 6100 Organization Theory/Organizational Behavior in Health Care, and MHSA 7100 Leadership Seminar. She also has served as an MPH public health practicum site supervisor. As the Director of Nursing and Clinical Services for the Coastal Health District, she exposes students during their practicum experience to real public health issues and encourages them to find solutions to local public health problems.

Dr. Paula Reynolds is a part-time instructor in the Department of Health Sciences who regularly teaches two elective MPH courses, PUBH 5570 Women’s and Minority Health Issues and PUBH 5800 Epidemiology of Cancer. She is a medical doctor with a Master of Public Health degree who until December 2012 was the executive director of SafetyNet at the Coastal Health District.

Dr. Linda Samuel is a part-time instructor in the Department of Health Sciences who regularly teaches one elective MPH course, PUBH 5500 Survey of Gerontology. She is an Assistant Professor of Social Work at Savannah State University in Savannah, Georgia. She is also a Licensed Master Social Worker (LMSW), with more than 20 years of professional experience. She holds a Ph.D. in Social Work form Clark Atlanta University (completed in 2007) and a

146

Graduate Certificate in Gerontology from the University of Georgia (also completed in 2007). In addition, she has a Master of Social Work degree from the University of South Carolina (1990) and a bachelor’s degree in Social Welfare from South Carolina State University. Her area of professional experience includes medical social work in public health and health care as both a home health and oncology social worker. Her research interests include: aging, rural health, and health disparities.

Dr. Erika Tate is a part-time instructor in the Department of Health Sciences who regularly serves as an MPH public health practicum site supervisor and teaches one core MPH course, PUBH 6200 Methods of Health Promotion. She is the founding CEO and president of bluknowledge (word fusion: blueprint + knowledge), a social-justice design and research firm resolved to end health and scientific inequities through empowering community education and advocacy (http://www.bluknowledge.com/).

147

4.1.d. Identification of measureable objectives by which the program assesses the qualifications of its faculty complement, along with data regarding the performance of the program against those measures for each of the last three years.

The MPH program has developed the following set of strategies for the assessment of faculty achievement of program goals related to teaching, research, and service.

Table 4.1.d. Outcome Measures for Judging the Qualifications of MPH Faculty Complement As of 6/1/13

Outcome Measure Target 2010 2011 2012 2013

Proportion of MPH faculty complement who hold terminal degrees (i.e., doctoral-level degrees).

75% 92.3% (12/13) 92.3% (12/13) 93.8% (15/16) 93.8% (15/16)

Proportion of MPH faculty complement who hold Graduate Faculty status (as approved by the Graduate Affairs Committee).

100% 100% (13/13) 100% (13/13) 100% (16/16) 100% (16/16)

Proportion of MPH faculty complement who serve in a significant consulting capacity in their area of expertise that supports local, state, national, and/or international agencies or organizations. This role may involve applied research.(annually)

50% 100% (13/13) 92.3% (12/13) 87.5% (14/16) 87.5% (14/16)

Number* of grants or contracts submitted for funding for research and/or service activities expressed as a percentage of the MPH faculty complement.(annually)

50% 53.5% (7/13) 76.9% (10/13) 50.0% (8/16) 13% (2/16)

Number* of refereed or invited scholarly presentations at state, regional, national, or international scientific meetings and/or professional conferences expressed as a percentage of the MPH faculty complement. (annually)

75%107.7% (14/13)

92.3% (12/13) 100% (16/16) 50% (8/16)

Number* of publications (as author or co-author) in an appropriate area of expertise in a refereed journal or a non-refereed publication that is disseminated at the state, regional, national, or international level expressed as a percentage of the MPH faculty complement.(annually)

25% 23.1% (3/13) 30.8% (4/13) 68.8% (11/16) 31% (5/16)

*Note: The denominator is the total number of faculty in the MPH Program. However, numerators reflect outcome measures for numbers of grants, presentations, and publications are calculated using only MPH primary faculty (n=5). For example in line 5, 2010, there were 13 total MPH faculty, however, the 5 primary MPH faculty had a total of 14 refereed or invited scholarly presentations at state, regional, national, or international scientific meetings and/or professional conferences i.e.14/13 = 107.7%. For a complete list, see Resource File.

148

4.1.e. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: The MPH program has an adequate faculty complement with appropriate training, research, and practice experience. The MPH faculty members provide expertise that comprehensively covers the areas of knowledge basic to public health, with a focus on community health education. Additional content areas of interest to MPH students also are offered as electives. The faculty members make linkages with real-world situations, expertise, and contacts in their courses. This faculty complement is fully able to support the program’s mission, goals, and objectives. The MPH program has established quantifiable outcome measures that assess the qualifications of the MPH faculty. The faculty complement possesses a wide range of expertise related to public health that reflects the multidisciplinary nature of the profession. Ongoing part-time instructors with significant practice experience also contribute regularly to the program. The distribution of scholarly output of the core MPH faculty has increased significantly. Outcome measures for numbers of grants, presentations, and publications were met using MPH total faculty (n=5) only. If the full complement of MPH faculty were used, outcomes would greatly exceed targets.

Weaknesses: In order for the faculty to generate more grants and publications, adjustments need to be made in teaching loads.

Future Plans: The MPH Program will continue to look for knowledgeable practitioners and part-time (adjunct) faculty to augment faculty content knowledge.

149

4.2 Faculty Policies and Procedures: The program shall have well-defined policies and procedures to recruit, appoint and promote qualified faculty, to evaluate competence and performance of faculty, and to support the professional development and advancement of faculty.

4.2.a. A faculty handbook or other written document that outlines faculty rules and regulations.

The policies, procedures, and operational guidelines for faculty rules and regulations are included in the AASU Faculty Handbook (revised May 15, 2012), which is accessible to all faculty via downloadable PDF (see Resource File and/or the following link at http://www.armstrong.edu/images/academic_affairs/Faculty_Handbook.pdf). The Faculty Handbook covers policies and procedures related to the following issues:

101 Administrative Organization102 Academic Units103 Governance

103.1 Faculty Senate103.2 Constitution of the Armstrong Faculty Senate103.3 Bylaws of Armstrong Faculty Senate

104 Standing Committees of the University105 Evaluation Policies and Procedures

105.1 Policy on Evaluation of Administrators105.2 Faculty Evaluation

106 Faculty Rights and Responsibilities106.1 Academic Freedom106.2 Teaching and Advising Expectations106.3 Outside Activities106.4 Professional Expectations106.5 Workplace Expectations

107 Employment Policies107.1 Hiring Policies107.2 Appointment to the Faculty107.3 Contracts107.4 Faculty Personnel Actions and Tenure107.5 Termination of Employment107.6 Other Policies

4.2.b. Description of provisions for faculty development, including identification of support for faculty categories other than regular full-time appointments.

Armstrong Atlantic State University makes available developmental activities related to teaching, research and funding for all faculty members regardless of type of appointment (part-

150

time or full-time). Three divisions within the university are principally tasked with faculty development and include:

The Office of Faculty Development, which is informed by the University Faculty Development Committee (http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/faculty_development/faculty_development_welcome);

Grants and Sponsored Programs (http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/grants/grants_welcome); and

The Office of Online and Blended Learning (http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/office_online_learning/online_blended_welcome).

Developmental activities provided by the University include an array of teaching resources and seminars;1 internal and collaborative research and teaching grants;2 grant opportunities and grant writing resources;3 faculty awards;4 technical support;5 and professional development funds. Multiple seminars related to teaching are offered annually through the Offices of Faculty Development and Online and Blended Learning. These include Friday Faculty Forums, Faculty Reading Roundtables, Faculty Learning Communities, and online and blended learning workshops and boot camps for faculty and students on new technologies that can be used in the classroom. All of these programs are intended to assist faculty in traditional and online course development and the continued improvement and adaptation of teaching techniques, particularly as educational tools and technologies change. Moreover, the Office of Online and Blended Learning specifically supports online course development and delivery, assisting faculty with the attainment of E-faculty status and conducting online course reviews.

Through the Office of Faculty Development, AASU also sponsors annual internal grant competitions that support the development of proposals and/or seed money for projects in teaching and learning, research and scholarship, and leadership activities. Additionally, Grants and Sponsored Programs assists faculty with locating appropriate external funding sources and grant solicitations in their areas of expertise. This is carried out on an ongoing basis, and faculty

1 http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/faculty_development/faculty_development_teaching_resources and http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/office_online_learning/online_blended_professional_development. 2 http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/faculty_development/faculty_development_internal_grants_and_collaborative_grants. 3 http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/faculty_development/faculty_development_grant_writing_resources; http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/grants/grants_funding_opportunities; and http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/grants/grants_proposal_development. 4 http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/faculty_development/faculty_development_faculty_awards. 5 http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/grants/grants_training and http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/office_online_learning/online_blended_faculty_staff_resources.

151

members are notified via e-mail or through the university mail system. Grants and Sponsored Programs also offers one-on-one tutorials and grant writing workshops to assist faculty, staff and students in developing skills needed to create competitive proposals.Both full- and part-time faculty, as well as alumni and staff members, are honored every year with awards recognizing exemplary teaching and mentoring and distinguished service to the University, the academic discipline, and the community.

The AASU Foundation makes available endowment funds that are granted to faculty members for assistance in projects that will directly benefit the university. Applications for these grants are made in writing to the President and are evaluated on the basis of their academic merit. The Health Sciences Department Foundation fund is another source for faculty development activities on an ad hoc basis.

Faculty members also have access to multiple sources of funding for travel to professional meetings (including departmental stipends as well as some resources from the Dean’s Office, the Office of International Studies, and the Office of the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs). The University provides transportation support for attending meetings located outside of the Savannah area. Transportation may include a state car paid for by the University or an employee car for which the University reimburses at the official mileage rate.

Finally, AASU makes available summer salary support for those faculty members who wish to teach during this period. This support has to be approved by the Department Chair, the Dean, and the University President. A separate contract is provided to faculty for this period and salary is calculated according to the number of courses and total credit hours taught.

4.2.c. Description of formal procedures for evaluating faculty competence and performance.

The purpose and intent of faculty evaluation is to provide a regular, systematic evaluation on performance; to encourage professional development and renewal; to assess progress toward tenure and promotion; to encourage individual excellence and achievement; to encourage activities that contribute to the missions and goals of the University, the College of Health Professions, and the Department of Health Sciences; to provide a basis for merit salary increases; and to help those who are not achieving at satisfactory levels to do so. The evaluation process encourages excellence in both traditional and innovative approaches with regard to teaching, research and service.

Armstrong Atlantic State University has several methods to evaluate faculty competence and performance. Faculty members are evaluated in the areas of teaching, research and service. The performance of each faculty member is reviewed annually and judged as not meeting expectations, meeting expectations, or exceeding expectations. The primary methods used to evaluate faculty performance are the Annual Professional Activities Report (APAR) and the Annual Faculty Evaluation (AFE); however, additional measures include pre- and post-tenure

152

review, reappointment ballots, Faculty Peer Evaluation (FPE), graduate faculty status, and student Faculty and Course Evaluations (known as FACE; see Criterion 4.2.d below for more information).

The Annual Professional Activities Report (APAR) is a portfolio that explains and highlights faculty members’ activities with respect to teaching (60 percent), scholarship (20 percent), service (20 percent), and any other appropriate activity faculty wish to submit. This report is completed by faculty every January and includes all activities in which faculty members have engaged during the prior calendar year (from January to December). Supporting documents and materials, including data from student course FACE evaluations, must be included. The APAR is submitted directly to the Department Chair, who reviews the contents and evaluates faculty members’ performance on each of the criteria. The Chair then meets with faculty members individually to discuss the APAR. The completed APAR with the Chair’s written assessments becomes the Annual Faculty Evaluation (AFE), which is submitted to the Dean of the College of Health Professions and subsequently to the University Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs.

Each College within the University determines its faculty’s criteria for annual performance reviews. Each College’s criteria are consistent with those of the other Colleges, but none are identical. In the College of Health Professions, each graduate faculty member is expected to have a record of ongoing scholarly activity. Usually, this results in a peer-reviewed publication; however, it may also result in scholarly activity of another sort. The extent to which a faculty member meets his or her research expectations is described in the candidate’s Annual Performance and Academic Review (APAR) and subsequently reflected in the faculty member’s Annual Faculty Evaluation (AFE). In addition, the quality and quantity of faculty research are significant factors in whether or not a faculty member receives tenure and/or promotion.

All faculty members being reviewed for tenure and promotion are evaluated according to the Department of Health Science’s (see Resource File) and College of Health Professions’ (http://www.armstrong.edu/Health_professions/deans_office/chp_tenure_promotion) guidelines, consistent with the AASU Faculty Handbook (see Criterion 4.2.a above) and USG Board of Regents policies and without prejudice from prior applications. Those applying for tenure undergo both pre-tenure and post-tenure review. Pre-tenure review takes place in the third year of a tenure-track position; post-tenure review takes place the year after tenure has been granted. Tenure and promotion portfolios are reviewed by the Department Chair, in conjunction with the Department’s Tenure and Promotion Committee members, followed by a review by the College’s Tenure and Promotion Committee in light of the College’s criteria. Recommendations are returned to the Dean, who then evaluates the portfolio independently. Candidates whose applications for tenure and/or promotion are rejected may appeal through the appropriate procedures of the University.

153

An additional evaluation method may include Faculty Peer Evaluation (FPE) (see Resource File). Faculty members—particularly non-tenured or pre-tenured faculty being reviewed for reappointment—are required to undergo evaluation by their peers each year prior to being granted tenure. During this process, annual retention ballots are distributed to departmental colleagues. The Department Chair reviews these ballots and departmental members’ feedback and then makes a recommendation to the Dean.

Graduate faculty also must maintain graduate faculty status. Every three to five years after the initial appointment (based upon a candidate’s graduate faculty rank), graduate faculty are re-evaluated by the Graduate Faculty Status Subcommittee of the University Graduate Affairs Committee to ensure maintenance of graduate faculty status. (see Resource File - Graduate Faculty Status Criteria) http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/faculty_senate/senate_graduate_affairs_committee_bylaws).

4.2.d. Description of the processes used for student course evaluation and evaluation of instructional effectiveness.

Teaching effectiveness is a component of faculty evaluation. Evaluation of this component includes faculty members’ expertise to communicate subject matter to students via methods such as lecturing; supervision and training in a laboratory or clinical setting; collection and development of subject materials for courses; guidance of students in practicum experiences, independent studies and research; and ongoing academic advisement.

All faculty and the courses they teach are evaluated by students in those courses at the close of each term according to a University-wide evaluation process (Faculty and Course Evaluation, known as FACE). This assessment tool questions teaching adequacy, accessibility and efforts to help students understand the topics being taught. In addition, an opportunity is given for open-ended student comments. The FACE process is overseen by the University’s Office of Institutional Research (http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/institutional_research/institutional_research_face).

Data are collected and reported to each faculty member, the Department Chair, and the Dean at the end of every term; annual compilations of this data also are provided. (Evaluation forms for courses with less than five students are evaluated only at the departmental level.) FACE data must be included in faculty members’ APAR and AFE reports. (see Resource File or http://www.armstrong.edu/images/institutional_research/eFace_Questions.pdf for copies of the University FACE form.)

The MPH program also utilizes additional forms of assessment so that students may provide input regarding program curriculum, resources, faculty competence, students’ own professional growth and students’ practicum experiences. These assessments include the MPH Student Exit Questionnaire, the MPH Practicum Student Evaluation of the Site, the MPH Initial and Final

154

Competency Self-Evaluation Surveys, and the MPH Alumni Survey. This information is collected by the MPH program and is reviewed by the MPH Coordinator and faculty and used to make program decisions.

The MPH Student Exit Questionnaire (see Resource File) is a survey that all graduating MPH students complete in an anonymous manner. It includes both quantitative and qualitative questions regarding the MPH program curriculum (in general as well as core courses), the practicum experience, MPH faculty, and program and institutional facilities. It also asks students to comment on the major strengths and weakness of the program and its faculty and to suggest improvements.

The MPH Practicum Student Evaluation of the Site (see Resource File) asks students to rate their practicum site and practicum site supervisor using five-point Likert scales and open-ended comment sections. This assessment tool requests that students to reflect upon the quality, availability and professionalism of their site supervisor as well as the practicum site’s contribution to the attainment of practicum objectives and to the student’s professional potential.

The MPH Competency Self-Evaluation Surveys (see Resource File) are administered to students at two times: new student orientation (pre-survey) and prior to graduation during the PUBH 7500 capstone course (post-survey). This tool asks students to reflect on and evaluate their current proficiencies in several competencies: communication, analytical assessment, administration/management, cultural competencies and community, basic public health sciences skills, policy development/program planning, and leadership and ethics. Although these are student self-evaluations, this assessment assists the MPH program and its faculty in refining instruction, evaluation and the curriculum to best meet the professional development needs of students and the discipline of public health.

Lastly, the MPH Alumni Survey (see Resource File) obtains information about graduates’ impressions of how the program and program of study prepared them for their professional lives. The tool seeks information about whether students are employed in public health positions, how long it took to secure employment, what sector(s) of public health they work in, how well the AASU MPH program in general prepared them for this work, and to what extent they use competencies addressed in the MPH program of study (particularly core courses and the practicum experience).

4.2.e. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: The University, College and Department have clearly defined policies and procedures that allow the program to recruit, appoint, evaluate, promote and tenure qualified faculty. The University, College and Department also provide multiple avenues of opportunity

155

for the development of faculty members and the evaluation of courses, faculty and the program by current and graduated students. The University, College and Department have clearly defined policies and procedures that allow the program to recruit, appoint, evaluate, promote and tenure qualified faculty. Performance policies and criteria are reviewed by Departmental and College committees and are accessible online and/or within the Department of Health Sciences. Faculty evaluations are conducted annually and are reviewed by the Department Chair, Dean and Provost. The University, College and Department provide opportunity for the development of faculty members. The MPH program provides multiple avenues of evaluation of courses, faculty and the program by current and graduated students.

Weaknesses: The level of financial support for research, scholarship and creative endeavors is considered to be inadequate. Even though AASU provides small grants for scholarly endeavors, operational budgets and departmental travel budgets have been significantly cut in the past several years. Classroom, meeting and office facilities for graduate courses, graduate students and Department of Health Sciences faculty also are considered to be inadequate. Classrooms geared toward graduate education and dedicated meeting spaces for faculty to meet with graduate students do not currently exist. Dedicated office space for MPH faculty members is inadequate.

Future Plans: The MPH Program will seek additional opportunities and additional funding to compliment faculty development activities.

156

4.3 Student Recruitment and Admissions: The program shall have student recruitment and admissions policies and procedures designed to locate and select qualified individuals capable of taking advantage of the program’s various learning activities, which will enable each of them to develop competence for a career in public health.

4.3.a. Description of the program’s recruitment policies and procedures.

The College of Health Professions, the Department of Health Sciences and the MPH program recruit students at the local level via personal referral and marketing linkages as well as at the national, regional and state levels via meetings and print and online promotion. Recruiting efforts are overseen primarily by the College of Health Professions and its Coordinator of Recruitment and Retention. Recruiting methods include up-to-date websites (http://www.armstrong.edu/Health_Professions/Health_Sciences/healthsciences_master_of_public_health) and social media groups (e.g., http://www.linkedin.com/groups/Armstrong-Master-Public-Health-4754771); billboards and other displays; printed brochures; booths at meetings; visits and presentations to local and state campuses and health-related organizations; and personal contact (e.g., with faculty members as well as “PIER” Leaders; see http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/Alumni/alumni_recruit_students). Recruitment also is enhanced by efforts of the University’s School of Graduate Studies (which subscribes to list-serves that allow interested individuals access to graduate program information and which produces a brochure that illuminates each graduate program at AASU), the Office of Alumni Relations (which oversees PIER Leaders; http://www.armstrong.edu/index.php/Departments/Alumni/alumni_welcome), and the Office of Advancement (http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/external_affairs/external_affairs_welcome).

Recruitment efforts have been so successful that the MPH program is continuously accommodating the maximum number of students. To date, personal referral and online promotion have been the most successful marketing approaches.

Scholarship funds for MPH students include funds from the Scholarships for Disadvantaged Students (SDS). Dr. Streater, Coordinator of the MPH Program, in conjunction with the Grants and Sponsored Research Office and the College of Health Professions Dean’s Office, competed for and was awarded Scholarships for Disadvantaged Students (Grant Award T08HP25216-01-00) in the amount of $240,000/year for the years 2012-2015. Qualified students may receive up to $15,000 per year or $7,500 per semester based on financial need.

4.3.b. Statement of admissions policies and procedures.

For admission to the MPH program, students must complete a general application to AASU’s School of Graduate Studies as well as supplemental application materials specific to the MPH program. A list of MPH program-specific materials can be found on the AASU School of

157

Graduate Studies website (http://www.armstrong.edu/Admissions/graduate2/graduate_program_requirements) as well as the Department of Health Sciences website (http://www.armstrong.edu/Health_Professions/Health_Sciences/healthsciences_apply). Application packets are available from the School of Graduate Studies as hard-copies or electronically (http://www.armstrong.edu/Admissions/graduate3/admissions_apply_aasu_graduate). The general Graduate Studies application can be requested in person or by mail on hard-copy; downloaded and completed on hard-copy; or accessed and completed online. The MPH program-specific application materials can be requested in person or by mail on hard-copy or downloaded and completed on hard-copy (see http://www.armstrong.edu/Admissions/graduate3/graduate_forms).

All applications to the MPH program are submitted (or forwarded, in the case of transcripts and test scores) directly to AASU’s School of Graduate Studies and must include:

Graduate Studies application form $30 non-refundable application fee Immunization form Two (2) official transcripts of all post-secondary education Letter of intent Two (2) completed reference forms Completed work experience form Official GRE or MAT scores (required for degree-seeking students only).

Copies of completed applications are then provided by the School of Graduate Studies to the MPH Program Coordinator, who uses the MPH Program Admission Score sheet (see Resource File) to evaluate materials and assess whether applicants should be admitted. Requirements for admission to the MPH program are as follows:

Baccalaureate degree from a regionally accredited institution Minimum overall undergraduate GPA of 2.8 Minimum score ≥ 70 for applicant’s letter of intent Minimum score ≥ 70 for personal references Minimum test score for one of the following:

o GRE ≥ 286 (verbal + quantitative; formerly 800) oro MAT ≥ 400

Public health-related work experience is also factored in

While there are minimum scores for all the above criteria (except work experience), it is the total score that considered for admission to the program. Applicants with an overall score of 2000 or higher are accepted for regular admission to the MPH program. Applicants who score a

158

minimum of 1785 may still be considered; the MPH Coordinator consults with the MPH faculty for further guidance about these applicants. New students are admitted to the MPH program on a rolling basis at the beginning of every term (Fall, Spring and Summer). If more applicants are approved for admission than slots are available for a specific term, acceptances for students who applied last are delayed one semester. The MPH program conforms to all AASU School of Graduate Studies admission and progression criteria. Course offerings are designed to accommodate full-time or part-time students. Courses are also offered in the evenings, and some are in hybrid form or online to accommodate traditional and non-traditional students.

4.3.c. Examples of recruitment materials and other publications and advertising that describe, at a minimum, academic calendars, grading and the academic offerings of the program. If a program does not have a printed bulletin/catalog, it must provide a printed web page that indicates the degree requirements as the official representation of the program. In addition, references to website addresses may be included.

Armstrong Atlantic State University publishes its Graduate Catalog on a yearly basis (http://www.armstrong.edu/images/academic_affairs/current_graduate_catalog.pdf (see Resource File). In the catalog, each graduate program offered by the University is described in detail, including admission requirements, the program of study, and standards of progression and graduation. This document is always available to students, staff and faculty electronically via a link on the School of Graduate Studies home page. The academic calendar for all three terms in the specified academic year is included on the second page of the Graduate Catalog, and information about AASU’s Honor Code and Code of Conduct and academic policies related to grades, grade reporting, academic standing, academic dismissal due to low grades, and course load and limitations are included. Additionally, via the AASU University Registrar website (http://www.armstrong.edu/index.php/Departments/registrar/registrar_welcome), students can access academic calendars, course schedules, final exam schedules, policies about GPA changes and withdrawals, and the Graduate Catalog. Under “Academic Resources” on the Registrar’s home page, students also can locate academic policies (http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/registrar/registrar_academic_policies) and policies about academic standing (http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/registrar/registrar_academic_standing).

Program details regarding the MPH degree—including admission requirements, the program of study, graduate assistantships, and the program’s mission, vision and goals—and selected resources related to careers in public health also are provided through the Health Sciences website, which is updated as needed (http://www.armstrong.edu/Health_Professions/Health_Sciences/healthsciences_master_of_public_health). Materials related to technical standards, grade expectations and degree progression,

159

and suggested MPH course sequences are given to all MPH students during new student orientation (see Resource File).

4.3.d. Quantitative information on the number of applicants, acceptances and enrollment, by concentration, for each degree, for each of the last three years. Data must be presented in table format.

Over the past three academic years, 189 students have applied to the MPH program. Of that number, 111 were admitted and 62 enrolled.

Table 4.3.d. Quantitative Information on Applicants, Acceptances, and Enrollments, Fall 2010 to Spring 2013

2010 2011 2012 2013

As of 6/1/13

Total

Community Health Education

Applied 42 63 84 21 210

Accepted 25 35 51 16 127

Enrolled 17 19 26 13 75

4.3.e. Quantitative information on the number of students enrolled in each specialty area of each degree identified in the instructional matrix, including headcounts of full- and part-time students and an FTE conversion, for each of the last three years. Explain any important trends or patterns, including a persistent absence of students in any degree or specialization. Data must be presented in table format.

Over the past three academic years, the number of students in the MPH program, both full-time and part-time, has increased (41, 50 and 65, respectively).

Table 4.3.e. Student Enrollment Data from fall 2010 to spring 2013 As of 6/1/13

2010 2011 2012 2013

HC FTE HC FTE HC FTE HC FTE

MPH: Community Health Education

25 FT

16 PT34

36 FT

14 PT44

35 FT

30 PT53

41

2354

160

4.3.f. Identification of measurable objectives by which the program may evaluate its success in enrolling a qualified student body, along with data regarding the performance of the program against those measures for each of the last three years.

The outcome measures used to evaluate success in enrolling quality students into the MPH program include the following measures, as identified in each applicant’s completed application packet and assessed using the MPH Program Admission Score Sheet (see 4.3.b above):

Table 4.3.f. Outcome Measures for Judging the Qualifications of MPH Students As of 6/1/13

Outcome Measure Target 2010 2011 2012 2013

GPA (undergraduate) ≥ 2.887.0% (20/23)

x3.12

91.7% (22/24)

x3.07

93.3% (28/30)

x3.24

92% (11/12)

x3.19

GRE (verbal) ≥ 40063.2% (12/19)

x467

50% (11/22)

x422

60% (18/30)

442

67% (8/12)

x414

GRE (quantitative) ≥ 40078.9% (15/19)

x482

68.2% (15/22)

x493

66.7% (20/30)

x477

83% (10/12)

x479

MPH Application Letter of Intent Score ≥ 70100% (23/23)

x90

100% (25/25

x90

100% (30/30

x90

100% (12/12)

x85

MPH Application Professional References Scores

≥ 35 (each)

100% (46/46)

x51

100% (50/50)

x52

98.3% (59/60)

x54

100% (12/12)

x52%

MPH Program Admission Score (total) ≥ 178590.9% (20/22)

x2182

100% (24/24)

x2212

100% (29/29)

x2131

100% (12/12)

x2118

4.3.g. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

161

Strengths: The admission and recruitment policies followed by the MPH program ensure that qualified applicants are identified and selected for admission and that students have access to information about the program as well as performance and progression expectations. The MPH program continues to recruit and admit qualified students every year. The use of the MPH Program Admission rubric allows flexibility for applicants with real potential for a successful career in public health who may not necessarily “fit” the traditional model. HRSA funding for qualified but financially disadvantaged students will ensure that admission into the MPH program will not be limited by socioeconomic status. Information about admission policies, academic calendars, the program of study, and grade expectations are available in multiple places (both electronically and on hard-copy).

Weaknesses: The MPH program is continuously accommodating the maximum number of students and sometimes must delay acceptances by one semester. The ability to grow in capacity is dependent upon increasing more faculty and infrastructural resources. Supplemental application materials specific to the MPH program, while available online for download, currently cannot be completed online, and links to these materials are difficult to find on the Office of Graduate Studies website.

162

4.4 Advising and Career Counseling: There shall be available a clearly explained and accessible academic advising system for students, as well as readily available career and placement advice.

4.4.a. Description of the program’s advising services for students in all degrees and concentrations, including sample materials such as student handbooks. Include an explanation of how faculty are selected for and oriented to their advising responsibilities.

Armstrong Atlantic State University has established two official advisement periods that last four weeks every Fall (e.g., Monday, March 26, to Friday, April 20, 2012) and four weeks every Spring (e.g., Monday, March 25, to Friday, April 19, 2013) and are listed on the University’s academic calendars. Additionally, two advisement days occur on the last two business days before the first day of every term (Fall, Spring and Summer). During official advisement periods, students may request appointments with their faculty advisors to discuss upcoming schedules and other academic concerns. MPH faculty typically will advise students outside of these periods as well when requested. The University also has an Office of Academic Orientation and Advisement, with resources for both traditional and non-traditional students (see http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/advising/advising_advisement_and_course_selection), and the College of Health Professions has a dedicated Coordinator of Recruitment and Retention who may advise students as necessary.

Both the Office of Graduate Studies and the MPH program offer orientation sessions for students at the beginning of every term (Fall, Spring and Summer). The Office of Academic Orientation and Advisement also offers a seminar for faculty on an ongoing basis (at least once per year) on best practices for advising. Additionally, the MPH Program Coordinator and senior Health Sciences faculty informally mentor junior faculty in advising.

MPH students are initially assigned a faculty advisor by the MPH Program Coordinator based on their admission application letter of intent. The MPH Program Coordinator tries to match students’ interests in public health with faculty areas of expertise and research. Once in the program, however, students may select a different advisor, if they so choose, at any time. All MPH students are first advised during the new student orientation session, attended by all MPH faculty, or, if the student is absent, by the MPH Program Coordinator. Graduate students are not required by the University to make advising appointments during the remainder of their matriculation, but they are strongly encouraged to do so by the MPH program and its faculty. Approximately two to three weeks prior to official advisement periods, all MPH students are contacted via e-mail to remind them of advisement dates and procedures. Students sign up for advisement slots by stopping by or calling the front desk of the Health Sciences office.

For efficacy reasons and to establish strong working relationships between students and faculty, in-person advisement is recommended, but advisement also may take place by telephone or online if a student prefers.

163

At the MPH orientation sessions, students are provided the MPH Student Handbook and other informational materials, including (among other items) information about the University, campus life and Lane Library; general academic and financial resources; the MPH program’s mission, vision, goals and strategies, student learning outcomes, technical standards and Mandala Movement; progression and graduation policies; the MPH program of study; and suggested MPH course sequences (see Resource File). Students’ official MPH program of study, documenting their progression through the program, is kept in their departmental file and is shared with the student and updated by the faculty advisor during advisement.

4.4.b. Description of the program’s career counseling services for students in all degree programs. Include an explanation of efforts to tailor services to meet specific needs in the program’s student population.

The MPH program page on the Department of Health Sciences website includes a selected list of career resources related to public health as well as information on credentialing, CHES certification, and other web sites related to public health (http://www.armstrong.edu/Health_Professions/Health_Sciences/healthsciences_master_of_public_health); additionally, AASU MPH students can join a LinkedIn group that enables current students and graduate students to connect with one another and potentially other public health professionals (http://www.linkedin.com/groups/Armstrong-Master-Public-Health-4754771). When members of the public health community contact MPH faculty regarding internships, fellowships and jobs, these notices are sent to the Secretary of the Department of Health Sciences, who maintains a list of all MPH students and sends this information out in an e-mail.

The MPH program has written small grants and been awarded graduate assistantships that are specifically devoted to community projects. These assistantships place MPH students with public health-related sites directly in the community and occasionally evolve into employment opportunities. Likewise, students’ required MPH practicum experiences have served as a relatively regular vehicle for employment, and MPH faculty encourage and assist students with finding appropriate practicum sites that match students’ public health career goals. Community practitioners are also utilized in a career-advising capacity through classroom presentations and other public health-related events (e.g., programs hosted by the Department of Health Sciences, the MPH program, and/or the Center for Public Health Media and Research).

MPH students have the opportunity to serve in various public health leadership roles by participating as a member or an officer of the Health Sciences Student Association and its programs and events (e.g., AASU Day, Light the Night, etc.); as the official MPH liaison for AASU’s Graduate Student Coordinating Council (GSCC); and/or as a student liaison or volunteer for the Georgia Public Health Association or American Public Health Association. These opportunities can assist students with networking; moreover, the GSCC offers monetary assistance to graduate students to attend conferences.

164

Both the Office of Graduate Studies and the University’s Career Services (http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/career_services/career_welcome) offer workshops on job search strategies, resume writing, interviewing skills, and business and social etiquette as well as career placement counseling, job listings and referrals, and job fairs. The University also offers confidential counseling services to students via its Counseling Center for issues related to setting goals or resolving personal issues (http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/counseling_center/counseling_welcome).

4.4.c. Information about student satisfaction with advising and career counseling services.

Each semester, student exit surveys are administered by the MPH program (see Resource File and 4.2.d above, and 4.4.d below). The MPH Student Exit Questionnaire is a mandatory survey that all MPH students complete in an anonymous manner at the close of their practicum experience. (For ease of dissemination and collection, this survey is provided to students in the MPH Practicum Guidebook and collected following the MPH Practicum Presentation session. Because the survey is mandatory and is collected at the time of the oral practica presentations, the return rate is 100%). It includes both quantitative and qualitative questions regarding the MPH program curriculum (in general as well as core courses), the practicum experience, MPH faculty, and program and institutional facilities. It also asks students to comment on the major strengths and weakness of the program and its faculty and to suggest improvements. Two questions on this questionnaire addressed student impressions as to the quality of MPH advisement and the student’s perception of their academic preparation.

Survey Item Target 2010 2011 2012

Advisement was

adequately provided

throughout my

program

80% responses

good and/or

excellent

90.5% 93.3% 75.1%

I feel that I am

academically well

prepared for the career

I plan to enter.

80% responses

good and/or

excellent

100% 100% 100%

Note: There is not data for 2013 as we do not assess 2013 until January 2014.

The University’s Office of Institutional Review in conjunction with Alumni Services, Career Services and the Student Union also administers an exit questionnaire to AASU graduate students each term. Students complete these assessments, which address the quality of counseling services, advising and career services, among other issues, at the end of their matriculation and prior to graduation. The University’s Office of Institutional Review disseminates its exit survey to all graduating students every semester, obtaining a list of

165

graduating students and their e-mail addresses from the graduate applications that students submit to Graduate Studies. An e-mail that contains a Survey Monkey link to the questionnaire is sent to students. Students also may fill out the survey using a kiosk set up at the University’s graduation fair. Small incentives (e.g., entry into a drawing for a prize) are used to encourage completion of the survey. If students indicate on their survey that their responses may be shared, Institutional Review provides reports to Alumni Services, Career Services and the Student Union. This exit survey reveals that approximately 95% of all graduate students who report utilizing the Career Services Department say they are satisfied with the service per Elizabeth Wilson, Director of the AASU Career Services Department.

4.4.d. Description of the procedures by which students may communicate their concern to program officials, including information about how these procedures are publicized and about the aggregate number of complaints and/or student grievances submitted for each of the last three years.

At any time during their program, students may file formal complaints and/or appeals. Students may initiate appeals for admission, progression and graduation decisions. The process for appeals is included in the Armstrong Graduate Catalog (http://www.armstrong.edu/images/academic_affairs/current_graduate_catalog.pdf, page 20); the form is available on the School of Graduate Studies website (http://www.armstrong.edu/images/graduate/Appeal%20Form%20Revised%20May%202012-3.pdf); and the process is explained to MPH students during the new student orientation session. Appeals must be submitted prior to mid-term of the next regular semester, and students must complete a Graduate Student Appeal Form and submit appropriate documentation related to their appeal. The procedure for appeals is as follows:

1. Student submits completed appeal form and supporting documentation to the appropriate Program Coordinator.

2. The appeal is then forwarded to the Department Chair and/or Dean for recommendation.

3. The appeal is returned to Graduate Studies and the student is notified of the decision.

If a student wishes to dispute the result of the appeal, the following procedure takes place:1. Student submits a formal letter to Graduate Studies to request a hearing with the

Graduate Student Appeals subcommittee, an elected standing committee of the Graduate Coordinating Council.

2. The chair of the Graduate Student Appeals subcommittee calls a meeting.3. A representative from the Department and the student attend the hearing to

petition the committee to adjudicate the departmental decision.4. The Graduate Appeals Committee submits a recommendation to the Provost/Vice

President for Academic Affairs.

166

5. All decisions made by the Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs are final and will be returned to Graduate Studies.

6. Graduate Studies will notify the student of the final decision.

Similarly, grade appeals may be initiated through the Chair of the appropriate academic department prior to midterm of the semester after the grade was received, in accordance with the regulations of Armstrong Atlantic State University. The procedure for appeals is as follows:

1. The student discusses the contested grade with the instructor involved.2. If the grade dispute remains unresolved, the student meets with the Department

Chair and the instructor. If the grade dispute is with the Department Chair, the student meets with the Dean of the College and the Department Chair. A memorandum for the record is prepared by the Department Chair (or Dean) that includes the substance of the conversations during the meeting. The student will receive a copy upon request.

3. If the grade dispute remains unresolved, the student will present his or her appeal in writing to the Department Chair or the Dean of the College, as applicable, who will then appoint a review board to hear the appeal.

4. The review board hears the grade appeal and presents its findings to the Dean.5. If the Dean denies the appeal, the student may continue the appeal to the Vice

President and Dean of Faculty. This appeal must be in writing and must be filed within five days of notification from the Dean.

Informal complaints and/or appeals are directed to the MPH Graduate Coordinator or individual MPH or Health Sciences faculty members during informal or formal advising appointments.As noted in 4.2.d above, students play a significant role in program, course and faculty evaluation. To summarize, students provide regular feedback using the following tools:

University-wide Faculty and Course Evaluation (FACE) protocol, administered at the end of every course, with feedback shared with the faculty member of record, the Department Chair, and the Dean (see http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/institutional_research/institutional_research_face and http://www.armstrong.edu/images/institutional_research/eFace_Questions.pdf).

MPH Competency Self-Evaluation Surveys (see Resource File), administered to students at the new student orientation session (pre-survey) and just prior to graduation during the PUBH 7500 capstone course (post-survey). This tool asks students to reflect on and evaluate their current proficiencies in several competencies: communication, analytical assessment, administration/management, cultural competencies and community, basic public health sciences skills, policy development/program planning, and leadership and ethics. Although these are student self-evaluations, this assessment assists the

167

MPH program and its faculty in refining instruction, evaluation and the curriculum to best meet the professional development needs of students and the discipline of public health.

MPH Practicum Student Evaluation of the Site (see Resource File), administered at the close of a student’s practicum experience. This tool asks students to rate their practicum site and practicum site supervisor and reflect upon the quality, availability and professionalism of their site supervisor as well as the practicum site’s contribution to the attainment of practicum objectives and to the student’s professional potential.

MPH Student Exit Questionnaire (see Resource File), a survey that all MPH students complete in an anonymous manner at the close of their practicum experience. (For ease of dissemination and collection, this survey is provided to students in the MPH Practicum Guidebook and collected following the MPH Practicum Presentation session). It includes both quantitative and qualitative questions regarding the MPH program curriculum (in general as well as core courses), the practicum experience, MPH faculty, and program and institutional facilities. It also asks students to comment on the major strengths and weakness of the program and its faculty and to suggest improvements.

MPH Alumni Survey (see Resource File), publicized via direct e-mail every year to MPH graduates and administered via Survey Monkey, obtains information about graduates’ impressions of how the program and program of study prepared them for their professional lives. The tool seeks information about whether students are employed in public health positions, how long it took to secure employment, what sector(s) of public health they work in, how well the AASU MPH program in general prepared them for this work, and to what extent they use competencies addressed in the MPH program of study (particularly core courses and the practicum experience).

Data from these tools are collected by the MPH program and reviewed by the MPH Graduate Coordinator and faculty in order to make program decisions and improvements. Students are also represented on MPH faculty search committees.

Students can provide input into program policies and issues through the MPH Advisory Council and AASU’s Graduate Student Coordinating Council (GSCC). The MPH Advisory Council, which includes student representatives, makes recommendations concerning program curriculum issues, policies and overall program functioning. The GSCC serves several purposes, including “to represent the graduate student body in all matters concerning academics, welfare, administration, and services; to assist graduate students by providing professional development activities that make them more employable; to promote closer graduate student–faculty–

168

administration relations; and to work with Graduate Studies, the Division of Student Affairs, and other campus offices to promote greater recognition of graduate education on and off the campus” (2012–2013 Graduate Catalog, p. 44).

Over the past three academic years, no formal grievances have been filed in relation to the MPH Program. Only one informal complaint was lodged in relation to one instructor’s teaching methodologies. Per University, College and Departmental policies, this complaint began at the program level and was subsequently resolved. Only matters that reach the College level in the grievance protocol are considered “formal” grievances.

4.4.e. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: Students have access to one-on-one formal and informal academic advising at minimum nine weeks out of every year and theoretically year-round. They also have access to multiple formal and informal opportunities for career counseling and networking. Formal advising periods are available to students nearly nine weeks of every year, with informal advising available practically year-round. Projected goals regarding adequacy of advisement were surpassed for 2010 and 2011. Students’ perceptions of their academic preparation for their career surpassed goal. Formal and informal procedures for students to provide program feedback and/or submit grievances are in place, and information about these mechanisms is available through the Graduate Catalog and MPH new student orientation sessions.

Weaknesses: Even though the format of the MPH Alumni Survey has been changed, the response rate (although improved slightly from prior years) continues to be less than desirable. Student responses to quality of advisement in 2012 was 4.9% lower than the established goal.

Future Plans: The MPH Program will monitor the Alumni Survey to determine if advisement dissatisfaction is a trend or an aberration. MPH faculty members will determine whether course advisement for each term will become mandatory for MPH students.

169

Addendum A

2.7.a. Description of the procedures used for monitoring and evaluating student progress in achieving the expected competencies, including procedures for identifying competency attainment in practice and culminating experiences.

Competency Assessment via Curriculum

The instructional matrices as identified in Tables 2.6.c.i and 2.6.c.ii were designed to insure that each core course contributes to specific competencies to be achieved by the student during their tenure in the program. The program defines the public health competencies that students are to attain. Course materials and assignments satisfy learning experiences associated with each competency. The student’s performance is assessed in the form of grades. In addition, the program utilizes expanded assessment tools to further evaluate student progress in achieving competencies.

Additional Competency Assessment

Beginning spring 2012, each student is required to complete a self-assessment at the orientation session prior to beginning the MPH program. Incoming students are asked to reflect and evaluate their current proficiency in each of the program’s competency areas on a scale from 1 to 5; 1 meaning they feel they are not at all proficient, and 5 meaning they feel that they possess a very high level of proficiency. The results of this self-assessment will be compared to students’ post-assessment results which is a program requirement at the completion of the capstone course. Results can be compared to those of previous academic years to assess trends. The primary MPH faculty review the findings during annual retreat each January to evaluate any areas in need of improvement. (Refer to Resource File for a copy of pre and post self-assessment tools.)

In addition to the above-mentioned assessment, each student is required to anonymously complete a Student Exit Questionnaire which allows the student to assess their perceived value of the program regarding courses, faculty and facilities. Students may also respond to open-ended questions regarding program strengths and weaknesses. The primary MPH faculty review the findings during annual retreat each January to evaluate any areas in need of improvement. (Refer to MPH Student Handbook for a copy of the Student Exit Questionnaire.)

The MPH Alumni Survey provides an additional vehicle for post-graduation feedback as to the student’s perceived proficiency in the program’s competencies as applicable to their current job requirements. The primary MPH faculty review the findings during annual retreat each January to evaluate any areas in need of improvement. (Refer to on-site Resource File for a copy of the MPH Alumni Survey.)

170

Competency Assessment via Culminating Experiences

Culminating experiences include the capstone course (PUBH 7500 – Planning and Evaluation) as well as the practicum (PUBH 7675). For full explanations of the culminating experiences please refer to Criteria 2.4 and 2.5.

Capstone Project (PUBH 7500): The program establishes the objectives for the capstone course/project which are based on programmatic competencies. The syllabus for the course lists the objectives students are expected to have attained at the end of the course (refer to syllabus for PUBH 7500 in Resource File). Please refer to Table 2.5.a. for the Capstone Schematic which illustrates the interface between core public health courses and the program competencies within the capstone project (a larger more legible version is available in Resource File). The programmatic competencies demonstrate that the student is able to synthesize and integrate knowledge acquired through the MPH program into an applied experience (refer to Goal 1 in criteria 1.1.c. and 1.1.d.). The primary MPH faculty review the findings during annual retreat each January to evaluate any areas in need of improvement.

Practicum (PUBH 7675): Before enrolling in the practicum, each student is required to develop objectives in consultation with a site supervisor and a faculty supervisor. Upon completion of the practicum (after 225 hours on-site), the student submits an executive summary that summarizes this applied practice experience. They are also required to present the practicum orally. The executive summary, the oral presentation and the site supervisor evaluation are evaluated by primary MPH faculty using rubrics established by the program (refer to MPH Student Handbook in Resource File for MPH practicum evaluation instruments). The primary MPH faculty review the findings during annual retreat each January to evaluate any areas in need of improvement.

171