Introduction · Web viewLearning Agreement Scoring Rubric x 0.20 = Practicum presentation Practicum Presentation Scoring Rubric x 0.25 = Practicum poster Practicum Poster Scoring

Tammi Thomas Sections for Response to PM&DC Application Information Page PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT 1 of NUMPAGES \* MERGEFORMAT 42

Introduction

Many of the items requested in the application to the Pakistan Medical and Dental Council (PM&DC) for registering the Master of Public Health Program (MPH Program), University of Louisville (UofL), are not directly applicable to a standalone program in public health. Our MPH Program is population-based and does not include direct clinical- or patient-oriented experiences.

In order to be as responsive as possible, the information provided by UofL includes restatements of requests that are clinical in nature. The restatements are intended to be responsive to the requests from a public health population perspective. Restatements include reference to this Introduction for clarity.


(1) Professor Dr. Craig H. Blakely, PhD, MPH, Dean(2) 62(3) PhD, Michigan State University, Ecological Psychology, 1980; MPH, Maternal and Child Health, University of

Texas Health Science Center at Houston, 1992(4) Clinical Research Statistics

Honors SeminarResearch DesignIntroduction to Health Policy and ManagementCapstone in Public Health


(4) Health Management and System Sciences

(7) Permanent/Tenured Full Professor

(8) [NO problem including this if necessary]

1412 Saint James Court

Louisville, KY 40208, USA


9) PNG image on right can be resized as needed

10) (a) 001-502- 852-3297

(b) 001-979- 777-3584

12) 01 April, 2013


Pete’s comments:

We are not asked for anything above. We don’t have the annexures cited above. In addition, for some of these (viz., (viii) and (xi)), our procedures take

precedence for UofL, SACS, and CEPH considerations. Suggest adding nothing, since it’s technically not OUR but NUR’s application, so far as I know.


21. 1. For the MPH Program, the learning experience opportunities through which the competencies are met include the core and concentration coursework, the Practicum, the Integration course, non-practicum related field experience, and data assessment methodology, the latter two of which are offered in several MPH courses. Methods to evaluate the degree to which students achieve the competencies vary by the learning experience opportunity. For course work, evaluations include a combination of exams, term papers, oral presentations, and peer-evaluated team work. For the practicum, all students complete their field experience, which includes preparation of a concept document and learning agreement prior to starting their field work and a written report, poster, and oral presentation after completion of the practicum work. For the Integration class, evaluation includes case evaluations and presentations and case development and presentation plus a final comprehensive examination covering the core and cross-cutting competencies.

21. 2. The practicum experience bridges the gap between classroom and public health practice by providing field experience at a public health worksite. Each MPH student identifies a practicum site, develops a learning agreement in consultation with the practice site mentor and his or her faculty mentor, works at the site to pursue the components of the learning agreement and to gain experience within the organization, prepares a written characterization of the practice site, and prepares written and oral reports describing the practicum experience.

At the completion of the practicum experience, the successful student is able to:

Develop goals, objectives, and execution plans for the field work and its deliverables Participate in the day-to-day operations of a public health-related worksite, working with practicing

public health professionals Understand and describing, in detail, the functions, organization, and operations of a public health-

related worksite Identify challenges faced by the organization in achieving its public health mission and characterizing

strategies used by the organization carry out its mission within the public health system Understand and describe the experience of working at a public health-related site


On completion of the practicum, students are required to prepare written and oral reports and an electronic poster, each of which describes the learning objectives, above.


(xiii) The UofL definition of a credit hour is 50 minutes of instruction over a 14-week period in a semester. This definition applies to each credit hour of the total number of credit hours needed to complete the requirements of all professional and academic degrees offered by the UofL.

The MPH program requires 48 total credit hours to complete the MPH degree. The MPH curriculum consists of coursework in four areas: 18 credit hours covering the five core areas of knowledge basic to public health (biostatistics, epidemiology, environmental/occupational health, health policy/administration and social/behavioral health), 15 credit hours of concentration courses in one of the five core areas of public health or individual track coursework, 6 credit hours of practicum experience, and 9 credit hours of additional course work including the following three credit hour courses: Critical Thinking and Program Evaluation, and Integrated Learning and Experience in Public Health, and a 3 credit hour elective.

UofL policy requires each syllabus to include a statement that students are expected to spend at least 2.5 hours of study outside the classroom for each hour of classroom contact. While no formal method of ensuring this exists, compliance in the MPH Program is indirectly evidenced by student evaluations. Not being a clinical program, the MPH Program does not need to monitor student study or duty to protect the health of both trainees and patients.


18(1)

The concept of the culminating experience for the MPH program on matriculation and consists of the successful completion of three components. Each component builds on the knowledge and experience gained in the preceding phase of the culminating experience; students are required to pass each component. The three components are:

PHPH-614 Critical Thinking and Program Evaluation Practicum (PHPH-679), which includes:

o A field experience at a public health practice siteo A paper discussing the practicumo An electronic poster showcasing the work done for the practicumo An oral presentation of the practicum, its results, and other pertinent information

PHPH-697 Integrating Learning and Experience in Public Health course, which includes:o Working in public health core interdisciplinary teams (based on students’ concentrations) to evaluate, present,

and discuss practitioner-developed public health scenarioso Working in public health core interdisciplinary teams to write a public health case study o Working individually, and as a team, to complete a comprehensive examination covering the core areas of public

health

Within the above culminating experience, a learning activity that meets criteria 18 (1) is the completion of a practice experience at a public health worksite (PHPH-679). This experience has been described in Section 21.2 with more detail available in the course syllabus. The practicum experience is designed to bridge the gap between academia and public


health practice by providing field experience at a public health worksite. Each MPH student identifies a practicum site, develops a learning agreement in consultation with the practice site mentor and their faculty mentor, works at the site to address the components of the learning agreement and to gain experience within the organization, prepares a written characterization of the practice site, and prepares written and oral reports describing the practicum experience.

The successful practicum student is able to:

Develop goals, objectives, and execution plans for the field work and its deliverables Participate in the day-to-day operations of a public health-related worksite, working with practicing public health

professionals Understand and describing, in detail, the functions, organization, and operations of a public health-related

worksite Identify challenges faced by the organization in achieving its public health mission and characterizing strategies

used by the organization carry out its mission within the public health system Understand and describe the experience of working at a public health-related site

18(2)

As described in 18(1), the capstone course PHPH-697 Integrating Learning and Experience in Public Health is taken in the last semester and is designed to synthesize and integrate knowledge acquired in course work and other learning experiences and to apply this knowledge to situations that represent professional public health practice. At the beginning of the course, students are assigned to interdisciplinary teams consisting of 5-6 members, based on their declared concentrations. The goal is to have each of the five core areas of public health represented on each team, however, because all core areas cannot be equally represented, due to varying numbers in each concentration, team composition has variable representation from each of the core areas. Teams work together during the entire semester to complete the following integration activities. Each team is required to evaluate and present two small cases (1 page vignettes) that have been selected to represent real public health events. This is followed by the analysis and presentation of a large case derived from the literature. For both the small and large cases, teams are required to provide a description of the case and relevant background information; clear identification of the decision-makers and decision to be made; lead a discussion of the team decision or recommended course of action; and a discussion of the key issues in the case and any core and cross-cutting competencies used in the analysis of the case. The third activity in the course requires that each team research, develop, write, and present a new public health case. The format for the cases is provided in the syllabus and a specific rubric is available to provide guidance for the development of the case. These activities require teams to identify relevant public health information, use relevant technology to summarize and assess the data, evaluate the validity of the available information, compile the evidence, and apply the findings into a coherent case presentation that is critically by both the faculty and their peers. A full description of these activities is available in the course syllabus for PHPH-697.


(4) a) MPH students are required to interact a variety of public health professionals, their faculty mentors, and their peers through classroom instruction, community projects (not related to their practicum), their practicum experience, and the culminating capstone course PHPH-697 Integrating Learning and Experience in Public Health. The activities associated with the practicum and the integration course (see sections 18(1) and 18(2)) are designed to demonstrate student’s knowledge of public health and his or her ability to communicate that knowledge through peer and faculty review of presentations as well as faculty-evaluated written reports. In addition to these activities, students work in teams for much of their course work in PHPH-697. For example, in the core environmental and occupational health course, students are assigned to teams and work together to develop both homework assignments and team projects that require oral and written reports that are critiqued by the faculty. This requires that a team coordinates its members’ responsibilities for a given project and assure that a coherent document or report is provide that effectively communicates the assignment. Another example is from the course PHPH-614 Program Planning and Evaluation. For this course, students work in teams to complete community-based projects. The assignment requires that each team identifies a community project, develops a program plan to implement the project, and designs an evaluation strategy to assess the proposed program plan. The program plans and evaluation strategies are presented and evaluated by the community site health professionals and faculty. Team work is an integral part of the MPH curriculum and enhances skills needed to effectively communicate public health issues to both the general public and public health professionals.

(4) b) This section is not applicable to the MPH program. As described in the introduction, the MPH degree is a professional degree focused on the health of populations; interactions with individual patients, family members, and others are not part of the mission of public health


One of the learning activities in which students develop competency in communication to a broad range of health professionals with diverse ranges of socioeconomic and cultural background is through community service efforts. The SPHIS tracks student community service efforts by the following metrics: date of service, community group or organization served, location of service, description of the service performed, numbers of student and employee participants, and number of hours served. Additional information includes the primary issue addressed (e.g., community and economic development, disaster response and recovery, environmental health, nutrition, youth development). Students report the learning experiences involved with these activities through classroom venues and seminars. A summary of recent student service/community engagement activities is included in Appendix SPHIS 1.

Appendix SPHIS 1

Recent Student Service and Community Engagement ActivitiesStudent, Group or

OrganizationOrganization Served Description of Service Students

Faculty/ Staff

Hours Served

UofL Chapter of the Kentucky Public Health Association

Wheatley Elementary and the California Neighborhood California Love Project:

Volunteers pick up trash in a two block grid of the California neighborhood

20 2 8

UofL Chapter of the Kentucky Public Health Association

Public health fieldHosted a booth to let students know about public health as part of National Public health week

5 3 5

SPHIS Student Government Association

Louisville AIDS WalkEach year, the SPHIS SGA organizes and sponsors the Louisville AIDS Walk week in September.

25 4 12

Department of Health Management and Systems Science

Healthy Hoops KentuckyA special initiative that uses basketball and fun to focus on the needs of kids with asthma. Children between the ages of 7 and 13 - and their families, participate.

7 5 10

SPHIS Dean's Office Out of the Darkness Suicide Prevention Walk in Louisville Metro 6 10 4

Center for Health Hazards Preparedness

H1N1 Drive Thru ClinicHelped with the Louisville Metro Department of Public Health and Wellness H1N1 immunization clinic for two-days

19 9 20

SPHIS Dean's Office Service Trip to GhanaConducted a field study in a remote village shared findings with local university

4 2 120

Jade Ashley Service Trip to India10-day service trip to India over winter break. helped operate medical camps in needy communities.

1 1 80

Stephanie Denkhoff and Avonne Connor

JCPS school - AHECPresented on public health for the AHEC-sponsored health career fair at Moore High School

2 1 4

Whitney Kirzinger and Avonne Connor

JCPS school - AHECPresented on public health for the AHEC-sponsored health career fair at Olmsted South Middle

2 1 5


Recent Student Service and Community Engagement ActivitiesStudent, Group or

OrganizationOrganization Served Description of Service Students

Faculty/ Staff

Hours Served


Louisville AIDS WalkEach year, the SPHIS SGA organizes and sponsors the Louisville AIDS Walk week in September

15 3 26


Supplies Over Seas (SOS)

A local organization that collects, sorts, and packages surplus medical supplies from medical offices in Louisville and ships them to sites in need throughout the world.

6 0 24


National Public Health Week

Activities included a cook-out, a 10,000 Step Challenge, and an Alcohol Awareness table.

10 2 12


American Cancer SocietySponsored a team in support of the UofL American Cancer Society Relay For Life,

4 0 20


Community Drug Toss Event

Drug Toss event at various locations - accepted expired or unused medications. Coordinated by University of Louisville

4 1 5

Department of Health Management and Systems Sciences

Healthy Hoops KentuckyAn initiative that uses basketball and fun to focus on the needs of kids with asthma.

7 5 10

SPHIS Dean's Office Service Trip to GhanaConducted a needs assessment in Tamale, Ghana with an emphasis on Maternal Health

4 1 120

Department of Health Management and Systems Sciences

Healthy Hoops KentuckyAn annual initiative that uses basketball and fun to focus on the needs of kids with asthma.

8 4 14


7.(1) See section 7.(3), below.

7.(2) The program utilizes a Blackboard organization dedicated solely to the practicum. Students and faculty mentors communicate regularly through the site as requirements are submitted. Additionally, faculty communicate with students (in person or via email) regularly to discuss practicum progress.

7.(3) Practicum requirements are evaluated based on the standards in Appendix SPHIS 2. Additionally, the practicum site is asked to complete an electronic evaluation of the student. Appendix SPHIS 3.

Additionally, during the student’s final semester of coursework PHPH-697 Integrated Learning and Experience in Public Health is required. The course is designed to integrate knowledge acquired in coursework and other learning experiences and to apply this knowledge to situations with various aspects of professional public health practice. Students develop and analyze public health cases as well as complete a comprehensive exam. The multiple choice exam assesses a student’s grasp of core public health concepts prior to graduation. Students are required to obtain a minimum score of 80% to pass the exam.

7.(4) Students are asked to complete an electronic course evaluation at the conclusion of the semester. See Appendix SPHIS 4.

Students are also asked to complete an electronic practicum experience survey. See Appendix SPHIS 5.

Graduating students are encouraged to complete the MPH graduation survey. See Appendix SPHIS 6.


Appendix SPHIS 2

Practicum Requirements

Preparation Requirements

The following items are required prior to start of formal practicum field.

01: Practice site and site mentor information (due by September 1). The student, working with the faculty mentor, MPH program personnel, and site personnel, is responsible for identification of the practice site.

02: Practice site affiliation agreement (due by September 1). This term refers to one of two documents: a legal agreement with an entity outside the University or a memo of understanding with an entity within the University. If the site identified by the student is not already in a site affiliation agreement with the School of Public Health and Information Sciences, the Dean’s Office is responsible for negotiating and executing an agreement with the site.

03: Student practicum agreement (legal document; due by September 1). The student completes and signs an agreement in which the student agrees to the terms and condition of the affiliation agreement with the site. Information for the student to complete and submit this agreement is in the assignment in the student’s Blackboard group and in the Practicum Experience Manual.

The student’s practice site may require additional agreements or documents signed or acknowledged by the student as conditions of participating in the activities of the site. These site requirements are not within the jurisdiction of the University; the Dean’s Office is available to discuss specific site requirements with students but is not available to provide legal advice.

Student Evaluation

The components of student evaluation are:

04: Practicum concept document (5% of final grade; due by September 1). A document describing the proposed primary activities for the practicum.

Following submission, the practicum concept document is reviewed, approved, and scored by the faculty mentor to ensure the student’s practicum is conceived as onsite field experience at and for a public health-related site.

The following rubric is used to determine the score for this component:

04: Practicum Concept Document Scoring RubricStandard On time (100%) Late (0%) Percent

Timeliness On or before September 1 After September 1 %Raw Score 100Score (Raw Score x Percent) =


05: Practice site profile (5% of final grade; due by September 1). A document describing the practice site.

Following submission, the practice site profile is reviewed, approved, and scored by the faculty mentor.


05: Practice Site Profile Scoring RubricStandard On time (100%) Late (0%) Percent

Timeliness On or before September 1 After September 1 %Raw Score 100Score (Raw Score x Percent =

06: Learning agreement (20 % of final grade; due by October 1). A document describing the conditions and parameters for the practicum experience.

The learning agreement is electronically acknowledged and agreed to by the student by submitting it, by site mentor and faculty mentor by grading it.

The learning agreement may be modified by submitting a revised version with the same electronic acknowledgments and agreements.


06: Learning Agreement Scoring Rubric

Standard On time(100%)

A bit late(85%)

Two bits late(75%)

Four bits late(50%)

Too late(0%) Percent

Timeliness On or before October 1 October 15 November 1 December 1 December 15 %

Raw Score (calculated using Written Deliverable Scoring Rubric)Score (Raw Score x Percent %) =

07: Practicum presentation (20 % of final grade; due by April 21). A PowerPoint presentation presenting the practicum tasks, projects undertaken or participated in, and results.


07: Practicum Presentation Scoring RubricStandard On time (100%) Late (90%) Percent

Timeliness On or before April 21 After April 21 %Raw Score (calculated using Oral Deliverable Scoring Rubric)Score (Raw Score x Percent) =


08: Practicum poster (15 % of final grade; due by day of oral presentation). A PowerPoint poster on the practicum experience.


08: Practicum Poster Scoring RubricStandard On time (100%) Late (90%) Percent

Timeliness On or before day of oral presentation

After day of oral presentation %

Raw Score (calculated using Poster Deliverable Scoring Rubric)Score (Raw Score x Percent =

09: Practicum report (20 % of final grade; due by date specified by faculty mentor but not later than April 29). A document presenting the practicum, tasks and projects undertaken or participated in, and results.


09: Practicum Report Scoring RubricStandard On time (100%) Late (90%) Percent

TimelinessOn or before date specified by

faculty mentor but not later than April 29

After April 29 %

Raw Score (calculated using Written Deliverable Scoring Rubric)Score (Raw Score x Percent) =

10: Student evaluation of practicum experience (5% of final grade; due by April 29). A survey on the practicum experience completed by the student.


10: Student Evaluation of Practicum Experience Scoring RubricStandard On time (100%) Late (0%) Percent

Timeliness On or before April 29 After April 29 %Raw Score 100Score (Raw Score x Percent) =

11: Site mentor evaluation of student (3-point bonus on final grade; due by April 29). A questionnaire completed by the site mentor. While the student does not have control over whether the site mentor does this or not, the student is in a position to influence the site mentor to do so.



11: Site Mentor Evaluation of Student Scoring RubricStandard On time (100%) Late (0%) Percent

Timeliness On or before April 29 After April 29 %Raw Score 3Score (Raw Score x Percent) =

Grading

The final grade for the practicum is not determined until the full six credit-hours of the practicum have been completed. Students are usually expected to take the practicum as one credit-hour in the summer term, two in the fall semester, and three in the spring semester prior to graduation; or as two three credit-hour in each of the fall and spring semesters prior to graduation. A grade of “X” is assigned for a practicum course completed without achieving a total of 6 credit-hours. After completion of the required six credit-hours, the letter grade earned is assigned to each practicum course.

The components of student evaluation are weighted as follows:

01: Practice site and site mentor information --02: Practice site affiliation agreement --03: Student practicum agreement --04: Practicum concept document 5%05: Practice site profile 5%06: Learning agreement 20%07: Practicum presentation 25%08: Practicum poster 15%09: Practicum report 25%

10: Student evaluation of practicum experience 5%11: Site mentor evaluation of student 3 points BONUS

Grading is on an A-B-C-F basis.

Final Grade Final ScoreA 90.00-100+B 80.00-89.99C 70.00-79.99F 0-69.99


Rubric for Calculating Final Score

Rubric for Calculating Final Score

Component Scoring RubricScore from

Scoring Rubric

WeightPoints Toward

Final Score(Score x Weight)

01: Practice site and site mentor information

02: Practice site affiliation agreement

03: Student practicum agreement

04: Practicum concept document

Practicum Concept Document Scoring Rubric x 0.05 =

05: Practice site profile Practice Site Profile Scoring Rubric x 0.05 =06: Learning

agreementLearning Agreement Scoring Rubric x 0.20 =

07: Practicum presentation

Practicum Presentation Scoring Rubric x 0.25 =

08: Practicum poster Practicum Poster Scoring Rubric x 0.15 =09: Practicum report Practicum Report Scoring Rubric x 0.25 =10: Practice site

evaluation by student

Practice Site Evaluation by Student Scoring Rubric x 0.05 =

11: Site mentor evaluation of student

(extra credit)

Site Mentor Evaluation of Student Scoring Rubric x 1.00 =

Final Score ∑ =


Oral Deliverable Scoring Rubric

Oral Deliverable Scoring Rubric

Topic

Assessment of Topic(Note: Assigned score within a range is subjective assessment of degree criteria are met.) Topic

ScoreExceptional Acceptable Marginal Unacceptable

Content

45-50 pointsProvides an accurate and complete overview of the practicum experience and relates the public health competencies to the work completed at the practice site.

40-44 pointsProvides an overview of the practicum experience relating some of the public health competencies to the work completed at the practice site.

35-39 pointsProvides an overview of the practicum experience but does not relate the public health competencies to the work completed at the practice site.

0-34 pointsInadequate description of the practice site experience with no effort to relate the public health competencies to the work completed at the practice site.

= _____

Organization

14-15 pointsPresentation is clear, logical, and organized. Listener can follow line of reasoning.

12-13 pointsPresentation is generally clear and well organized. A few minor points may be confusing.

10-11 pointsListener can follow presentation only with effort. Some arguments are not clear. Organization seems haphazard.

0-9 pointsListener unable to follow presentation. Arguments are not clear. No evidence of organization in presentation.

= _____

Level of Presentation

14-15 pointsLevel of presentation is appropriate for the audience.

Presentation is paced for audience understanding. It is not a reading of a paper.

Speaker is clearly comfortable in front of the group and can be heard by all.

12-13 pointsLevel of presentation is generally appropriate.

Pacing is sometimes too fast or too slow.

The presenter seems slightly uncomfortable at times, and the audience occasionally has trouble hearing him/her.

10-11 pointsAspects of presentation are too elementary or too sophisticated for audience.

Much of the information is read.

Presenter seems uncomfortable and can be heard only if listener is very attentive.

0-9 pointsThe entire presentation is too elementary or too sophisticated for audience.

The information is read with limited or no eye contact with the audience.

Presenter is uncomfortable and cannot be heard by listener.

= _____

Contact with audience/Handling questions

18-20 pointsConsistently clarifies, restates, and responds to questions.

Summarizes when needed.

16-17 pointsGenerally responsive to audience comments, questions, and needs.

14-15 pointsMisses some opportunities for interaction.

Responds to questions inadequately.

0-13 pointsLack of interaction with audience.

No questions are answered. No interpretation made.

= _____

Score for Assessment of Oral Deliverable (transfer to deliverable scoring rubric; maximum of 100) ∑ =


Written Deliverable Scoring Rubric

Written Deliverable Scoring Rubric

TopicAssessment of Topic

(Note: Assigned score within a range is subjective assessment of degree criteria are met.) Topic Score

Exceptional Acceptable Marginal Unacceptable

Organization & Style

14-15 pointsInformation is presented in a logical, interesting way that is easy to follow.

Purpose is clearly stated and explains the structure of work.

12-13 pointsInformation is presented in a logical manner that is easily followed.

Purpose of work is clearly stated assists the structure of work.

10-11 pointsWork is hard to follow as there is very little continuity.

Purpose of work is stated, but does not assist in following work.

0-9 pointsWork is hard to follow as there is very little continuity.

Purpose of work is stated, but does not assist in following work.

= _____

Content & Knowledge

45-50 pointsRelates the goals of the learning agreement to the learning experience.

Demonstration of full knowledge of the core and cross-cutting public health competencies with explanations and elaboration.

40-44 pointsRelates most of the goals of the learning agreement to the learning experience.

Demonstration of full knowledge of the core competencies of public health with explanations and elaboration.

35-39 pointsRelates the goals of the learning agreement to the learning experience.

Fails to demonstrate knowledge of the public health competencies.

0-34 pointsFails to relate the goals of the learning agreement to the learning experience.

Fails to demonstrate knowledge of the public health competencies.

= _____

Format & Esthetics

14-15 pointsFormat is consistent throughout including heading styles and captions.

Figures and tables are presented logically and reinforce the text.

12-13 pointsFormat is generally consistent including heading styles and captions.

Figures and tables are neatly done and provide intended information.

10-11 pointsMostly consistent format.

Figures and tables are legible, but not convincing.

0-9 pointsWork is illegible, format changes throughout, e.g., font type, size, etc.

Figures and tables are sloppy and fail to provide intended information.

= _____

Spelling & Grammar

9-10 pointsNegligible misspellings and/or grammatical errors.

8 pointsMinor misspellings and/or grammatical errors.

7 pointsSeveral spelling and grammatical errors.

0-6 pointsNumerous spelling and grammatical errors.

= _____

References

9-10 pointsReference section complete and comprehensive.

Consistent and logical referencing system.

All appropriate persons and organizations appropriate acknowledged.

8 pointsMinor inadequacies in references.

Consistent referencing system.

Some organizations or persons not acknowledged.

7 pointsInadequate list of references or references in text.

Inconsistent or illogical referencing system.


0-6 pointsNo acknowledgements given.

No referencing system used.

= _____

Score for Assessment of Written Deliverable (transfer to deliverable scoring rubric; maximum of 100) ∑ =


Poster Deliverable Scoring Rubric

Poster Deliverable Scoring Rubric

TopicAssessment of Topic

(Note: Assigned score within a range is subjective assessment of degree criterion is met.) Topic Score

Exceptional Acceptable Marginal Unacceptable

Content Accuracy

36-40 pointsAll content in the poster is accurate. There are no factual errors.

8 pointsMost of the content is accurate but there is one piece of information that seems inaccurate.

28-31 pointsThe content is generally accurate, but one piece of information is clearly inaccurate.

0-27 pointsContent confusing or contains more than one factual error.

= _____

Use of Graphics and Tables

18-20 pointsAll graphics/tables are attractive (size and colors) and support the topic of the poster.

8 pointsA few graphics/tables are not attractive but all support the topic of the poster.

14-15 pointsAll graphics/tables are attractive but a few do not support the topic of the poster.

0-13 pointsSeveral graphics/tables are unattractive AND detract from the content of the poster.

= _____

Text Font Choice & Formatting

9-10 pointsFont formats (color, bold, italic) have been carefully planned to enhance readability and content.

8 pointsFont formats have been carefully planned to enhance readability.

7 pointsFont formatting has been carefully planned to complement the content. It may be a little hard to read.

0-6 pointsFont formatting makes it very difficult to read the material.

= _____

Spelling and Grammar

9-10 pointsPoster has no misspellings or grammatical errors.

8 pointsPoster has 1-2 misspellings, but no grammatical errors.

7 pointsPoster has 1-2 grammatical errors but no misspellings.

0-6 pointsPoster has more than 2 grammatical and/or spelling errors.

= _____

Sequencing of Information

9-10 pointsInformation is organized in a clear, logical way. It is easy to anticipate the next panel.

8 pointsMost information is organized in a clear, logical way. One slide or piece of information seems out of place.

7 pointsSome information is logically sequenced. An occasional panel or piece of information seems out of place.

0-6 pointsThere is no clear plan for the organization of information.

= _____

References

9-10 pointsReference section complete and comprehensive.

Consistent and logical referencing system.

All appropriate persons and organizations appropriate acknowledged.

8 pointsMinor inadequacies in references.

Consistent referencing system.


7 pointsInadequate list of references or references in text.

Inconsistent or illogical referencing system.


0-6 pointsNo referencing system used.

No acknowledgements given.

= _____

Score for Assessment of Poster Deliverable (transfer to deliverable scoring rubric; maximum of 100) ∑ =


Appendix SPHIS 3

SITE MENTOR EVALUATION OF PRACTICUM EXPERIENCE

Name: _____________________________Date:_________

Email____________________________________

Phone____________________________________

Student Name:__________________________________________

Student PerformanceUse the following scale; please evaluate the student's performance for the full practicum.

5=Outstanding. 4=Very Good, 3=Good, 2=Fair, 1=Poor, N/A=Not Applicable

_____Reliability (attendance, punctuality, etc.)

_____Motivation and Initiative

_____Organizational skills

_____Contributed innovative ideas to improve project(s)

_____Completed projects in timely manner

_____Worked independently when needed

_____Worked as a part of a team when needed

_____Exercised own judgment appropriately

_____Made efforts to develop and improve skills

_____Accepted feedback and suggestions objectively

_____Ability to research problems or issues pertaining to their project

_____Met specified goals and objectives (e.g. those in the learning agreement)


1. I met with the student in order to develop and/or review the practicum learning objectives._____Yes _____ No – why not?

2. The student was on-site:_____Less than 100 hours_____101 – 150 hours_____151 – 200 hours_____201 – 250 hours_____251 – 300 hours_____301 +

3. The student met the objectives stipulated in the learning agreement?___Strongly Agree ___Agree ___Neutral ___Disagree ___Strongly Disagree

4. The student's work contributed to the mission of our agency/organization?___Strongly Agree ___Agree ___Neutral ___Disagree ___Strongly Disagree

5. I was able to provide input on the student’s practicum deliverables (paper, presentation, poster)?_____Yes _____ No

6. I would recommend the following professional development for the student (check all that apply):___Oral and written communication skills ___Development of professional network___Statistical software ___Research skills___Graphic presentation skills___Time management


___Critical thinking skills___Data analysis skills___Organizational skills___Critical analysis of scientific literature___Professional dress___Health risk assessment___Data collection/organization___Health education and communication with diverse populations___Knowledge about advocacy and policy___Politics and public health___Health access issues___Health equity and social justice___Public speaking___Team building___How to work in a group___Community engagement___Research methodology___Other _____________________

7. Will you or your agency provide supervised practicum experiences in the future?_____Yes _____ No – why not?

Public Health Competencies

Program Performance8. The SPHIS faculty mentor contacted me to discuss the requirements of the practicum experience._____Yes _____ No

9. The SPHIS faculty mentor was accessible (by phone, email, etc.)___Strongly Agree ___Agree ___Neutral ___Disagree ___Strongly Disagree

10. I was invited to attend the student’s practicum presentation.


_____Yes _____ No

11. The SPHIS faculty mentor contacted me to discuss the student’s final grade in relation to practicum performance and deliverables._____Yes _____ No

12. Please provide any other comments you feel would be useful in order for us to continue to improve the practicum experience.

We appreciate your time and your continued support of the MPH Program at the University of Louisville!


Appendix SPHIS 4

STUDENT EVALUATION OF PRACTICUM EXPERIENCE

Student Name: _________________________________Date: __________

Practice Site Name: ___________________________________________

Name of Faculty Mentor: __________________________________

******************************************************************************Please answer each question according to selection of responses.

Guidance by MPH Program:1. How did you select your practicum site? __Found through the list of affiliation agreements__Faculty member suggested__Found on my own__Program sent out announcement regarding site__Other ______________________

2. To what extent did the MPH Program provide adequate information and guidance in preparing for your practicum?__A lot __Some __Very Little__None

3. The MPH Program was available throughout the practicum to answer questions.___Strongly Agree ___Agree ___Neutral ___Disagree ___Strongly Disagree

Guidance by faculty mentor : 4. My faculty mentor was accessible (by phone, email, etc.).___Strongly Agree ___Agree ___Neutral ___Disagree


___Strongly Disagree

5. The faculty mentor reviewed and discussed the requirements (syllabus and grading rubics) for successfully completing the practicum experience with me.___Fully reviewed___Partially reviewed___Did not review

6. The individual meetings with the faculty mentor throughout the practicum were useful in the development of learning objectives and monitoring my practicum progress.___Strongly Agree ___Agree ___Neutral ___Disagree ___Strongly Disagree___ I did not meet with my faculty mentor.

7. My faculty mentor reviewed my practicum deliverables and provided feedback.___Fully reviewed___Partially reviewed___Did not review

8. Overall, my faculty mentor was very effective.___Strongly Agree ___Agree ___Neutral ___Disagree ___Strongly Disagree

Guidance by Other SPHIS Faculty9. Did you have any assistance from any other SPHIS faculty or staff to help in the preparation or throughout your practicum? _____Yes If yes, who were they, and how did they help?

_____ No


Guidance by Site Mentor10. The site mentor was available throughout the practicum to provide guidance and answer questions.___Strongly Agree ___Agree ___Neutral ___Disagree ___Strongly Disagree

11. I was given an orientation to the practicum site._____Yes_____ No

12. I met with my site mentor . . . ___Daily (each time I was on site)___Weekly___Bi-weekly___Monthly___As needed___Other

13. Was this a sufficient amount of time?_____Yes_____ No

14. The feedback provided by my site mentor was appropriate and useful._____Yes_____ No

15. I felt my site mentor was qualified to supervise my practicum experience.___Strongly Agree ___Agree ___Neutral ___Disagree ___Strongly Disagree

10. I would you recommend this particular site mentor for future projects and student work?


___Strongly Agree ___Agree ___Neutral ___Disagree ___Strongly Disagree

Overall Program Experience11. The practicum increased my ability to work in and understand public health.___Strongly Agree ___Agree ___Neutral ___Disagree ___Strongly Disagree

12. The MPH Town Hall Meetings increased my understanding of the practicum and its requirements.___Strongly Agree ___Agree ___Neutral ___Disagree ___Strongly Disagree

13. The Integration course was useful in reflecting on my practicum experience and public health practice.___Strongly Agree ___Agree ___Neutral ___Disagree ___Strongly Disagree

14. The practicum blackboard site was useful.___Strongly Agree ___Agree ___Neutral ___Disagree ___Strongly Disagree

15. Developing the practicum poster was valuable.___Strongly Agree ___Agree


___Neutral ___Disagree ___Strongly Disagree

16. Would you recommend your practicum site to other SPHIS students? _____Yes – why?_____ No – why not?

17. Are there any knowledge areas that would have been helpful in preparing you for your practicum? (check all that apply)___SAS/SPSS___GIS___Issue briefs___Grant writing___Writing press releases___Microsoft Access___More in depth electives ___Program planning___Finding funding sources___Learning about specific job roles in public health___Informatics___Health equity___IRB process___Leadership skills___Cultural competence___Reading and understanding budgets___Data analysis skills

18. Do you have any additional comments concerning your practicum?


Appendix SPHIS 5

MPH STUDENT GRADUATION SURVEY ____

1. What were your personal expectations at the time you enrolled in the MPH program?

2. How well did the MPH program do in meeting these expectations?

3. How would you assess the MPH program in terms of the usefulness, applicability, and currency of the courses and course materials?

4. How do you feel about the balance between theory and practice?

5. What are the program’s strengths?

6. What aspects need improvement?

7. Would you recommend the MPH program to others?


Final EvaluationMPH Program

Year ____ Graduates

1. Effectiveness of Instructional Approaches

Instructional Approaches

VeryEffective

Generally Effective

As Effective

as Ineffective or Neither

GenerallyIneffective

Very Ineffective

Cannot Evaluate

a. Lecturesb. Guest speakersc. Case studiesd. Videose. Class discussionsf. Individual student presentationsg. Group student presentationsh. Group student projectsi. Examsj. Research papers

2. Of the courses you have taken in the MPH program, how many, if any, have brought in public sector practitioners as guest speakers or lecturers?

_______ _______ _______ _______ _______ _______ Almost Most of About half Some of Very few No

all them of them them of them Opinion

3. To what extent, if any, have public sector practitioner guest speakers or lecturers enhanced your learning in the MPH program?

_______ _______ _______ _______ _______ _______ To a very To a great To a To some To little or Nogreat extent extent moderate extent no extent Opinion

extent

Considering the MPH courses you have taken to date, how effective or ineffective are each of the following instructional approaches in helping you learn the material?


4. To what extent, if any, have the students in your classes who are public sector practitioners enhanced your learning?

_______ _______ _______ _______ _______ _______ To a very To a great To a To some To little or Nogreat extent extent moderate extent no extent Opinion

extent

5. Considering all the MPH courses you have taken to-date, overall, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with each of the following:

Very Satisfied

Generally Satisfied

As Satisfiedas Dissatisfied

or Neither

Generally Dissatisfied

VeryDissatisfied

Cannot Evaluate

a. Opportunities to participate in class discussionb. Extent to which you are learning new informationc. Extent to which you are learning useful informationd. The currency of course materialse. The amount of theory presented in coursesf. The amount of hands-on application in coursesg. Class size

6. If you were designing these classes, would you include more or less of these approaches?

MuchMore

SomewhatMore

About the Same

Somewhat Less

MuchLess

No Opinion

a. Lecturesb. Guest Speakersc. Class Discussiond. Case Studiese. Research Papersf. Group Projectsg. Exams


7. MPH Faculty Performance – In general, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with various aspects of faculty performance?

Very Satisfied

Generally Satisfied

As Satisfiedas Dissatisfied

or Neither

Generally Dissatisfied

VeryDissatisfied

Cannot Evaluate

a. Level of faculty knowledgeb. Ability of faculty to relate concepts to real world settingsc. Willingness of faculty to meet student needsd. Availability of faculty outside of classe. Ability of faculty to treat students as adult learnersf. Ability of faculty to create learning environmentsg. Ability of faculty to include the diverse views of all students in classroom settings

8. Thinking about your experiences with the MPH courses and program, please describe your best experience and what made it the best.

9. How strongly would you recommend or not recommend the MPH program to others?

_____ a. Strongly Recommend

_____ b. Generally Recommend

_____ c. Possibly Recommend

_____ d. Generally Not Recommend

_____ e. Strongly Not Recommend

_____ f. No Opinion

Response to PM&DC Application Information Page 36 of 42

14.(ii) Yes.

14.(ii) Yes.

14.(ii)

Competency Assessment Method(s) Evaluator(s)

Public health knowledge exams reports using rubrics oral presentations using rubrics

faculty members


Competency Assessment Method(s) Evaluator(s)

Public health practice-based learning outcomes-based rubrics faculty member community-based preceptor in public

health-related organization

Interpersonal & communication skills reports using rubrics oral presentations using rubrics

faculty member community-based preceptor in public


Professionalism reports using rubrics oral presentations using rubrics



Systems-based public health practice exams reports using rubrics oral presentations using rubrics




(3) See section 18.


3. SPHIS sponsored grant and contract expenditures

Fiscal Year (FY) Total in FY2013 $3,479,9072014 $2,369,644

23. Publications data are collected by the Office of the Executive Vice President for Research and Innovation on a calendar year basis. Publication counts for the years 2009 through 2013 are below. Data collection for calendar year 2014 is ongoing.

Calendar Year (CY) Count in CY2009 582010 682011 852012 742013 632014 ongoing


Pete’s comments:

For 34. I suggest includingo Missions of UofL and SPHISo Relevant sections of Redbook on faculty jurisdiction for academics (see next bullet for sections)o Art III, Sec 4 of our Bylaws on executive faculty jurisdiction for academicso Proposition 2 delegating powers to Faculty Forum re: academic approvalso Document academic change procedure https://sharepoint.louisville.edu/sites/sphis/ppgf/pubs/Acad

%20Chg%20Proced.pdf For 35. Suggest stating what and how post-graduate fellowships are handled in SPHIS, citing Introduction. For 36. Suggest stating handling of ethics in public health, citing Introduction.

34.

The equivalent of an academic council’s constitution for UofL and SPHIS is presented in the following excerpts from the missions, policies, and procedures cited for each.

U of L Mission Statement

The University of Louisville shall be a premier, nationally recognized metropolitan research university with a commitment to the liberal arts and sciences and to the intellectual, cultural, and economic development of our diverse communities and citizens through the pursuit of excellence in five interrelated strategic areas:

1. Educational Experience

2. Research, Creative, and Scholarly Activity

3. Accessibility, Diversity, Equity, and Communication

4. Partnerships and Collaborations

5. Institutional Effectiveness of Programs and Services.

SPHIS Mission Statement:

We advance knowledge for the public’s health in the increasingly complex and interconnected world of the 21st century. We accomplish this through activities in the three cornerstone areas for advancing knowledge:

o Research. We create knowledge by seeking new discoveries and understanding through scientific exploration. We communicate our findings.

o Teaching. We share knowledge with students committed to and prepared for learning in a facilitated environment. Our learners are our students, our faculty, and our staff. We commit to preparing our learners for success.

o Service. We apply knowledge through quality services to the communities of which we are a part – the University, Louisville Metro, Kentucky, the United States, and their respective environs.


Academic Authority is described in the U of L Redbook. Sections specifically related to academic authority include Section 6.6 as detailed below.

Sec. 6.6.1 Academic Authority

The academic authority of the University in all matters involving academic status of each student shall be vested in the academic unit in which the student is enrolled. The authority over an individual course rests with the academic unit in which it is offered.

Sec. 6.6.2 Course Grading

The authority for the determination of grades in any course shall rest with the faculty of the academic unit offering the course. Each student shall have the right to discuss any grade with the appropriate faculty member or academic dean in accordance with the procedure of the academic unit.

Sec. 6.6.3 Degree Status

Each academic unit shall be charged with the responsibility and authority to make academic determinations as to continuation in a degree or other program, probation, or permanent or temporary dismissal of students. Such determination shall be made upon evaluation of the student's academic performance and demonstrated fitness to continue in the program in accordance with promulgated standards established by the unit. Academic dishonesty in any form, including plagiarism, forgery, or cheating, reflects detrimentally upon the fitness of a student to continue in a program.

When an academic unit makes a decision recommending action which results in a change of a student's academic status, the appropriate dean shall notify the student. The student shall have the right to discuss this matter with the proper person from that academic unit and follow such procedures as may have been established by that unit. A representative of the unit shall meet informally with the student and shall explain the basis of the academic decision. The academic unit shall keep as a part of the student's record a notation of any academic determination other than promotion or unqualified continuation in a program, with such record to contain a brief statement of the reasons for such action as discussed with the student and a statement of the date of the informal meeting as well as a list of the names of the persons attending that meeting.

SPHIS Academic Authority is described in the Bylaws of the SPHIS

Article III., Section 4, states: “Except as otherwise provided in The Redbook of the University of Louisville, the Executive Faculty of the School of Public Health/Health Information Sciences has general legislative powers over all matters pertaining to its own personnel policies, criteria, and procedures; to its own meetings; to amendment of these Bylaws and Rules; and to the admission requirements, curricula, instruction, examinations, and recommendations to the Board of Trustees through the Dean for granting of degrees within the School, as specified in The Redbook, Article 3.3, Sec. 3.3.2.”

Proposition 2, adopted by the Executive Faculty, states: “The Executive Faculty hereby empowers the Faculty Forum to act on its behalf with regard to the following aspects of the Executive Faculty’s jurisdiction: admission requirements, curricula, instruction, examinations, and recommendations to the Board of Trustees through the Dean for granting of degrees within the School, as stated in the Bylaws, Art. III, Sec. 4. Such action taken on behalf of the Executive Faculty requires approval by two-thirds of the quorum present.”

SPHIS Academic Change Procedures

See Appendix SPHIS 7. [Attached separately]

35. As described in the introduction, the MPH program is based on population health and does not offer post-graduate positions in public health practice. SPHIS does offer post-doctoral fellowships in the separate disciplines for recent Ph.D. . graduates, both from SPHIS and other public health schools.


36. As described in the introduction, the MPH program is based on population health and does not require a formal ethics committee. MPH Students are specifically introduced to public health values and ethics as a part of their required coursework. These are based on development of MPH competencies in Leadership from the Association of Schools and Programs of Public Health at: http://www.aspph.org/educate/models/mph-competency-model/

The MPH competencies related to ethics are:

The ability to demonstrate ethical choices, values and professional practices implicit in public health decisions; consider the effect of choices on community stewardship, equity, social justice and accountability; and to commit to personal and institutional development.

Discuss sentinel events in the history and development of the public health profession and their relevance for practice in the field.

Apply basic principles of ethical analysis (e.g. the Public Health Code of Ethics, human rights framework, other moral theories) to issues of public health practice and policy.

Apply evidence-based principles and the scientific knowledge base to critical evaluation and decision-making in public health.

Apply the core functions of assessment, policy development, and assurance in the analysis of public health problems and their solutions.

Promote high standards of personal and organizational integrity, compassion, honesty and respect for all people.

Analyze determinants of health and disease using an ecological framework.

Analyze the potential impacts of legal and regulatory environments on the conduct of ethical public health research and practice.

Distinguish between population and individual ethical considerations in relation to the benefits, costs, and burdens of public health programs.

Embrace a definition of public health that captures the unique characteristics of the field (e.g., population-focused, community-oriented, prevention-motivated and rooted in social justice) and how these contribute to professional practice.

Appreciate the importance of working collaboratively with diverse communities and constituencies (e.g. researchers, practitioners, agencies and organizations).

Value commitment to lifelong learning and professional service including active participation in professional organizations.

Documents

Introduction · Web viewLearning Agreement Scoring Rubric x 0.20 = Practicum presentation Practicum Presentation Scoring Rubric x 0.25 = Practicum poster Practicum Poster Scoring