Download - Society for Public Health Education

Conference Abstracts36multilevel systems at work in public health and to fostercampus-community partnerships to improve the health ofChicago. As students work with their practica communitypartners, they explore and directly experience—at theircommunity’s level—how public health requires collaborationacross communities to effect system change, whether creatingan ethnic-specific worksite wellness plan or a foundationalhealth policy manual for Chicago Public Schools. As studentsexperience collaboration for public health promotion intheir community settings, they concurrently experiencecollaborative learning in the classroom as a cohort. In thiscohort learning model, students enter the program as a smallgroup and advance together through coursework, receivinghighly individualized feedback to create a collaborativelearning model. We define collaborative learning, core tothis cohort model, as “students and teachers engaged in aprocess of mutual inquiry and reflection through the sharingof ideas, experiences, and perspectives” (Lawrence, 2002, pp.85). This adult-learning process involves “exploring problemsand issues through dialogue from the multiple viewpointsin order to arrive at a deeper understanding. . . participantslearn from their peers, teach their teachers, and createknowledge together” (ibid). Students in our program notonly see a multidisciplinary, multilevel approach to publichealth, they experience it in our classroom. By integrating thismultilevel approach to learning in and out of the classroom,our students are uniquely prepared to enter the workforceas public health practitioners capable of identifying andleveraging opportunities to create public health change tomake the goals of Healthy People 2020 a reality in Chicagocommunities. References: References: Freire, P. (1970/2006).Pedagogy of the oppressed. Healthy People. (2011). HealthPeople 2020 Framework. Lawrence, R. L. (2002). A smallcircle of friends: Cohort groups as learning communities.In D. S. Stein & S. Imel (Eds.), Adult learning in communitySchon, D. (1987). Educating the Reflective Practitioner.Engaged Learning and theUndergraduate Research ProcessMary Brown, PhD, CHES, Utah Valley UniversityThe purpose of this presentation is to share ideas regardinghealth education research and practice in achieving a healthycampus/community. This presentation will highlight theengaged learning process which allows undergraduatestudents to experience the research process whilecollaborating with various departments. Since Utah ValleyUniversity (UVU) received “community engaged” classificationfrom the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement ofTeaching in 2008, faculty members have been encouraged todevelop collaborative relationships to emphasize practical,real-world applications of what had formally been taught inthe classroom. While engaged learning may include a varietyof learning activities and pedagogies, this abstract discussesundergraduate research within the context of the universityas the community to help future health education specialistsdevelop skills in several areas of responsibility. Undergraduatepublic and community health education students weregiven the opportunity to work on a research project with ahealth professor regarding vending machines food choicesat Utah Valley University. Students worked collaborativelywith other departments such as Dining Services, InstitutionalReview Board, and Institutional Research and Information.SOPHE 62nd Annual MeetingThe purpose of the research project is to assess which foodsstudents would like to have in the vending machines oncampus, increase the number of healthy choices providedto students, and promote healthier choices via the “trafficlight” nutrition system. Interested public and communityhealth students were recruited through several upperdivision classes and nearly a dozen students volunteeredto participate. Students were divided into committeesbased upon the skills they would like to develop for theirprofessional portfolio. For example, one group of studentswho wanted to develop their research skills assisted with aliterature review to determine the influences of food choicesamong college students. In addition, they investigated otherprograms which sought to provide health vending options forstudents and employees. A second group of students whodesired assessment experience created focus group protocoland questions, developed a demographic questionnaire,and assessed the nutrition content of the vending machinefood and beverage options on campus. Another group ofstudents developed the educational and social marketingintervention plan based upon the Social Cognitive Theory. Afinal group of students will evaluate the program in January2012. The intent of this presentation is to share strategiesto involve students in the engaged learning process whileparticipating in undergraduate research at a teachinginstitution. Benefits, barriers, and challenges will be discussed.Managing Asthma on College CampusesDebra Weiss, EdD, MA, CHES, Borough of ManhattanCommunity College/Health EducationBackground: Asthma is an incurable disease affecting 23million Americans (Healthy People 2020) and a significanthealth problem on U.S. college campuses today, affecting12% of students (American College Health Association, 2006).Forty percent of asthmatic students do not seek medicalcare (Carpentier, Mullin, & Van Pelt, 2007). College studentsrepresent an underserved population in need of interventionregarding asthma management (Carpentier et al., 2007; Reeceet al., 2002). Objectives: The objectives of the study were toconduct a population-based survey of asthma managementon four-year NY State college campuses to determine (a)staffing, allergy capability, and asthma action plans, policies,and information; and (b) respondents’ perceptions aboutasthma education and management on campus. TheoreticalFramework: The study used the PRECEDE-PROCEED PlanningModel (Green & Kreuter, 1999), Phases 1-4, as the theoreticalframework for this needs assessment study. Participants:College health center directors at New York State four-yearcolleges with at least 1,000 full-time undergraduate students.Methods: Quantitative and qualitative data were collectedby telephone survey in January 2010 using a measurementinstrument designed by investigator and Expert Panel.Quantitative data were measured using a 13-item AsthmaScorecard Total Score (ASTS), weighted using the Delphitechnique. Qualitative results, facilitated by NVivo analysis,assessed respondents’ satisfaction with asthma services,perceptions of barriers to treatment, and recommendationsfor improving asthma management. Results: Responserate was 85.5%. Quantitative results from sample (N=110)were presented using descriptive statistics and multiplelinear regression. There was a significant association (p