SYLLABUS  
CPH  574:  Public  Health  Policy  &  Management  
FALL  2012  
 
January  15,  2013  
 
Time:   Tuesdays,  4:00  –  6:50  pm  
 
Location:  Drachman  Hall,  Rm.  A-­‐120  (A-­‐118  Breakout)  
 
Instructor:      
  Kenneth  Schachter,  MD,  MBA  
  kschacht@email.arizona.edu  
  626-­‐7960  (office)  
  Drachman  Hall,  A-­‐216  
  Office  hours  by  appointment  
 
Teaching  Assistant:    
  Ali  Gabriel  
  akgabrie@email.arizona.edu      
  Office  hours  by  appointment  
 
A. Course  Description:    
Management  processes/roles  of  public  health  professionals;  health  service  organizations;  policy  issues  and  
resource  utilization/control;  human  resources  management;  public  health  trends.    Grading:    Regular  
grades  are  awarded  for  this  course:  A  B  C  D  E.    May  be  repeated  for  credit  1  time  (maximum  2  
enrollments).  
 
B. Course  Prerequisites:    None  
 
C. Required  Text:  
• Public  Health  Administration:  Principles  for  Population-­‐Based  Management,  Second  Edition;  Novick  
L,  Morrow  C,  Mays  G;  Jones  &  Bartlett  Publishers;  2007;  ISBN-­‐13:  9780763738426  
• Other  readings  as  assigned  and  posted  on  D2L  
 
D. Overall   Course   Learning   Objectives:   This   course   provides   an   overview   of   a   broad   range   of   public   health  
topics.  By  the  end  of  the  course  you  should  be  able  to:  
1. Identify  major  components  and  issues  in  the  organization,  financing,  and  delivery  of  the  U.S.  public  
health  system  
2. Describe  the  legal  and  ethical  bases  of  public  health  
3. Describe  how  public  policy  both  creates  and  solves  public  health  problems  
4. Apply  principles  of  strategic  planning  
 5. Demonstrate  leadership  skills  for  building  partnerships  
6. Describe  the  principles  of  marketing  and  social  marketing  
7. Discuss  the  policy  process  for  improving  the  health  status  of  populations  
8. Communicate  health  policy  issues  using  appropriate  channels  and  technologies  
9. Describe  the  principles  of  program  planning,  development,  budgeting,  management  and  evaluation  
in  organizational  and  community  initiatives  
10. Recognize  and  practice  good  teamwork    
 
E. MPH  Competencies  Covered:  
 
Analytical  Skills  
• Defines  a  problem  
• Determines  appropriate  uses  and  limitations  of  data  
• Understands  how  the  data  illuminates  ethical,  political,  scientific,  economic,  and  overall  public  
health  issues  
• Understanding  basic  research  designs  used  in  public  health  
• Makes  relevant  inferences  from  data  
 
Communication  Skills  
• Communicates  effectively  both  in  writing  and  orally  (unless  a  handicap  precludes  on  of  these  forms  
of  communication  
• Soliciting  input  from  individuals  and  organizations  
• Leading  and  participating  in  groups  to  address  specific  issues,  including  ability  to  work  in  teams,  
span  organizational  boundaries,  and  cross  systems  
• Demonstrating  cultural  competency  in  all  of  the  above  and  community  development  
 
Policy  Development/Program  Planning  Skills  
• Assess  and  interpret  information  to  develop  relevant  policy  options  
• States  policy  options  and  writes  clear  and  concise  policy  statements  
• Articulating  the  health,  fiscal,  administrative,  legal,  social,  political,  and  ethical  implications  of  each  
policy  option  
• Identifying  public  health  laws,  regulations,  and  policies  related  to  specific  programs  
 
Cultural  Skills  
• Interacting  competently,  respectfully,  and  professionally  with  persons  from  diverse  backgrounds  
• Identifying  and  examining  the  role  of  cultural,  social,  ethnic,  religious,  spiritual,  and  behavioral  
factors  in  determining  disease  prevention  health  promoting  behavior,  and  health  service  
organization  and  delivery  
• Developing  and  adapting  approaches  to  public  health  problems  that  take  into  account  cultural  
differences  
• Determining  health  related  consequences  of  social  structure  
 
   
 Basic  Public  Health  Science  Skills  
• Defining,  assessing,  and  understanding  the  health  status  of  population,  determinants  of  health  and  
illness,  factors  contributing  to  health  promotion  and  disease  prevention,  and  factors  influencing  
the  use  of  health  services  
• Understanding  research  methods  in  all  basic  public  health  sciences  
• Applying  the  basic  public  health  sciences  including  behavioral  and  social  sciences,  biostatistics,  
epidemiology,  environmental  public  health,  and  prevention  of  chronic  and  infectious  diseases  and  
injuries  
• Understanding  of  the  historical  development  and  structure  of  state,  local,  and  federal  public  health  
agencies  
 
Financial  Planning  and  Management  Skills  
• Managing  programs  within  budgetary  constraints  
• Developing  strategies  for  determining  priorities  
• Monitoring  programs  
• Applying  basic  human  relations  skills  to  the  management  of  organizations  and  the  resolution  of  
conflicts  
• Managing  personnel  
 
F. Course  Requirements:  
• Team   Work   –   This   course   is   NOT   lecture   based.     It   uses   team-­‐based   learning,   which   requires   your  
active  participation  inside  and  outside  of  class.    Students  will  be  assigned  to  a  small  (5-­‐7  people)  team  
during  the  first  class.  You’ll  work  in  that  team  throughout  the  semester.    Today’s  professionals  often  
work  in  groups,  teams,  and  coalitions.    This  class  will  help  you  develop  the  needed  skills.  
• Readings   –   You   are   expected   to   attend   every   class   and   come   fully   prepared   –   i.e.,   having   read   all  
assigned  materials  and  completed  all  assignments.  
• News   Articles   –   Every   week,   each   team   is   expected   to   identify   a   reasonably   current   news   or   magazine  
article  in  the  in  the  popular  press  (e.g.,  New  York  Times,  Wall  Street  Journal,  Washington  Post,  Business  
Week,  Wired,  etc.)  relevant  to  that  week’s  topic  and  readings.    All  team  members  are  expected  to  have  
read  and  to  be  able  to  present  and  discuss  the  article  in  class.  
• Team   Quizzes   –   Most   classes   will   begin   with   a   team   quiz   testing   your   shared   understanding   of   the  
assigned   readings.     Each   team   member   is   expected   to   contribute   to   the   discussion   and   teams   are  
responsible  for  implementing  a  system  that  ensures  that  everyone  participates.      
• Other  –  Typical  in-­‐class  activities  include  team  assignments,  oral  team  reports  and  presentations,  full  
class  discussions,  and  individual  or  collective  reflection.  The  instructor/TA  may  circulate  among  teams  
during  team  discussions.  
• D2L  Online  Discussion  Board  –  This  course  uses  D2L’s  online  discussion  board.    Every  student  is  
expected  to  contribute  to  it  weekly,  with  all  comments  posted  before  the  deadlines.    Comments  should  
be  responsive  to  the  questions  posed  and  demonstrate  that  you  have  read,  understand,  and  can  
meaningfully  apply  and  extrapolate  from  the  information  you’ve  gained.  You  are  encouraged  to  
introduce  relevant  readings  that  were  not  assigned  and  to  share  relevant  knowledge  and  experience.    
Comments  or  replies  to  other  postings  (e.g.,  "I  really  liked  chapter  4"  or  "I  agree  with  what  Dana  
wrote")  are  not  sufficient  and  will  receive  a  zero  grade.    Similarly,  poor  grammar,  lack  of  etiquette,  
insensitivity,  rudeness,  etc.,  will  adversely  affect  your  grade.  
 
   
G. Grading/Student  Evaluation:  ≥90%  =  A;  ≥80%  =  B;  ≥70%  =  C;  ≥60%  =  D;  <60%  =  E  
With  team-­‐based  learning,  a  student’s  final  grade  is  based  on  his/her  individual,  team,  and  peer  review  
grades.    Individual  and  team  grades  will  be  awarded  throughout  the  semester.    Students  who  do  not  
appear  to  be  earning  at  least  a  “B”  average  for  their  individual  performance  by  the  middle  of  the  term  will  
be  individually  contacted  by  the  instructor.    The  percentage  contribution  of  (and  in)  each  of  the  three  
categories  to  the  course  grade  is  shown  below.  
Individual  performance:      
• D2L  discussion  board  and  dropbox  postings   35%  
• In-­‐class  participation   15%  
Team  performance    
• Quizzes   20%  
• Participation  (class  discussions,  projects,  presentations,  articles,  etc.)   10%  
• Final  exam   10%  
Peer  Review    
• Individual  contribution  to  team  functioning   10%  
TOTAL   100%  
H. Class  Attendance/  Absence  Policy:  
Students  are  expected  to  attend  every  class  and  to  notify  the  TA  and  instructor  when  they  are  unable  to  
attend.     There   is   no   make-­‐up   work   for   the   first   absence,   though   students   are   required   to   complete   and  
turn  in  any  written  at-­‐home  assignments  due  for  that  class.  Subsequent  absences  must  be  cleared  with  the  
instructor  and  students  will  need  to  complete  make-­‐up  papers.    Paper  grades  will  substituted  for  team  quiz  
grades  for  every  missed  class  after  the  first.  Because  important  aspects  of  team-­‐based  learning  and  case  
study   learning   occur   in   class;   multiple   absences   may   result   in   a   lowered   grade   or   even   an   incomplete.    
Holidays  or  special  events  observed  by  organized  religions  will  be  honored  for  those  students  who  show  
affiliation  with  that  particular  religion  with  the  same  make-­‐up  requirements  mentioned  aboved.    Absences  
pre-­‐approved  by  the  UA  Dean  of  Students  or  designee  will  be  honored.  
 
I. Participation  and  Expectations:    
• Complete  required  readings  and  assignments  prior  to  each  class.  
• Attend  class  and  actively  participate  in  class  and  online  discussions.  
• Think  analytically  
• Be  open  to  new  ideas  
• Focus  on  the  readings  and  issues  that  we  are  discussing.  
• Avoid  rambling  or  monopolizing  discussions  
• Be  courteous  in  your  critiques  and  disagreements.  Refrain  from  rudeness  and  personal  attacks  
• Actively  contribute  to  team  activities  in  class,  including  team  assignments  and  presentations  
 
J. Discussion  Board  Instructions  and  Grading  Rubric:  
See  attachment  “A”  
 
K. Peer  Review:  
The  peer  review  portion  of  your  grade  will  be  determined  by  your  teammates.    Team  members  will  
anonymously  evaluate  each  other’s  contributions  to  team  functioning  at  the  end  of  the  semester  using  a  
standard  form  to  make  written  comments  and  award  a  numerical  grade.      We’ll  do  a  practice  review  mid-­‐
semester  that  will  not  affect  your  peer  review  grade,  but  will  give  you  some  feedback  on  your  team  
performance.    You  will  be  grading  each  other  based  on  four  criteria  –  preparation,  contribution,  respect  for  
others’  ideas,  and  flexibility.  
 
 • Preparation-­‐  Where  they  prepared  when  they  came  to  class?  
• Contribution-­‐  Did  they  contribute  productively  to  group  discussion  and  work?  
• Respect  for  others’  ideas-­‐  Did  they  encourage  others  to  contribute  to  their  ideas?  
• Flexibility-­‐  Were  they  flexible  when  disagreements  occurred?  
 
L. Course  Schedule  and  Required  Readings:  (See  weekly  course  overviews  for  additional  optional  readings)  
Date   Topic   Required  Readings    
Week   (Thru  Week  6)  
8/21   Course  intro,  team    
Week  1   assignments/meetings  
8/28   Introduction  to  public   • Novick  L,  Morrow  C,  Mays  G;  Public  Health  Administration:  
Week  2   health  and  working  in   Principles  for  Population  Based  Management;  “Chapters  1  (Defining  
teams   Public  Health:  Historical  and  Contemporary  Developments)    &  2  (A  
Framework  for  Public  Health  Administration  and  Practice),  pp  1-­‐68  
• Baldwin  T,  Bommer,  W,  Rubin  S;  “Chapter  8:  Team  Effectiveness  
and  Diversity”;  Developing  Management  Skills:  What  Great  
Managers  Know  and  Do;  McGraw-­‐Hill  Irwin  2008  –  Background  on  
teams  .  .  .  benefits,  challenges,  lifecycle,  tools,  resources,  etc.  (35p)  
• Davison  S;  Creating  Working  Norms  and  Agreements;  pp.  1-­‐3  (Bring  
to  class)  
• Dinkin  D;  Team  Charter  Template,  2010  Action  Learning  Toolkit;  pp.  
1-­‐3  (Bring  to  class)  
9/4   Organization  of  the   • Novick  L,  Morrow  C,  Mays  G;  Public  Health  Administration:  
Week  3   public  health  system   Principles  for  Population  Based  Management;  “Chapter  3  
(Organization  of  the  Public  Health  Delivery  System),  pp  69-­‐110  
• Gebbie  C,  Building  a  Constituency  for  Public  Health  Case  Study,  10p  
9/11   Public  health  law  and   • Novick  L,  Morrow  C,  Mays  G;  Public  Health  Administration:  
Week  4   ethics   Principles  for  Population  Based  Management;  Chapters  4  (Public  
Health  Law)  &  5  (Ethics  in  Public  Health  Practice  and  Management),  
pp  127-­‐160  
• Bayer  &  Fairchild:  The  Genesis  of  Public  Health  Ethics  –  Provides  a  
brief  history  of  bioethics  and  public  health  ethics.    Compares  and  
contrasts  public  health  ethics  to  bioethics  and  discusses  some  of  
the  challenges  inherent  in  developing  an  ethics  for  public  health  
(21p)      
• Gostin  &  Powers:  Social  Justice–  Applies  the  concept  of  social  
justice  to  public  health  and  discusses  how  the  framework  of  social  
justice  informs  the  ethics  of  public  health  (8p)  
• Alderman  J,  Dollar  K,  Kozlowski  L;  Understanding  the  origins  of  
anger,  contempt,  and  disgust  in  public  health  policy  disputes:  
Applying  moral  psychology  to  harm  reduction  debates  –  Describes  
different  moral  perspectives,  the  emotions  elicited  by  their  
perceived  violation,  and  relates  both  to  public  health  and  political  
debates  (16p)  
• For  the  Public’s  Health:  Revising  Law  and  Policy  to  Meet  New  
Challenges;  Report  Brief,  June  2011;  Institute  of  Medicine  of  the  
National  Academies;  www.iom.edu/lawandhealth    
 9/18   Policy  and  public  health   • Novick  L,  Morrow  C,  Mays  G;  Public  Health  Administration:  
Week  5   Principles  for  Population  Based  Management;  Chapter  6  (Legislative  
Relations  in  Public  Health),  pp  161-­‐187  (26p)  
• Oliver  T;  The  Politics  of  Public  Health  Policy;  Annual  Review  of  
Public  Health  2006;  27:195-­‐225  (31p)  –  The  article  discusses  the  
political  dimensions  of  health  policy  and  articulates  a  role  for  the  
political  analysis  of  public  health  issues.  
• Rosenstock;  Attacks  on  Science:  The  Risks  to  Evidence-­‐Based  Policy  
–  Describes  how  scientific  data  can  be  politicized  in  the  policy  
process  (5p)  
• Freudenberg  N,  Galea  S;  The  Impact  of  Corporate  Practices  on  
Health:  Implications  for  Health  Policy;  Journal  of  Public  Health  
Policy  (2008)  29  –  Asserts  that  corporate  practices  play  a  substantial  
role  in  shaping  health  and  health  behavior  (13p)  
• Satcher  D;  Ethnic  Disparities  in  Health:  The  Public’s  Role  in  Working  
for  Equality;  PLoS  Medicine  |  www.plosmedicine.org  1683  Essay  
October  2006  |  Volume  3  |  Issue  10  |  e405  –  Provides  an  overview  
of  health  disparities  in  the  U.S.  and  describes  the  McKinlay  Model  
for  understanding  and  classifying  public  health  interventions  (3p)  
• Root  Causes  –  The  Five  Whys  (2p)  
9/25   U.S.  health  care  system   • Shi  L,  Singh  D,  Essentials  of  the  U.S.  Health  Care  System,  Jones  and  
Week  6   and  health  care  reform   Bartlett  Publishers,  2010,  Chapter  1:  Major  Characteristics  of  U.S.  
Health  Care  Delivery  (25p)  
• Ario  J,  Jacobs  L;  In  The  Wake  Of  The  Supreme  Court  Decision,  Many  
Stakeholders  Still  Support  The  Affordable  Care  Act;  Health  Affairs;  
August  2012  31:8  (12p)  
• Rosenbaum  S;  The  Patient  Protection  and  Affordable  Care  Act:  
Implications  for  Public  health  Policy  and  Practice;  Public  Health  
Reports  /  January–February  2011  /  Volume  126  (6p)  
• Gawande  A;  Getting  There  from  Here:  How  should  Obama  reform  
health  care?;  The  New  Yorker;  January  26,  2009  –  Provides  some  
international  comparisons  and  recommends  an  incremental  
approach  to  health  care  reform,  building  on  what  is  already  there  
(9p)  
• Gawande  A;  The  Cost  Conundrum:  What  a  Texas  town  can  teach  us  
about  health  care;  The  New  Yorker;  June  1,  2009  (16p)  
• Health  Care  Costs  101;  California  Health  Care  Almanac;  April  2011;  
http://www.chcf.org/~/media/Files/PDF/H/HealthCareCosts10.pdf  
−  A      chartbook  providing  information  on  US  health  care  spending  
(p1-­‐11)  
• Schultz  and  Torres,  Ten  Things  You  Didn’t  Know  Were  In  The  
Affordable  Care  Act,  Kaiser  Health  News  (2p)  
10/2   Overview  of   • Pfeffer  J,  Sutton  R;  Trust  the  Evidence,  Not  Your  Instincts;  The  New  
Week  7   management  work:   York  Times;  September  3,  2011  (2p)  
Managing  programs  and   • Novick  L,  Morrow  C,  Mays  G;  Public  Health  Administration:  
people   Principles  for  Population  Based  Management;  “Chapters  9  (Human  
  Resources  Management  –  pp  261-­‐279)  and  19  (Community-­‐Based  
Prevention  –  pp  545-­‐563)  
 • Longest  B;  Logic  Models  as  Aids  in  Managing  Health  Programs;  
Journal  of  Nursing  Administration;  Vol.  35,  No.  12,  December  2005  
–  Discusses  three  core  management  activities  and  how  “logic  
models,  depictions  of  what  programs  are  intended  to  accomplish  
and  how  they  will  go  about  it”,  can  help  program  managers.  (6p)  
• The  Core  Competencies  for  Public  Health  Professionals  (Look  at  the  
Explanation  on  the  first  page  and  the  Sections  titled  –  “Policy  
Development/Program  Planning  Skills”  and  “Financial  Planning  
and  Management  Skills”);  Council  on  Linkages  Between  Academia  
and  Public  Health  Practice;  Adopted  3/3/10;  Accessed  8/14/11;  
http://www.phf.org/link/corecompetencies.htm    
10/9   Public  health  finance   • Novick  L,  Morrow  C,  Mays  G;  Public  Health  Administration:  
Week  8   and  budgeting   Principles  for  Population  Based  Management;  Chapter  7  (Financing  
Practice  Peer  Review   the  Public’s  Health),  pp  189-­‐224  –  Explores  the  history  and  current  
trends  for  financing  public  health  services  and  some  of  the  business  
tools  needed  to  deliver  public  health  effectively  in  the  21st  century  
• Teutsch  M,  Baciu  A,  Mays  G,  Getzen  T,  Hansen  M,  Geller  A;  Wiser  
Investment   for   a   Healthier   Future;   J   Public   Health   Management  
Practice,   2012,   18(4),   295–298   –   Recommendations   for   investing  
more  in  public  health  (4p)  
• Potter  M,  Fitzpatrick  T;  State  Funding  for  Local  Public  Health:  
Observations  From  Six  Case  Studies;  J  Public  Health  Management  
Practice,  2007,  13(2),  163–168  –  Reviews  how  five  states  fund  and  
structure  their  local  health  departments  (6p)  
• Colby  S  and  Rubin  A;  Costs  are  Cool:  The  Strategic  Value  of  
Economic  Clarity;  The  Bridgespan  Group;  2003  –  Discusses  why  and  
how  budgets  become  distorted  and  the  strategic  importance  of  
understanding  total  costs  (17p)  
• A  Career  Manager  &  the  Budget  Process  A&B  –  In  this  case  study,  
we’ll  look  at  budgeting  at  the  department  level  and  explore  its  
power  as  a  management  tool  (44p)  
10/16   Leading  &  managing   • Novick  L,  Morrow  C,  Mays  G;  Public  Health  Administration:  
Week  9   Principles  for  Population  Based  Management;  Chapter  10  
(Leadership  for  Public  Health),  pp  281-­‐295  –  An  overview  of  
leadership  theory  relevant  to  public  health  
• Drucker  P;  Managing  Oneself;  Harvard  Business  Review;  January  
2005  (10  p)    
• Goleman  D;  Leadership  that  Gets  Results;  Harvard  Business  Review;  
March-­‐April  2000  (15  p)  
10/23   Community  assessment   • A  Handbook  for  Participatory  Community  assessments,  Experiences  
Week  10     from  Alameda  County  –  This  monograph  provides  a  full  description  
of  the  community  assessment  process  from  a  real-­‐world  
perspective.  (p1-­‐97)  
• Using  Secondary  Data  to  Assess  Community  Health  –  These  slides,  
developed  by  Dr.  Merrill  Eisenberg,  provide  information  on  
secondary  data  that  can  contribute  valuable  data  to  community  
assessments.    These  data  resources  are  organized  around  four  
components  of  community  assessment  –  problems,  resources,  
 community  assets,  and  political  environment.  
10/30   Assessment  and   • Novick   L,   Morrow   C,   Mays   G;   Public   Health   Administration:  
Week  11   strategic  planning   Principles   for   Population   Based   Management;   Chapter   15  
  (Assessment   and   Strategic   Planning   in   Public   Health),   pp   435-­‐438  
(stop  before  Chapter  Review)  
• Steiner  J,  Gross  G,  Ruffolo  M,  Murray,  J;  Strategic  Planning  in  Non-­‐
Profits:  Profit  from  It;  Administration  in  Social  Work;  Vol  18(2)  1994  
–   Provides   a   good   basic   description   of   strategic   planning   and   its  
major  elements  in  the  nonprofit  sector  (22p)  
• Lardon  C,  Soule  S,  Kernak  D,  Lupie  H;  Using  Strategic  Planning  and  
Organizational   Development   Principles   for   Health   Promotion   in   an  
Alaska   Native   Community;   Journal   of   Prevention   &   Intervention   in  
the  Community,  39:65–76,  2011  –  Illustrates  some  of  the  difficulties  
applying   western   constructs   (e.g.,   strategic   planning)   in   other  
cultures  (13p)  
• Case   Study,   2V/ACT:   Planning   for   Change   and   Determining  
Relevance   –   This   youth   involvement   project   provides   a   real   world  
example   of   the   use   of   strategic   planning   in   an   organizational  
context  (30p)  
11/6   Program  design   • McKay  E;  Using  the  Logic  Model  for  Program  Planning;  WJ  Kellogg  
Week  12   Foundation/Mosaica  (11p)  
• Helitzer  D,  Willging  C,  Hathorn  G  Benally  J;  Using  Logic  Models  in  a  
Community-­‐Based  Agricultural  Injury  Prevention  Project;  Public  
Health  Reports  /  2009  Supplement  1  /  Volume  124  –  Looks  at  the  
use  of  a  logic  model  in  the  design  of  a  community-­‐based  program  
(11p)  
• Kaplan  S,  Garrett  K;  The  use  of  logic  models  by  community-­‐based  
initiatives;  Evaluation  and  Program  Planning  28  (2005)  167–172  –  
The  benefits  and  challenges  of  using  logic  models  in  community-­‐
based  initiatives  (6p)  
• Shelbyville  Teen  Pregnancies  Case  Study  (2p)  
11/13   Program  evaluation  and   • Novick  L,  Morrow  C,  Mays  G;  Public  Health  Administration:  
Week  13   quality   Principles  for  Population  Based  Management;  Chapter  18  
(Evaluation  of  Public  Health  Interventions)  –  495-­‐529  
• Riley  W,  Brewer  R;  Review  and  Analysis  of  Quality  Improvement  
Techniques  in  Police  Departments:  Application  for  Public  Health;  
Journal  of  Public  Health  Management  Practice,  2009,  15(2),  139–
149  –  A  look  at  quality  improvement  methods  in  police  
departments  and  how  lessons  learned  may  be  applied  to  public  
health  (11p)  
• Carey  J;  Medical  Guesswork:  From  Heart  Surgery  to  Prostate  Care,  
The  Health  Industry  Knows  Little  about  which  Common  Treatments  
Really  Work;  Business  Week,  May  29,  2006  –  Discusses  a  core  issue  
in  ensuring  and  improving  health  care  quality;  the  lack  of  good  
evidence  of  effectiveness  (15p)  
• Welch  G;  Testing  What  We  Think  We  Know;  The  New  York  Times;  
Op-­‐Ed;  August  19,  2012  –  A  very  recent  Op-­‐Ed  plea  for  more  
funding  for  comparative  effectiveness  research  (2p)  
 • Gawande  A;  Big  Med:  Restaurant  chains  have  managed  to  combine  
quality  control,  cost  control,  and  innovation.  Can  health  care?;  The  
New  Yorker,  August  13,  2012  –  Describes  the  quality,  cost  control,  
and  innovation  achieved  in  a  large  restaurant  chain  (Cheesecake  
Factory),  contrasts  that  with  the  current  state  of  our  U.S.  health  
care  system,  and  provides  examples  of  health  care  moving  toward  a  
“Cheesecake  Factory”  future  (17p)  
• Electronic  Hallway:  The  Overcrowded  Clinic  –  Will  give  you  an  
opportunity  to  analyze  workflow  and  management  issues  at  an  
overcrowded  clinic  (9p)  
11/20   Leadership  reflections   • Deresiewicz  W;  Solitude  and  Leadership:  If  you  want  others  to  
Week  14   See   discussion   board   follow,  learn  to  be  alone  with  your  thoughts;  American  Scholar,  
for  assignment   00030937,  Spring  2010,  Vol.  79,  Issue  2  (10p)  
• Eagly  A  and  Carli  L;  Women  and  the  Labyrinth  of  Leadership;  
No  face-­‐to-­‐face  class  
Harvard  Business  Review;  September  2007  (11p)  
• George  B,  Sims  P,  McLean  A,  Mayer  D;  Discovering  Your  Authentic  
Leadership;  Harvard  Business  Review;  February  2007  (10p)  
11/27   Advocacy   • Avery  B,  Bashir  S;  The  Road  to  Advocacy-­‐Searching  for  the  Rainbow;  
Week  15   American  Journal  of  Public  Health;  August  2003,  Vol  93,  No.  8    –  
Profiles  two  courageous  women  who  became  advocates  for  causes  
(4p)  
• Dorfman  L,  Wallack  L,  Woodruff  K;  More  Than  a  Message:  Framing  
Public  Health  Advocacy  to  Change  Corporate  Practices;  Health  
Education  &  Behavior,  Vol.  32  (3):  320-­‐336  (June  2005)  (17p)  
• Building  Community  Power  by  Building  Grassroots  Leaders:  
Sacramento  Valley  Organizing  Community  (SVOC);  The  Electronic  
Hallway;  2009  (Case  Study)  (8p)  
• Cwikel  J;  After  Epidemiologic  Research:  What  Next?  Community  
Action  for  Health  Promotion;  Public  Health  Reviews  1994  22  375-­‐
394  –  presents  four  case  studies  of  efforts  to  move  from  
epidemiological  evidence  to  policy  change  (22p)  
• Greathouse  L,  Hahn  E,  Chizimuzo  T,  Warnick  T,  Riker  C;  Passing  a  
Smoke-­‐Free  Law  in  a  Pro-­‐Tobacco  Culture:  A  Multiple  Streams  
Approach;  Policy,  Politics,  &  Nursing  Practice;  VoI.  6  No.  3,  August  
2005,  211-­‐220  –  a  case  study  describing  the  policy  development  
and  political  decision-­‐making  process  in  the  enactment  of  
Lexington,  Kentucky’s  smoke-­‐free  law  (9p)  
• APHA  Legislative  Advocacy  Handbook:  A  Guide  for  Effective  Public  
Health  Advocacy;  Work-­‐Place  Rules  and  Guidelines  for  Public  Health  
Advocates;  American  Public  Health  Association  (5p)  –  Discusses  the  
differences  between  advocacy  and  lobbying  and  the  rules  governing  
advocacy  activities  
• Survival  Skills  for  Advocates;  Part  1,  Chapter  30,  Section  2  Advocacy;  
The  Community  Tool  Box  (6p):  
http://ctb.ku.edu/en/tablecontents/sub_section_main_1198.aspx    
• Tips  for  Writing  a  Letter  to  the  Editor;  Washington  Environmental  
Council  (1p)  http://www.wecprotects.org/make-­‐a-­‐difference/take-­‐
action/lte-­‐tips  accessed  11/28/09  
 12/4   Communications,  media   • Novick  L,  Morrow  C,  Mays  G;  Public  Health  Administration:  
Week  16   relations  ,  and   Principles  for  Population  Based  Management;  Chapters  20  
marketing   (Communications  and  Media  Relations)  and  22  (Using  Marketing  in  
Public  Health  –  567-­‐588  and  621-­‐656  
 
12/11   Final  Exam    
3:30-­‐5:30  
Week  17  
 
Required  Statements:        
 
M. Communications:    You  are  responsible  for  reading  emails  sent  to  your  UA  account  from  your  professor  and  
the  announcements  that  are  placed  on  the  course  web  site.  Information  about  readings,  news  events,  your  
grades,  assignments  and  other  course  related  topics  will  be  communicated  to  you  with  these  electronic  
methods.  The  official  policy  can  be  found  at:    http://www.registrar.arizona.edu/emailpolicy.htm    
 
N. Disability  Accommodation:    If  you  anticipate  issues  related  to  the  format  or  requirements  of  this  course,  
please  meet  with  me.    I  would  like  us  to  discuss  ways  to  ensure  your  full  participation  in  the  course.    If  you  
determine  that  formal,  disability-­‐related  accommodations  are  necessary,  it  is  very  important  that  you  be  
registered  with  Disability  Resources  (621-­‐3268;  drc.arizona.edu)  and  notify  me  of  your  eligibility  for  
reasonable  accommodations.    We  can  then  plan  how  best  to  coordinate  your  accommodations.    The  
official  policy  can  be  found  at:  http://catalog.arizona.edu/2012%2D13/policies/disability.htm    
 
O. Academic  Integrity:    All  UA  students  are  responsible  for  upholding  the  University  of  Arizona  Code  of  
Academic  Integrity,  available  through  the  office  of  the  Dean  of  Students  and  online:  The  official  policy  
found  at:  http://deanofstudents.arizona.edu/codeofacademicintegrity    
 
P. Classroom  Behavior:  (Statement  of  expected  behavior  and  respectful  exchange  of  ideas)  
The  Dean  of  Students  has  set  up  expected  standards  for  student  behaviors  and  has  defined  and  identified  
what  is  disruptive  and  threatening  behavior.  This  information  is  available  at:    
http://deanofstudents.arizona.edu/disruptiveandthreateningstudentguidelines    
 
Students  are  expected  to  be  familiar  with  the  UA  Policy  on  Disruptive  and  Threatening  Student  Behavior  in  
an  Instructional  Setting  found  at:  http://policy.arizona.edu/disruptive-­‐behavior-­‐instructional  and  the  Policy  
on  Threatening  Behavior  by  Students  found  at:  
http://deanofstudents.arizona.edu/sites/deanofstudents.arizona.edu/files/Disruptive_threat_bklt_2012.p
df    
 
Q. Grievance  Policy:    Should  a  student  feel  he  or  she  has  been  treated  unfairly,  there  are  a  number  of  
resources  available.  With  few  exceptions,  students  should  first  attempt  to  resolve  difficulties  informally  by  
bringing  those  concerns  directly  to  the  person  responsible  for  the  action,  or  with  the  student's  graduate  
advisor,  Assistant  Dean  for  Student  and  Alumni  Affairs,  department  head,  or  the  immediate  supervisor  of  
the  person  responsible  for  the  action.  If  the  problem  cannot  be  resolved  informally,  the  student  may  file  a  
formal  grievance  using  the  Graduate  College  Grievance  Policy  found  at:  
http://grad.arizona.edu/academics/policies/academic-­‐policies/grievance-­‐policy    
 
R. Grade  Appeal  Policy:  http://catalog.arizona.edu/2012-­‐13/policies/gradappeal.htm  
 
S. Syllabus  Changes:    Information  contained  in  the  course  syllabus,  other  than  the  grade  and  absence  
policies,  may  be  subject  to  change  with  reasonable  advance  notice,  as  deemed  appropriate.  
 
T. Telephone  and  Computer  Use:    Computers  only  for  class  work.    Cell  phones  on  silent  or  vibrate  mode.  
 
U. Plagiarism:  What  counts  as  plagiarism?    
• Copying  and  pasting  information  from  a  web  site  or  another  source,  and  then  revising  it  so  that  it  
sounds  like  your  original  idea.    
• Doing  an  assignment/essay/take  home  test  with  a  friend  and  then  handing  in  separate  assignments  
that  contain  the  same  ideas,  language,  phrases,  etc.    
• Quoting  a  passage  without  quotation  marks  or  citations,  so  that  it  looks  like  your  own.    
• Paraphrasing  a  passage  without  citing  it,  so  that  it  looks  like  your  own.    
• Hiring  someone  to  do  your  work  for  you  or  purchasing  a  paper  through  any  on-­‐  or  off-­‐line  source.  
   
 Attachment  A  
 
Discussion  Board  Instructions  and  Grading  Rubric  
 
D2L  Discussion  Board  
 
In  this  course,  you  are  expected  to  participate  and  interact  with  your  classmates  both  in-­‐class  and  online.    A  
significant   portion   (35%)   of   your   final   grade   will   be   based   on   your   participation   in   weekly,   online,   D2L  
discussions.    In  addition  to  your  own  original  responses,  you  are  required  to  comment  on  the  postings  of  at  
least  two  of  your  classmates  each  week.  Your  postings  may  be  brief,  but  need  to  substantively  contribute  to  
the  topic  under  discussion  and  reflect  the  quality  of  discourse  characteristic  of  a  professional  level  seminar.    
All  of  your  postings  should  be  well-­‐informed,  respectful,  and  original.    
 
• A   well-­‐informed   posting   requires   that   you   have:   (1)   completed   all   readings   and   viewed   all   media;   (2)  
conducted   any   necessary   independent   research;   (3)   carefully   reviewed   and   considered   the   discussion  
question(s)   before   posting   your   own   comments;   and   (4)   carefully   read   other   students’   postings   before  
commenting  on  them.      
• A   well-­‐informed   posting   responds   to   the   question(s)   asked,   demonstrates   understanding   of   the  
questions(s),   materials,   and   (when   commenting)   other   responses;   discusses   relevant   issues;   and  
introduces  cited  information  from  additional  credible  sources  where  required  or  appropriate.    Wikipedia  
and  similar  sources  will  not  be  counted  as  references.    Use  instead  peer-­‐reviewed  journals;  books;  national  
newspapers   or   magazines;   national,   state   or   local   public   health   agencies;   national   non-­‐governmental  
public  health  agencies  and  foundations;  etc.  
• Respectful  means  that  you  avoid  rude,  condescending,  disparaging,  or  obscene  communication.      
• Original   means   that   you   are:   (1)   expressing   your   own   ideas   in   your   own   words,   (2)   appropriately   crediting  
original  sources  when  you  are  not,  and  (3)  adhering  to  the  University  Code  of  Academic  Integrity.  
 
The  following  rubric  will  be  used  for  grading:  
 
  Excellent  (4  pts)   Good  (3  pts)   Fair  (2  pts)   Poor  (1  pts)   None  (0  pts)  
 
Content            
 
Ideas/Organization            
 
Conventions            
 
TOTAL  (  a+b+c  /  12)    
 
• Content  –  Content  demonstrates  understanding  of  materials  and  responds  to  question(s)  asked  
• Ideas/Organization  –  Thoughts,  ideas  and  recommendations  are  clear,  interesting,  persuasive,  and  –  
wherever  possible  –  based  on  available  scientific  evidence.    Content  is  organized  in  a  manner  that  allows  
reader  to  easily  follow  and  understand    
• Conventions  –  Adheres  to  writing  conventions  (i.e.,  spelling,  punctuation,  capitalization,  grammar,  and  
paragraphing)