| Course Title: | Advocacy in Public Health Policy and Law |
|---|---|
| Course Number: | MPH503 |
| Credit Hours: | 3 credits |
| Course Pre-requisites: | MPH500, MPH501, MPH502, MPH505, MPH509, MPH506 |
| Course Description: |
In this course, students will examine the impacts of economics, ethics, legal issues, political science, management, communications and technology on public health policymaking. Students explore contemporary issues in health policy through review of U.S. health policy development and factors that affect future health policy initiatives. Students are challenged to think systematically and critically about these issues and about various methods available to policymakers to improve the U.S. healthcare system. |
Syllabus
Course Information
Fieldwork Compliance Requirements
Chamberlain does not have specific practicum field compliance requirements for MPH students. Meeting student compliance requirements will only be necessary when the student’s fieldwork facility requires it. Students who do not complete the facility-specific requirements prior to the start of the course will not be registered or will be withdrawn from the course. Students should direct any questions to MPHFieldSupport@chamberlain.edu.
Textbooks and Resources
Required Textbooks
The following books are required for this course:
American Psychological Association. (2010). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
Access E-Book
Bhattacharya, D. (2013). Public health policy: Issues, theories, and advocacy (1st ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Access E-Book
Teitelbaum, J. B., & Wilensky, S. E. (2017). Essentials of health policy and law (3rd ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Publishers.
Optional Resources
The following resources are available for this course:
Physical Books and Supplies
To obtain all your books and supplies, visit the online Chamberlain bookstore at https://bookstore.chamberlain.edu/.
eBook Details
First Time Using VitalSource?
Step 1: View the VitalSource Video
Step 2: Register with VitalSource Bookshelf Online
- Click the cover or title of your eBook. A new window will open.
- Enter email address and password. Bookshelf Online will open.
Step 3: Access the Desktop and Mobile Versions
You must complete Step 2 prior to using the desktop or mobile versions.
Already Registered? 3 Ways to Access Your eBooks
Online
Access your eBook by clicking on the book cover or title in the syllabus page. Bookshelf Online will open.
Desktop
Download your eBooks and use them whether you're connected to the Internet or not.
Mobile
Download the app and get your eBooks on your iPhone, iPad, or Android device.
Program Outcomes
The MPH program outcomes are aligned with the Council for Education of Public Health (CEPH) accreditation criteria (2011) and the Association of Schools and Programs of Public Health (ASPPH) publication, a Master of Public Health Degree for the 21st Century (2014).
At the completion of the Chamberlain MPH program, the graduate will be able to
1
Articulate the history and philosophy of the professional discipline of public health relative to its core values, concepts, functions, and leadership roles.
2
Utilize quantitative methods and epidemiologic tools to assess, monitor, and review the health status of populations and their related determinants of health and illness.
3
Apply evidence-based reasoning and health informatics approaches to the process of program planning, development, budgeting, management, and evaluation in public health organizations and public health interventions to improve community health outcomes.
4
Specify approaches for assessing, preventing, and controlling environmental hazards that pose risks to human health and safety.
5
Apply theoretical constructs of social change, health behavior, and social justice in planning public health interventions.
6
Develop public health programs and strategies responsive to the diverse cultural values and traditions of the communities being served.
7
Practice systems thinking techniques and problem solving to understand and respond to the dynamic interactions among sectors, organizations and public health professionals in improving public health.
8
Demonstrate leadership abilities as effective collaborators and coordinators within and across organizations and as members of interdisciplinary and interprofessional teams.
9
Communicate public health messages to a variety of audiences using targeted written, mass media and electronic communication, and social marketing.
10
Apply the ethical, legal, economic, political, and regulatory dimensions of healthcare and public health policy to developing, evaluating, and advocating for public health policies.
Course Outcomes
Chamberlain courses are built to align course content with specific competency-focused Course Outcomes (COs). The COs define the learning objectives that the student will be required to comprehend and demonstrate competency by course completion. The COs that will be covered in detail for each module can be found in the overview page in that particular module. Whenever possible, a reference will be made from a particular activity or assessment back to the CO that it emphasizes.
Upon completion of this course, the student will be able to demonstrate the following.
1
Explain the policy-making process and how this affects laws and legal processes. (POs 1 and 7)
2
Relate healthcare economics and financing to health policymaking. (POs 2 and 3)
3
Explain federal health insurance programs and their connection to access healthcare, the uninsured, and health reform. (POs 5 and 7)
4
Recognize the basic legal concepts that underlie the healthcare and public health systems, including the legal rights and responsibilities of various stakeholders in the healthcare system and the extensive and complex role played by federal and state laws in the protection of the public’s health. (POs 5 and 6)
5
Write a concise and effective policy analysis. (POs 3, 5, and 6)
6
Identify various forms of public health ethics and the increasing relevance of human rights, particularly the right to health. (POs 5, 7, and 10)
7
Compare and contrast the roles, skills, and leadership abilities of health policy professionals through the examination of case studies. (POs 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9)
8
Advocate for local, state, national, and international policies that influence public health. (POs 7 and 8)
9
Identify the role of public health professionals in emergency preparedness and infectious disease. (POs 6 and 7)
Learning Guide
Module, Topic, and Outcomes | Readings | Learning Activities |
|---|---|---|
Module 1 Law, Public Health, and the Policy-Making Process CO 1 | Module 1 Lesson: Law, Public Health, and the Policy-Making Process Bhattacharya, D. (2013). Public health policy: Issues, theories, and advocacy. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Teitelbaum, J. B. & Wilensky, S. E. (2017). Essentials of health policy and law. (3rd ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.
| Graded Discussions |
Module 2 Role of Epidemiology and Health Economics in Policymaking CO 2 | Module 2 Lesson: Role of Epidemiology and Health Economics in Policymaking Bhattacharya, D. (2013). Public health policy: Issues, theories, and advocacy. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Hayward Medical Communications. (2009). What is a QALY? Retrieved from http://www.medicine.ox.ac.uk/bandolier/painres/download/whatis/qaly.pdf Teitelbaum, J. B. & Wilensky, S. E. (2017). Essentials of health policy and law. (3rd ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.
| Graded Discussions Graded Assessment: Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Paper |
Module 3 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and Access to Care CO 3 | Module 3: Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and Access to Care Bhattacharya, D. (2013). Public health policy: Issues, theories, and advocacy. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Blavin, F., Shartzer, A., Long, S. K., & Holahan, J. (2015). An early look at changes in employer-sponsored insurance under the Affordable Care Act. Health Affairs 34(1), 170–177. Blumenthal, D., Abrams, M., & Nuzum, R. (2015). The Affordable Care Act at 5 years. The New England Journal of Medicine, 372, 2451–2458. doi:10.1056/NEJMhpr1503614 Shaw, F. E., Asomugha, C. N., Conway, P. H., & Rein, A. S. (2014). The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act: Opportunities for prevention and public health. The Lancet, 384(9937), 75–82. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736 Teitelbaum, J. B., & Wilensky, S. E. (2017). Essentials of health policy and law. (3rd ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.
| Conference Call with Faculty Graded Discussions |
Module 4 Public Health Institutions, Systems, and the Right to Healthcare COs 1 and 4 | Module 4 Lesson: Public Health Institutions and Systems Bhattacharya, D. (2013). Public health policy: Issues, theories, and advocacy. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Teitelbaum, J. B., & Wilensky, S. E. (2017). Essentials of health policy and law. (3rd ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.
| Graded Discussions |
Module 5 Policy Analysis CO 5 | Module 5 Lesson: Policy Analysis Bhattacharya, D. (2013). Public health policy: Issues, theories, and advocacy. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Embree, M. G., & Randall, G. E. (2014). Social determinants of health and health equity policy research: Exploring the use, misuse, and non-use of policy analysis theory. Social Science and Medicine 108, 147–155. Teitelbaum, J. B., & Wilensky, S. E. (2017). Essentials of health policy and law. (3rd ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.
| Graded Discussions Graded Assessment: Healthcare Policy Analysis Paper |
Module 6 Ethics and Human Rights in Public Health CO 6 | Module 6 Lesson: Ethics and Human Rights in Public Health Beracochea, E. A., Weinstein, C., & Evans, D. B. A. (2010). Rights-Based Approach to Health Care. Retrieved from http://www.nesri.org/resources/a-rights-based-approach-to-health-care-reform Bhattacharya, D. (2013). Public health policy: Issues, theories, and advocacy. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Gable, L. (2011). The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Public Health, and the Elusive Target of Human Rights. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 39(3), 340–354. doi:10.1111/j.1748-720X.2011.00604.x Petrini, C. (2010). Theoretical models and operational frameworks in public health ethics. International Journal of Environmental Research in Public Health 7(1), 189–202. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2819784/ World Heath Organization. (2016). WHO human rights based approach to health. Retrieved from http://www.who.int/trade/glossary/story054/en/ | Graded Discussions |
Module 7 Public Health Professionals as Leaders and Advocates for Health COs 7 and 8 | Module 7 Lesson: Public Health Professionals as Leaders and Advocates for Health Bhattacharya, D. (2013). Public health policy: Issues, theories, and advocacy. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Czabanowska, K., Smith, T., Konings, K. D., Sumskas, L., Otok, R., Bjegovic-Mikanovic, V., & Brand, H. (2013). In search for a public health leadership competency framework to support leadership curriculum—a consensus study. European Journal of Public Health 24(5), 850–856. doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckt158 Day, M., Shickle, D., Smith, K., Zakariasen, K., Moskol, J., & Oliver, T. (2014, February 9). Training public health superheroes: Five talents for public health leadership. Journal of Public Health Advance Access, 1–10. doi:10.1093/pubmed/fdu004 Dodson, E., Stamatakis, K. A., Chalifour, S., Haire-Joshu, D., McBride, T., & Brownson, R. C. (2013). State legislator's work on public health related issue: What influences priorities? Journal of Public Health Management and Practice 19(1), 25–29. doi: 10.1097/PHH.0b013e318246475c Farrer, L., Marinetti, C., Cavaco, Y. K., & Costongs, C. (2015). Advocacy for health equity: A synthesis review. The Milbank Quarterly 93(2), 392–437. doi: 10.1111/1468-0009.121122-4 Garcia, L. B., Hernandez, K. E., & Mata, H. (2015). Professional development through policy advocacy: Communicating and advocating for health and health equity. Health Promotion Practice 16(2), 162–165. | Graded Discussion Graded Assessment: Letter to the Editor |
Module 8 Emergency Preparedness and Public Health in the Global Arena CO 9 | Module 8 Lesson: Emergency Preparedness and Public Health in the Global Arena Bhattacharya, D. (2013). Emergency preparedness and infectious diseases. In D. Bhattacharya (Ed.). Public health policy: Issues, theories, and advocacy, (pp. 99–140). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass/Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Frenk, J., & Moon, S. (2013). Governance challenges in global health. The New England Journal of Medicine 368(10), 936–942. Hunter, D. J., & Reddy, K. S. (2013). Global health: Non-communicable disease. The New England Journal of Medicine 369(14), 1336–1343. Teitelbaum, J. B., & Wilensky, S. E. (2017). Public health preparedness policy. In J. B. Teitelbaum, & S. E. Wilensky ( Eds.). Essentials of health policy and law (3rd ed.) (pp. 253–274). Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.
| Graded Discussion |
Evaluation Methods
The maximum score in this class is 1,000 points. The categories, which contribute to your final grade, are weighted as follows.
| Learning Activities and Assessments | Points | Weighting |
|---|---|---|
| Graded Discussions (Modules 1–6, 2 discussions; Modules 7–8, 1 discussion) | 210 | 21% |
| Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Paper (Module 2) | 220 | 22% |
| Healthcare Policy Analysis Paper (Module 5) | 350 | 35% |
| Letter to the Editor (Module 7) | 220 | 22% |
| Total Points | 1,000 | 100% |
No extra credit assignments are permitted for any reason.
The course grade is determined by transferring the total number of points possible in the course to a percentage grade. There is no rounding of grades. Percentages of 0.5% or higher are not raised to the next whole number.
All of your course requirements are graded using points. At the end of the course, the points are converted to a letter grade using the scale in the table below.
| Letter Grade | Points | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| A | 930–1,000 | 93% to 100% |
| A- | 900–929 | 90% to 92.9% |
| B+ | 870–899 | 87% to 89.9% |
| B | 830–869 | 83% to 86.9% |
| B- | 800–829 | 80% to 82.9% |
| C+ | 770–799 | 77% to 79.9% |
| C | 730–769 | 73% to 76.9% |
| C- | 700–729 | 70% to 72.9% |
| D+ | 670–699 | 67% to 69.9% |
| D | 630–669 | 63% to 66.9% |
| D- | 600–629 | 60% to 62.9% |
| F | 599 and below | Below 60% |
Discussion Participation
In discussions, you, as a student, will interact with your instructor and classmates to explore topics related to the content of this course. You will be graded for the following.
1. Attendance
Weekly discussion: Discussions are a critical learning experience in the online classroom. Participation in each discussion is required. Each discussion earns a maximum of 15 points per module.
2. Guidelines and Rubric for Discussions
Purpose: Threaded discussions are designed to promote dialogue between faculty and students, and students and their peers. In the discussions, students should
- demonstrate an understanding of the concepts for the module;
- integrate professional resources;
- engage in meaningful and respectful dialogue with classmates; and
- express thoughts clearly and logically.
Participation requirement: You are required to post a minimum of three times in each discussion. These three posts must be on a minimum of two separate days. You must respond to the initial discussion question by 11:59 p.m. MT on Wednesday. To receive credit for a week's discussion, students may begin posting no earlier than the Sunday immediately before each module opens.
3. Threaded Discussion Guiding Principles
The ideas and beliefs underpinning the Threaded Discussions (TDs) guide students through engaging dialogues as they achieve the desired learning outcomes and competencies associated with their course in a manner that empowers them to organize, integrate, apply, and critically appraise their knowledge to their selected field of practice. The use of TDs provides students with opportunities to contribute level-appropriate knowledge and experience to the topic in a safe, caring, and fluid environment that models professional and social interaction. The TD's ebb and flow is based upon the composition of student and faculty interaction in the quest for relevant scholarship. Participation in the TDs generates opportunities for students to actively engage in the written ideas of others by carefully reading, researching, reflecting, and responding to the contributions of their peers and course faculty. Threaded Discussions foster the development of members into a community of learners as they share ideas and inquiries, consider perspectives that may be different from their own, and integrate knowledge from other disciplines.
4. Grading Rubric
Discussion Criteria | Outstanding or highest level of performance | Very good or high level of performance | Competent or satisfactory level of performance | Poor or failing or unsatisfactory level of performance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Answers the initial graded discussion question(s)/topic(s), demonstrating knowledge and understanding of the concepts for the module. | Addresses all aspects of the initial discussion question(s) applying experiences, knowledge, and understanding regarding all modular concepts. AND, Posts initial response to the discussion no later than Wednesday of the week. | Addresses most aspects of the initial discussion question(s) applying experiences, knowledge, and understanding of most of the modular concepts. AND, Posts initial response to the discussion no later than Wednesday of the week. (Maximum of 2 points if initial response is posted to the discussion AFTER Wednesday of the week.) | Addresses minimal aspects of the initial discussion question(s) applying experiences, knowledge, and understanding of some of the modular concepts. | Does not address the initial discussion question(s). |
Integrates evidence to support discussion. Sources are credited.* (APA format not required.) | Integrates evidence to support your discussion from
AND
Sources are credited.* | Integrates evidence to support discussion from
BUT,
Sources are credited.* | Integrates evidence to support discussion only from an outside source, with no mention of assigned readings or lesson. Sources are credited.* | Does not integrate any evidence. |
Engages in meaningful dialogue with classmates or instructor before the end of the week. | Responds to a classmate or instructor's post furthering the dialogue by providing more information and seeking clarification, thereby adding significant depth to the discussion. | Responds to a classmate or instructor's post furthering the dialogue by providing more information or seeking clarification, thereby adding limited depth to the discussion. | Responds to a classmate or instructor but does not further the discussion. | No response post to another student or instructor before the close of the week. |
| Outstanding or highest level of performance | Very good or high level of performance | Competent or satisfactory level of performance | Poor or failing or unsatisfactory level of performance |
Communicates in a professional manner. | Presents information using clear and concise language in an organized manner (NO errors in English grammar, spelling, syntax, and punctuation). | Presents information in an organized manner (minimal, meaning fewer than 3, errors in English grammar, spelling, syntax, and punctuation). | Presents information using understandable language but is somewhat disorganized (more than 3 errors in English grammar, spelling, syntax, and punctuation). | Presents information that is not clear, logical, professional, nor organized to the point that the reader has difficulty understanding the message (significant errors in English grammar, spelling, syntax, and punctuation). |
* Credited means stating where the information came from (specific article, text, or lesson). Examples: Our text discusses.... The information from our lesson states..., Smith (2010) claimed that..., Mary Manners (personal communication, November 17, 2011)... APA formatting is not required.
** Assigned readings are those listed on the Syllabus or Learning Activities page as required reading. This may include text readings, required articles, or required websites and media.
*** Scholarly source—per the APA Guidelines, only scholarly sources should be used in written assignments. These include peer-reviewed publications, government reports, or sources written by a professional or scholar in the field. Wikipedia, Wikis, .com websites, or blogs should not be used because anyone can add to these. Outside sources do not include assigned required readings.
Web Links Disclaimer
The purpose of Web Links is to provide students with annotated bibliographies of world-wide websites relevant to their courses. These websites are not meant to be all inclusive of what is available for each course's subjects and have not been sanctioned as academically rigorous or scholarly by Chamberlain. Please exercise caution when using these websites for course assignments and references. The Web Links page is located on the Course Resources page.
Disability Accommodations in Academic Programs
Chamberlain is committed to maintaining an academic environment free of discrimination and complies with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Chamberlain will make reasonable accommodations to afford students with disabilities full and equal enjoyment of Chamberlain’s programs and services. Chamberlain makes no assumptions concerning any individual’s abilities or disabilities and makes an individual assessment to determine whether each student’s needs can be met at Chamberlain.
Our intent is to ensure that every student who makes a request for accommodations under ADA is advised of the accommodation process as promptly as possible. If you are a student with a verifiable documented disability, and you can provide medical documentation regarding this disability, then contact our ADA Officer at adaofficer@chamberlain.edu for more information on how to receive ADA accommodations in your online classes or fax your request to 630-596-1651.
Late Work Policy
Students are expected to submit assignments by the time they are due. Assignments submitted after the due date and time will receive a deduction of 10% of the total points possible for that assignment for each day the assignment is late. Assessments will be accepted, with penalty as described, up to a maximum of 3 days late, after which point a zero will be recorded for the assessment.
In the event of an emergency that prevents timely submission of an assignment, students may petition their instructor for a waiver of the late submission grade reduction. The instructor will review the student's rationale for the request and make a determination based on the merits of the student's appeal. Consideration of the student's total course performance to date will be a contributing factor in the determination. Students should continue to attend class, actively participate, and complete other assignments while the appeal is pending.
This policy applies to activities and assessments that contribute to the numerical calculation of the course letter grade.
TurnItIn
Students agree that, by taking this course, all work submitted for a grade is subject to submission for textual similarity review to Turnitin.com for the detection of plagiarism. All submitted papers will be included as source documents in the Turnitin.com reference database solely for the purpose of detecting plagiarism of such papers. Use of the Turnitin.com service is subject to the Terms and Conditions of Use posted on the Turnitin.com site.
Purpose:
The purpose of this Turnitin® policy is to facilitate the formative development of scholarly writing skills.
Overview:
Turnitin® is a web-based resource that Chamberlain makes available to students and faculty to comprehensively check work to identify a similarity index for matching text with a database of existing written work, web pages, and electronic journals. Turnitin® assists students in identifying potential plagiarism and supports the student toward academic integrity and originality in order to further develop their scholarly writing skills. Student-created work that is submitted to Turnitin® generates a Turnitin® Originality Report that students use to further edit work prior to submitting to faculty for feedback and evaluation.
Information about Turnitin® can be located in the Chamberlain Student Handbook. The link to Turnitin.com is placed in every online course under the Course Home area, which is located at the bottom of the list.
Policy:
All faculty members teaching in the Master of Public Health (MPH) program will use TurnItIn® for each written assessment in all courses unless the Syllabus states that a particular assessment is excluded. Additionally, all faculty can screen any submitted activity for plagiarism, using TurnItIn.
Professional ePortfolio
Across the Master of Public Health (MPH) program, you will collect assignments and compile them as artifacts within a Professional ePortfolio to demonstrate your professional growth, competency, and expertise. Your final ePortfolio, developed throughout your program and submitted at the end of the degree program, will be assessed against the learning outcomes of the program. Chamberlain will provide detailed information regarding how and when to submit your Professional ePortfolio in your final courses of the program. It is each student's responsibility to save, maintain all artifacts, and upload required artifacts to the ePortfolio.
e-Portfolio Guidelines and Rubric are available on the Course Resource page (under Course Home).
Please retain the following artifacts from this course to include in the e-Portfolio:
- MPH503 Syllabus (copy)
- Cost Effective Analysis Paper (W2)
- Health Care Policy Analysis (W5)
- Letter to the Editor (W7)