Guidelines for curriculum development in the preparation of health education specialists in health-care delivery settings Public Deposited

http://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/concern/graduate_thesis_or_dissertations/gt54kq773

Descriptions

Attribute NameValues
Creator
Abstract or Summary
  • This study was designed to establish a baseline of data regarding guidelines for curriculum development in the preparation of health education specialists in health-care delivery settings. The survey method was utilized and an expert panel of 15 jurors was selected to respond to a 51 item questionnaire. Professions represented on the panel included seven directors of health education in health maintenance organizations and hospitals; two health educators; one education specialist and consultant; one university system field health education program supervisor; and one administrator of a health maintenance organization. Committee members were asked to indicate desired academic proficiency levels on a five-point scale to 51 specific items grouped according to seven major subject areas: (1) Education; (2) Behavioral Sciences; (3) Biological Sciences; (4) Organizational Processes and Management; (5) Communications; (6) Organization for Health; and (7) Health Sciences. Results were tabulated, a weighted percentage was calculated for each item of the questionnaire, and a relative priority listing was made of the items within each of the seven subject areas. As a basis for determining the relative importance of each item the following arbitrarily assigned scale, referred to as the "Index of Importance", was applied to the weighted percentages: Very High Priority (90 to 100%); High Priority (80 to 89%); Moderate Priority (70 to 79%); Low Priority (60 to 69%); Very Low Priority (50 to 59%); and No Priority (0 to 49%). Using the "Indices of Importance", three (5.9%) of the items were given a very high priority rating; nine (17.6%) a high priority rating; 20 (39.2%) a moderate priority rating; 16 (31.4%) a low priority rating; two (3.9%) a very low priority; and one item (2.0%) was given a no priority rating. For analysis, a weighted percentage average was calculated to determine the relative importance of each subject matter area which ranked as follows: (1) Education (80.50): (2) Organizational Processes and Management (76.00%); (3) Behavioral Sciences (75.33%); (4) Communications (75.33%); (5) Health Sciences (70.00%); (6) Organization for Health (65.68%); and (7) Biological Sciences (58.67%). Based upon the priority ratings, those classified from high to very high, the greatest desired proficiency levels involve knowledge of: program implementation and management; written and oral communications; formulation of behavioral objectives; criteria for selection of health educational materials appropriate for particular individuals and/or groups; values and attitudes which influence health behavior; organizational theory and structure as it relates to the health-care delivery institutions; problem-solving methodology; theories of teaching and learning; theories of motivation; methodology for program evaluations; community organization and development; and basic organization and functions of the health-care delivery institution's departments and services.
Resource Type
Date Available
Date Copyright
Date Issued
Degree Level
Degree Name
Degree Field
Degree Grantor
Commencement Year
Advisor
Committee Member
Academic Affiliation
Non-Academic Affiliation
Subject
Rights Statement
Peer Reviewed
Language
Digitization Specifications
  • File scanned at 300 ppi (Monochrome) using Capture Perfect 3.0 on a Canon DR-9050C in PDF format. CVista PdfCompressor 4.0 was used for pdf compression and textual OCR.
Replaces
Additional Information
  • description.provenance : Approved for entry into archive by Kirsten Clark(kcscannerosu@gmail.com) on 2013-10-24T19:56:32Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 NiemieDebraArdell1977.pdf: 1131789 bytes, checksum: 1f505f9fabfdfe80c28c0248d05b2188 (MD5)
  • description.provenance : Approved for entry into archive by Kirsten Clark(kcscannerosu@gmail.com) on 2013-10-24T20:01:55Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 NiemieDebraArdell1977.pdf: 1131789 bytes, checksum: 1f505f9fabfdfe80c28c0248d05b2188 (MD5)
  • description.provenance : Submitted by Sergio Trujillo (jstscanner@gmail.com) on 2013-10-22T17:33:31Z No. of bitstreams: 1 NiemieDebraArdell1977.pdf: 1131789 bytes, checksum: 1f505f9fabfdfe80c28c0248d05b2188 (MD5)
  • description.provenance : Made available in DSpace on 2013-10-24T20:01:55Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 NiemieDebraArdell1977.pdf: 1131789 bytes, checksum: 1f505f9fabfdfe80c28c0248d05b2188 (MD5) Previous issue date: 1977-04-19

Relationships

In Administrative Set:
Last modified: 08/10/2017

Downloadable Content

Download PDF
Citations:

EndNote | Zotero | Mendeley

Items