1998 ASSESSMENT REPORT
SCHOOL OF HEALTH SCIENCES
BACKGROUND
The School of Health Sciences has been in existence for four years. The academic programs in the School were formerly a part of what the School of Health and Sports Sciences. Market shifts and program growth made it both wise and necessary to create this new entity.
The programs within the School have continued to grow over the past four years, and enrollment appears to have
?leveled out? just in this past year. The School has over 500 majors and 13 full-time faculty positions. There have been 3 School Directors in this 4 year period. The first Director left Ohio University shortly after his first year of service due to health problems. Next, an Interim Director was in place until July, 1997. Then, a new Director was hired and began work in July, 1997. This situation has caused some issues related to continuity and in assuring that strong assessment systems have been developed and implemented.There has also been faculty turnover in the past year. One position remained open throughout 1997-98. Two other faculty resigned in 1997-98, with one leaving mid-year, and the other departing at the end of the year. One other faculty member announced her intent to take the early retirement option at the end of calendar year 1998. Another faculty member is also expected to depart at the end of calendar year 1998, in order to follow her spouse to his new locale.
Although we do not like to see colleagues leave, this turnover has given us an opportunity to reassess our programs, their direction, curriculum, marketability, and viability. Much of what we accomplished during 1997-98 focused on this type of assessment. Our focus was much stronger in examining
?what we are doing?, versus ?how we are doing? it. However, please note that we did not ignore the question of how we are doing it, or issues of quality.Our faculty believe we are well positioned to have a banner year in 1998-99. A great deal was accomplished during this past year, and the future looks very bright for us. Particularly as we strengthen our programs and prepare for the 21st Century in the dynamic field of health.
The School of Health Sciences offers a wide variety of programs at the undergraduate and masters degree levels.
Undergraduate Programs
-Community Health Services
-Long-Term Care Administration
-Health Services Administration
-Environmental Health Sciences
-Industrial Hygiene
-Health Education*
*Health Education will not be in the 1998-99 catalog while the program
is completely reassessed and redeveloped.
Graduate Program
Master of Health Administration**
**Program currently has two tracks, Long-Term Care Administration and
Acute Care Administration
Four of the undergraduate programs have external accrediting bodies. The Long Term Care Program is accredited by the National Board of Examiners in Long Term Care (NAB). Graduates of this program are eligible to sit immediately for the State of Ohio and National licensure examinations for long term care administrators. The NAB
?s initial accreditation visit was during October, 1997. The Environmental Health Sciences Program is accredited by the National Environmental Health Science and Protection Accreditation Council. This group made a re-accreditation site visit to our program during April, 1998. The accrediting body for the Industrial Hygiene Program is the Related Accreditation Commission, Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (RAC/ABET). This group visited our program in November, 1997 for an initial accreditation visit. The accrediting body for the Health Education Program is The American Association for Health Education (AAHE). Their last review of our program took place during March, 1997.The accrediting body for the Graduate Program in Health Administration is the Accreditation Commission for Education is Health Services Administration (ACEHSA), which is affiliated with the Association of University Programs in Health Administration (AUPHA). Our graduate program became affiliated with these organizations in Spring, 1998. The Graduate Program is entering the pre-candidacy program for ACEHSA and work has already begun toward entering the accreditation process. Our advisors with ACEHSA expect that the process for accreditation will take 4 years. This timeline seems realistic to our faculty and should be manageable from a programmatic perspective.
1(a) What are your unit
?s goals for student learning?The School of Health Sciences
? goals for student learning vary according to program. Each of our programs is unique, meeting specific needs for students. Because our programs are geared toward preparing practitioners, each program has specific external pressures that guide program goals. However, there are specific goals which are consistent throughout all of our programs. They are:* All students will acquire a basic knowledge in health and health sciences and in their specific program areas and disciplines.
* All students will exhibit a balance of learned theory and practices within the professional setting of their choice.
* All students will exhibit the highest level of ethical and professional attitudes and behaviors.
* All students will have the ability to communicate effectively, using oral and written techniques and approaches.
* All students will have at least a basic understanding and ability to utilize modern technological methods.
* All students will have the ability to analyze professional strengths, shortcomings, and skill levels with regard to personal evaluations (i.e. self assessments).
* All students will utilize their knowledge base acquired in health sciences to synthesize creative and conceptual solutions to problems.
* All students will demonstrate an understanding of the availability, distribution, career path, and practice patterns of various types of health professionals in their specific program area.
* Graduate students will demonstrate advanced analytical skills and knowledge needed for administrative and research endeavors.
1(b) Indicate how your goals were developed and who was involved.
These goals were developed in Fall, 1995, during the first retreat of the new School of Health Sciences faculty. All the program faculty, including regional campus representatives, were involved in this development process. Each year, this year being no exception, the faculty review the goals at our annual faculty/staff retreat. The set of goals in this document have evolved over a four year period. Our faculty retreat for this academic year was in September, 1997.
1(c) Have the goals been modified based on last year
?s report?There was very little modification of the goals based on last year
?s report. The primary reason for this is that the School had brand new leadership at the time. There were some minor modifications, the most significant being the addition of one new goal. The goal involving the understanding and mastery of modern technology is new. In the 1995 goals, there was no mention of technology. In 1996, technology was mentioned, but included in the goal regarding effective communication. It was the overwhelming opinion that modern technology is so critical that it deserved to stand alone as a goal. We do expect that there will be significant revision of these goals for the upcoming academic year.2(a) How did you assess student learning? What testing instruments, methods and processes did you use to collect assessment data?
The following is a comprehensive list of instruments, methods and processes used to assess student learning.
* Completion of student evaluations of course and course instructor. This assessment
includes open-ended comment sheets.
* Active professionals from the health care industry and appropriate professions were involved in the assessment of student projects and presentations.
* Ongoing review of performance by students and graduates on licensure and qualifying professional examinations.
* Evaluated student performance in their internships, practica, and other field experiences. The evaluation included three different reviews, one from the student
* Conducted our annual student advisement evaluation. This evaluation includes an assessment of program courses and curricula (see appendix A).
* Developed two new program advisory committees (Long Term Care Administration and Health Services Administration) to aid in assessing curriculum development and student employability. Two advisory committees (Environmental Health Sciences and Industrial Hygiene) were already in place from the previous year, and continued their ongoing assessment of curriculum and student employability.
* Surveyed alumni in the following programs: Long Term Care Administration, Industrial Hygiene, and Environmental Health Sciences. All alumni for whom we had an address were surveyed in these programs.
* Three accreditation site visits took place during the academic year. In addition, one program began a pre-candidacy phase for its accreditation.
* Reviewed grade distributions in all of our courses. Individual instructors and courses were compared to others in our School and to appropriate benchmarks for the College of Health and Human Services and the University.
2(b) Have these assessment activities been modified based on last year
?s report?Some change has taken place as a result of our assessment activities. We expect to have even more significant changes and additions to our assessment activities in the next year. A primary example is that we will attempt to survey alumni from all programs. We plan to establish advisory committees for the remainder of our programs. We also plan to begin exit interviews for graduating students.
3(a) Detail how you are analyzing the data and diagnosing strengths and weaknesses.
* Completion of students
* Invited outside examiners used to assess students
? presentations of projects: Professional from program related areas are involved in the evaluation of certain student projects. These professionals use their professional expertise and experience, giving the students real world perspectives of their work, or their approach to their work. The evaluation involves a combination of forced choice questionnaires and open-ended discussion with the students. These data are a useful tool for faculty in assessing student progress and learning. This aspect is particularly helpful because of the emphasis in the School of Health Sciences in preparing practitioners. One example of this interaction is in HLTH 225 and HLTH 325, which are Long-Term Care Administration I and II. Long-Term care administrators from the area are involved in observing and evaluating student?s final projects and reports. In addition, several Industrial Hygiene and Environmental Health Courses including, IH 400, IH 405, IH 415, EH 310, EH 330, EH 430, and EH 457 also use this approach. Practicing professionals come to classroom and laboratory sessions to demonstrate techniques and assess students? sampling procedures, survey techniques, projects, and presentations.* Analyzed performance on licensure and qualifying professional examinations: Students in several of the disciplines within the School of Health Sciences must take licensure and certification examinations in order to practice within their chosen professions. Information about our students is compared to the sample as a whole, and to performance in previous years. When the information is available, our success or lack of it in certain aspects of the exam is also reviewed. In these cases, this data assists faculty is assessing classroom content and approach. Programs involved in this activity include Environmental Health Sciences, Health Education, Health Administration, and Long-Term Care Administration.
* Evaluated student performance in internships, practica, and other field experiences: Evaluation of external experiences is a three part evaluation. All the parties involved, including faculty, student, and preceptor, evaluate the experience. Each student either completes an evaluation form or writes a one to two page synopsis of their external experience. The synopsis includes feedback about the overall quality and learning in the experience, evaluates the preceptor
?s involvement and assistance, and evaluates the faculty advisor?s involvement and assistance. Faculty are required to evaluate student projects and to assess daily logs or journals from the experience. Faculty are in ?regular? contact with the student and preceptor to monitor the experience throughout. The preceptors evaluate the student?s on-the-job performance as if they were regular employees of the organization. Preceptors complete a comprehensive evaluation form concerning each individual student. Faculty members use this combination of data to determine the student?s grade for the experience. In addition, several other things are evaluated from this data. First of all, not all internship sites provide the quality of experience our students deserve. The data assists the Director and faculty in making this judgement. Occasionally, a preceptor is just not ideal for what we need to accomplish. The data assists us in making these assessments. Also, the data help us in guiding new and current preceptors and internship sites in how to get the most out of the internship situation. We learn what it takes for these experiences to be successful, and pass that along to others who are, or eventually become involved. Our goal is to create a win-win-win situation. The student wins with a superb external experience, the institution/agency wins with an able individual who accomplishes something for them, and the School wins by developing more solid internship site which may turn into job opportunities for our students.* Conducted student advisement evaluations: Our students have just completed an advisement evaluation (See Appendix A). The evaluation is completed each Spring Quarter as students pick up their DARS reports during the advising period. These forms are reviewed by two sources, the School Director and the School Promotion and Tenure Committee. The depth or quality of follow up from last year
?s advisement evaluation are uncertain, since no documentation has been maintained. However, this year the following will occur. The School Director will review the advisement evaluations and make an assessment. Strengths and weaknesses will be noted and reviewed with individual faculty members. This review will be completed before the advisement period that takes place during the Fall Quarter. The Promotion and Tenure Committee will also review this material in their assessment of Progress Toward Tenure and in the annual performance review conducted for each faculty member. Any weaknesses or problems will be noted through this process. If needed, a plan for correction of any issues will be developed mutually by the faculty member and the School Director.* Developed program advisory committees: Program advisory committees are used for three primary reasons: 1.) To conduct ongoing review of the curriculum, 2.) To keep the programs grounded in reality, making them relevant to producing high quality practitioners, and 3.) To enhance job opportunities for our program graduates. Our standing rule is to have the curriculum of each program reviewed each year by these
advisory committees. The following programs have active program advisory committees:
-Industrial Hygiene
-Environmental Health Sciences
-Long-Term Care Administration
-Health Services Administration
Each of these committees met twice during the academic year, with the exception of Health Services Administration. The Health Services Administration committee was inaugurated in April, 1998, with its first meeting. The other committees met twice, primarily because each of their programs had an accreditation visit during the 1997-98 academic year. The committees were helpful in preparation for those visits. In addition, the committees took part in meeting with the accreditation site visit teams for each accreditation visit. These committees represent the essence of assessment. Their primary focus is to tell us how we are doing from an external/professional-based perspectivewith the quality and content of our programs. Our approach is to listen to them, and implement their suggestions when appropriate. They keep us relevant and play a critical role in assessing our programs.
* Surveyed alumni and their employers: Alumni surveys were completed during 1997-98 for the Master of Health Administration Program, as well as repeat surveys of the Environmental Health Sciences and Industrial Hygiene alumni. The focus of these surveys was to assess student preparedness for their employment, plus, updating information about our graduates. The data was reviewed by both the faculty and advisory groups. There have been curriculum changes in the past, based on survey results. However, this year, there were no changes made. There was no significant, new information collected in 1997-98.
* Reviewed Grade Distributions: Grade inflation and academic integrity are critical aspects which must be assessed. This data was analyzed quarterly and there were follow up sessions with faculty and teams of faculty regarding their progress. Grade distributions were examined by course, by program, and by individual faculty.
* Curriculum Review: Course by course reviews of syllabi were completed by faculty in Long-Term Care Administration, Health Services Administration, and the Graduate Program in Health Administration. The programs were evaluated in reference in accreditation and professional recommendations, as well as input from the appropriate program advisory committees.
4(a) What evidence (assessment data) have you gathered indicating that you are accomplishing your goals?
* Student employment following graduation has been, and continues to be tracked for several of our programs. Students in the Environmental Health Sciences, Industrial Hygiene, and Long-Term Care Administration programs have over a 90% employment rate in their major fields over the past three years. Other programs are not tracked systematically at this time. We believe that the strong internship programs in these particular programs have been the key to this high employment rate. The demand for these students is quite high, and we have developed very strong relationships with employers in these industries.
* Students in one of our programs, Long-Term Care Administration, must sit for a licensure examination in order to become a nursing home administrator. Over the past three years, our students have a pass rate of over 85%, exceeding the average of 80% pass rate per examination. In the Environmental Health Sciences program, our students sit for the qualifying professional examination to become Registered Sanitarians (R.S.). Our pass rate has been 95% over a four year period. The average pass rate for this examination is 84%. Also, students in Health Education sit for an examination to become a Certified Health Education Specialist (C.H.E.S.). Last year, our pass rate was 100%. We believe these certification and licensure examination results are evidence that students have acquired a basic knowledge in health sciences and within their specific program areas.
* Student evaluations from external experiences are also reviewed each quarter. Over our four year history of existence in the School of Health Sciences, reports on student progress are above average on a consistent basis, for each program. There are over 175 external placements in our School each year. Our students all get placements for these experiences. Most institutions, agencies, and businesses are multiple
* Data from the student advisement forms for Spring Quarter 1997 show evidence of success. This evaluation was the first formal assessment of advising provided by the Health Sciences faculty. The results were quite favorable. All of our faculty received above average to excellent composite ratings. This evaluation has just been completed for this academic year. The final results are not available, but preliminary review shows high ratings and mostly positive feedback again this year. The assessment tells us that faculty are providing high quality advising to our students on a consistent basis.
* Student evaluation data have continued to be positive regarding their classroom experiences. Overall, our students are quite satisfied with the quality of their professors, their preparation, their enthusiasm, their knowledge base, and their approach to students. Faculty within the School received above average to excellent ratings in the three categories evaluated; instructional deliver, instructional design, and course management. This type of evaluation is an indicator that students are acquiring basic knowledge in health sciences and in their specific program areas.
* During the past year our School experienced three accreditation site visits. The following is a summary of how each of those visits presented evidence that the School and faculty were accomplishing goals.
Long-Term Care Administration- The Long-Term Care Administration program had a site visit in late October, 1997. This site visit was the initial one for our program. The results were outstanding, and our program became only the fifth program approved by the National Board of Examiners (NAB) in the United States. The visitors found no deficiencies in our program. They were impressed by our faculty, students, curriculum, and facilities. Their strongest, positive comments related to the strength of our internship program and its integral relationship with the Long-Term Care Professional Community in the State of Ohio. This external assessment gave us strong evidence that this is a very high quality program.
Industrial Hygiene- This program underwent a self-study during 1996-97 and had a site visit in October, 1997. This site visit was the initial one for our program. The results for this visit are not finalized, but our feedback was very positive. Final results and a recommendation will be made in July, 1998. Basically, our curriculum, students, faculty, and facilities met the standards of the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (RAC/ABET). We expect to become one of fewer than ten accredited programs in the United States in July. This external assessment provided evidence that the program is among the best in the United States.
Environmental Health Sciences- This program completed a self-study during 1997-98 and had a site visit in April, 1998 from the National Environmental Health Science and Protection Accreditation Council. This program received initial accreditation six years ago, and this was a site visit for re-accreditation. The results of this visit will be finalized in late June, 1998. Our preliminary report was outstanding. The curriculum, students, faculty, and facilities met the accreditation standards. This program is one of 23 accredited programs in the United States. This external assessment provided evidence that the program is among the best in the country.
* Advisory Committees also served a role in assessing the programs. The following section presents feedback from these committees that provides evidence that the programs are meeting their objectives.
Long-Term Care Administration- This committee gave us very strong feedback this year regarding the relevance of the curriculum in this program. All of these individuals had utilized students in internships and were quite positive about the quality of students and their preparation. In addition, during our accreditation site visit, this group was extremely positive about the program while interacting with the site visit team.
Environmental Health Sciences- This committee provided very strong feedback regarding the value of internship and co-op experiences for students. They reinforced the value of these experiences for both the student and their employing agency. The council also provided very high marks to our program curriculum.
Industrial Hygiene- This group also gave strong reviews to the curriculum. Again, the value and quality of external experiences was stressed by this group.
Health Services Administration- This group identified several curriculum needs including courses or course content in health law, health information systems, managed care, and health care marketing. The group also gave us a recommendation to eliminate the undergraduate internship for all students. They suggested that the internship become an
?honors? type of course for perhaps 15-20 students total per year. On the graduate level, they recommended that our internship be extended from the current one quarter to three quarters, or nine months.4(b) What evidence indicates that your goals are not being fully accomplished?
* Both preceptor and student feedback have identified some curricular deficiencies in both the undergraduate and graduate Health Services Administration programs. Their assessment was based on student readiness for the internship experience. The primary deficiencies were in the areas of Management Information Systems (MIS), Health Law, Health Finance, and Health Care Marketing.
* Preceptor feedback from all programs indicates a need for even stronger communication skills, both verbal and written.
* Accreditation site visits identified opportunities for improvement in all of our programs. The following is a program by program review which highlights areas for improvement.
Industrial Hygiene- The following were noted:
1.) Need to reduce faculty teaching load and have a corresponding
increase in research productivity
2.) Need to strengthen review of transfer credits
3.) Need to add a physics class and an additional mathematics class to the
curriculum.
Environmental Health Sciences- The following were noted:
1.) Need to add course or course content in planning
2.) Need to add course or course content in program evaluation.
3.) Need to reduce faculty teaching load and increase research
productivity.
Long-Term Care Administration- The following were noted:
1.) No curriculum needs were noted by the visiting team.
2.) Faculty were told to anticipate changes in standards which
may require an expansion of undergraduate and graduate
internships to 1000 hours, in order to sit for licensure exams.
* The Graduate Program in Health Administration (MHA) has begun a process to earn accreditation from the Accrediting Commission for Education in Health Services Administration (ACEHSA). This process involves two steps that the program and faculty have already undertaken. First, the program has a faculty mentor assigned by ACEHSA. This mentor has reviewed the program curriculum. Second, the faculty conducted a review of the program using the ACEHSA standards (These are attached as Appendix B). Please note that this review is cursory in comparison to an accreditation self-study. However, the review served as an extremely important assessment tool. In addition, the mentor has reviewed the faculty
1.) Course content or courses need to be developed in Management Information Systems, Health Economics, Health Law, Quality Assurance, and Health Care Marketing
2.) The two current tracks in the MHA program (Acute Care Administration and Long-Term Care Administration) are out of date. New tracks need to be defined and implemented. The suggestion from all parties appears to be
3.) Faculty teaching loads are high and need to be reduced. Research productivity must also increase
4.) Graduate program syllabi must become much more sophisticated and be tied to the ACEHSA standards
5.) The graduate program internship needs to be lengthened from its current 3 months to 9 months. The 9 month time frame is the industry standard and provides a much more in-depth experience for the student.
* The initial meeting of the Health Services Administration Advisory Committee provided feedback that goals were not being fully accomplished. The Advisory Committee was able to reinforce a great deal of what the pre-accreditation activity had already identified. The following is a list of their major issues;
1.) Increase the length of the internship at the graduate level to 9 months to meet the industry standard
2.) Drop the requirement that the undergraduate HSA majors complete a practicum (10 credit hours, 200 field hours) and an internship (15 credit hours, 400 field hours). Their recommendation was to offer an internship as an honors course for approximately 15 to 20 of the top students each year. The Advisory Committee did not believe that these experiences were of value to most students or institutions/agencies
3.) Add curriculum content or courses in MIS, Health Law, Health Economics, Marketing, Finance, Ethics, and Accounting. The Committee made this recommendation for both the graduate program and the undergraduate program
4.) Eliminate the current tracks and implement two new tracks of
5.) Accreditation by ACEHSA must be pursued. This lack of accreditation is a serious deficiency for the graduate program
6.) The Advisory Committee also identified weaknesses in the current internship system. The greatest problems appear to be organizational in nature, particularly in lack of clear objectives and faculty involvement/follow up.
5(a) What improvements or enhancements have been implemented based on your assessment activity? How are you using information from your answer to question #3 to improve your program?
The following areas and issues were addressed during the past year.
* Development of a single catalog of information regarding internship sites- Up to this point, internships were tracked and cataloged by individual faculty members. The School has developed a central database of internships. This information will allow us to begin
* Reshaping of HLTH 202,
?Health Sciences and Lifestyle Choices?- HLTH 202 is the introductory course in the School of Health Sciences, which also is our service course to the University and students. We deliver this course to over 2,000 students per year on the Athens Campus, and approximately 350 more per year on our regional campuses. The HLTH 202 faculty (a combination of full-time, adjunct, and teaching assistants) met weekly throughout the School year. The initial impetus for these meetings was to share information, strategies, and approaches to various content areas of the course. However, the group expanded its focus and addressed other issues at the request of the School Director. One issue was the learning objectives, which were broad, unclear, and unmeasurable. The group worked throughout the Fall Quarter to develop clear and measurable objectives for this course. In addition, this process got the faculty talking to each other about course content. We believe that our assessment and action has helped us develop a course that is relevant, and has consistency despite the numerous instructors involved. One other issue this group tackled was grade inflation. The grades were becoming inflated to the point that the academic integrity of the course was in question. Through monitoring grade reports, the distribution of grades improved from Fall to Winter. We are anxiously awaiting Spring grade reports to see if the trend continues to bring grade distributions more in line with University, College, and School patterns.* Groundwork for curriculum redesign in Health Services Administration and Long-Term Care Administration- Faculty have been assigned the task of reshaping the curriculum in these programs. This action is a direct result of assessments mentioned in this report. Our goal is to begin further discussions and action in Fall, 1998 so that appropriate changes can be implemented for the 1999-2000 catalog. Two subgroups of faculty have been given this assignment for Summer.
* Call for greater emphasis on communication skills being integrated into the classroom- Feedback from several assessment sources continued to emphasize the need for stronger communication skills for our graduates. Faculty have received directives to integrate the development and demonstration of such skills whenever possible within their courses.
* Clear, measurable course objectives- Faculty were instructed by the School Director to further refine and develop course objectives from their current level. Objectives were to be measurable and clear. There was some improvement throughout the year. However, we still have significant room to improve in this area.
* Reexamination of field experiences- The quality and content of internships and other field experiences are being assessed. The goal is to create a system for this process, which is lacking at this point in time. Work has begun on this systematization of the experiences, their evaluation, and the interaction process among faculty, student, and external agency/institution/business. Attached as Appendix C is a likely model of material to be used for assessing the internship experience, developed by Ruth Waibel, a Health Sciences faculty member.
* Identification of faculty members and faculty teams to solve curriculum issues- Teams and/or individual faculty have been assigned various tasks related to curriculum evaluation and design. In effect, Program Coordinators will be leading these efforts.
* Enhancing computer skills- Faculty are being encouraged to integrate computer technology, and the use of this technology into their courses. This need is most critical in our hard science based programs of Environmental Health Sciences and Industrial Hygiene
* Vigorously pursue the candidacy process for ACEHSA- Accreditation is an absolute necessity for the long term viability of the graduate program. The graduate program is the anchor program for the School of Health Sciences. We must make this program as strong and distinctive as possible for the long term strength of our School and all of its programs.
6. What changes do you recommend for your unit in the future: (a) in academic program/curriculum, and (b) in your school
?s assessment process (goals, objectives, methods)?The following changes are recommended for the School of Health Sciences to improve the quality of the assessment process:
* Continue to develop even stronger assessment measures within the School.
* Conduct an assessment process within each of the program areas. Assign a team leader at the beginning of Academic Year 1998-99 for each program. Measurement approaches will be developed and implemented.
* Continue to strengthen the use of Advisory Committees which are already in place in Health Services Administration, Long-Term Care Administration, Industrial Hygiene, and Environmental Health Sciences. Develop one more Committee in early 1998-99 for the Community Health Services Program.
* Continue to develop even stronger external experiences for students. Reexamine the need for various experiences, and if determined appropriate, make the faculty involvement and assessment even stronger.
* Bring more written and verbal communication skill building to each course in our curriculum.
* Redesign HLTH 101, Introduction to Health and Human Services Professions. The course is not working as intended, according to evaluations and instructor feedback. Redesign this course and implement by Winter, 1999.
* Design and implement better means to evaluate teaching effectiveness. Too much reliance is put in student evaluations.
* Design and implement a new introductory course for majors in Health Sciences. HLTH 202 is working well as a service course to the University. However, it appears that our majors need an even stronger introduction. A team will work on the development of HLTH 201 to serve as the introductory course for majors.
* Intensify the review and redevelopment of our curriculum, particularly within the Graduate Program and Community Health Services Major.
* Systematize the external experiences. Uniform approaches need to be developed and implemented for the evaluation of internships, practica, and co-ops.
* Rebuild the Health Education Program. Collaborative prospects exist, particularly with the Physical Education major and campus recreation.
* Continue to monitor grade distribution and academic rigor within our courses.