HLED221-16S1 (C) Semester One 2016

Models of Health Education

15 points

Details:
Start Date: Monday, 22 February 2016
End Date: Sunday, 26 June 2016
Withdrawal Dates
Last Day to withdraw from this course:
  • Without financial penalty (full fee refund): Sunday, 6 March 2016
  • Without academic penalty (including no fee refund): Sunday, 22 May 2016

Description

This course introduces students to theoretical models utilised within Health Education and promotion. It equips students with the skills required to apply their understanding of the models to a range of diverse needs and in a variety of settings. Community engagement enables students to develop an understanding of all stages of programme planning and the skills required to align each stage with the requirements of a target population.

Learning Outcomes

1. Explore and critique a range of Health Education and promotion models and articulate the theoretical underpinnings of each.
2. Apply models of Health Education and promotion to a range of diverse settings.
3. Develop an understanding of the health education learning area within the New Zealand Curriculum.
4. Articulate and demonstrate the process of developing, implementing and evaluating a health education project.
5. Demonstrate an understanding of a variety of culturally appropriate processes to consult with a range of cultural and population groups.
6. Demonstrate sound facilitation skills that reflect models of Health Education.

Prerequisites

Course Coordinator

Tracy Clelland

Assessment

Assessment Due Date Percentage  Description
Test 01 Apr 2016 30%
Case studies 11 May 2016 40% This is due to be in the dropbox by 11 May. Presentations will be on 12 May.
Facilitation activity 30% This will be held over the last two weeks of the semester.


Students must complete all 3 assessment requirements in order to pass the course.

Textbooks / Resources

Course Readings:

Allen and Clarke Policy and Regulatory Specialists. (2007): Health promoting schools: A framework for a national approach. Wellington: Allen and Clarke Policy and Regulatory Specialists.

Baric, L. (1976). Preparation of manpower for health education: A comparative view. Health Education and Behaviour, 4: 254.

Bartholomenu, K., Parcel, G. and Kok, G. (1998). Intervention mapping: A process for developing theory and evidence-based health education programs. Health education and Behaviour, 25(5), 545- 563.

Benson, J., Scriven, A. (2013). Psychological, social and environmental barriers to cycling to school. International Journal of Health Promotion and Education, 50(1), 34-44.

Buijs, G. (2009). Better schools through health: Networking for health promoting schools in Europe. European Journal of Education, 44(4), 507-520.

Cushman, P. (2008). Health promoting schools: A New Zealand perspective. Pastoral Care in Education, 26, 4 231-24.

Davis, J., Buchanan, K. and Green, L. (2013). Racial/ethnic differences in cancer prevention beliefs: Applying the health belief model framework. American Journal of Health Promotion, 27(6), 384-389.

de Bruijn, G., Kremers, S., de Vries, H., van Mechelen, W. & Brug, J. (2007). Associations of social-environmental and individual level factors with adolescent soft drink consumption: results from the SMILE study. Health Education Research, 22(2), 227-237.

Dresienger, M., Boland, E., Filler, C., Baker, E., Hessel, A. and Brownson, R. (2012). Contextual factors influencing readiness for dissemination of obesity prevention programs and policies. Health Education Research, 27(2), 292-306.

Forland, G. and Ringsberg, K. (2012). Implementation of a standardised Health Education in a local context: A case study. Scandanavian Journal of Caring Sciences, 27: 724-732

Glover, M. and Kira, A. (2012). Pregnant Maori smokers’ perceptions of smoking support and how it can be more helpful. Journal of Smoking Cessation, 7(2), 65-71

Golden, S. & Earp, J. (2012). Socio-ecological approaches to individuals and their contexts: Twenty years of health education and behaviour health promotion interventions. Heath Education and Behaviour, 39(3), DOI: 10.1177/1090198111418634.

Hand, J. (2006). Evaluation for health promotion practitioners. Keeping up to date. Health Promotion Forum 9(5), 1-4.

Jury, A. and Flett, R. (2010). Stages of change for fruit and vegetable intake among New Zealand men: Readiness to eat five servings a day and impact of contextual factors.
International Journal of Men’s Health 9(3), 184-200.

Lovell, S., Kearns, R. and Rosenberg, M. (2011). Community capacity building in practice: Constructing its meaning and relevance to health promoters. Health and Social Care, 19(5), 531-540.

McClenahan, C., Shevlin, M., Adamson, G., Bennett, C., & O’Neill, B. (2007). Testicular self-examination: a test of the health belief model and the theory of planned behaviour. Health Education Research, 22(2), 272-284.

McGregor, K., Glover, M., Gautum, J. and Julich, S. (2010). Working sensitively with child sexual abuse survivors: What female child sexual abuse survivors want from health professionals. Women and Health 50: 737-755.

Nagler, E. et al. (2013). Designing in the social context: using the social contextual model of health behaviour change to develop a tobacco control intervention for teachers in India, Health Education Research, 28(1), 113-129.

Nolan, S. (2008). Drug-free workplace programmes: A New Zealand perspective. Forensic Science International 174 (2008) 125-132.

Ogden, J., Karim, l., Choudra, A. and Brown, K. (2007). Understanding successful behaviour change: the role of intentions, attitudes to the target and motivations and the example of diet. Health Education Research, 22(3), 397- 405.

Redding, C., Rossi, J., Rossi, S., Velicer, N., & Prochaska, J. (2000). Health behaviour models. The International Journal of Health Education, 2000:3 (Special Issue), 180-193.

Robinson, B., Bockting, W., Rosser, S., Miner, M. and Coleman, E. (2002). The sexual health model: application of a sexological approach to HIV prevention. Health education Research, 17(1), 43-57.

Soeberg, M. (2009). Four stories from the field: The increasing momentum of health impact assessment methods and approaches in New Zealand. Keeping up to date. Health Promotion Forum. No.31, i-iv.

Stewart-Brown, S. (2006). What is the evidence on school health promotion in improving health or preventing disease and specifically what is the effectiveness of the health promoting schools approach? Copenhagen, Denmark: WHO Regional Office for Europe.

Tipene-Leach, D., Coppell, K., Abel, S., Pahau, H., Ehau, T. and Mann, J. (2013). Ngati and healthy: translating diabetes prevention evidence into community action. Ethnicity and Health 18(4), 402-14.

Werch, C. (2006). The Behaviour-image model: a paradigm for integrating prevention and health promotion in brief interventions. Health Education Research 22(5), 677-690.

Additional Course Outline Information

Assessment and grading system

Assessment items will be given a mark, and final grades will be calculated and reported using the UC Common Grading Scale.

Grading Scale
Grade    GPA Value        Marks

A+              9            90 – 100
A                8            85 – 89.99
A-               7            80 – 84.99
B+              6            75 – 79.99
B                5            70 – 74.99
B-               4            65 – 69.99
C+              3            60 – 64.99
C                2            55 – 59.99
C-               1            50 – 54.99
D                0            40 – 49.99
E               -1             0 – 39.99

Student's final grades will be determined by adding the marks awarded for each assignment.

Attendance

At least 80% attendance at class sessions is required throughout the course. Students must attend and participate in the course sufficiently to meet the learning outcomes.

Student must complete all 3 assessment requirements in order to pass the course.

Evaluation

Formal and informal evaluation will take place in accordance with the relevant Course Evaluation Policy, to provide feedback to teaching staff about the relevance and validity of what has been learned as well as the quality of course delivery.

Grade moderation

Departmental quality assurance for all courses on a rotational basis.

Late submission of work

Work handed in after the due date with no extension granted is considered late. Late work will not be marked.

Other specific requirements

Written assignments must be word processed in Times New Roman 12 point font and double-spaced. Assignments should not be presented in clear files.  Keep a copy of all assignments.

Requests for extensions

Under exceptional circumstances (eg illness, accident, bereavement or critical personal circumstances) individual students may be granted an extension of the due date for an assignment. There is, however, a limit to the length of time that an extension can be granted and this should be negotiated with the relevant lecturer in the first instance. Extensions will not normally be given for longer than one week from the due date, unless exceptional circumstances prevail. Extensions are not granted automatically to students. Requests for extensions should be emailed to the lecturer at least two days prior to the due date for the assignment. Relevant evidence such as a medical certificate or a letter from a counsellor may be required in order for the lecturer to make a decision about whether or not to grant an extension. A copy of the lecturer’s email confirming the extension (if granted) and any supporting documentation must be attached to and submitted with the assignment. Extensions will not normally be granted because of pressure of university study, eg several pieces of work being due at about the same time. Students are encouraged to plan their work in a realistic manner and in advance so that they can meet their assessment deadlines.

Resubmissions

Resubmissions of assignments are not permitted in this course.

Aegrotat

Aegrotat considerations:  students should refer to Regulation H of the General Course and Examination Regulations.

Where to submit and collect work

Students will be expected to submit their assessments via the online assessment system dropbox in the Learn (Moodle) class site by 11:55pm on or before the due date. All assessments will be subjected to the software Turnitin, to check for plagiarism.

It is the responsibility of the students to check their Internet access and ability to submit their work via the online system.  Any technical difficulties should be notified well in advance of the due date so that assistance can be provided or alternative arrangements can be negotiated. (Students who have unreliable internet access are advised to attend to this early in the course to prevent last minute pressures.) If you require assistance, please email ictservicedesk@canterbury.ac.nz, or phone 0800 763 676 ext 6060.

Students MUST also submit a hard copy of their assessment to the College of Education, Health and Human Development Assignment Room in Orakipaoa at a time directed by the course lecturer.

Indicative Fees

Domestic fee $720.00

International fee $3,638.00

* All fees are inclusive of NZ GST or any equivalent overseas tax, and do not include any programme level discount or additional course-related expenses.

Minimum enrolments

This course will not be offered if fewer than 20 people apply to enrol.

For further information see School of Sport and Physical Education .

All HLED221 Occurrences

  • HLED221-16S1 (C) Semester One 2016