Subject(s)
Health Care Rationing , Health Priorities , Health Services Research/organization & administration , Health Status Indicators , Socioeconomic Factors , Academic Medical Centers , Age Factors , Community Health Planning , Ethnicity , Health Services Accessibility , Humans , Interinstitutional Relations , Morbidity , Mortality , Risk Factors , Sex Factors , Social Justice , United States/epidemiologyABSTRACT
Despite substantial progress in establishing academic and public health partnerships over the past 20 years, two questions require further examination: (1) How are the most effective partnerships achieved? and (2) How well are these partnerships suited to the current and future problems of public health? The authors propose the "new public health" perspective, which offers challenges to develop a dialogue and power relationships among partners based on symmetry rather than conventional asymmetry. New forms of discourse and benchmarking of progress in improving the health of the public may be achieved by adopting this paradigm.
Subject(s)
Interinstitutional Relations , Public Health Practice , Schools, Public Health/organization & administration , Benchmarking/organization & administration , Forecasting , Humans , Interprofessional Relations , Needs Assessment/organization & administration , Power, Psychological , United StatesABSTRACT
Within many schools of public health, substantial ambiguity surrounds the process of defining and rewarding faculty contributions to practice-oriented scholarly activities. Ernest L. Boyer introduced a powerful and compelling new paradigm for assessing the core domains of scholarship: the scholarships of discovery, integration, teaching, and application. This article draws on Boyer's domains and his colleagues, Charles E. Glassick, and others' criteria for evaluating them in introducing a framework for assessing practice-oriented scholarship within schools of public health. The article presents concepts, content, and defining criteria of practice-oriented scholarship and identifies the principles that might guide tenure and promotion decisions related to it.
Subject(s)
Faculty, Medical/standards , Fellowships and Scholarships/standards , Interinstitutional Relations , Program Evaluation/methods , Public Health Practice/standards , Schools, Public Health/standards , Career Mobility , Diffusion of Innovation , Humans , Models, Educational , Models, Organizational , Organizational Objectives , Research/standards , Teaching/standards , United StatesABSTRACT
The steady increase in immigrants to the United States has fueled a critical analysis of the process of allocation of health and social benefits to these newcomers. The myriad of interests and values surrounding this issue precipitated the formulation and adoption of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity (Welfare Reform) Act of 1996. This dramatic welfare reform impacts federal, state, and local agencies that are required to determine the eligibility of benefits and manage the attendant consequences to the public as well as members of this vulnerable group. Especially challenging are the decisions confronting public health professionals who struggle to reconcile the resulting policy, programmatic mandates, and compliance imperatives with prevailing public health principles and practice norms. This paper proposes a framework for understanding the incongruence between the provisions of the law as it pertains to legal and illegal immigrants and public health values. The impact of policy incongruence and professionals' dissonance on public health practice norms is explored with an explicit focus on public health outcomes and legal implications. The examination of tuberculosis as a health example reveals the policy conflicts and public health dilemmas. Finally, the paper elicits a range of options available to public professionals for responding to these legal mandates.
