Graduate Curriculum Committee Course Proposal Form
for Courses Numbered 6000 and Higher
Note: Before completing this form, please carefully read the accompanying instructions.
Submission guidelines are posted to the GCC Web site: http://www.ecu.edu/cs-acad/gcc/index.cfm
1. Course prefix and number:
COMM 6226
2. Date:
1/11/2012
3. Requested action:
X New Course
Revision of Active Course
Revision & Unbanking of a Banked Course
Renumbering of an Existing Course from
from
to
#
Required
X
#
Elective
4. Method(s) of delivery (check all boxes that apply for both current/proposed and expected
future delivery methods within the next three years):
Current or
Proposed Delivery
Method(s):
X
On-campus (face to face)
Expected
Future Delivery
Method(s):
X
Distance Course (face to face off campus)
Online (delivery of 50% or more of the instruction is offered online)
X
5. Justification (must cite accreditation and/or assessment by the graduate faculty) for new course
or course revision or course renumbering:
It is the assessment of the graduate faculty of the School of Communication that a course in health
advocacy is needed to prepare our masters students for careers in health communication. Additionally,
during an external assessment of our current graduate curriculum performed by Dr. Gary Kreps, our 2011
visiting scholar and an internationally renowned health communication expert, health advocacy was
identified as one of two health communication areas suggested for addition to our current program to reflect
the growing field of health communication.
Within our current curriculum, our students are required to take 9 hours of elective courses in health
communication, and can select from: media and health communication, intercultural communication in
health contexts, interpersonal health communication, communication and health organizations, and special
topics in health communication. The current proposed course would be added to this group of elective
courses in health communication to expand the health communication choices available to students. The
course will prepare masters students for careers in organizations in which advocacy is a secondary or
1
Revised 04-06-11 and posted fall of 2011
primary responsibility, by giving them the knowledge and skills to effectively advocate for health-related
policies in the public sphere.
6. Course description exactly as it should appear in the next catalog:
6226. Communication Approaches to Health Advocacy (3) P: Admission to M.A. in communication or
consent of graduate program director. Theories and practices of advocacy in health contexts.
7. If this is a course revision, briefly describe the requested change:
N/A
8. Course credit:
Lecture Hours
3
3
Weekly
OR
Per Term
Credit Hours
s.h.
Lab
Weekly
OR
Per Term
Credit Hours
s.h.
Studio
Weekly
OR
Per Term
Credit Hours
s.h.
Practicum
Weekly
OR
Per Term
Credit Hours
s.h.
Internship
Weekly
OR
Per Term
Credit Hours
s.h.
Other (e.g., independent study) Please explain.
s.h.
3
Total Credit Hours
s.h.
3
9. Anticipated annual student enrollment:
10. Changes in degree hours of your programs:
Degree(s)/Program(s)
Changes in Degree Hours
M.A. in Communication with an
emphasis in Health Communication
Course will serve as an elective toward
required 12 hours in health
communication; no change to degree
hours of program
11. Affected degrees or academic programs, other than your programs:
Degree(s)/Program(s)
Changes in Degree Hours
M.A. in Health Education
N/A
Master of Public Health
N/A
12. Overlapping or duplication with affected units or programs:
2
Revised 04-06-11 and posted fall of 2011
X
Not applicable
Documentation of notification to the affected academic degree programs is
attached.
13. Council for Teacher Education (CTE) approval (for courses affecting teacher education):
X Not applicable
Applicable and CTE has given their approval.
14. University Service-Learning Committee (USLC) approval:
X Not applicable
Applicable and USLC has given their approval.
15. Statements of support:
a. Staff
X Current staff is adequate
Additional staff is needed (describe needs in the box below):
b. Facilities
X Current facilities are adequate
Additional facilities are needed (describe needs in the box below):
c. Library
X
Initial library resources are adequate
Initial resources are needed (in the box below, give a brief explanation and an
estimate for the cost of acquisition of required initial resources):
d. Unit computer resources
X
Unit computer resources are adequate
Additional unit computer resources are needed (in the box below, give a brief
explanation and an estimate for the cost of acquisition):
e. ITCS resources
X
ITCS resources are not needed
The following ITCS resources are needed (put a check beside each need):
Mainframe computer system
Statistical services
Network connections
Computer lab for students
Software
Approval from the Director of ITCS attached
3
Revised 04-06-11 and posted fall of 2011
16. Course information (see: Graduate Curriculum and Program Development Manual for
instructions):
a. Textbook(s) and/or readings: author(s), name, publication date, publisher, and
city/state/country. Include ISBN (when applicable).
Books:
Loue, S., Lloyd, L. S. & O’Shea, D. (2003). Community health advocacy. New York: Kluwer
Academic/Plenum Publishers. ISBN-13: 978-0306473906
Klawiter, M. (2008). The biopolitics of breast cancer: Changing cultures of disease and activism.
Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. ISBN-13: 978-0816651085
Articles:
Pfau, M. (1997). The inoculation model of resistance to influence. In F.J. Boster & G. Barnett (Eds.),
Progress in communication sciences (pp. 133–171). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Pan. Z. & Kosicki, G. M. (2001). Framing as a strategic action in public deliberation. In S. D. Reese, O.
H. Gandy, Jr., & A. E. Grant (Eds.), Framing public life: Perspectives on media and our understanding
of the social world, (pp. 35–66). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Cathcart, R. S. (1990). Movements: Confrontation as rhetorical form. In B. L. Brock, R. L. Scott, and J.
W. Chesebro (Eds.) Methods of rhetorical criticism: A twentieth-century perspective, 3rd ed.. Wayne
State Univ. Press.
McCombs, M. & Reynolds, A. (1994). How the news shapes our civic agenda. In J. Bryant & M. Oliver,
(Eds.) Media effects advances in theory and research. (pp. 1-16). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Scheufele, D. A. (1999). Framing as a theory of media effects. Journal of Communication, 49, 103–122.
Bitzer, L. (1968). The rhetorical situation. Philosophy & Rhetoric, 1, 3-23.
Vatz, R. (1968). The myth of the rhetorical situation. Philosophy & Rhetoric, 6, 157-177.
Vatz, R. (2009). The mythical status of situational rhetoric: Implications for rhetorical critics' relevance
in the public arena. The Review of Communication, 9, 1-5.
Wander, P. C. (1984). The third persona: An ideological turn in rhetorical theory. Central States Speech
Journal, 35, 197-216.
Andersen, P. A. (1993). Beyond criticism: The activist turn in ideological debate. Western Journal of
Communication, 57, 247-256.
Zoller, H. & Dutta, M. (2008). Communication and health policy. In Zoller, H. & Dutta, M. (Eds).
Emerging perspectives in health communication: Meaning, culture and power. (pp. 357-364).
Routledge: New York.
Conrad, C. & Jodlowski, D. (2008). Dealing drugs on the border: power and policy in pharmaceutical
reimportation debates. In Zoller, H. & Dutta, M. (Eds). Emerging perspectives in health communication:
Meaning, culture and power. (pp. 365-389). Routledge: New York.
Zoller, H. (2008). Technologies of neoliberal governmentality: the discursive influence of global
economic policies on public health. In Zoller, H. & Dutta, M. (Eds). Emerging perspectives in health
communication: Meaning, culture and power. (pp. 390-410). Routledge: New York.
Desouza, R., Basu, A., Kim, I., Basnyat, I., & Dutta, M. (2008). The paradox of “fair trade”: the
influence of neoliberal trade agreements on food security and health. In Zoller, H. & Dutta, M. (Eds).
4
Revised 04-06-11 and posted fall of 2011
Emerging perspectives in health communication: Meaning, culture and power. (pp. 411-430).
Routledge: New York.
Wood, R., Hall, D., & Hasain, M. (2008). Globalization, social justice movements, and the human
genome diversity debates: a case study in health activism. In Zoller, H. & Dutta, M. (Eds). Emerging
perspectives in health communication: Meaning, culture and power. (pp. 431-446). Routledge: New
York.
Alcoff, L. (1991). The problem of speaking for others. Cultural Critique, 20, 5-32.
Freudenberg, N. (2005). Public health advocacy to change corporate practices: Implications for health
education practice and research. Health Education & Behavior, 32, 298-319.
Dorfman, L., Wallack, L., & Woodruff, K. (2005). More than a message: Framing public health
advocacy to change corporate practices. Health Education & Behavior, 32, 320-336.
Wilst, W. H. (2006). Public health and the anticorporate movement: Rationale and recommendations.
American Journal of Public Health, 96, 1370-1375.
Shrader-Frechette, K. (2007). Lives at risk. Taking action, saving lives: Our duties to protect
environmental and public health. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 3-38.
Mebane, F., Blendon, R. J. (2001). Political strategy 101: How to make health policy and influence
political people. J Child Neurology, 16, 513-8.
Oliver, T.R. (2006). The politics of public health policy. Annu Rev Public Health, 27, 195-233.
Kromm, J. N., Frattaroli, S., Vernick, J. S., & Teret, S. P. (2009). Law and the public's health: public
health advocacy in the courts: opportunities for public health professionals. Public Health Reports,
124(6), 889-894.
Galer-Unti, R. A. (2010). Advocacy 2.0: Advocating in the digital age. Health Promotion Practice,
11(6), 784-787. doi:10.1177/1524839910386952
Wallack, L. & Dorfman, L. (1996). Media Advocacy: A strategy for advancing policy and promoting
health. Health Education Quarterly, 23,:293-317.
Christiansen, A. E. & Hanson, J. J. (1996). Comedy as cure for tragedy: ACT UP and the rhetoric of
AIDS. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 82, 157-70.
Gamson, J. (1989). Silence, death, and the invisible enemy: AIDS activism and social movement
"newness." Social Problems, 36, 351-367.
Wachter R. (1992). AIDS, activism, and the politics of health. N Engl J Med, 326, 128-133.
Chvasta, M. (2006). Anger, irony, and protest: Confronting the issue of efficacy, again. Text and
Performance Quarterly, 26, 5-16.
Courtney, B. (2006). Is obesity really the next tobacco? Lessons learned from tobacco for obesity
litigation. Annals of Health Law, 15, 61-106.
Pomeranz, J. L., Teret, S. P., Sugarman, S. D., Rutkow, L., & Brownell, K. D. (2009). Innovative legal
approaches to address obesity. Milbank Quarterly, 87(1), 185-213. doi:10.1111/j.14680009.2009.00552.x
Diller, P. A., & Graff, S. (2011). Regulating food retail for obesity prevention: How far can cities go?.
Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 3989-93. doi:10.1111/j.1748-720X.2011.00575.x
5
Revised 04-06-11 and posted fall of 2011
Brownell, K. D. & Warner, K. E. (2009). The perils of ignoring history: Big tobacco played dirty and
millions died. How similar is big food? The Milbank Quarterly, 87, 259-294.
b. Course objectives for the course (student – centered, behavioral focus)
Upon completion of this course, students will be able to:
 Describe the role of health advocates in making policy change
 Discuss the current social context for health advocacy, including the corporate and
governmental obstacles to health-related policy changes
 Analyze the role of culture within advocacy efforts
 Explain the importance of coalition building for advocacy
 Apply communication theories to health advocacy contexts
 Analyze and evaluate legislation, regulation, and litigation as targets for advocacy efforts
 Construct an advocacy plan for a health related policy
 Argue for a policy position using persuasive presentation techniques
 Choose and create media tools used for health advocacy
 Evaluate the effectiveness of current and past advocacy efforts
c. Course topic outline
UNIT 1 –Communication Theories for Advocacy
 The rhetorical situation
 Inoculation
 Framing
 Agenda setting
 The ideological turn
 Confrontational rhetoric
UNIT 2 – Health Advocacy in the Neoliberal Political Environment
 Corporate practices undermining health
 The role of public relations in protecting industry
 The use of private interest science
 The relationship between corporations and government
UNIT 3 – The Advocate’s Toolbox
 Community-based organizing
 Coalition building
 Legislation, regulation, and litigation
 Media advocacy
 Public protest
UNIT 4 – Culture, Ethics, and Health Advocacy
 Ethics for advocates
 The role of culture in advocacy
 The politics of representation
UNIT 5 – Health Advocacy in Action
 AIDS activism
6
Revised 04-06-11 and posted fall of 2011


Breast cancer advocacy
The anti-obesity movement
d. List of course assignments, weighting of each assignment, and grading/evaluation system
for determining a grade
ASSIGNMENTS
Critical response paper
Health advocacy plan and presentation
Final exam
Presentation of readings
TOTAL
20%
40%
20%
20%
100%
GRADING SCALE
A = 90-100%
B = 80-89.9%
C = 70-79.9%
F = Below 70%
7
Revised 04-06-11 and posted fall of 2011