Table of Contents
Chronological History of the MPH Program at Armstrong Atlantic State University
List of Electronic Reference Folders/Files…………………………………………..
Glossary of Terms……………………………………………………………………
2
4
5
The Public Health Program…………………………………………………..
Mission……………………………………………………………………….
Evaluation…………………………………………………………………….
Institutional Environment…………………………………………………….
Organization and Administration…………………………………………….
Governance…………………………………………………………………...
Fiscal Resources……………………………………………………………...
Faculty and Other Resources………………………………………………...
Diversity………………………………………………………………………
Instructional Programs………………………………………………………..
Degree Offerings……………………………………………………………...
Program Length………………………………………………………………
Public Health Core Knowledge………………………………………………
Practical Skills………………………………………………………………..
Culminating Experience……………………………………………………...
Required Competencies………………………………………………………
Assessment Procedures……………………………………………………….
Bachelor’s Degrees in Public Health…………………………………………
Academic Degrees……………………………………………………………
Doctoral Degrees……………………………………………………………..
Joint Degrees………………………………………………………………….
Distance Education or Executive Degree Program…………………………...
Creation, Application and Advancement of Knowledge……………………..
Research………………………………………………………………………
Service………………………………………………………………………..
Workforce Development……………………………………………………...
Faculty, Staff and Students…………………………………………………...
Faculty Qualifications………………………………………………………...
Faculty Policies and Procedures……………………………………………...
Student Recruitment and Admissions………………………………………...
Advising and Career Counseling……………………………………………..
Addendum A
7
7
12
21
35
39
48
52
61
79
79
81
82
84
89
92
98
103
103
103
103
103
104
104
122
133
136
136
151
158
164
171
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
2.0
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
2.10
2.11
2.12
3.0
3.1
3.2
3.3
4.0
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
1
Chronological History of the MPH Program at Armstrong Atlantic State University
Armstrong Atlantic State University (AASU) is a unit of the University System of Georgia. AASU
is located in Savannah, Georgia. As of fall, 2012 AASU had approximately 7,400 students of
which 6,731 were undergraduates and 708 were graduate students. As of spring, 2013, AASU has
over 300 full-time faculty members. The university offers 28 bachelor’s degree programs and 14
master’s degree programs through its College of Liberal Arts, College of Education, College of
Health Professions, and College of Science and Technology. The institution was founded in 1935
as Armstrong Junior College and became a unit of the University System of Georgia, in 1959.
Senior college status was conferred to Armstrong State College in 1964 after which both
baccalaureate and master’s degrees were authorized. In 1996, the institution gained university
status and its new name, Armstrong Atlantic State University.
The precursor to the MPH Program at Armstrong Atlantic State University, the Master of Health
Science, was approved by the Board of Regents (BOR) of the University System of Georgia (USG)
in 1981. At that time, Armstrong State College (ASC) was one of the three Regional Health
Professions Education Centers in the University System designated by the University System
Board of Regents (Medical College of Georgia, Georgia State University, Armstrong State
College). The Master of Health Science (MHS) degree allowed students to choose an emphasis
area of study in either health education or health services administration. In 1990, the Department
of Health Science, on the recommendations of its advisory committee and input from the
community began deliberate faculty acquisition and thorough restructuring of its curriculum. The
MHS program based its redesigned emphasis areas in health promotion/education and health
services administration on institutions enjoying excellent national reputations in public health and
health services administration. The MHS program experienced phenomenal growth (748%
increase in quarter hours generated from 1990 -1996, AASU Data Digest).
From 1990-1997, the Department of Health Science existed as a dichotomy with two distinctly
separate faculty specializations and produced students prepared in either public/community health
or health services administration. Therein lay the dilemma; because the student’s academic
preparation was a major rather than a degree designation, there was often confusion as to the exact
academic preparation of the student, thus resulting in reduced marketability of the program as well
as the student. The faculty proposed the degree re-designations to better meet and serve student
demands, to facilitate program accreditation, and to better define an educational experience which
more accurately reflected the fields of Public Health and Health Services Administration.
As a result of a successful history of program delivery (as the MHS with an emphasis area in
health/promotion education), community support, well established collaborative relationships with
other system institutions and a positive report from the consultant from the Accrediting Council on
Education for Public Health (CEPH), the Master of Public Health degree received a priority one
status from AASU in the institution’s strategic plan for new programs
2
In early 1997, the MHS, with input from its advisory committee, the faculty members of the Health
Science Department (this designation was later changed to Health Sciences Department) presented
a proposal and needs assessment to the BOR requesting a re-designation of the MHS degree with
an emphasis in health promotion/education to the Master of Public Health (MPH) degree and the
MHS with an emphasis in health services administration to the Master of Health Services
Administration (MHSA) degree. This change enabled Armstrong Atlantic State University to
improve its existing programs in the direction that would better achieve a goal central to the 1998
proposed mission of Armstrong Atlantic State University and its School of Health Professions,
namely (a) “to promote academic excellence and provide appropriate access to its programs. . ..in
Health Professions . . .and to form partnerships with other institutions in the university system” and
(b) ensure that academic needs are not duplicated elsewhere.
The BOR approved the request to establish the MPH degree (40 semester hours) at AASU in
December 10, 1997 (note: the total hours in the program of study for the MPH was increased to 42
semester hours and subsequently 45 semester hours).
In 1999, the MPH Program at AASU submitted its proposal to begin its accreditation process to
CEPH. AASU was notified on June 30, 1999 that CEPH had approved the request to begin the
accreditation process and that the self-study must be submitted prior to June 2001.
On September 29th, 2000, the MPH Program at AASU submitted its initial Self-Study to CEPH.
The initial site visit was scheduled for October 2000. The result of the site visit was full initial
accreditation of 5 years.
In October 2005, the MPH Program at AASU submitted a self-study for re-accreditation to CEPH.
A site visit was scheduled for April 2006. On October 16th 2006, the CEPH Board of Councilors
accredited the program for the maximum seven year term.
The MPH Program is located in the Department of Health Sciences which is located
organizationally in the College of Health Professions. In addition to the MPH Program, there are
three additional programs: the Bachelor of Health Science, the Master of Health Services
Administration and the Master of Science in Sports Medicine. There are also two certificate
programs, Gerontology (graduate and undergraduate) and Strength and Conditioning (graduate
only). There are currently 5 core faculty members and 16 in the total faculty complement. As of
spring 2013 there were 64 students enrolled in the MPH Program.
Since 2006, the MPH Program has thrived increasing in faculty complement, collaborative
community partnerships and producing well prepared graduates to enter the public health
workforce.
3
List of Electronic Reference Folders/Files
The following information is provided in a separate format (via memory stick) to support the
Final Self-Study:
MPH Administration
 ACOPH Meeting Minutes 12.13.11
 Armstrong Graduate Catalog 2012-13
 Childhood Obesity in Chatham County – 2012 Community Report
 Complete List of Grants
 Constituent Letter for Comments
 eFACE Questions
 MOU List (as of 6.9.13)
 MPH Recruitment Brochure
 Public Health Workforce Needs Assessment 2011
MPH Advisory Committee
 MPH Advisory Committee Aug 09-Aug 11
 MPH Advisory Committee Spring 2013
MPH Courses
 Capstone Course_PUBH 7500 (folder)
 MPH Course Syllabi (folder)
 Practicum Course_PUBH 7675 (folder)
MPH Faculty
 MPH Faculty CVs (folder)
 MPH Faculty Meeting Minutes (folder)
 Department of Health Sciences_Tenure & Promotion Policy
 Faculty Handbook (as of May 2012)
 Graduate Faculty Status Associate & Full Application
 Graduate Faculty Status Temporary Application
MPH Students
 Figure 1.7.b_Learning Commons Floor Plan
 MPH Practicum Guide (prior to Fall 2013)
 MPH Student Handbook (as of Fall 2013)
 MPH Student Handbook (prior to Fall 2013)
 MPH Student Self Evaluation Survey – Data
 MPH Student Self Evaluation Survey – Initial Assessment Tool
 MPH Student Self Evaluation Survey – Final Assessment Tool
4
Glossary of Terms
Abbreviation
AA/EOE
AAHE
AAMI
AASU
ACOPH
AFE
AHEC
AMA
APAR
APHA
ASPH
BHS
BOR
CAMINO
CDC
CEPH
CEU
CHES
CINAHL
CME
COHP
CPH
CV
DrPH
EdD
eFACE
FACE
FPE
FTE
GA
GA
GAF
GAIN
GALILEO
GIL
GPA
GPHA
GRE
GSCC
HBCU
Definition
Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer
American Association for Health Education
African American Male Initiative
Armstrong Atlantic State University
Administrative Committee on Public Health
Annual Faculty Evaluation
Areal Health Information Centers
American Medical Association
Annual Professional Activities Report
American Public Health Association
Associated Schools of Public Health
Bachelor of Health Science
Board of Regents
College Access Mentoring Information and Outreach Program
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Council on Education for Public Health
Continuing Education Unit
Certified Health Education Specialist
Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature
Continuing Medical Education
College of Health Professions
Certified in Public Health
Curriculum Vita
Doctor of Public Health
Doctor of Education
Electronic Faculty and Course Evaluation
Faculty and Course Evaluation
Faculty Peer Evaluation
Full-time Employee
Georgia
Graduate Assistantship
Graduate Affairs Committee
Georgia Network for Medical Information
Georgia Library Learning Online
GALILEO Interconnected Libraries
Grade Point Average
Georgia Public Health Association
Graduate Record Examinations
Graduate Student Coordinating Council
Historically Black College or University
5
Abbreviation
HC
HHS
HOLA
HRSA
HS
IRB
JSTOR
LEED
LGBTQ
MAT
MD
MEDLINE
MHS
MHSA
MOU
MOVE
MPA
MPAB
MPH
MSSM
NCHEC
PhD
PIER
PROF
PUBH
QEP
SACS
SDS
SFR
SOPHE
SSC
SSU
T&P
USG
VP
Definition
Head Count
Health and Human Services
Hispanic Outreach and Leadership
Health Resources and Services Administration
Health Science
Institutional Review Board
Journal Storage
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design
Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer
Miller’s Analogy Test
Medical Doctor
Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System
Master of Health Science
Master of Health Services Administration
Memo of Understanding
Men of Vision and Excellence
Master of Public Administration
MPH Program Advisory Board
Master of Public Health
Master of Science Sports Medicine
National Commission for Health Education Credentialing
Doctor of Philosophy
Pirates Impacting and Evaluating Recruitment
Peer Review Outcome Form
Public Health
Quality Enhancement Plan
Southern Association of Colleges and Schools
Scholarships for Disadvantaged Students
Student/Faculty Ratio
Society of Public Health Education
Self-Study Steering Committee
Savannah State University
Tenure and Promotion
University System of Georgia
Vice President
6
1.0
1.1
The Public Health Program
Mission. The program shall have a clearly formulated and publicly stated mission
with supporting goals, objectives and values.
1.1.a. A clear and concise mission statement for the program as a whole.
The mission of the MPH program at Armstrong Atlantic State University is to support
and enhance public health for the Georgia coastal region through workforce development,
research and community service.
The mission supports the programmatic vision: To be the principal center of public health
education, information and advocacy in the Georgia coastal region.
1.1.b. A statement of values that guides the program.
The MPH program embraces values that align with the values of Armstrong Atlantic
State University:






We value public health education that is student-focused, transformative,
experiential and rigorous, leading to student success.
We value balance among teaching, mentoring and scholarship to support and
enhance public health for the Georgia coastal region.
We value an environment of mutual trust and collegiality to support and enhance
public health among our local constituents.
We value and respect diversity.
We value ethical behavior and accountability to support high standards of
performance by the public health workforce within our local community.
We value civic engagement through outreach and service to support and enhance
public health for the Georgia coastal region.
1.1.c. One or more goal statements for each major function through which the
program intends to attain its mission, including at a minimum, instruction, research
and service.
Instruction
GOAL 1: To prepare, encourage, and recognize academic achievements of public health
students in order to create effective public health professionals.
Research
GOAL 2: To enhance the body of knowledge in public health through academic and
applied research.
7
Service
GOAL 3: To provide leadership, expertise, and assistance in public health education and
promotion that responds to changing community health needs.
1.1.d. A set of measurable objectives with quantifiable indicators related to each
goal statement as provided in Criterion 1.1.c. In some cases, qualitative indicators
may be used as appropriate.
Goals
1. To prepare, encourage, and
recognize academic
achievements of public health
students in order to create
effective public health
professionals.
2. To enhance the body of
knowledge in public health
through academic and applied
research.
Objectives
1.1. MPH graduates will
demonstrate the ability to
integrate and apply all core
competencies.
Indicators
1.1. 90% of MPH Graduates
will complete the capstone
course PUBH 7500 Planning
and Evaluation with a grade of
B or better.
1.2. Program will maintain
affiliation with at least one
active chapter of health related
honors society.
1.3. Program will select
students to receive awards for
academic achievement at least
once a year.
1.4. The program will
maintain an 80% degree
completion rate.
1.2. Number of honor societies
with which the MPH is
affiliated.
1.5. All graduates will report
increased self-efficacy in
public health programmatic
competencies.
2.1. 50% of faculty will submit
grants/contracts for funding of
research (annually).
2.2. 75% of faculty will
present refereed or invited
scholarly presentations at
state, regional, national or
international scientific
meetings and/or professional
conferences (annually).
2.3. 25% of faculty will author
or co-author publications in a
refereed journal or non-
1.3. Number of awards earned
by MPH students each year.
1.4. % of graduates who
complete the degree within the
allowable time period (7
years).
1.5. % students with increase
in scores for initial/final selfassessment of programmatic
competencies.
2.1. Number of
grants/contracts submitted for
funding for service activities
expressed as a percentage of
MPH faculty complement.
2.2. Number of refereed or
invited scholarly presentations
at state, regional, national or
international scientific
meetings and/or professional
conferences expressed as a
percentage of MPH faculty
complement.
2.3. Number of publications as
author or co-author in an
appropriate area of expertise in
8
Goals
3. To provide leadership,
expertise, and assistance in
public health education and
promotion that responds to
changing community health
needs.
Objectives
refereed publication
disseminated at the state,
regional, national, or
international level (annually).
2.4 100% of faculty will
satisfy scholarship
requirements to maintain
university graduate faculty
status (annually).
3.1. The program will
maintain an advisory council
that comprises representatives
from nonprofit, public, and
for-profit agencies with a
concern for local public health
issues (annually).
3.2. 50% of faculty will serve
in a significant consulting
capacity in their area of
expertise that supports local,
state, national, and/or
international agencies or
organizations (annually).
3.3. 75% of faculty will
maintain membership in
national, regional, and/or state
professional organizations
(annually).
3.4. 100% of faculty will
satisfy service requirements to
maintain university graduate
faculty status (annually).
Indicators
a refereed journal or nonrefereed publication that is
disseminated at the state,
regional, national, or
international level expressed
as a percentage of MPH
faculty complement.
2.4 % of faculty with graduate
faculty status.
3.1. Roster of current MPH
Advisory Council
membership.
3.2. Proportion of MPH
faculty complement who serve
in a significant consulting
capacity in their area of
expertise that supports local,
state, national, and/or
international agencies or
organizations.
3.3. % of faculty reporting
membership in national,
regional, and/or state
professional organizations in
annual APAR.
3.4. % of faculty with graduate
faculty status.
1.1.e. Description of the manner through which the mission, values, goals and
objectives were developed, including a description of how various specific
stakeholder groups were involved in their development.
The former MPH mission, goals, and objectives were developed in 1998 and revised in
2006 and were based on Council on Education for Public Health (CEPH) criteria, as well
as the Standards for the Preparation of Graduate-Level Health Educators published by
the American Association for Health Education and the Society for Public Health
Education.
9
The MPH Committee of the Whole, along with MPH graduate student Chris Newman,
met in early fall 2012 and reviewed the former mission, goals and objectives and
updated/developed a draft of new mission statement, goals and objectives based upon
Competency-Based Framework for Health Educators (2006), Association of Schools of
Public Health competencies, and Council of Linkages between Academia and Public
Health Practice domains that more clearly reflected the current status of the MPH
Program. The MPH Advisory Committee composed of alumni and professional
practitioners were sent draft copies of the new mission, goals and objectives and asked to
provide input in establishing direction for the program and its curriculum. After
receiving input from the MPH Advisory Committee, the final draft of the mission, goals
and objectives was written and published.
1.1.f. Description of how the mission, values, goals and objectives are made
available to the program’s constituent groups, including the general public, and how
they are routinely reviewed and revised to ensure relevance.
The MPH mission, values, goals, and objectives are made available to the program’s
constituent groups through a variety of communication resources, including the MPH
Student Handbook (see Resource File).
(http://www.armstrong.edu/Health_Professions/Health_Sciences/healthsciences_master_
of_public_health). The MPH Advisory Committee was sent a copy of the new mission,
goals and objectives. The mission, goals and objectives are also published on the MPH
website. They are included in the MPH self-study which is published on the MPH
website.
The mission, values, goals and objectives are reviewed on an annual basis at MPH faculty
strategic planning retreat in January. Revisions to the program mission, values, goals and
objectives, if deemed necessary, are made and continue through the same protocol
described above for approval. The MPH faculty members (the Committee of the Whole)
with one or more MPH students complete the initial annual review and produce a new
draft if deemed appropriate. The draft document with changes, if any, is sent
electronically to the MPH Advisory Committee members for input. After receiving input
from the MPH Advisory Committee, the final draft is completed and communicated in
the various sites mentioned above.
1.1.g. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the
program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.
This criterion is met.
Strengths: The MPH program has a clear and concise mission statement, a statement of
values that guides the program, three goal statements for the major functions of
instruction, research and service, and a set of measurable objectives with quantifiable
10
indicators related to each goal. The mission, values, goals and objectives are readily
available to the program’s constituent groups, and are routinely reviewed and revised to
ensure relevance.
Weaknesses: None.
Future Plans: The MPH program will continue to evaluate progress toward the stated
mission, values, goals and objectives, and make changes as necessary.
11
1.2
Evaluation. The program will have an explicit process for monitoring and
evaluating its overall efforts against its mission, goals and objectives; for assessing
the program’s effectiveness in serving its various constituencies; and for using
evaluation results in ongoing planning and decision making to achieve its mission.
As part of the evaluation process, the program must conduct an analytical self-study
that analyzes performance against the accreditation criteria defined in this
document.
1.2.a. Description of the evaluation processes used to monitor progress against
objectives defined in Criterion 1.1.d, including identification of the data systems and
responsible parties associated with each objective and with the evaluation process as
a whole. If these are common across all objectives, they need to be described only
once. If systems and responsible parties vary by objective or topic area, sufficient
information must be provided to identify the systems and responsible party for
each.
ASSESSMENT METHODS
1.1
% percent of graduates with a grade of “B” or better in capstone course.
Data System: End of term grade report for PUBH 7500
Responsible Party Data Collection: Instructor of record for PUBH 7500 will report data
to MPH Coordinator.
Assessment Responsibility: MPH Coordinator
1.2
Number of honor societies on campus that award honors to MPH students for
awards.
Data System: List of number of honor societies affiliated with the MPH Program
Responsible Party Data Collection: MPH Coordinator
Assessment Responsibility: MPH Coordinator
1.3 Number of awards earned by MPH students each year.
Data System: List of number of awards received by MPH students each year
Responsible Party Data Collection: MPH Coordinator
Assessment Responsibility: MPH Coordinator
1.4. % of graduates who complete degree within allowable time period (7 years)
Data System: Yearly data of MPH graduates
Responsible Party Data Collection: MPH Coordinator will request data from Office of
Institutional Research
Assessment Responsibility: MPH Coordinator
1.5. % of graduates with increase in scores for initial/final assessment of programmatic
competencies
Data System: Yearly assessment of MPH Student Initial/Final Self-Assessment
12
Responsible Party Data Collection: MPH Coordinator (initial) & instructor of record for
PUBH 7500 (final)
Assessment Responsibility: MPH Coordinator/MPH Faculty at yearly retreat
2.1. Number of grants/contracts submitted for funding for research activities expressed as
a percentage of MPH faculty complement.
Data System: MPH Faculty APARS
Responsible Party Data Collection: HS Department head to MPH Coordinator
Assessment Responsibility: MPH Coordinator
2.2. Number of refereed or invited scholarly presentations at state, regional, national or
international scientific meetings and/or professional conferences expressed as a
percentage of MPH faculty complement.
Data System: MPH Faculty APARS
Responsible Party Data Collection: HS Department head to MPH Coordinator
Assessment Responsibility: MPH Coordinator
2.3. Number of publications as author or co-author in an appropriate area of expertise in a
refereed journal or non-refereed publication that is disseminated at the state, regional,
international or international level.
Data System: MPH Faculty APARS
Responsible Party Data Collection: HS Department head to MPH Coordinator
Assessment Responsibility: MPH Coordinator
2.4 % of faculty with graduate faculty status
Data System: Graduate Faculty Coordinating Council list of Graduate Faculty
Responsible Party Data Collection: MPH Faculty to MPH Coordinator
Assessment Responsibility: MPH Coordinator
3.1. Roster of current MPH Advisory Council membership.
Data System: Annual list of MPH Advisory Council Members
Responsible Party Data Collection: MPH Coordinator
Assessment Responsibility: MPH Coordinator
3.2. % of faculty reporting technical assistance, leadership or consulting to public-related
organizations in GA coastal region in annual APAR.
Data System: MPH Faculty APARS
Responsible Party Data Collection: HS Department head to MPH Coordinator
Assessment Responsibility: MPH Coordinator
3.3. % of faculty reporting membership in national, regional and/or state professional
organizations in annual APAR.
Data System: MPH Faculty APARS
Responsible Party Data Collection: HS Department head to MPH Coordinator
Assessment Responsibility: MPH Coordinator
13
3.4. % of faculty with graduate faculty status.
Data System: Graduate Faculty Coordinating Council list of Graduate Faculty
Responsible Party Data Collection: MPH Faculty to MPH Coordinator
Assessment Responsibility: MPH Coordinator
1.2.b. Description of how the results of the evaluation processes described in
Criterion 1.2.a are monitored, analyzed, communicated and regularly used by
managers responsible for enhancing the quality of programs and activities.
1.1: % percent of graduates with a grade of
“B” or better in capstone course.
1.2: Number of honor societies that award
honors to MPH students for awards.
1.3: Number of awards earned by MPH
students each year.
1.4: % of graduates who complete degree
within allowable time period (7 years)
1.5: % of graduates with increase in scores for
initial/final assessment of programmatic
competencies
2.1: # of grants/contracts submitted for
funding research activities
December
November
October
September
August
July
June
May
April
March
February
Table 1.2.b: Data Collection Schedule for
Assessment of Outcome Measures*
January
It is the responsibility of the MPH Coordinator to oversee all information derived from
evaluation processes described in Criterion 1.2.a. The assessment data are collected,
monitored, analyzed, communicated, archived and regularly employed by the MPH
Program Coordinator, in conjunction with the Health Sciences Department Head and
input from MPH faculty, students, and MPH Advisory Committee to enhance the quality
of programs and activities (see assessment schedule, Table 1.2.b below). The
information is discussed in MPH faculty meetings, MPH curriculum committee meetings,
and MPH Advisory Committee meetings. Examples of programmatic changes due to
assessment are: objective 1.5 was added in spring 2012 as a result of discovering that
objective 1.1 (performance in the capstone course) did not yield a broad enough
perspective of the students’ perspective of their own professional growth; objectives 2.12.3 were developed in 2010 and implemented in 2011 as a result of difficulty in making
an objective assessment of faculty performance in scholarship. Until fall 2013, the
program relied on the instructor of record to evaluate the student’s ability to demonstrate
and apply all core competencies (objective 1.1). As of fall 2013 all total faculty will
attend the student presentations in the capstone course and will have input to the student’s
performance in that to enhance the assessment reliability for objective 1.1.
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
14
2.2: # of refereed or invited scholarly
presentations at state, regional, national, or
international scientific meetings/conferences
2.3: # of publications as author or co-author in
an appropriate area of expertise in refereed
journal or non-refereed publication that is
disseminated at the state, regional, national or
international level.
2.4: % of faculty with graduate faculty status
3.1: Roster of current MPH Advisory Council
membership
3.2: % of faculty reporting technical
assistance, leadership or consulting to publicrelated organizations in GA coastal region in
annual APAR.
3.3. % of faculty reporting membership in
national, regional and/or state professional
organizations in annual APAR.
3.4. % of faculty with graduate faculty status.
X
X
X
X
X
X
MPH Student Exit Questionnaire (part of
X
X
PUBH 7675 Practicum requirements)
eFACE course evaluations
X
X
MPH Practicum Student Evaluation of Site
X
X
and Site Supervisor
MPH Practicum Site Supervisor Evaluation of
X
X
Student
MPH Alumni Survey
MPH Mission, Goals and Objectives
X
*Beginning in January 2014, all data will be reviewed by MPH primary faculty during annual MPH Program
Strategic Planning Retreat, which will occur in January of each subsequent year. Results will be used for future
programmatic improvements.
December
November
October
September
August
July
June
May
April
March
February
X
January
Data Collection Schedule for Additional
Programmatic Assessments*
December
November
October
September
August
July
June
May
April
March
February
January
Table 1.2.b: Data Collection Schedule for
Assessment of Outcome Measures*
X
X
X
X
X
1.2.c. Data regarding the program’s performance on each measurable objective
described in Criterion 1.1.d must be provided for each of the last three years. To
the extent that these data duplicate those required under other criteria (e.g., 1.6, 2.7,
3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 4.1, 4.3, or 4.4), the program should parenthetically identify the criteria
where the data also appear.
15
Table 1.2.c. Outcome Measures for AASU MPH Program
Outcome
Target
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Measure
2010
2011
2012
Objective 1.1: All graduates will demonstrate the ability to integrate and apply all core
competencies.
1.1. % percent of
90%
Met
Met
Met
graduates with a
(100%)
(100%)
(100%)
grade of “B” or
better in capstone
course.
Objective 1.2: Program will maintain affiliation with at least one active chapter of public health
related honors society.
1.2. Number of
1 or more
Met
Met
Met
honor societies
(Delta
(Delta Omega,
(Delta Omega, Alpha
on campus that
Omega, Alpha
Alpha Eta, Phi
Eta, Phi Kappa Phi, and
award honors to
Eta, Phi
Kappa Phi, and
Omicron Delta Kappa)
MPH students
Kappa Phi,
Omicron Delta
for awards.
and Omicron
Kappa)
Delta Kappa)
Objective 1.3: Program will select students to receive awards for academic achievement at least
once a year.
1.3 Number of
3 or more
Met
Met
Met
awards earned by
3 Alpha Eta
3 Alpha Eta
4 Alpha Eta
MPH students
3 Delta
3 Delta Omega
3 Delta Omega
each year.
Omega
Objective 1.4: The program will maintain an 80% degree completion rate.
1.4. % of
80%
Met
Met
Met
graduates who
(100%)
(100%)
(100%)
complete degree
within allowable
time period (7
years)
Objective 1.5: All graduates will report increased self-efficacy in public health programmatic
competencies.*
1.5. % of
100%
N/A
N/A
In Progress (*See note
graduates with
at end of table)
increase in scores
for initial/final
assessment of
programmatic
competencies.
Objective 2.1: 50% of faculty will submit grants/contracts for funding of research (annually).
2.1. Number of
30%
Met
Met
Met
grants/contracts
53.5%
76.9%
50.0%
submitted for
(7/13)
(10/13)
(8/16)
funding for
research
activities
expressed as a
percentage of
MPH faculty
Year 4
as of 6/2013
Met
(100%)
Met
(Delta
Omega,
Alpha Eta,
Phi Kappa
Phi, and
Omicron
Delta Kappa)
Met
3 Alpha Eta
3 Delta
Omega
Met
(100%)
In Progress
(*See note at
end of table)
Not Met Yet
13%
(2/16)
16
Table 1.2.c. Outcome Measures for AASU MPH Program
Outcome
Measure
complement.
Target
Year 1
2010
Year 2
2011
Year 3
2012
Objective 2.2: 75% of faculty will present refereed or invited scholarly presentations at state,
regional, national or international scientific meetings and/or professional conference
(annually).
2.2. Number of
75%
Met
Met
Met
refereed or
107.7%
92.3%
100%
invited scholarly
(14/13)
(12/13)
(16/16)
presentations at
state, regional,
national or
international
scientific
meetings and/or
professional
conferences
expressed as a
percentage of
MPH faculty
complement.
Objective 2.3: 25% of faculty will author or co-author publications in a refereed journal or nonrefereed publication disseminated at the state, regional, national or international level
(annually).
2.3. Number of
25%
Not Met
Met
Met
publications as
23.1%
30.8%
68.8%
author or co(3/13)
(4/13)
(11/16)
author in an
appropriate area
of expertise in a
refereed journal
or non-refereed
publication that
is disseminated
at the state,
regional, national
or international
level.
Objective 2.4: 100% of faculty will satisfy Scholarship requirements to maintain university
graduate faculty status (annually).
2.4. % of faculty
100%
Met
Met
Met
with graduate
100%
100%
100%
faculty status.
(13/13)
(13/13)
(16/16)
Objective 3.1: The program will maintain an advisory council that comprises representatives
from nonprofit, public and for-profit agencies with a concern for local public health issues
(annually).
Year 4
as of 6/2013
Not Met Yet
50%
(8/16)
Met
31%
(5/16)
Met
100%
16/16
17
Table 1.2.c. Outcome Measures for AASU MPH Program
Outcome
Target
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Measure
2010
2011
2012
as of 6/2013
3.1. Roster of
Annual
Met
Met
Met
Met
current MPH
membership
(Refer to
(Refer to
(Refer to Resource File for
(Refer to
Advisory
roster
Resource
Resource
roster)
Resource File
Council
File for
File for
for roster)
membership.
roster)
roster)
Objective 3.2: 75% of faculty will provide technical assistance, leadership or consulting to
public-related organizations in the Georgia coastal region at least once every year (annually).
3.2. % of faculty
50%
Met
Met
Met
Met
reporting
100%
92.3%
87.5%
75%
technical
(13/13)
(12/13)
(14/16)
(12/16)
assistance,
leadership or
consulting to
public-related
organizations in
GA coastal
region in annual
APAR.
Objective 3.3: 75% of faculty will maintain membership in national, regional and/or state
professional organization (annually).
3.3. % of faculty
75%
Met
Met
Met
Met
reporting
100%
100%
100%
100%
membership in
(13/13)
(13/13)
(16/16)
(16/16)
national, regional
and/or state
professional
organizations in
annual APAR.
Objective 3.4: 100% of faculty will satisfy service requirements to maintain university graduate
faculty status (annually).
3.4. % of faculty
100%
Met
Met
Met
Met
with graduate
100%
100%
100%
100%
faculty status.
(13/13)
(13/13)
(16/16)
(16/16)
*Objective 1.5: The Initial & Final Self-Assessment Evaluations began in Spring 2012; therefore, a full set of data
is not yet available for students. Refer to Reference File for data collected up to present.
Current program assessment is as follows: data collection - specific MPH total faculty are
assigned data collection for each objective; e.g., the Health Sciences Department Chair
has ready access to data that that assesses faculty performance criteria (Objectives 2.1-2.4
and 3.2-3.4). Advisory Council data (Objective 3.1) is assessed by the MPH Coordinator.
Data collection pertaining student focused objectives are assigned to specific MPH total
faculty (Objectives 1.1-1.5). All data is submitted to the MPH Coordinator for analysis
and storage which includes raw data in locked file data and password protected electronic
data.
MPH Program Assessment of the above objectives has been done in an ad hoc fashion in
the past. As a result of this self-study, a more organized plan for annual review for all
18
program assessments will be instituted in January 2014. Please refer to section 1.2.b.
(Future Plans) for a detailed summary of the format for the annual program assessment.
1.2.d. Description of the manner in which the self-study document was developed,
including effective opportunities for input by important program constituents,
including institutional officers, administrative staff, faculty, students, alumni and
representatives of the public health community.
The Department of Health Sciences began the self-study process in early fall 2012. All
of the programs major constituent groups, administration, faculty, graduate students,
MPH Advisory Committee, health professionals, internship preceptors and alumni have
had the opportunity to participate in this self-study.
As of late spring 2012, bi-monthly meetings were scheduled, and additional ad hoc
individual and group meetings were scheduled as needed. The MPH faculty reviewed the
criteria for accreditation and criteria writing assignments were selected. Deadline criteria
drafts were established and weekly meetings were instituted in spring 2013 for program
faculty and student representatives to review drafts of criteria. MPH Advisory
Committee members were emailed drafts for review. The participants in the self-study
recommended programmatic changes to the MPH faculty. The first draft was completed
April 2013. This draft was shared with the Dean of Health Professions and the AASU
Provost. In July 2013, third party comments were solicited on the MPH website
http://www.armstrong.edu/Health_Professions/Health_Sciences/healthsciences_master_of_public
_health and the MPH LinkedIn group page http://www.linkedin.com/groups/Armstrong-
Master-Public-Health-4754771. The name and mailing address for CEPH was included in
the notice and respondents were directed to send comments to CEPH. The final draft is
due for delivery to CEPH on August 12, 2013.
1.2.e. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met, and an analysis of the
program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.
This criterion is met with commentary.
The commentary pertains to Objectives 1.5 and 2.3. Objective 1.5 states that all
graduates will report increased self-efficacy in public health programmatic competencies.
This evaluation measure was operationalized for the first time in May 2012; therefore, the
first MPH students who participated in the initial assessment have not completed their
program of study, and thus have not yet completed a final assessment. Objective 2.3
pertains to number of publications by faculty as author or co-author in an appropriate area
of expertise in a refereed journal or non-refereed publication that is disseminated at the
state, regional, national or international level; this criterion was not met for 2010;
however, it was subsequently met for 2011 and 2012, demonstrating progress.
19
Strengths: The MPH program has an explicit process for monitoring and evaluating its
overall efforts against its mission, goals and objectives. Results are utilized in ongoing
planning and decision making to achieve its mission.
Weaknesses: One key measure that evaluates student progression and increase in selfefficacy in public health programmatic competencies is still in an early phase of data
collection. Data will continue to be collected each semester, and as soon as the cohort
that began in May 2012 completes their program of study, a complete cycle of data will
be available for analysis and inclusion in the program’s ongoing self-assessment.
Future Plans: The MPH program will continue to evaluate progress toward the stated
mission, values, goals and objectives, and make changes as necessary.
20
1.3 Institutional Environment. The program shall be an integral part of an accredited
institution of higher education.
1.3.a. A brief description of the institution in which the program is located, and the names
of accrediting bodies (other than CEPH) to which the institution responds.
The University System of Georgia
The Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia was created in 1931 as a part of a
reorganization of Georgia’s state government. With this act, public higher education in Georgia
was unified for the first time under a single governing and management authority. The governor
appoints members to the Board, who each serve seven years. Today the Board of Regents is
composed of 18 members, five of whom are appointed from the state-at-large, and one from each
of the 13 congressional districts. The Board elects a chancellor who serves as its chief executive
officer and the chief administrative officer of the University System.
The Board oversees the 35 colleges and universities that comprise the University System of
Georgia, Skidaway Institute of Oceanography and The Georgia Public Library System.
These institutions enroll approximately 318,000 students and employ approximately 41,680
faculty and staff members to provide teaching and related services to students and the
communities in which they are located.
Armstrong Atlantic State University (AASU) is a unit of the University System of Georgia.
AASU is located in Savannah, Georgia. As of fall, 2012 AASU had approximately 7,400
students of which 6,731 were undergraduates and 708 were graduate students. As of spring,
2013, AASU has over 300 full-time faculty members. The university offers 28 bachelor’s degree
programs and 14 master’s degree programs through its College of Liberal Arts, College of
Education, College of Health Professions, and College of Science and Technology. The
institution was founded in 1935 as Armstrong Junior College and became a unit of the University
System of Georgia, in 1959. Senior college status was conferred to Armstrong State College in
1964 after which both baccalaureate and master’s degrees were authorized. In 1996, the
institution gained university status and its new name, Armstrong Atlantic State University.
College of Health Professions Mission:
Improve the health and wellness of our culturally diverse communities by educating students to
become team-oriented, evidence-focused and compassionate healthcare professionals.
College of Health Professions Vision 2020
In 2020 the College of Health Professions at Armstrong is a thriving, sustainable, and
community-based hub of integrated healthcare education, health promotion, and service. The
college is widely recognized as a leader in innovative, interdisciplinary education.
21
Our recognition is based on the following accomplishments and realities:
 The college’s state-of-the-art facilities and advanced technologies prepare graduates for the
healthcare environment of the future
 Outstanding faculty excel at bringing applied research and professional healthcare experience
directly into the learning process
 Graduates demonstrate comprehensive disciplinary knowledge and skill, as well as an ability
to function in a complex, team-oriented healthcare system
 Strategic community partnerships provide learning laboratories for our students and faculty
 The college and our partners collaborate to identify, confront and solve current healthcare
issues while working to prevent the problems of tomorrow
http://www.armstrong.edu/Health_professions/deans_office/chp_our_vision_mission
Accreditation and Affiliation
Armstrong Atlantic State University is fully accredited by the Commission on Colleges of the
Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) to award associate, baccalaureate,
masters, and doctorate degrees.
Various academic programs currently have special accreditation by the following other than
CEPH:
 Chemistry – American Chemical Society Committee on Professional Training
 Communicative Disorders – American Speech, Language and Hearing Association.
 Computer Science – Computing Accreditation Commission of the Accreditation Board for
Engineering and Technology
 Dental Hygiene – Commission on Dental Accreditation of the American dental Association
 Medical Technology – National Accrediting Agency for Clinical Laboratory Sciences
 Music – National Association of Schools of Music
 Nursing (Baccalaureate and master’s Degree) – Commission of Collegiate Education in Nursing
 Physical Therapy – Accreditation in Physical Therapy Education
 Radiologic Sciences – Joint Review Committee on Education in Radiologic Technology
 Respiratory Therapy – Committee on Accreditation of Allied Health Educational Programs
 Teacher Education – National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education and the Georgia
Professional Standards Commission
 Health Services Administration - Commission on Accreditation of Health Management Education
1.3.b. One or more organizational charts of the university indicating the program’s
relationship to the other components of the institution, including reporting lines and clearly
depicting how the program reports to or is supervised by other component of the
institution.
22
23
24
1.3.c. Description of the program’s involvement and role in the following:
Budgeting and resource allocation, including budget negotiations, indirect cost recoveries,
distribution of tuition and fees and support for fund-raising.
The budget and resource allocation is determined in the following manner:





Each department head with input from faculty and program coordinators, presents an annual
budget request to the college dean.
The college dean in turn prioritizes the budget requests of the departments in the college and
presents priorities to the university president, provost/academic vice president and vice president
for business and finance.
The president recommends the university’s budget to the Board of Regents for the University
System of Georgia.
The Board of Regents recommends to the general assembly and the governor the annual funding
level for the state-supported institutions of higher education.
The general assembly determines the budget for the University System of Georgia.
Indirect cost recoveries:
The University has a negotiated indirect cost rate agreement with the US Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS). It is a fixed final predetermined rate. The on-campus rate is 48%. The offcampus rate is 24.50%. The rate is valid through June 30, 2015.
Personnel recruitment, selection and advancement, including faculty and staff:
Armstrong, the College of Health Professions, and the Department of Health Sciences are bound by
the policies of the University System of Georgia for faculty recruitment, selection and advancement.
Faculty recruitment:
When filling a full-time faculty position, the academic unit head appoints a search committee.
Members of the Search Committee meet with Human Resources to insure that they perform their
duties according to Affirmative Action guidelines and university policy. In accordance with the
policies of the University System of Georgia, all application materials and committee actions
(including written records) are subject to the Open Records Act.
1. The Search Committee in conjunction with the department head prepares a position
description and has the position description approved by the dean.
2. The Search Committee in conjunction with the department head prepares an advertisement
including the following information: department in which the position is located, rank, status
(10-month/12-month), qualifications (required and preferred), experience (required and
preferred), application deadline (at least 30 days after initial posting in the Applicant
Clearinghouse of the University System of Georgia, AA/EOE Statement).
3. The Search Committee or department head forwards the position advertisement to the dean.
25
4. Once approved, the dean forwards the position advertisement to the Office for Academic
Affairs for approval and placement in advertising outlets appropriate for the discipline
including, but not limited to, national clearing houses for academic position announcements,
minority publications, appropriate institutions where new or recent doctoral students were
graduated, and the Applicant Clearinghouse of the University System of Georgia.
5. If the position advertisement is not approved at any level, it will be remanded to the Search
and Screening Committee with suggested revisions.
6. The Search Committee screens applicants and identify a qualified pool of applicants for the
position.
7. The Search Committee selects a group of potential interviewees. The list of names will be
forwarded to the department head and dean.
8. The Search Committee arranges interviews with approved applicants. Interviews should
include, but are not limited to: faculty, unit head, and dean. Interviews with the provost and
vice president for academic affairs are optional.
9. The Search Committee recommends to the department head a list of interviewees with
descriptions of the interviewees’ strengths and weaknesses for the position.
10. The unit head forwards his/her recommendation and the faculty recommendation, with voting
record attached, through appropriate channels.
Board of Regents’ Policy Manual, Academic Affairs, 3.2.2 Election of Faculties
Faculty Advancement:
Faculty personnel actions include decisions regarding tenure, promotions, retention, and salaries. In
each case, decisions are based on the needs of the university, the individual’s history of evaluations,
and the minimum requirements outlined below. Under the terms of a normal faculty appointment,
there should be evidence of accomplishment in teaching, scholarship, service, and professional
development. Because of the different missions of the departments/programs, the weighing of
teaching, scholarship, service, and professional development may vary from department to
department. However, it is essential that each department maintain a primary and active commitment
to teaching, which remains the primary criterion in actions relating to tenure, retention, promotion,
and salary.
At the time of initial appointment, each appointee is informed of the merit system of the university.
The system rewards only faculty of demonstrated abilities and achievements based on established
university criteria. The performance of each faculty member in a department is reviewed annually
and the past year’s performance judged according to the evaluative scale used within each college.
An outstanding contribution in a single area of activity may result in a decrease in the other areas, but
in no case will a reward for merit be given if the continuing performance of the faculty member is not
judged satisfactory in teaching. The annual evaluation is communicated to the individual faculty
member and included in the faculty member’s official file. Retention throughout a probationary
period of service is by itself insufficient to guarantee the success of a candidacy for tenure.
26
Each college has a promotion and tenure committee. Decisions involving tenure and promotion are
based primarily on the cumulative record of teaching, scholarship, service and professional
development. Standards of judgment for such actions shall be consistent with those specified in
university criteria, published by each college’s tenure and promotion committee, and printed in
departmental statements.
Board of Regents’ Policy Manual, Personnel, 8.3 Additional Policies for Faculty
Tenure:
Tenure embraces both rights and duties. It is a pledge of professional academic performance by the
professor who holds it to the institution that grants it. It protects a professor from arbitrary dismissal.
Criteria Relating to Tenure:
In order to be considered for tenure, a faculty member must have completed a satisfactory
probationary period of at least five years of full-time service at the rank of assistant professor or
higher. The five-year period must be continuous except that a maximum of two years' interruption
because of leave of absence or of part-time service may be permitted, provided, however, that no
probationary credit for the period of an interruption shall be allowed. A maximum of three years'
credit toward the minimum probationary period may be allowed for service at other institutions in
tenure-track positions or for full-time service at the rank of instructor at Armstrong Atlantic State
University. Such credit for prior service may be requested by the individual and is defined in writing
by the president at the time of the initial appointment at the rank of assistant professor or higher or at
the time of promotion from instructor to assistant professor. Evidence of noteworthy teaching,
scholarship, service and professional development produced during the credited years is considered
in the tenure review.
A candidate for tenure must not only meet the designated minimum period of service, but also must
meet what are, at that time, seen as the long range needs of the university and must show a history of
evaluations that merits the award of tenure. A history of weak evaluations may lead to the denial of
tenure. Retention throughout a probationary period of service is by itself insufficient to guarantee the
success of a candidacy for tenure.
Procedures Relating to Tenure
Candidacies for tenure should be initiated by the written request of the candidate to the department
head or, in the case of a department head, to the appropriate dean. In the absence of an application by
the candidate, such application may be initiated by the department head for a faculty member or by
the college dean for a department head. The department head must solicit an assessment of the
candidate’s application for tenure through ballots and commentary from departmental colleagues.
Each department (or college if that is lowest level of review) must have on file with the dean of the
college and with the provost and vice president for academic affairs a plan for ascertaining
departmental peer review of tenure or promotion applications, pre-tenure reviews, or post-tenure
reviews. The department head makes the initial recommendation to the dean.
27
The application is then sent to the dean of the college who forwards it to the college's promotion and
tenure committee. Each promotion and tenure committee serves in an advisory capacity and makes
recommendations to the respective dean based on the college’s promotion and tenure documents.
Criteria used by the committee must be in writing and must be consistent with the criteria and
procedures contained in these regulations. The dean of each college, after receiving
recommendations from the respective promotion and tenure committee, forwards them with his or
her own recommendations to the provost and vice president for academic affairs. The provost and
vice president for academic affairs may call a consultative meeting with the deans before forwarding
his or her recommendations to the president. Individuals who are awarded tenure by the president
shall be notified in writing of that award.
At the beginning of the fall semester the Office for Academic Affairs distributes to deans and
department heads a list of deadlines for when documents for evaluations, reviews, tenure, promotion,
and non-retention decisions must be received by the provost and vice president for academic affairs.
Deans, in consultation with their department heads, set department and college deadlines for
submitting and processing these documents on the deadlines set by the Office for Academic Affairs.
Generally, tenure applications are submitted and processed at the department and college levels in the
fall semester and submitted to the provost and vice president for academic affairs early in the spring
semester.
Candidates whose applications for tenure are rejected may pursue a formal administrative appeal.
Full-time faculty hired on a tenure-track may not serve more than seven years without the granting of
tenure.
Board of Regents’ Policy Manual, Personnel, 8.3.7 Tenure and Criteria for Tenure
Pre-tenure Review:
All non-tenured faculty members in tenure-track positions must be reviewed during their third year
(including probationary credit). This review will be used to determine if satisfactory progress is being
made toward tenure and, if not, to determine appropriate faculty development activities and other
remedies as indicated. Pre-tenure review also serves as the mechanism for retention for the fifth year.
Criteria Relating to Pre-tenure Review:
Each department and college uses its criteria for annual evaluation and tenure and promotion, and the
College’s tenure criteria for the pre-tenure review. The college criteria are an amplification of the
university’s tenure criteria. Departmental tenure and promotion criteria may be an amplification of
the respective college’s criteria. While teaching effectiveness will be the most important factor in the
evaluation, scholarship, service and professional development will also be evaluated. Future needs of
the department must also be considered. If conditions in the department have changed since initial
employment, the department head may recommend a redirection of the faculty member’s efforts.
28
Procedures Relating to Pre-tenure Review:
As a part of the retention recommendation during the faculty member’s third year, the retention
procedure is expanded to include the pre-tenure review. If a faculty member has probationary credit
towards tenure, pre-tenure review will be conducted during the year in which he or she would
achieve three years toward tenure. A new faculty member awarded three years of probationary credit
toward tenure is considered to have achieved a rating of Satisfactory Progress toward Tenure for
purposes of the pre-tenure review at the time of hire. A faculty member who receives two years of
probationary credit is reviewed during his or her first year; a faculty member who receives one year
of credit is reviewed in his or her second year. The pre-tenure review will include peer reaction at the
departmental level, performance evaluation using the departmental annual evaluation criteria, and
evaluation using the college tenure criteria.
The department head, who solicits an assessment of the candidate’s progress toward tenure through
ballots and commentary from tenured departmental colleagues, makes the initial review. The review
results are transmitted in writing to the dean of the college (who may for recommendations from the
college promotion and tenure committee) and then to the provost and vice president for academic
affairs. The department head selects one of the following ratings as an outcome of the review:
satisfactory progress toward tenure, satisfactory with recommendations, improvement needed, or
unsatisfactory. A satisfactory review does not constitute a guarantee of tenure.
A rating of satisfactory progress toward tenure indicates that the candidate is meeting expectations in
teaching, scholarship, service, and professional development. A rating of satisfactory with
recommendations indicates that the candidate’s performance is promising, that recommendations for
needed faculty development can be completed within one year, and that achievement of a rating of
satisfactory progress toward tenure is likely after the completion of faculty development.
A rating of improvement needed indicates that there are serious reservations about the faculty
member’s performance, and measures are needed to address substantive deficits. The pre-tenure
review must be repeated the following year if this rating is assigned. A rating of unsatisfactory
indicates that the candidate is not expected to be retained and will likely receive a notification of nonretention.
Post-tenure Review:
The university has an obligation to each faculty member to ensure that his or her effectiveness
continues after the tenure decision has been made. With tenure, the faculty member pledges
continued quality academic performance on the one hand, and the university pledges to offer the
faculty member opportunities to continue to develop professionally on the other. It is against this
backdrop that post-tenure review is framed. Post-tenure review exists to give tenured faculty
information on performance effectiveness and to identify opportunities for development in a fashion
consistent with the ever-changing needs of the institution.
29
In those rare cases where performance is not satisfactory and does not improve as a result of a
development plan, post-tenure review may look to an intervention designed to protect the public
interest.
All faculty, excluding those who hold administrative rank at the department head level or above
(those holding administrative rank are evaluated through administrative rather than post-tenure
review), will be reviewed under the Procedures Relating to Post-tenure Review during the fifth year
after the year in which tenure is awarded by the Board of Regents and every five years thereafter. If a
faculty member is promoted in rank during the five-year period, the post-tenure review will occur
during the fifth year after the year in which the promotion becomes effective. A successful promotion
review will serve in lieu of a post-tenure review.
Criteria Relating to Post-tenure Review:
Teaching effectiveness will be the single most important factor in all evaluations. Scholarship,
service, professional development and the role of each faculty member within the department,
college, and university will also be considered in the post-tenure review evaluation.
Each college or department further defines the criteria for post-tenure review, but these provisions
must be in writing, widely published, and approved by the provost and vice president for academic
affairs.
Procedures Relating to Post-tenure Review:
At the beginning of each year, the provost and vice president for academic affairs will provide each
academic dean with a list of faculty who must undergo post-tenure review during the current
academic year. Generally, by December the faculty member shall prepare a portfolio containing, at
the very least, an updated vita, all Annual Faculty Evaluations since the last post-tenure review or
tenure review, all Annual Professional Activity Reports (APARs) since the last post-tenure review or
tenure review, and an assessment or narrative from the faculty member being reviewed as to his or
her role in the institution and examples of specific measures that faculty member is taking to fulfill
that role. Individual colleges or departments may specify other materials that should be included in
the portfolio, and the candidate may provide additional materials relevant to his or her discipline.
Each college and department shall develop and use a faculty peer evaluation system for post-tenure
review. Each department shall have on file with the college dean and the provost and vice president
for academic affairs, a faculty peer evaluation process, specific to post-tenure review that involves
consideration of the post-tenure review portfolio. In departments where the number of tenured
faculty is three or fewer, the dean may involve a limited number of tenured faculty members from a
department having a similar mission in the peer review process. However, in such cases, the
candidate will be informed as to the identity of these extra-departmental reviewers. No faculty
member may participate in the post-tenure peer review process unless he or she is willing to certify
that he or she has reviewed the portfolio.
30
After reviewing the portfolio and the results of peer review, the department head will complete the
Peer Review Outcome Form (PROF).
The department shall forward the PROF and supporting documentation to the dean of the respective
college. The dean may seek the opinion of the college promotion and tenure committee on the posttenure progress of the faculty member. The dean summarizes the college’s promotion and tenure
committee’s opinion and comment on the faculty member’s post-tenure work to the provost and vice
president for academic affairs.
Outcome of Post-Tenure Review:
Satisfactory: The faculty member is performing effectively as a teacher and is making satisfactory
contributions, appropriate to a senior faculty member, in either scholarship or service. Individual
departments/programs may have specific service or scholarship expectations for individual faculty
members because of the particular position held by the faculty member. This point should be
addressed in the review.
If a faculty member is found to be "satisfactory," the department head may wish to commend the
faculty member and even suggest specific development activities that he or she feels would be
helpful.
Satisfactory with Recommendations: The faculty member is performing satisfactorily in teaching and
service or scholarship, but the department head may believe that enhancement of performance in one
or more areas will avoid future problems. In this area, the department head and faculty member
should agree on a faculty development plan. Recommendations for redirection of a faculty member's
efforts to adjust to changes in the academic program will be made in writing and through a personal
interview with the department head.
Improvement Needed: This category is to be used for the purpose of establishing a faculty
development plan for a faculty member who is performing satisfactorily in instruction, but whose
contributions in neither scholarship nor service is adequate. This category is also to be used when a
redirection in faculty effort is required by changes in the academic program.
A faculty member who receives an "improvement needed" must meet with the department head to
construct a development program. The department head shall be obliged to consider the progress of
the faculty member as part of subsequent annual evaluations. The department head must state in the
annual evaluation whether or not adequate improvement is taking place, review the development
plan, and discuss the evaluation with the faculty member. Failure on the part of a faculty member to
remedy the difficulties identified by the time of the next post-tenure review will necessitate the
receipt of "unsatisfactory" in the subsequent post-tenure review.
Unsatisfactory: A faculty member will receive an "unsatisfactory" in any case where teaching
performance is deemed to be less than satisfactory. A faculty member will also receive an
"unsatisfactory" if, in the judgment of the department head, a faculty member has failed to respond
successfully to a development plan resulting from an "improvement needed" in the previous review.
31
Any tenured faculty member receiving an “unsatisfactory” will meet simultaneously with both the
department head and the dean. The result of this meeting will be a comprehensive development plan
designed by the dean in consultation with the department head and faculty member. After a period of
one year, the department head and dean will again meet with the faculty member to assess progress.
Lack of improvement will result in no pay increase in all future contracts until the “unsatisfactory”
rating is removed. Other intervention strategies may be employed for unsatisfactory performance
with the written approval of the provost and vice president for academic affairs. Continued failure to
improve an “unsatisfactory” rating will result in the application of more rigorous strategies, including
in appropriate cases, revocation of tenure.
Annual Evaluation with Post-Tenure Review:
Post-tenure review will substitute for the annual evaluation in the year in which it is conducted.
Board of Regents’ Policy Manual, Personnel, 8.3.54 Post-Tenure Review for Tenured Faculty and
Administrators.
Department of Health Sciences [MPH] Tenure and Promotion Committee
Composition of the Tenure and Promotion Committee



The committee will be composed of one faculty member from each program within the
Department.
Term of service is two years.
The Department Head may serve on the committee.
Appointment to the Tenure and Promotion Committee.


Appointed faculty must hold tenure in their respective program. A non-tenured member
may sit on the committee only if no tenured faculty from that Department is eligible.
The department faculty, with the approval of the Department Head, will determine the
method of selection to serve on this committee.
Functions of the Committee

The committee will review the guidelines and make recommendations to the Department
Head regarding suggested revisions to Department of Health Sciences' Guidelines for
Promotion and Tenure.

The committee will review the application materials of candidates for tenure and for
promotion and make its recommendation to the Department Head.

The committee will utilize established Department criteria for tenure and promotion
recommendations.
32
Chair of the Committee

The committee will elect a chairperson who will serve for a term of one academic year.
The chair may be re-elected for a second one-year term.
The chair will be responsible for:






Ensuring receipt of application materials for tenure and promotion
Distributing information concerning applications to committee members
Ensuring the smooth transition of committees from year to year
Scheduling and overseeing meetings of the committee
Maintaining accurate records of all proceedings
Forwarding all recommendations of the committee to the Department Head who forward
the recommendations to the Dean of Health Professions
Vote of the Committee
 Votes should be by secret ballot.
 The results of each vote, along with any comments describing suggestions for the
candidate, will be included in the recommendation of the committee to the Department
Head.
See Resource File for Department of Health Sciences [MPH] Guidelines for Tenure and
Promotion and Format for Submission of Tenure and Promotion Portfolios.
1.3.d. If a collaborative program, descriptions of all participating institutions and
delineation of their relationships to the program.
N/A
1.3.e. If a collaborative program, a copy of the formal written agreement that established
the rights and obligations of the participating universities in regard to the program’s
operation.
N/A
1.3.f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of program’s
strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.
This Criterion is met.
Strengths: The University is fully accredited, and the MPH program is well integrated into the
administrative and academic structure. There are clear and effective processes and relationships
are in place to enable the MPH Program to secure the resources it needs to fulfill its mission
Weaknesses: None
33
Future Plans: The MPH Program will strive to maintain its good standing with all units in the
University.
34
1.4 Organization and Administration. The program shall provide an organizational setting
conducive to public health learning, research and service. The organizational setting shall
facilitate interdisciplinary communication, cooperation and collaboration that contribute
to achieving program’s public health mission. The organizational structure shall effectively
support the work of the program’s constituents.
1.4.a. One or more organizational charts delineating the administrative organization of the
program, indicting relationships among its internal components.
The MPH Program is located in the Department of Health Sciences which is located
organizationally in the College of Health Professions. In addition to the MPH Program, there are
three additional programs: the Bachelor of Health Science, the Master of Health Services
Administration and the Master of Science in Sports Medicine. There are also two certificate
programs, Gerontology (graduate and undergraduate) and Strength and Conditioning (graduate
only).
1.4.b. Description of the manner in which interdisciplinary coordination, cooperation and
collaboration occur and support public health learning, research and service.
The MPH Program Coordinator reports directly to the Health Sciences Department Head
who in turn reports directly to Dean of the College of Health Professions. The MPH
faculty, office staff, and program graduate assistants report to the Coordinator. Specific
roles and responsibilities are as follows:
35
MPH Program Coordinator
The MPH Program Coordinator is responsible for the oversight of all curriculum, fiscal, and
personnel matters necessary to support the MPH Program. More specific responsibilities
include student recruitment, admissions and retention, recruitment and evaluation of faculty,
and program governance. Decisions involving curriculum, faculty recruitment, faculty
evaluation, and student affairs clearly are central to the role and function of faculty; thus
decisions regarding such are shared by faculty and the Program Coordinator.
The administrative duties of the Program Coordinator constitute a 25% FTE load. For the other
75%, the Coordinator also teaches nine credit hours per semester and participates in research and
service activities. As with other teaching faculty, reduction in teaching can be made for
inordinate research or service activity.
MPH Faculty
All MPH faculty members have a 12-credit hour or 18 contact hour teaching load per semester
(or 24 credit hours per academic year). MPH faculty also provide academic advising to MPH
students, serve on Program, College, and University committees, and participate in research
and professional service activities. Faculty members who assume additional inordinate
research or service activity are allowed teaching reductions on an ad hoc basis.
MPH Graduate Assistant(s)
Each graduate degree program at AASU is assigned one graduate assistant. Additional
graduate assistants may be assigned if funding permits. MPH graduate assistant(s) provide
support to MPH faculty in research and service activities. Although each graduate assistant is
assigned primarily to a particular faculty member, all GAs are expected to assist any MPH
faculty member when the need arises.
Interdisciplinary Collaboration:
The department heads and program directors of the COHP meet monthly with the college dean
(who chairs the meeting), assistant to the dean of the college, and appropriate invited guests to
discuss college and university issues and to make decisions on college policies and procedures.
Each of the department heads and the program coordinator hold departmental and program
meetings to share the information and solicit faculty input from the COHP meeting. To conduct
the business of the college, the COHP also maintains the following standing committees:
Recruitment/Retention, Interdisciplinary, Education Technology, Continuing Education, Health
and Safety, Curriculum and Tenure and Promotion. Each COHP department has representation
on each of these committees.
The COHP programs are housed physically in several locations. Nursing, Medical Laboratory
Sciences, and Respiratory Therapy are housed in Ashmore Hall. Physical Therapy,
36
Communication Science and Disorders, and Radiologic Sciences are housed in University Hall
and Health Sciences is housed in Solms Hall.
Interdisciplinary activity is highly encouraged between universities, between colleges and
between programs by the Chancellor of the University System of Georgia, the President of
AASU, the AASU college deans and the department heads. Examples of interdisciplinary
coordination, cooperation and collaboration include:










The gerontology certificate is an interdisciplinary effort composed of courses from Public Health,
Medicine, and Psychology; certificate electives can be chosen from appropriate courses in many
more disciplines. Moreover, the Georgia Gerontological Consortium (of which AASU is a
member) offers courses via distance learning to member institutions;
The graduate epidemiology course taught by the MPH Program is required for MHSA students.
The graduate biostatistics course taught by the MPH Program is required for Nurse Practitioner
students.
The course, Foundations of Public Health, Concepts and Administration is required for MHSA
and MPH students;
MPH, MSSM, and MHSA students may take selected courses from any of the three programs as
electives.
The graduate public administration program (MPA) at Savannah State University and the MPH
program at AASU offer selected courses that may be taken as electives by students in either
program.
The College of Health Professions offers the following inter-professional collaborative: students
from all COHP programs may participate in a case study where they are assigned to
interdisciplinary groups to develop care plans for a virtual patient.
Faculty from Health Sciences, Physical Education and Physical Therapy teach courses in the
Sports Medicine Program (MSSM).
The MPH and MHSA programs at AASU and Georgia Southern University collaborate in the
following ways: transferability of specified courses, offering courses via distance learning, and
serving on practicum committees.
The MPH faculty members are involved in numerous collaborative projects in various
communities. Detailed descriptions of these endeavors appear in Criterion 3.1b and Criterion
3.2c.
1.4.c. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the
program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.
This criterion is met.
Strengths: The program environment promotes an interdisciplinary public health community
that allows the program to carry out its instructional, research and service functions. All
Armstrong employees are required to, upon hire, to complete an Ethics Training Course and on
37
an annual basis, complete the Ethics Policy Recertification Course. All MPH faculty members
have current Ethics Policy certification. Interprofessional collaboration is promoted and
supported.
Weaknesses: AASU does not differentiate between graduate and undergraduate teaching loads.
Faculty teaching loads are heavy and are an obstacle to meeting service and scholarship
expectations.
Future Plans: The MPH Program will continue to seek opportunities for interdisciplinary
collaboration. The MPH Program representatives will continue to work for recognition of a
differentiation between undergraduate and graduate teaching loads.
38
1.5 Governance. The program administration and faculty shall have clearly defined rights
and responsibilities concerning program governance and academic policies. Students shall
where appropriate, have participatory roles in the conduct of program evaluation
procedures, policy setting and decision making.
1.5.a. A list of standing and important ad hoc committees, with a statement of charge,
composition and current membership for each.
MPH Committee of the Whole
Charge: The MPH Committee of the Whole is charged with addressing all general issues
concerning the program including curriculum development and academic standards and policies.
Composition: Due to program size, MPH faculty members meet as a whole Therefore there are
very few ad hoc committees required. Faculty members include: Sandy Streater, Ed.D., Richard
St. Pierre, Ed.D., (Retired December 2012), Nandi Marshall Dr.P.H. (Replaced Dr. St. Pierre in
fall 2013), Leigh Rich, Ph.D., David Adams, Ph.D., and Sara Plaspohl, Dr.P.H. An MPH student
serves on this committee and has a vote when appropriate. The student representative is chosen
by the MPH Coordinator.
Ad Hoc MPH Assessment/Self-Study Steering Committee (SSC)
Charge: The MPH Self Study Steering Committee plans and oversees the comprehensive selfstudy process (conducted throughout 2012-present) and coordinates the writing of the self-study
document.
Composition: The Self Study Steering Committee is chaired by the MPH Program
Coordinator and also includes the COHP Dean (ex-officio), four additional MPH faculty
members (faculty members include: Sandy Streater, Ed.D., Richard St. Pierre, Ed.D.. retired
December 2012), Leigh Rich, Ph.D., David Adams, Ph.D., Linda Wright, Ph.D., and Sara
Plaspohl, Dr.P.H.), one MPH advisory committee member, and one MPH student
representative. The student representative is chosen by the MPH Coordinator and has a vote
when appropriate.
Ad Hoc MPH (HS) Tenure and Promotion Committee
Charge: The MPH (HS) T&P Committee oversees the tenure and promotion process on an as
needed basis. The committee members will discuss candidates for promotion and/or tenure and
vote by secret ballot. The results of each vote, along with any comments describing suggestions
re the candidate, will be included in the recommendation of the committee to the Department
Head.
Composition: The MPH (HS) T & P Committee shall be composed of all tenured HS
faculty members. In matters of promotion, associate faculty members may vote only on
39
promotions to associate, professors may vote only on promotion to professor. MPH tenured
faculty members include: Sandy Streater, Ed.D., Richard St. Pierre, Ed.D., Leigh Rich,
Ph.D., David Adams, Ph.D., Joey Crosby, Ph.D., Rod McAdams, Ph.D., Robert LeFavi,
Ph.D., Andy Bosak, Ph.D., Janet Buelow, Ph.D., Bryan Riemann, Ph.D., and Linda Wright,
Ph.D.
Ad Hoc MPH Search Committees
Charge: The committee will review faculty candidates, determine who is invited for campus
interviews and forward all recommendations of the committee to the Department Head who
forwards the recommendations to the Dean of Health Professions.
Composition: The department faculty, with the approval of the Department Head, will
determine the method of selection to serve on this committee. Faculty members include: Sandy
Streater, EdD, Richard St. Pierre, EdD, Leigh Rich, Ph.D., David Adams, Ph.D., Linda Wright
Ph.D., and Sara Plaspohl, Dr.PH. An MPH student serves on this committee. The student
representative is chosen by the MPH Coordinator and has a vote.
1.5.b. Identification of how the following functions are addressed within the program’s
committees and organizational structure:
General program policy development
Armstrong departments are structured so that the department chair has ultimate responsibility for
all decisions related to the programs in the department including the MPH program. The policies
and procedures of the program are designed and delivered by the MPH Graduate Faculty. The
MPH program is led by the MPH Program Coordinator. Note: Dr. Michael Mink was named
MPH Program Coordinator in 2006 and served in that position until July 2010. He accepted a
position at another university – upon his departure, Dr. Streater, department head and former
MPH Coordinator, reassumed the position of Coordinator of the MPH program. Since the MPH
program budget is part of the overall budget of the Health Sciences Department in which the
program resides; the MPH Program Coordinator, with input from the MPH faculty, staff and
advisory committee, proposes prioritized budget requests for the next fiscal year, based on the
previous year’s expenses, and submits it to the HS Department Head (Currently the HS
Department Head and the MPH Coordinator are one and the same. A new MPH Coordinator will
be named in 2014) who submits this request to the COHP dean.
Additional duties of the MPH program coordinator include:



Oversee the development and production of MPH program accreditation documents (CEPH and
SACS);
Market MPH degree locally and in external sites
Assure representation of MPH degree when called upon
40









Direct Regents’ assessments for MPH program
Coordinate AASU library holdings for MPH program
Establish, visit and maintain agreements with practica/internship sites in the Savannah area and
elsewhere
Serve as chair and schedule meetings for the MPH Advisory Committee
Supervise and evaluate designated MPH graduate assistant(s)
Oversee maintenance of MPH database(s)
Coordinate scheduling of course offerings
Maintain student academic records, graduation applications and programs of study for MPH
students
Advise MPH students
The MPH Coordinator serves as the MPH representative on the Armstrong Graduate Affairs
Committee (GAF) and attends monthly and called meetings.
Graduate Affairs Committee Mission
The Graduate Affairs Committee, serving as the official representative of the Graduate Faculty, and
acting under the oversight of the President, will exercise jurisdiction over all matters related to
graduate-level programming at Armstrong Atlantic State University.
The committee will:
1. Act on behalf of the Graduate Faculty except as specified elsewhere in the Bylaws;
2. Develop, review, and keep current all policies and procedures affecting graduate-level recruitment,
admissions, progression through programs, retention, and graduation;
3. Approve the list of graduate students for fall and spring commencements;
4. Receive reports from the Graduate Student Coordinating Council;
5. Establish and maintain the following committees, and receive and act upon their
recommendations:
 Graduate Faculty Status Committee
 Graduate Student Appeals Committee
 Graduate Curriculum Committee
The GAF reports its actions to the Armstrong Faculty Senate regarding all matters related to graduate
school programming from its various subcommittees.
Planning and evaluation
The HS faculty members (including the MPH faculty) meet on a regular basis (approximately one
time per month) throughout the semester. Additional MPH program meetings are held as needed.
During these meetings, all faculty members participate in discussions of plans for the Program.
The MPH Program Coordinator and the faculty in the MPH program are responsible for planning
and evaluating all activities related to the MPH program. Planning in the program is based on the
41
missions of the program, department, the college, and the university. Additional input is given
by the MPH Advisory Committee (for an expanded description of program evaluation see
criterion 1.2.).
Budget and resource allocation
The MPH budget is subsumed within the Health Sciences Department budget (see section
1.6.b). The MPH Coordinator reports directly to the Health Sciences Department Head who
reports directly to the Dean of Health Professions for management of the department budget
and resource allocation, according to University budgeting procedures. The MPH Coordinator
discusses Program needs with MPH faculty members who have an opportunity to generate ideas
or requests regarding resource needs. The coordinator also receives input from the MPH
student exit assessments as well as from the MPH Advisory Committee.
Student recruitment, admission and award of degrees
While working in concert with the policies of the COHP and AASU, the MPH program
administers its own student recruitment plans and activities, including the distribution of
program materials. Specific recruitment policies are based on proven methods of recruiting
students with diverse backgrounds, with the potential to be leaders as public health professionals,
and with the academic preparation to be successful in the program. The MPH Program is
represented at many recruitment events by the COHP Coordinator of Recruitment. Additional
recruitment methods are discussed in section 1.8.a.
The MPH faculty members also develop admission criteria. Armstrong Atlantic State
University is responsible for awarding of degrees after approval by the Graduate Affairs
Committee. However, the MPH faculty and Program Director are responsible to ensure and
inform the Graduate Program that students have met Program requirements for graduation.
Faculty recruitment, retention, promotion and tenure
As mentioned in Criterion 1.3.c., requests for new faculty lines are made to the Health Sciences
Department Head by the MPH Program Coordinator. The Health Sciences Department Head
communicates this need to the Dean of Health Professions and the Dean negotiates with the
Provost for centrally funded new or redirected positions. When vacancies exist, a Search
Committee is established and charged with the development of a recruitment plan that is
approved by the University’s Human Resources Office..
Membership on the Search Committee may include MPH faculty members (including the
Program Coordinator), MPH students, as well as Program alumni or other outside constituents.
The Search Committee Chair provides a summary and recommendation of the search to the
Head of the Health Sciences Department who communicates this recommendation to the Dean
of Health Professions who is responsible for negotiating salary and other hiring terms with the
Provost.
42
Faculty retention, promotion and tenure, follow the Department of Health Sciences [MPH]
Guidelines for Promotion and Tenure (see Resource File) that align with the college of Health
Professions and University promotion and tenure guidelines as presented in the Armstrong
Atlantic State University Faculty Handbook.
(http://www.armstrong.edu/images/academic_affairs/Faculty_Handbook.pdf)
Annual Faculty Evaluations
Annual faculty evaluations of tenure-track faculty and promotion reviews follow the faculty
members submitting the Annual Professional Activity Report (APAR) to the Head of the Health
Science Department. The department head prepares the Annual Faculty Evaluations (AFE’s)
which is sent to the college dean for review.
The Dean makes his evaluation and recommendation, and sends a list of all required actions
with appropriate documentation, to the Provost. For tenure and promotion, the Dean forwards
his recommendations along with all previous recommendations to the Provost who makes the
final recommendation to the President of the university.
Academic standards and policies, including curriculum development
The MPH Program Coordinator is responsible for ensuring that the Program maintains quality
academic standards that align with fair and ethical policies of the University. The MPH Faculty
is chaired by the Program Coordinator and monitors, reviews and, if necessary, votes on changes
to program policy and curriculum.
Research and service expectation and policies
The MPH Coordinator and ultimately the Department Head is responsible for ensuring the
research and service expectations and policies are in line with the MPH Program mission, goals
and objectives. The MPH Faculty plays an important role in this responsibility, and assists in
this process by establishing outcome measures and related targets for the Program’s research
and service goals and objectives, as well as helping to collect data on faculty and student
research and service activities (see sections 3.1 and 3.2). These research and service
expectations were developed by the MPH Faculty and were endorsed by all MPH faculty
members.
1.5.c. A copy of the bylaws or other policy documents that determines the rights and
obligations of administers faculty and students in governance of the program, if applicable.
The University System of Georgia Policy Manual clearly states the right of faculty and students
rights in governance. For faculty this can be found at:
http://www.usg.edu/policymanual/section8/C245
For students, Regents policies re rights in governance can be found at:
http://www.usg.edu/policymanual/section4
43
AASU administrator and faculty rights and privileges are discussed in the AASU Faculty
Handbook and can be found at:
http://www.armstrong.edu/images/academic_affairs/Faculty_Handbook.pdf
The AASU Faculty Senate addresses issues that directly and peripherally affect faculty rights in
program governance and can be found in the Senate Constitution and Bylaws at:
http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/faculty_senate/senate_constitution_bylaws
The Graduate Student Coordinating Council is the representative body for AASU graduate
students. A member of the council attends the Graduate Affairs meetings. Graduate students are
also appointed to specific standing committees of the Graduate Affairs Committee. This
representation does give the student direct and peripheral right in governance. The website for
the Graduate Coordinating Council can be found at:
http://www.armstrong.edu/Students/activities_and_orgs/student_affairs_graduate_student_coordi
nating_council
Additional discussion of student rights and privileges in governance can be found in the AASU
Graduate Catalog at:
http://www.armstrong.edu/images/academic_affairs/current_graduate_catalog.pdf
1.5.d. Identification of program faculty who hold membership on university committees,
through which faculty contribute to the university.
The following MPH faculty members hold membership on many department, college and
university committees. A listing of current committee memberships includes:
Leigh Rich
AASU Faculty Senate, Senator (for Health Sciences), Member of Senate Steering Committee,
Member of Senate Elections Committee, MPH Curriculum/Reaccreditation Committee, MHSA
Curriculum/Reaccreditation Committee, COHP Interdisciplinary Committee, AASU Graduate
Faculty, AASU Academic Calendar Committee, AASU Gender and Women’s Studies Council and
Chair of the Robert I. Strozier Faculty Lecture Series.
Sara Plaspohl
Armstrong Tobacco Policy Committee, MPH Advisory Committee, MPH Curriculum &
Reaccreditation Committee, COHP Continuing Education Planning Committee for “Americans with
Disabilities Act: Then and Now” One-Day Workshop by Steve Milam, JD, AASU Common Read
Committee, AASU Graduate Faculty, AASU Institutional Review Board, Graduate Curriculum
Committee, MPH Faculty Search Committee, and AASU Makin’ Maroon Green.
Rod McAdams
Member, MHSA Strategic Planning Committee, MHSA Curriculum Committee, MHSA Advisory
44
Board, MHSA Accreditation Committee, MPH Accreditation Committee, AASU Honors Advisory
Committee AASU Parking Appeals Committee, COHP Educational Technology Committee, MHSA
faculty search committee, MPH faculty search committee, and MSSM faculty search committee.
Linda Wright
Educational Technology Committee and Senate Educational Technology Committee.
Andy Bosak
COHP Strategic Planning Committee, and Serving as “Host” for an International Student at AASU.
Janet Buelow
Member, AASU Graduate Council Member, SACS Faculty Credentials Committee , AASU Faculty
Sponsor for the Institute of Healthcare Improvement Savannah Chapter, Chair of Interdisciplinary
Healthcare Taskforce, and MHSA Search Committee.
David Adams
MPH Curriculum Committee, MPH Accreditation Committee, MPH Faculty Search Committee,
COHP Curriculum Committee, COHP Appeals Committee, AASU Honors Committee, and AASU
Appeals Committee.
Bob LeFavi
Faculty Senate, President Chair, MSSM Search Committee, President’s Executive Staff, QEP
Steering Committee, QEP Budget Committee, SACS Task Force, SACS Leadership Team, Senate
Steering Committee, and Faculty Lecture Series Committee, Co-Chair.
Bryan Riemann
Senator, Department of Health Sciences, Member, Senate Planning and Budget Committee, Member,
Graduate Affairs Committee, Member, College of Health Professions Research and Scholarship
Committee, and Chair, Department of Rehabilitation Chair Search Committee.
Sandy Streater
AASU Academic Affairs Council AASU, Alternate Dispute Resolution Committee, AASU Morris
K. Udall Representative, AASU Graduate Faculty Affairs Committee, AASU Graduate Faculty,
Chair, Graduate student Appeals Committee, AASU Graduate Faculty Ad Hoc Committee on
Student Advancement, AASU Liberal Studies Committee, COHP Deans Search Committee, COHP
Interdisciplinary Healthcare Committee, Chair Health Sciences Curriculum Committee, Chair Health
Sciences Faculty Evaluation Committee, Health Sciences Liaison to the Committee for International
Programs and Activities, Health Sciences MPH Advisory Committee, Member Health Sciences
MHSA Advisory Committee, Member Health Sciences MPH Self Study Committee, Health Sciences
MSSM Advisory Committee Member.
45
1.5.e. Description of student roles in governance including any formal student
organizations.
Students are represented on the MPH Advisory Council. This group makes recommendations
concerning departmental curriculum issues, policies and overall departmental functioning.
Students are also represented on MPH faculty search committees.
Students have input into program policies and issues through the Graduate Student Coordinating
Council (GSCC). There are several purposes of this council: “to represent the graduate student
body in all matters concerning academics, welfare, administration, and services; to assist
graduate students by providing professional development activities that make them more
employable; to promote closer graduate student-faculty-administration relations; and to work
with the School of Graduate Studies, the Division of Student Affairs, and other campus offices to
promote greater recognition of graduate education on and off the campus” (see Resource File –
AASU Graduate Catalog, p44). The MPH program has a representative on the GSCC.
Additionally, the chair or a designee of this organization presents reports at the Graduate
Coordinating Council and Graduate Faculty meetings.
The assistant to the vice president for Academic Affairs/Provost, who oversees the office of
graduate studies, may appoint a student to any standing committee of the Graduate Coordinating
Council. This student may discuss issues at the meetings but may not offer motions or vote (see
Resource File, AASU Faculty Handbook).
All graduate students in the Health Sciences Department can belong to the Health Sciences
Student Association. This organization was chosen in lieu of an MPH organization by the
students, feeling that an association with their colleagues in the Master of Health Services
Administration, Master of Science in Sports Medicine and the undergraduate Bachelor of Health
Science students would be enriched by its diversity and strengthened by their numbers. This
organization gives Health Sciences students an opportunity to network at social events and to
coordinate service projects. The MPH Coordinator is the faculty representative for this
organization.
Some selected activities the Health Sciences Graduate Student Association has participated in:
Celebrate AASU Day, participating in Light the Night and raising over $1,000 for Leukemia and
Lymphoma research, sponsoring a team and raising funds for the breast cancer walk-a-thon, and
sponsoring a team and raising funds for the Diabetes walk-a-thon.
46
1.5.f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and analysis of the program’s
strengths, weaknesses and plans relation to this criterion.
This criterion is met.
Strengths: The faculty and students have clearly defined rights that allow them to participate in
program governance where appropriate.
Weaknesses: None
Future Plans: The Program will strive to be more inclusive to insure student participation in
Program governance.
47
1.6 Fiscal Resources. The program shall have financial resources adequate to fulfill its
stated mission and goals, and its instructional, research and service objectives.
1.6.a. Description of the budgetary and allocation processes, including all sources of
funding supportive of the instruction, research and service activities. This description
should include, as appropriate, discussion about legislative appropriations, formula for
funds distribution, tuition generation and retention, gifts, grants and contracts, indirect
cost recovery, taxes or levies imposed by the university or other entity within the
university, and other policies that impact the fiscal resources available to the program.
The budget allocation process for all AASU programs is initiated in early spring and ends in
early summer. The MPH program budget is part of the overall budget of the Health Sciences
Department in which the program resides. The MPH Program Coordinator, with input from the
MPH faculty and staff, proposes prioritized budget requests for the next fiscal year, based on the
previous year’s expenses, and submits it to the HS Department Head who submits this request to
the COHP dean. The COHP dean reviews the proposed budget requests of all COPH programs,
makes modifications based on the previous year’s revenues and expenses, prioritizes all program
budget requests, and presents the proposed prioritized COHP budget requests to the AASU
Provost for review and discussion. The preliminary proposed budget requests for all AASU
programs is then presented to the AASU President and Vice President for Business and Finance
for preliminary approval. Final approval of the proposed AASU budget is ultimately the
responsibility of the full Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia which is
dependent on funding from the Georgia State Legislature.
Tuition revenues from all AASU programs go the university; the university allocates budgets to
the programs based on their needs.
1.6,b. A clearly formulated program budget statement, showing sources of all available
funds and expenditures by major categories, since the last accreditation visit or for the last
five years, whichever is longer. If the program does not have a separate budget, it must
present an estimate of available funds and expenditures by major category and explain the
basis of the estimate. This information must be presented in a table format as appropriate
to the program.
48
Template 1.6.1 Sources of Funds and Expenditures by Major Category
Table 1.6.b. Sources of Funds and Expenditures by Major Category, 2008 to 2012
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Source of Funds
Course Fees
N/A
N/A
$3,782
$2,614
$4,150
State Appropriation
-
-
-
-
-
University Funds
$426,113
$464,399
$473,974
$475,860
$498,020
Grants/Contracts
$62,284
$22,094
$40,020
$4,298
$11,224
Indirect Cost Recovery
-
-
732
-
-
Endowment/Gifts
-
-
-
-
-
Total
$488,397
$486,493
$518,328
$475,860
$543,394
Faculty Salaries &
Benefits
$409,670
$403,344
$406,380
$394,784
$457,579
Staff Salaries &
Benefits
$53,319
$65,852
$66,306
$65,281
$66,421
Operations
$17,667
$15,896
$21,699
$10,932
$13,634
Travel
$7,741
$1,401
$2,943
$4,863
$5,760
Student Support
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
University Tax
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Total
$488,397
$486,493
$518,328
$475,860
$543,394
Expenditures
Source: AASU Office of Business and Finance.
Note: We are only able to access budget statements for the past five years as budgets are archived after five years.
The MPH budget is subsumed in the Department of Health Sciences Department Budget. The percentage of the HS
budget expenditures that is allocated to the MPH Program is based on FTE salaries and is 34%. The percentage of
income for travel is based on FTE faculty, the percentage of Grants/Contracts are approximately 56%; and
49
University funds 34% (source AASU Office of Business and Finance). Inconsistencies in faculty/staff salaries and
other expenditures are due, in part, to mandatory furloughs and fluctuations due to budget cutbacks. For example,
in 2010 3 furlough days were mandated. In 2011, one Health Sciences faculty member (not one of the primary MPH
faculty members) became ill and retired in early fall 2011 which is reflected in lower faculty salaries and benefits
for that year. A new faculty line (not one of the primary MPH faculty members) was added which is reflected in the
increase in 2012 faculty salaries and benefits. All University operations budgets were cut significantly between 2010
and 2011. Per the AASU Business Office, the MPH Program and the Health Sciences Department are not
considered a student support department, but are, by definition an instructional department. Therefore, no student
support funds are listed.
1.6.c. If the program is a collaborative one sponsored by two or more universities, the
budget statement must make clear the financial contributions of each sponsoring university
to the overall program budget. This should be accompanied by a description of how tuition
and other income is shared, including indirect cost returns for research generated by
public health program faculty who may have their primary appointment elsewhere.
N/A
1.6.d. Identification of measurable objectives by which the program assesses the adequacy
of its fiscal resources, along with data regarding the program’s performance against those
measures for each of the last three years.
Table 1.6.d. Outcome Measures for Adequacy of Program Fiscal Resources
Outcome measure
Target
2010
2011
2012
Institutional Expenses/all FTE
MPH Students**
Average amount of scholarship
funds available for students†
MPH Budget
$120,000
$127,877
$134,525
$168,809
$20,000
$64,995
$23,345
$240,000
>25% of
the total
HS Budget
34%
30%
34%
** Source: Office of budget and Finance AASU.
† Scholarship funds for MPH students include funds from the Scholarships for Disadvantaged Students (SDS). Dr.
Streater, Coordinator of the MPH Program, in conjunction with the Grants and Sponsored Research Office and
the College of Health Professions Dean’s Office, competed for and was awarded Scholarships For Disadvantaged
Students (Grant Award T08HP25216-01-00) in the amount of $240,000/year for the years 2012-2015. Qualified
students may receive up to $15,000 per year or $7,500 per semester based on financial need.
1.6.e. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the
program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.
This criterion is met with commentary.
Strengths: The MPH program is supported by the University and the College of Health
Professions, enabling it to develop and grow. Current staff, equipment and services to support
50
educational activities of the program are in place, functional and appropriately financed.
Scholarship funding for MPH students far exceeds goals.
Weaknesses: None currently although additional resources are always welcome.
Future Plans: The MPH Program will continue to closely monitor its fiscal resources and keep
an open channel of communication with the COHP Dean regarding its fiscal needs.
51
1.7 Faculty and Other Resources. The program shall have personnel and other resources
adequate to fulfill its stated mission and goals, and its instructional, research and service
objectives.
1.7.a. A concise statement or chart defining the number (headcount) of primary faculty
employed by the program for each of the last three years, organized by concentration.
Template 1.7.a. Primary Faculty by Core Knowledge Area (schools) or
Specialty/Concentration Area (programs) for the last three years
Note: Core MPH faculty are those who commit at least 51% of their time to the MPH program;
they are required to teach at least two MPH courses per term, advise and mentor MPH students,
conduct and/or be involved in research, participate in service to the university and the
community, and aid in the administration of the program. (These data are based on calendar
years).
As of
August
2013
Table 1.7.a. Headcount of Primary Faculty
Core Area/Specialty #1
2010
2011
2012
2013
5
5
5
5
1.7.b. A table delineating the number of faculty, students and SFRs, organized by
concentration, for each of the last three years (calendar years or academic years) prior to
the site visit. Data must be presented in a table format (see CEPH Data Template 1.7.2) and
include at least the following information: a) headcount of primary faculty, b) FTE
conversion of faculty based on % time devoted to public health instruction, research and
service, c) headcount of other faculty involved in the program (adjunct, part-time,
secondary appointments, etc.), d) FTE conversion of other faculty based on estimate of %
time commitment, e) total headcount of primary faculty plus other (non-primary) faculty,
f) total FTE of primary and other (non-primary) faculty, g) headcount of students by
department or program area, h) FTE conversion of students, based on definition of fulltime as nine or more credits per semester, i) student FTE divided by primary faculty FTE
and j) student FTE divided by total faculty FTE, including other faculty. All programs
must provide data for a), b) and i) and may provide data for c), d) and j) depending on
whether the program intends to include the contributions of other faculty in its FTE
calculations.
52
Template 1.7.b. Faculty, Students and Student/Faculty Ratios by Department (schools) or
Specialty/Concentration Area (programs)
Table 1.7.b. Faculty, Students and Student/Faculty Ratios by Department or Specialty Area
HC
Primary
Faculty
FTE
Primary
Faculty
HC
Other
Faculty
FTE
Other
Faculty
HC
Total
Faculty
FTE
Total
Faculty
HC
Students
FTE
Students
54
SFR by
Primary
Faculty
FTE
12:1
SFR by
Total
Faculty
FTE
6.14:1
2013 as of
6/1/13
5
4.5
13
4.3
18
8.8
64
2012
5
4.5
12
4
17
8.5
65
53
11.78:1
6.24:1
2011
5
4.5
11
3.67
16
8.17
50
44
9.78
5.39
2010
5
4.5
11
3.67
16
8.17
41
34
9.78
5.39
* Note: FTE = total full-time faculty + total part-time faculty/3 (AASU definition). FTE
enrolment is calculated as total full-time enrollment plus the sum of the credit hours taken
by part-time students divided by 9 (AASU definition).
The MPH Program experienced a large pool of very qualified applicants in 2012 (n=84).
Anticipating a large graduation in fall 2012 (n=10) and spring 2013 (n=18), we accepted a larger
than usual number of students (n=51) which resulted in a larger number of admissions (n=26).
This increased the 2012 SFR by primary faculty to slightly over 10:1 target, but the 2012 SFR by
the total faculty complement remained within our goal of 10:1. The current SFR (summer 2013)
for primary faculty is 5.33 (n=24) this SFR is typical for summer enrollments and does not
include admissions for fall 2013. Fall 2013 projected enrollment is well within the SFR 10:1
target for both primary and total faculty. These data are based on calendar years.
1.7.c. A concise statement or chart concerning the headcount and FTE of non-faculty, nonstudent personnel (administration and staff) who support the program.
Table 1.7.c. Administrative Staff that support the MPH Program
Staff Person
Title
% Effort Contribution
Tracy Middleton
Administrative Assistant to
the Health Sciences
Department
25%
Sylvia Flynn
(retired December 2012)
Dianne Coleman**,
Part-time secretary (30 hours)
30%
Administrative assistant to the Head of
Health Sciences. Coordinates all
activities, processes and procedures
associated with the MPH program.
Coordinates: MPH programs’ course
evaluations, text book acquisition, MPH
data base.
53
Staff Person
Title
% Effort Contribution
Director, Graduate
Enrollment Services
10%
Coordinates admissions and student
progression for all AASU graduate
programs.
10%
Supports the Graduate Director
(disabled African
American, hired to
replace Flynn April 2013)
Jill Bell*
Corine Ackerson-Jones*,
**
Staff Assistant – Graduate
Enrollment Services
Reference Librarian
dedicated to MPH
Coordinator of Recruitment
and Retention COHP
Liz Wilson*
Director of Career Services
Tasha White*,**
Kristin Stout
10%
5%
5%
Coordinates student research activities in
Lane Library.
Assists with recruitment of MPH
students at recruitment fairs, etc.
Assists MPH students with resumes and
job searches
* University staff, not in the MPH budget
** = minority staff member
1.7.d. Description of the space available to the program for various purposes (offices,
classrooms, common space for student use, etc.), by location.
Since fall 2003, the Department of Health Sciences has been housed in Solms Hall (completely
renovated in 2002-2003) on the Armstrong Atlantic State University campus.
The HS/MPH facility includes:
 Nine faculty offices, (nine in Solms Hall and one in Ashmore Hall (103-118 sq. ft.)
 One larger office in Solms shared by two faculty members (191 sq. ft.)
 One Department Head's office (217 sq. ft.)
 One secretarial cubical (112 sq. ft.)
 One reception area (282 sq. ft.)
 Part-time secretary cubical area shared with work study students (169 sq. ft.)
 One conference room (356 sq. ft.)
 Three dedicated classrooms: Solms 202 (684 sp. ft.), 203 (567 sq. ft.), 216(918 sq. ft.), with
additional classrooms available by reservation
 One unisex rest room with handicap access (54 sq. ft.)
 One break room with sink, microwave, and refrigerator. (63 sq. ft.)
The facilities and equipment potentially available to MPH students and faculty are competitive
with that of other benchmark institutions of similar size. Not all teaching facilities, including
access to computer laboratories, lecture halls and regular classrooms are considered adequate at
this time. Faculty office space is now filled to capacity. In fact, two new faculty hires for fall
2013 currently do not yet have designated office space. Any program growth will require
additional office space outside the current Health Sciences Suite or relocation of the department
54
to a larger suite. In order to accommodate the two new faculty hires for fall 2013, the HS
Conference will be converted to an office on one of the new hires and the other new hire will
share an office with another HS faculty member.
Currently there is no common space for any students in the Health Sciences Suite. Students do
have access to common spaces in the Lane Library and the Student Union.
(Note: It was recently announced that the HS Department will be relocated to an new site as of
January 1, 2014, see 1.7.j. Addendum for a complete description of the new HS suite).
1.7.e. A concise description of the laboratory space and description of the kind, quantity
and special features or special equipment.
N/A
1.7.f. A concise statement concerning the amount, location and types of computer facilities
and resources for students, faculty, administration and staff.
Each faculty member, as well as the staff, in the Department of Health Sciences, is issued a
personal computer (choice of desktop or laptop) in his/her office upon hire. These computers are
directly linked to the campus-wide network and the Internet through the AASU server. Hardware
and software upgrades are provided by AASU’s Computer and Information Services department
on a regular basis. Computer technicians are available to address any computer-based problems
faculty may have. The Health Sciences department has four laptops for faculty use by
reservation.
Campus-wide common community computer labs are available to MPH students. Locations and
number of computer stations include:




Lane Library - 125 stations
Solms Hall Room 104 - 60 stations
University Hall Room 112 - 42 stations
Science Center - 48 stations
1.7.g. A concise description of library/information resources available for program use,
including a description of library capacity to provide digital (electronic) content, access
mechanisms, training opportunities and document-delivery services.
The Lane Library provides excellent reference librarians to facilitate student library utilization
and research. Carols and group study rooms are available for students by reservation. There is
55
also a classroom available for student/faculty presentations. The library also contains a hundred
computers for student use.
Print and Media Materials:
The Library’s collection includes monographs, ebooks, reference materials, bound volumes,
current print journals, electronic journals, videocassettes, DVDs, and CD-ROMs that strongly
support the MPH program. Lane Library’s budget allocation for the MPH program is adequate.





Print, ebook, and media titles directly related to public health……………4,000
Related titles which indirectly support the field of public health………..16,152
Health Sciences print journal titles related to public health………………….18
Related print journals which indirectly support the field of public health…. 59
Electronic journals related to public health ……………………..………….252
Online Database Resources:
GALILEO (Georgia Library Learning Online), the University System of Georgia’s cooperative,
Web-based virtual library, provides access to multiple information resources including databases
that index thousands of periodicals and scholarly journals. A number of GALILEO databases
may be useful for public health research, including EBSCO Academic Source Complete,
Proquest Research Library, Proquest Nursing & Allied Health, MEDLINE Full Text, CINAHL,
EBSCO Health Source Nursing/Academic Edition, PsycINFO, PsycArticles, and LexisNexis
Academic.
Additional Lane Library databases (e.g., Web of Science, Cochrane Database of Systematic
Reviews, JSTOR, ) are accessible to current MPH students and faculty who conduct scholarly
research both on and off-campus.
In addition to indexing and abstracting thousands of journals, many Lane Library and GALILEO
databases offer “full text” (complete) articles. Scholarly and popular journal literature in these
databases can be downloaded, e-mailed, or printed at the convenience of the MPH student or
faculty member.
Materials From Other Institutions:
Through GIL Express, the University System of Georgia (USG) cooperative book delivery
request system, Armstrong faculty and students have access to monographs held in University
System of Georgia libraries, and Lane Library’s interlibrary loan system can obtain books and
photocopied journal articles from libraries nationwide. Both library services are provided at no
charge to MPH students and faculty members.
In addition to AASU’s Library holdings, students in the MPH program have ready access to
libraries at Memorial Health University Medical Center and St. Joseph’s/Candler Hospital, as
56
well as access to other regional and public libraries. Finally, MPH graduate students have access
to the GAIN (Georgia Interactive Network for Medical Information) database of journal articles
through the AHEC (Area Health Information Centers) network.
1.7.h. A concise statement of any other resources not mentioned above, if applicable.
AASU Learning Commons
Armstrong will open a new Learning Commons adjacent to the library in the spring of 2013.
The Commons arose from a need for more library space, specifically space for students to work
collaboratively in areas designed to promote learning. At 15,000 gross square feet, the
Commons will have seating for 284 students and will include 10 study rooms equipped with
large panel computer screens, 25 PC and 25 Mac desktop computers in the building’s open areas,
Wi-Fi throughout the building, and a mix of seating arrangements. One of the study rooms will
double as a presentation practice room, and flexible seating around wall-mounted display panels
will allow for creating of group presentation spaces as needed. An experimental technologies
room will include sound and video recording and editing equipment, a plotter, and a large touchpanel computer with videoconferencing capabilities. Three Agati multi-media group
collaboration tables with embedded touch-controlled computers and large secondary display
screens are sure to attract students. A “pink-noise” sound masking system, efficient acoustical
finishes, and ceiling-mounted directional speakers in group areas will help create an environment
with minimized distractions. (See Resource File for map of floor plan of the Learning Commons
on the AASU campus).
The building is designed to be operable by a small number of staff so that it can stay open well
into the early morning hours or open 24 hours a day if need be. Library staff, including reference
librarians, will be on hand to assist students. The building’s location adjacent to the library, the
student union, the food court, and the principal walkway between the living and academic areas
of the campus place it in the center of student activity. The building will feature a green roof,
photovoltaic roof panels, sustainable materials, and other features designed to earn LEED
certification at the Gold or possibly the Platinum level.
1.7.i. Identification of measurable objectives through which the program assesses the
adequacy of its resources, along with data regarding the program’s performance against
those measures for each of the last three years.
Outcome
measure
Support Staff for
MPH Program (HS
budget only)
Source
Target
2010
2011
2012
2013 as
of 6/1/13
Human
Resources
>1.5 FTE in
HS Budget
1.5
1.75
1.75
1.75
57
Outcome
measure
Student perception of
adequacy of
computing resources
Student perception of
adequacy of physical
environment and
facilities
Student perception of
adequacy of Library
Resources
FTE Student/Faculty
Ratio (FTE) Core and
Secondary faculty
Source
Target
2010
2011
2012
MPH Student
Exit
Questionnaire
MPH Student
Exit
Questionnaire
80% responses
rank good to
excellent
85%
85.2%
100%
80% responses
rank good to
excellent
90%
86.6%
100%
MPH Student
Exit
Questionnaire
Office of
Institutional
Review
80% responses
rank good to
excellent
81%
80%
100%
TBA
<10:1
4.72:1
6.11:1
7.36:1
6.02:1
2013 as
of 6/1/13
TBA
TBA
1.7.j. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the
program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.
This criterion is met with commentary.
Strengths: The AASU Learning Commons will provide state of the art resources (meeting
rooms and computer labs) for MPH students. Library resources are excellent. AASU has placed a
high priority to establish a new College of Health Professions building within the next five years.
As a result of the MPH Student Exit Questionnaire, MPH faculty noticed that although student
perceptions of the adequacy of library, computing facilities, and physical environment resources
met our goals, the scores improved significantly after we included additional information
regarding these resources to the new MPH students orientation.
Weaknesses: Not all teaching facilities are considered adequate and easily accessible at this
time. The facilities and equipment available to MPH students and faculty are competitive with
that of other benchmark institutions of similar size, but availability is not consistent. There is no
available space in the HS suite for MPH students to meet. There is no space in Solms Hall for
part-time faculty to meet with students. Health Sciences Department physical resources (office
space and student meeting rooms) are inadequate. Although the financial resources are
considered adequate at this time, redirection of a non-core Health Sciences Faculty member line
to the MPH Program is essential if any additional growth is to occur in the program
The current Health Sciences suite, Solms 201 is now filled to capacity and is not adequate to
meet existing or future needs for the department. In fact, two full time faculty members who will
be hired fall 2013 will have no assigned offices and one full time faculty member is currently
housed outside of Solms Hall. Program growth necessitates additional office space outside the
58
current Health Sciences Suite or departmental relocation to a larger suite. A redirection of a noncore Health Faculty line will be essential with any program growth.
Future Plans: The MPH Coordinator will maintain an open dialog with the Dean of Health
Professions to obtain more physical resources (i.e. faculty office space). As of June 2013 the
Health Sciences Department was told it would be moving into a larger suite in University Hall.
This suite contains 16 faculty offices and has small workrooms and computer resources for
students (see resource file for a more complete discussion of the new MPH facility).
Addendum: Update to criteria 1.7
Prior to Dr. Richard St. Pierre’s retirement in December 2012, search for his replacement was
approved and was initiated in early fall 2012 in hopes to have his position filled in January 2013.
Two offers for this position were made but not accepted for start dates in January 2013 or August
2013. The search was reopened in February 2013, new candidates were interviewed. Dr. Nandi
Marshall MPH, DrPH accepted the position. Dr. Marshall will begin her position as a primary
faculty member in the MPH program August 5, 2013. This hire will keep the headcount of
primary MPH faculty at 5 and FTE at 4.5.
Additionally, Dr. Andrea Thomas, MBA, MPH, FACHE will be joining the Health Sciences
Department as a primary faculty member in the Master of Health Services Administration
(MHSA) Program August 5, 2013. In addition to teaching in the MHSA Program, Dr. Thomas
will be available to teach course(s) for the MPH Program. This hire will make the FTE for Other
Faculty be 4.3 and the SFR for the total faculty be 6.14:1.
The Department of Health Sciences will be relocated to University Hall in December 2013. The
faculty offices and secretarial work space adjoin a classroom suite. This arrangement will allow
faculty and the secretaries to consult readily with one another and provide students with easy
access to faculty.
The suite has two large classrooms dedicated for lectures and one traditional classroom. Two 100
square foot discussion rooms will be available for use by student for studying or by faculty when
needed for small group discussions or private conversations.
A small student computer lab has 3 computers that are connected to a system printer. These
computers all have Microsoft office suite and SPSS 19 among other software.
The informal learning center (lounge) is a 200 square foot space that is equipped with 2
microwaves, a refrigerator, table and chairs, couch, coffee pot and toaster. This area will also
house the students’ mailboxes. The lounge can be used by students as a place where they can eat,
relax, and discuss coursework in a more informal setting.
A storage room will house all the records for the program. This room has a lockable door;
records are stored in two lockable filing cabinets. These filing cabinets may only be accessed by
59
the department secretary or faculty. A locked bin can be used to store sensitive materials for
offsite shredding.
When larger classrooms are needed for student meetings, guest lectures or other activities,
faculty and staff may reserve rooms elsewhere on campus.
Each total faculty member will be provided with a 108 square foot office, furnished with an L
shaped desk, a desk chair, a guest chair, 2 book cases and a filing cabinet. Each faculty is given
the choice of a Mac computer or a PC, desk top or laptop. All faculty members have individual
printers as well as being networked to the Department photocopy center. The Department Head
will have a 168 square foot office, furnished with a U-shaped desk, 2 filing cabinets, 3 book
cases, an office chair, and two guest chairs. The computer in this office is also connected to the
network. All offices are equipped with phones. These spaces are adequate for teaching, private
conferences – in short, for all faculty needs.
The needs of the adjunct faculty are met on an individual basis. Each associated faculty member
will have access to the conference room for individual conference, advising, and meeting with
other faculty. There is an additional suite of four offices which can be used by adjunct faculty.
There is a break room, work room/kitchen and conference room. The conference room can be
used for associated faculty, for faculty meetings, for interviews and for small group discussions.
Scheduled use of the conference room will be coordinated by the departmental senior secretary.
The secretaries of the Health Sciences Department will share a common area of 440 square feet.
This space is located adjacent to the department head’s offices and precedes entry to all faculty
offices. The secretary will have a large L-shaped desk, a desk chair, a guest chair, 1 book case,
and 2 lockable filing cabinets. Both secretaries will have computers and desk printers which are
also networked to the photocopy center. The secretarial space is also adjacent to the faculty work
room, and will offer ready access to a typewriter, fax machine, scanners, and large
printer/fax/email/photocopy system machine.
Space allotted will be adequate for the department faculty, staff and students.
60
1.8 Diversity. The program shall demonstrate a commitment to diversity and shall show
evidence an ongoing practice of cultural competence in learning, research and service
practices.
1.8.a. A written plan and/or policies demonstrating systematic incorporation of diversity
within the program. Required elements include the following:
1.8.a.i. Description of the program’s under-represented populations, including a rationale
for the designation.
Underrepresented populations for AASU and the MPH Program are Hispanic/Latino students
and African American students. The African American population in Chatham County, Georgia
is 40.2% while the enrollment of African American students at Armstrong is 23.3%. The
Hispanic/Latino population of Chatham County is 5.7% and the enrollment of Hispanic/Latino
students at Armstrong is 7%. Several initiatives have been undertaken by AASU to increase the
above two populations: The African American Male Initiative (AAMI), the Goizueta Initiative,
and Complete College Georgia.
1.8.a.ii. A list of goals for achieving diversity and cultural competence within the program,
and a description of how diversity-related goals are consistent with the university’s
mission, strategic plan and other initiatives on diversity, as applicable.
The mission of AASU is “Armstrong is teaching-centered and student-focused, providing diverse
learning experiences and professional programs grounded in the liberal arts”. A stated value is:
“We value and respect diversity”.
http://www.armstrong.edu/About/armstrong_facts/mission_statement
A core value of the AASU Office of Student affairs is SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT. We foster
cultural literacy and personal relationships founded on the principles of compassion, civility and
diversity. And two stated strategies are: DIVERSITY RECRUITMENT & PROGAMMING:
Create an environment on campus that attracts Hispanic/Latino students to enroll at the
University and within 15 years AASU could become the first Hispanic Serving Institution (HIS)
in the State of Georgia. And Provide opportunities for students to engage in activities that fully
promote their cultural contribution to the global society. Celebrate various cultural heritage
months (African American Heritage Month, Native American Heritage Month) and other days of
importance.
http://www.armstrong.edu/images/student_affairs/SAstrategicplan.pdf
The Mission of the College of Health Professions is to “Improve the health and wellness of our
culturally diverse communities by educating students to become team-oriented, evidence-focused
and compassionate healthcare professionals.”
http://www.armstrong.edu/Health_professions/deans_office/chp_our_vision_mission
61
A Stated Goal of Complete College Georgia, an initiative sponsored by the University system of
Georgia is to improve access for traditionally underserved groups.
http://www.armstrong.edu/images/Armstrong%20Atlantic%20State%20UniversityComplete%20College%20Georgia.pdf
The Mission of the Office of Multicultural Affairs is “To foster a culturally inclusive living and
learning environment in which differences as well as similarities are respected, recognized, and
revered in an effort to develop both civic and social responsibility within our Armstrong and
surrounding communities; to encourage student empowerment and both personal and
professional development.”
http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/multiculturalaffairs/multiculturalaffairs_mission
The university gives a great deal of latitude to the individual colleges and programs to develop
their own unique goals for achieving diversity and cultural competence.
MPH Program Goals for achieving and maintaining diversity and cultural competence:
 The MPH Program will maintain an enrollment of diverse students that is representative
of the service area.
 All MPH faculty members will complete the Safe Space Training by January 1, 2014.
 The MPH program will be represented at all appropriate minority recruitment events by
faculty and/or staff.
 The MPH Program will recruit a diverse field of external speakers to present in classes.
 The MPH Program will reorganize its Advisory Committee to include more minority
members.
 The MPH Program will increase the number of minority, MPH part-time faculty.
 The MPH Program will increase the number of minority MPH practicum site supervisors.
These goals are documented in the MPH website:
http://www.armstrong.edu/Health_Professions/Health_Sciences/healthsciences_master_of_public
_health?AASUSTID=cf50200ce56fd1a29117d036291b02b7
1.8.a.iii. Policies that support a climate free of harassment and discrimination and that
value the contributions of all forms of diversity; the program should also document its
commitment to maintaining/using these policies.
In its commitment to diversity, the MPH Program is bound by and agrees with the policies of the
Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, Armstrong Atlantic State University, and
the College of Health Professions. The MPH Program has also developed stand-alone policies to
enhance program diversity.
The Affirmative Action Policy of Armstrong Atlantic State University states that “Armstrong
Atlantic State University is an equal employment opportunity/affirmative action institution. In
62
accordance with the policy of the Board of Regents, the university stipulates that there shall be
no discrimination based upon race, ethnicity, sex, sexual orientation, religion, creed, national
origin, age, or handicap of employees in their appointment, promotion, retention, remuneration,
or any other condition of employment”.
The university provides a full range of education and training programs to promote awareness
and prevention of harassment. Education and training programs also include education about the
university's harassment policy, as well as training for responsible personnel in conducting
investigations, management and implementation of the complaint procedure.
Information regarding this policy is provided during student orientation, during employee
orientation, and to all individuals who volunteer in various positions on campus. Copies of the
policy will be readily available in all departments and units of the university. In addition, the
policy is posted on the university's website.
http://www.armstrong.edu/images/academic_affairs/Faculty_Handbook.pdf
“As a government contractor, Armstrong Atlantic State University is also committed to taking
affirmative action to hire and advance minorities and women as well as qualified individuals
with disabilities and covered veterans”.
http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/human_resources/human_resources_employee_handboo
k#q1
All Armstrong employees are required to, upon hire, to complete an Ethics Training Course and
on an annual basis, complete the Ethics Policy Recertification Course. All MPH faculty members
have current Ethics Policy certification.
The Health Sciences Department and the MPH Program adopted the tenants of the AASU
Mandala Movement in 1998 and continue to adhere to the spirit of the mission and goals of that
movement. The program strives to create persons who are Cultural Diversity Ambassador of
Change. The mission of the Mandala Movement is to foster an environment that supports and
celebrates diversity, actively encourages fairness, and provides a positive leaning, living and
working experience for everyone. The Goals of the Movement are to: Provide opportunities for
increasing self-awareness; encourage appreciation of values found in diversity; and create an
environment that supports positive change. New MPH students are introduced to these tenants at
MPH orientation.
Additionally, the MPH program has adopted a goal for each faculty member to complete the
training for a Safe Space by January 1, 2014. Safe Space is a campus-wide initiative offering a
visible message of inclusion, acceptance, and support to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and
queer (LGBTQ) people in the university community. Faculty who complete the workshop are
able to recognize appropriate and inclusive language regarding sex, gender, and sexual
63
orientation; identify challenges specific to LGBT students; name federal, state, local, and
Armstrong policies that concern the LGBT community; identify biases around issues of sex,
gender, and sexual orientation; describe strategies to support LGBT students and to respond to
anti-LGBT behavior; and identify resources for LGBT individuals on campus, in the community,
and online. http://www.armstrong.edu/Initiatives/safe_space/safe_space_welcome.
1.8.a.iv. Policies that support a climate for working and learning in a diverse setting.
The AASU mission states that “Armstrong is teaching-centered and student-focused, providing
diverse learning experiences and professional programs grounded in the liberal arts”.
One of the AASU values states “We value and respect diversity”. Another stated value is “We
value an environment of mutual trust and collegiality that builds an inclusive community”.
The Mission, Vision, and Values statements are prominently displayed on the University's
website. http://www.armstrong.edu/About/armstrong_facts/about_strategic_plan.
AASU supports an Office of Multicultural Affairs. This office provides supportive services to
ethnic minority students at Armstrong and works closely with Office of International Education
and with Hispanic Leadership & Outreach in providing comprehensive cultural programming
and support services. Armstrong's Office of Multicultural Affairs serves as a resource for
Armstrong students, providing programs and inviting guest speakers to make presentations that
target diversity, cultural competence, and education. In addition, this office serves as the primary
sponsor of programming for African American History Month, the International Fair and Native
American History Month and Women and History Month.
http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/multiculturalaffairs/multiculturalaffairs_welcome.
The MPH Program adheres to the policies of Armstrong Atlantic State University. It is the
policy of AASU that all employees shall have the opportunity to work in an atmosphere and
environment free from any form of harassment or retaliation based on race, color, religion,
gender, sex, national origin, age, or disability. Such forms of harassment or retaliation constitute
discrimination under various state and federal laws and will not be tolerated by the university. As
is dictated by the US Equal Opportunity Employment Commission.
http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/practices/harassment.cfm.
Harassment is defined as verbal or physical conduct that denigrates or shows hostility or aversion
toward an individual because of their race, color, religion, gender, sex, national origin, age, or
disability or that of their relatives, friends, or associates, and that:



has the purpose or effect of creating an intimidating, hostile or offensive working
environment
has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual's work performance
otherwise adversely affects an individual's employment opportunities
64
http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/human_resources/human_resources_employee_handbook#q
1.
1.8.a.v. Policies and plans to develop review and maintain curricula and other
opportunities including service learning that address and build competency in diversity
and cultural considerations.
MPH Program Technical Standards
All MPH students are introduced to the Technical Standards for the MPH Program and the
Department of Health Sciences at the MPH Orientation. These technical standards are core
performance that reflects the Program’s commitment to the standards that are necessary to
operate effectively and humanely in a diverse society and to obtain employment in the degree
fields. They are evaluated by the student’s practicum site supervisors as well as program faculty.
1. It is essential that the student must behave in a professional manner. The student must
not, in any fashion, cause disruption to the department, faculty, fellow students or clients.
Furthermore, the student must have the ability to behave in an ethical manner, have the
ability to demonstrate good judgment, maturity, sensitivity, emotional stability and
establish effective harmonious relationships with faculty, fellow student and clients.
2. It is essential that the student have the sensitivity and interpersonal skills sufficient to
interact with individuals, families and groups. Student will be evaluated using tools such
as classroom performance and practicum evaluation, utilized by site and faculty
supervisor, on the basis of their ability to appropriately adapt their manner of interaction
with clients from a variety of social, emotional, cultural and intellectual backgrounds.
3. It is essential that the students must have communication abilities sufficient for
interaction with others in verbal and written form. It is essential that the student be able to
appropriately adjust presentation/communication style to a level that is compatible with
the communication abilities of colleagues and clients.
The MPH Program has MOUs with many excellent sites for practica that build competency in
diversity and cultural considerations. A representative list of practica sites includes: St
Joseph/Candler Health Center – African American Health Information resource Center, St
Mary’s (Hispanic Medical Home), J.C. Lewis (Predominately African American Medical
Home), Community Health Mission (Minority Medical Home), Curtis Cooper Health Center
(Predominantly African American Medical Home), Coastal Health District Department of Health
Promotion, Girls on the Run (organization to enhance disadvantaged adolescent girls selfesteem through running programs), Planned Parenthood, Chatham County Board of Education,
Liberty County Health Department, and Union Mission (homeless shelter).
65
In 2010, the MPH Program added content to several courses in order to build competency in
diversity and cultural considerations. This course content is examined and or updated each year
(see section 1.8.b.)
1.8.a.vi. Policies and plans to recruit, develop, promote and retain a diverse faculty.
The MPH Programs ascribes and is bound to all University System of Georgia and Armstrong
Atlantic State University Policies to recruit, promote, and retain a diverse faculty (see section
1.3c).
The University, the College of Health Professions, and the Program value diversity in its faculty,
staff, and student body. Each welcomes applications from a diverse pool of candidates and
subscribes to inclusive excellence. A stated value in the recently adopted Armstrong Strategic
Plan is “We value and respect diversity”.
http://www.armstrong.edu/About/armstrong_facts/about_strategic_plan.
Section 107.1.1 of the AASU Faculty handbook states: “Armstrong Atlantic State University is
an equal employment opportunity/affirmative action institution. The university stipulates that
there shall be no discrimination based upon race, ethnicity, sex, sexual orientation, religion,
creed, national origin, age, or handicap of employees in their appointment, promotion, retention,
remuneration, or any other condition of employment.” Armstrong Atlantic State University,
Employee Handbook
http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/human_resources/human_resources_policies_procedures
This commitment to equal opportunity employment is also stated in the Board of Regents
Manual.8.2.1 Equal Employment Opportunity
http://www.usg.edu/policymanual/section8/policy/8.2_general_policies_for_all_personnel/#p8.2.
1_equal_employment_opportunity.
Armstrong Atlantic State University takes positive action in an effort to identify, to recruit, and
to employ qualified women and members of minority groups. Subsequent promotions and salary
increases are based solely on the quality of performance of the individual in his or her position.
Armstrong Atlantic State University, Employee Handbook
http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/human_resources/human_resources_policies_procedures
Armstrong has an Affirmative Action Program, which sets forth the policies, practices and
procedures Armstrong is committed to applying to ensure that its policy of non-discrimination
and affirmative action for qualified individuals is accomplished. Per the AASU Employee
Handbook, this policy is available upon request at the Human Resources Department.
http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/human_resources/human_resources_equal_employment
_opportunity_affirmative_action?AASUSTID=cdb796b6eb78353dd03e7d1c7c538954&AASUS
TID=898a3369526934d3f05b83c44b6af6a9.
66
The University is an EEOC employer. According to the AASU Employee Handbook,
"University policy is to employ those persons who are best qualified based on ability, skill,
experience, training, character, and physical condition, regardless of race, color, sex, or creed.
The university provides working conditions, salaries, and benefits that will attract and retain
competent employees."
The AASU Human Resources Department advertises all faculty positions in the following sites:
Armstrong Website, SavannahHelpWanted.com, HigherEdJobs.com, InsideHigherEd.com,
LatinosInHigherEd.com, Savannah Tribune, The Savannah Herald, Department of Labor,
Hero2Hired, and Indeed.com. Additionally, all position announcements are sent to Affirmative
Action Sites (via email).
Faculty Development and Retention:
AASU Faculty Development Office
The AASU Faculty Development Office makes resources and activities available for new and
established faculty. A Faculty Development web site has been designed to inform AASU faculty
about programs, services, and resources that promote teaching effectiveness, support scholarly
projects, and encourage professional involvement in community activities.
http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/faculty_development/faculty_development_welcome.
Through the AASU Faculty Development Office, funding is available to faculty on a competitive
basis. Faculty can apply for these funds by submitting proposals for teaching and learning grants
or for research and scholarship grants. Additional information on grant funding sources can be
found on the faculty development committee also offers faculty development activities.
http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/faculty_development/faculty_development_grant_writin
g_resources.
The Faculty Development office also offers resources to new faculty to support their progress
towards tenure and promotion.
http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/faculty_development/faculty_development_new_faculty
All new faculty hires are encouraged to take advantage of teaching resources located on the
Faculty Development website. Resources include: Academic Writing Boot camp, Faculty
Development Seminars, Communities, and Roundtables, Using Mid-Term Evaluations to
Promote Student Learning, Podcasting Resources, The Teaching Commons AT&T Blue Web'n,
Virtual Resource Site for Teaching with Technology, The Visible Knowledge Project, Blended
Learning, The Journal, Educational Technology Committee Blog @ AASUUSG Faculty,
Development Topics on iTunes U, Technology & Teaching.
67
Web Resources are made available on the website and include: Getting Smart: 50 Educational
Podcasts You Should Check Out,The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of
Teaching,The National Teaching & Learning Forum,Professional & Organizational
Development,World Lecture Hall, Merlot, Free-Ed.net,Center for Research on Learning &
Teaching,Center for Teaching Effectiveness, Derek Bok Center for Teaching &
Learning,Resources for Enhancing Education at Carnegie Mellon, HORIZON
There is also information available on Website Development: The HTML Writers Guild, Tips &
Tools for New Web Makers,Web Developer's Virtual Library: Beginner's Page, Webweaver.
http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/faculty_development/faculty_development_teaching_res
ources.
The Office of International Education provides support for faculty exchanges with partner
universities and helps establish new study abroad programs. The Office of International
Education also assists with bringing international faculty to the AASU campus for lectures and to
teach in our exchange programs.
http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/International/intl_welcome.
All Health Sciences faculty are eligible for travel funds from within the department that can be
used for travel to conferences, research, etc. Currently the faculty may receive up to $850 per
year from this fund. Conference registration fees are not included in the $850; they are taken
from a separate source. Faculty can apply to the College of Health Professions for discretionary
funding through the Dean of the College of Health Professions to supplement funds from other
sources. The Dean considers each need individually.
The department set up the Department of Health Sciences Foundation. This source of funding
enables MPH faculty to apply for research funds, additional travel funds, buy-out funding, and
mini grant funds. The awarding of these funds is on an ad hoc basis.
1.8.a.vii. Policies and plans to recruit develop and retain a diverse staff.
The AASU Human Resources Department advertises all staff positions in the following sites:
Armstrong Website, SavannahHelpWanted.com, HigherEdJobs.com, InsideHigherEd.com,
LatinosInHigherEd.com, Savannah Tribune, The Savannah Herald, Department of Labor,
Hero2Hired, and Indeed.com. Additionally, all position announcements are sent to Affirmative
Action Sites (via email).
Staff positions at AASU are graded positions and not structured for promotions. Staff members
are notified of open positions and may apply if interested.
68
AASU, the COHP and the Department of Health Sciences is committed to equal opportunity
employment and is bound by the policies of the Board of Regents Manual.8.2.1 Equal
Employment Opportunity (see section 1.8.a.iii and 1.8.a.iv)
http://www.usg.edu/policymanual/section8/policy/8.2_general_policies_for_all_personnel/#p8.2.
1_equal_employment_opportunity.
Armstrong Atlantic State University takes positive action in an effort to identify, to recruit, and
to employ qualified women and members of minority groups. Subsequent promotions and salary
increases are based solely on the quality of performance of the individual in his or her position.
Armstrong Atlantic State University, Employee Handbook
http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/human_resources/human_resources_policies_procedures
Armstrong has an Affirmative Action Program, which sets forth the policies, practices and
procedures Armstrong is committed to applying to ensure that its policy of non-discrimination
and affirmative action for qualified individuals is accomplished. Per the AASU Employee
Handbook, this policy is available upon request at the Human Resources Department.
http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/human_resources/human_resources_equal_employment
_opportunity_affirmative_action?AASUSTID=cdb796b6eb78353dd03e7d1c7c538954&AASUS
TID=898a3369526934d3f05b83c44b6af6a9.
The University is an EEOC employer. According to the AASU Employee Handbook,
"University policy is to employ those persons who are best qualified based on ability, skill,
experience, training, character, and physical condition, regardless of race, color, sex, or creed.
The university provides working conditions, salaries, and benefits that will attract and retain
competent employees."
The Department of Health Sciences recently partnered with the Georgia Vocational
Rehabilitation Agency and agreed to contact this agency when staff positions become available.
The AASU Office of Human Resources offers the following professional development
opportunities for staff: Building a Better U, Lunch & Learn, No Wrong Door - Exceptional
Customer Service.
http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/human_resources/human_resources_welcome
Tuition assistance is available to staff which allows them to pursue degrees within the University
System of Georgia tuition for free. Furthermore, Health Sciences Foundation funds are available
for faculty development on an ad hoc basis.
69
1.8.a.viii. Policies and plans to recruit, admit, retain and graduate a diverse student body.
Students are actively recruited from among undergraduate and graduate students from the
various University System of Georgia universities as well as outside of Georgia. In addition, our
program tries to recruit persons already working in the public health sector, members of
community-based organizations, and clinical professionals (MDs, Physician Assistants, and
Nurses), ideally from ethnically/racially diverse underserved populations, who are interested in
alleviating health disparities and serving the health needs of underserved urban populations in
southeast Georgia.
The program staff, and periodically, MPH students participate in various recruitment activities
both on and off campus. In addition, recruiters from the AASU Admissions and Recruitment
Office, the AASU Graduate Office, and the COHP Dean’s Office have been provided materials
to distribute to students, as they meet with a variety of college juniors and seniors. Faculty who
attend local, state, national and international conferences are also given program brochures to be
distributed to interested persons. As the program receives requests for information, the Graduate
Office and/or the MPH Coordinator immediately respond by emailing a program brochure and
instructions to access the MPH Graduate Application website. As applications are received,
acknowledgement letters and e-mail messages are sent to inform applicants of their application
status. Efforts are made to meet with prospective applicants in person or by phone prior to the
MPH Orientation if possible.
The African American Male Initiative is supported by the Men of Vision and Excellence
(MOVE) Project which began in 2008, and strives to enhance the admission, retention and
progression of African American males via financial support and a strong mentoring.
Representatives from the MPH Program attend recruitment and informational sessions to present
information on the MPH Program and careers in public health.
Complete College Georgia is a system initiative to improve access for traditionally underserved
groups. Funding for student and staff positions are available through this initiative.
Armstrong also provides targeted informational materials both in print and online designed for
distinct populations such as Hispanic students, focusing specifically on programs and/or services
for which these specific populations may have an interest. The Hispanic Outreach and
Leadership at Armstrong (HOLA) program at Armstrong provides admissions and advisement
information in Spanish for non-native English speakers program
The Goizueta Initiative addresses the following issues: lack of financial aid for qualified
Hispanic/Latino students; low “accepted” to “admitted” enrollment yields of Hispanic/Latino
students; and low percentages of full-time enrollment of Hispanic/Latino students. Hispanic
Outreach programs are directed by Ms. Melody Rodriguez; this office provides guidance on an
array of topics, from information about financial aid processes for incoming students to academic
development and leadership opportunities. The Hispanic Outreach and Leadership at Armstrong
70
(HOLA), office exists to assist Hispanic students at Armstrong, from enrollment to graduation.
MPH faculty members collaborate with Ms. Rodriguez and have made presentations to the
HOLA Club as well as attending the CAMINO Program Training informing the students re
public health as a major, job opportunities and funding opportunities which attempts to increase
the percentage of Latino students matriculating through AASU.
For the past four years, the MPH Program in conjunction with the AASU College of Health
Professions has applied for a HRSA Grant for financially needy students from disadvantaged
background as has been funded for multiple years (see section 1.6.d). Up to $15,000 can be
awarded to MPH students who qualify.
The MPH faculty members are being trained to be certified as a Safe Space by the Gay-Straight
Alliance. Safe Space is a three-hour workshop to raise awareness and knowledge of LGBTQ
issues and suggest ways to serve as an ally to LGBTQ individuals. Following the workshop,
participants receive a Safe Space decal to display in their workspace, indicating to the campus
community that they are knowledgeable and supportive allies.
Safe Space Learning Outcomes:
 Recognize appropriate and inclusive language regarding sex, gender, and sexual
orientation.
 Identify challenges specific to LGBTQ students.
 Name federal, state, local, and Armstrong policies that concern the LGBTQ community.
 Identify biases around issues of sex, gender, and sexual orientation.
 Describe strategies to support LGBTQ students and to respond to anti-LGBTQ behavior.
 Identify resources for LGBTQ individuals on campus, in the community, and online.
In order to increase MPH enrollment, it is necessary to get unrepresented populations enrolled in
undergraduate programs. The MPH Program has joined a COHP initiative which will offer a
summer camp to attract high-achieving students from disadvantaged and minority backgrounds.
The camp, free of cost to students, is being funded by a grant from Wal-Mart, the Hodge
Foundation and from alumni donors. The camp will introduce high achieving students to career
options in the health professions.
MPH Students are introduced to the AASU Counseling Services at their orientation and are
encouraged to utilize resources regarding Substance Abuse, Eating Disorders, Smoking
Cessation, Sexual Aggression, Prevention, and important Mental Health information.
MPH Faculty can access the counseling center to obtain information on Identifying and
Referring the Distressed Student and the Georgia Crisis and Access Line. For Students,
Counseling Center Resources include: Life Esteem, Georgia Crisis and Access Line, Eating
Disorders, ADDA - National Attention Deficit Disorder Association, Psych web, Screening for
71
Mental Health, Inc., Outside the Classroom (alcohol info), Depression Screening, Georgia
Treatment Center, American Cancer Society, and Rape Crisis Center of the Coastal Empire.
1.8.a.ix. Regular evaluation of the effectiveness of the above-listed measures.
Per the Equal Opportunity Employment policy, mandatory periodic reviews by administrators
and faculty committees are conducted to ensure that the equal employment and equal opportunity
objectives of the institution are receiving adequate attention and emphasis. In the establishment
of recruitment pools, in the selection of candidates to be interviewed for a position, and in the
final offer of employment, each dean must follow guidelines designed to ensure that notice of the
availability of the position has reached as wide a range of qualified individuals as possible and
that the best qualified applicant is offered the position.
Armstrong Atlantic State University, Employee Handbook
http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/human_resources/human_resources_policies_procedures
HRSA Grants are reviewed twice a year internally and once a year externally. Internal review
takes place in the COHP Dean’s Office as well as the AASU Grants and Sponsored Research
Office.
MPH faculty members are reviewed annually and recommendations are made to counter any
deficits if any. There is also a faculty pre-tenure review and post-tenure review.
Each term, retention reports are required by the Dean of Health Professions in order to monitor
changes in program enrollment.
1.8.b. Evidence that shows that the plan or policies are being implemented. Examples may
include mission/goals/objectives that reference diversity or cultural competence, syllabi and
other course materials, lists of student experiences demonstrating diverse settings, records
and statistics on faculty, staff and student recruitment, admission and retention.
See criterion 1.8.a.ii.
The African American Male Initiative is supported by the Men of Vision and Excellence
(MOVE) project which began in 2012 and strives to enhance the admission, retention and
progression of African American males via financial support and a strong mentoring program.
Complete College Georgia is a system wide initiative to improve access for traditionally
underserved groups. The Goizueta Initiative addresses the following issues: lack of financial aid
for qualified Hispanic/Latino students; low “accepted” to “admitted” enrollment of
Hispanic/Latino students; and low percentages of full-time enrollment of Hispanic/Latino
students The MPH program adopted the goals of increasing the numbers of African American
72
and Hispanic/Latino students in the program. The MPH program has become an active
participant in these initiatives via presentations and mentoring sessions to undergraduate
participants in these programs.
The MPH Program in conjunction with the College of Health Professions submitted HRSA
grants that have been funded for several years. The HRSA grant for disadvantaged students of
2012 was awarded funds for disadvantaged MPH students for $240,000/year for the next four
years.
The MPH Program has been represented at the following minority recruitment events:
Megagenises is a program designed to promote a college-going culture by providing college and
career information to all students and parents. This event was last held at Johnson High School
February 2013.
The MPH Program was represented at the following recruitment fairs: Morehouse School of
Medicine, Georgia College and State University, University of Georgia, Georgia Southern
University, Hispanic Go Steam Fair in Atlanta, GA, Savannah State University. Information re
the Scholarships for Disadvantaged Students was made available to interested attendees.
According to Anna Walker, Assistant Director of the AASU Office of Admissions for
Recruitment, her office covers around 400 events a year across the state of Georgia as well as
some out of state recruitment events.
In 2010, the MPH Program added content to several courses in order to build competency in
diversity and cultural considerations. This course content is reflected in the course syllabi and is
reviewed/updated each year:
PUBH 6050 Health Communication
Topics covered in this course include (but are not limited to): The Meaning of Meaning; Embodied
Narratives of Health and Illness; Idioms of Distress: Cultural Meanings of Health and Illness; Marked
Communication; and Somatization and Nonverbal Communication.
Students read two main textbooks:

Kleinman, A. (1988). The illness narratives: Suffering, healing, and the human condition. New
York: Basic Books.
o

This book includes chapters and narratives about: Personal and Social Meanings of
Illness; Conflicting Explanatory Models; Neurasthenia: Weakness and Exhaustion; and
The Social Context of Chronicity.
Gladwell, M. (2005). Blink! The power of thinking without thinking. New York: Little, Brown
and Company.
73
In addition to the two required textbooks, students also purchase a supplemental reader. In this reader
packet are several articles that relate to cultural competence and/or diversity issues with regard to public
health, health, and disease. These include:

Bohannan, L. (1999). Shakespeare in the bush. In J. Spradley & D. W. McCurdy (Eds.),
Conformity and conflict: Readings in cultural anthropology (10th ed., pp. 35–44). Boston: Allyn
and Bacon.

Farmer, P. (1999). Infections and inequalities: The modern plagues. Berkeley: University of
California Press. (Students read Chapter 3, "Invisible Women," which focuses
on structural violence and the the lives of three women from Harlem, rural Haiti and India who
are living with HIV.)

Scrimshaw, S. C. M., Zambrana, R. E., & Dunkel-Schetter, C. (1997). Issues in Latino women’s
health: Myths and challenges. In S. B. Ruzek, V. L. Olesen, & A. E. Clarke (Eds.), Women’s
health: Complexities and differences (pp. 329–347). Columbus: Ohio State University Press.

Tannen, D. (1991, June 19). Teachers’ classroom strategies should recognize that men and
women use language differently. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 37(40), B1, B3.

Tannen, D. (1993, June 20). Marked women, unmarked men. The New York Times Magazine, 18,
52, 54.

Tannen, D. (1999). Conversation style: Talking on the job. In J. Spradley & D. W. McCurdy
(Eds.), Conformity and conflict: Readings in cultural anthropology (10th ed., pp. 70–78). Boston:
Allyn and Bacon.

Tannen, D. (2005, March 15). The feminine technique: Men attack problems. Maybe women
understand there’s a better way. The Los Angeles Times, p. 11.

Thomson, D. S. (1999). The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis: Words shaped by worlds. In J. Spradley &
D. W. McCurdy (Eds.), Conformity and conflict: Readings in cultural anthropology (10th ed., pp.
79–91). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
PUBH 6150 Theory in Health Education
Two textbooks are required in this course:

Health Behavior and Health Education, Glanz, Rimer, & Lewis (Eds.)

Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity, Erving Goffman (1963)
Whether the students use the 3rd or 4th edition of the Health Behavior and Health Education text, they
are provided with and required to read Chapter 21 from the 3rd edition, "Applying Theory to Culturally
Diverse and Unique Populations" (by Ken Resnicow, Ron Braithwaite, Colleen DiIorio, and Karen
Glanz).
74
PUBH 7600 Special Topics: Leadership and Ethics
Two of the four required textbooks in this course relate to understanding structural violence from both a
historical and current/future perspective within the United States and globally:

Three Generations, No Imbeciles: Eugenics, the Supreme Court, and Buck v. Bell, Paul
Lombardo (2010)

The Red Market: On the Trail of the World's Organ Brokers, Bone Thieves, Blood Farmers, and
Child Traffickers, Scott Carney (2011), which focuses on the exploitation of peoples and bodily
tissues throughout the world and particularly in India, Eastern Europe, and China.
In 2010, the MPH program in collaboration with the Public Administration Program at Savannah
State University competed for and was awarded a small grant which enabled faculty from both
institutions to offer a for credit course to students from both institutions on the Affordable Health
Care Act in Spring 2011. Twenty-eight students from Armstrong and Savannah State University
enrolled in and completed this course.
The MPH Advisory Committee membership was restructured to include more minority
members. Formerly, the MPH Advisory Committee had at most, 20% minority members. The
committee is now 50% minority.
Guest Lecturers Courses (standing guest lectures):





Cristina Gibson, “Tick-borne Disease Epidemiology-Zoonotic and Arthropod-Borne
Disease,” PUBH 7110 – Epidemiology, (Philippine)
Ken Sajwan, “Intro to Toxicology” PUBH 7150 - Environmental Health, (East Indian)
Elizabeth Desnoyers-Colas, “Communication Models” PUBH 6050 -Health Communications
(African American)
Maya Clark, PUBH 6050 -Health Communications “Models of Communication”, (African
American)
Seema Csukas, PUBH 7720 – ”Community Mobilization re Maternal Child Health”, Theory
in Health Education (Middle Eastern)
Invited Guest Speakers past three years (Special Occasions) who are minorities:
 Aretha Jones, Medical Homes for Underserved Populations. PUBH 7600 Special Topics
(African American)
 Robert Bush, Attorney, Affordable Health Care Act. PUBH 7600 Special Topics (Gay Male)
 Bouphone Chanthavong, MPH, Chatham County Mosquito Control. PUBH 6200 Methods of
Health Promotion (Laotian)
 Hilton Fordham, MPH, J.C. Lewis Center. PUBH 6200 Methods of Health Promotion
(African American)
 Cristina Gibson, MPH, Coastal Health District. PUBH 6200 Methods of Health Promotion
(Philippine)
75

Patricia Sharpe, MSN, MHSA, Memorial Health University Medical Center. PUBH 6200
Methods of Health Promotion (African American)
Regular practica site supervisors who are minorities:
 Miriam Urizar, Community Health Center of Savannah (Hispanic)
 Cristina Gibson, Chatham County HD (Philippine)
 Ella Williamson, African American Men’s Health Initiative, (African American)
 Tamala Fulton, Employee Wellness Coordinator, Chatham County (African American)
 Hilton Fordham, Human Resources, J.C. Lewis Center, (African American)
 Bouphone Chanthavong, Chatham County Mosquito Control (Laotian)
 Erika Tate, CEO and President, bluknowledge (African American)
Additionally, the AASU MPH program has a continuing agreement with Savannah State
University (SSU), — a historically Black college— that enables students from both institutions
to take elective courses interchangeably in the MPH program at AASU and the MPA program at
SSU.
The SSU courses that AASU has adopted into the MPH curriculum are:
PADM 6830 – History, Scope, and Practice of Public Administration
PADM 6833 – Management of Human Resources
PADM 6837 – Intergovernmental Relations
PADM 6838 – Introduction to Public Policy
PADM 6858 – Seminar in Cultural Diversity
AASU Graduate Catalog pp142-143;
http://www.armstrong.edu/images/academic_affairs/current_graduate_catalog.pdf
1.8.c. Description of how the diversity plan or policies were developed, including an
explanation of the constituent groups involved.
Faculty (from the MPH Program and Health Sciences Department), staff and students were
involved during the development of goals for promoting diversity. The MPH Program is bound
by University System of Georgia and Armstrong Atlantic policies. The stand-alone goals were
developed by MPH faculty complement with input from students and the MPH Advisory
Committee.
1.8.d. Description of how the plan or policies are monitored, how the plan is used by the
program and how often the plan is reviewed.
The policies and plans are monitored by the MPH faculty and the MPH advisory committee and
are reviewed on a yearly basis. Changes are made as necessary.
76
1.8.e. Identification of measurable objectives by which the program may evaluate its
success in achieving a diverse complement of faculty, staff and students, along with data
regarding the performance of the program against those measures for each of the last three
years. At a minimum, the program must include four objectives, at least two of which
relate to race/ethnicity. Measurable objectives must align with the program’s definition of
under-represented populations in Criterion 1.8.a.
As of
6/1/2013
Template 1.8.e. Summary Data for Faculty, Students and/or Staff
Category/Definition
Method of
Collection
Data Source
Target
2010
2011
2012
2013
Students – African
American
Self-Report
30%
31.7%
36%
36.9%
38.2%
Faculty – Diverse
Background
Self-Report
Admission
Form
(voluntary
self-report)
Self-Report
20%
15.4%
14.3%
23.5%
23.5%
Students –
Hispanic/Latino
Self-Report
5%
5%
4.9%
6.2%
7.7%
Students – First
Generation College
Self-Report
Admission
Form
(voluntary
self-report)
Admissions
Office
20%
n=12
(29%)
n=13
(26%)
N=16
(25%)
N=16
(30%)
Staff – From Diverse
Backgrounds
Self-Report
20%
29%
29%
29%*
42.9%
Self-Report
Note: The Hispanic population in Chatham County is currently ~6.8%; The African American population in
Chatham County is currently 40.2%. The current total Hispanic enrollment at Armstrong is 6.3%, graduate
enrollment is .1%. The current total African American enrollment at Armstrong is 23.3%, graduate enrollment is
2.2%.
*Note: a new HS staff member was hired April 2013, an African American female. The diversity of the staff
increased from 29% to 42.9%.
1.8.f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the
program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.
This criterion is met.
Strengths: The University System of Georgia, Armstrong Atlantic State University and College
of Health Professions have published plans and/or policies that promote diversity. The MPH
Program is bound by and upholds these plans and policies. The MPH program has formulated
additional plans, policies, and goals that promote diversity. The MPH Program has worked hard
77
to achieve and maintain a diverse student enrollment. MPH plans policies and goals promote
diversity. As of April 2013 the diversity of the staff will increase from 29% to 42.9%
Weaknesses: Diversity among faculty members has increased, but we have only met the stated
goal of 20% since 2012.
Future Plans: The MPH Program will continue its plans to increase diversity in students,
particularly Hispanic/Latino students. The Program will also continue its efforts to enhance the
diversity of its faculty.
78
2.0 Instructional Programs
2.1 Degree Offerings. The program shall offer instructional programs reflecting its stated
mission and goals, leading to the Master of Public Health (MPH) or equivalent professional
master’s degree. The program may offer a generalist MPH degree and/or an MPH with
areas of specialization. The program, depending on how it defines the unit of accreditation,
may offer other degrees, if consistent with its mission and resources.
2.1.a. An instructional matrix presenting all of the program’s degree programs and areas
of specialization, including bachelor’s, master’s and doctoral degrees, as appropriate. If
multiple areas of specialization are available, these should be included. The matrix should
distinguish between professional and academic degrees for all graduate degrees offered and
should identify any programs that are offered in distance learning or other formats. Nondegree programs, such as certificates or continuing education, should not be included in the
matrix.
Table 2.1.a. Instructional Matrix – Degrees & Specializations
Academic
Professional
Masters Degree
Community Health Education
MPH
2.1.b. The bulletin or other official publication, which describes all degree programs listed
in the instructional matrix, including a list of required courses and their course
descriptions. The bulletin or other official publication may be online, with appropriate
links noted.
The Armstrong Atlantic State University 2012-2013 Graduate Catalog vol 18, pp 65-66,
describes the MPH Program of Study. The course descriptions can be found on pp149-151. This
document can be found on-line:
http://www.armstrong.edu/images/academic_affairs/current_graduate_catalog.pdf
2.1.c. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the
program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.
This criterion is met.
Strengths: The MPH Program offers an instructional program reflecting its stated mission and
goals, leading to the Master of Public Health (MPH).
79
Weaknesses: None
Future Plans: The MPH Program will continue to offer a quality program that reflects its
mission and goals.
80
2.2 Program Length. An MPH degree program or equivalent professional master’s degree
must be at least 42 semester-credit units in length.
2.2.a. Definition of a credit with regard to classroom/contact hours.
AASU utilizes semester hours. One semester hour = 750 minutes of classroom instruction.
2.2.b. Information about the minimum degree requirements for all professional public
health master’s degree curricula shown in the instructional matrix. If the program or
university uses a unit of academic credit or an academic term different from the standard
semester or quarter, this difference should be explained and an equivalency presented in a
table or narrative.
Master of Public Health (MPH) – Community Health Education…………45 Semester Hours
The program requires 27 credit hours related to the five core areas of public health, 9 credit
hours of electives, 3 credit hours for the field experience (practicum), 3 hours for the capstone
project, and 3 hours for the Leadership/Ethics course.
2.2.c. Information about the number of professional public health master’s degrees
awarded for fewer than 42 semester credit units, or equivalent, over each of the last three
years. A summary of the reasons should be included.
N/A
2.2.d Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the
program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.
This criterion is met.
Strengths: The MPH Program is the appropriate length (i.e. credits).
Weaknesses: None
Future Plans: The MPH program will maintain a curriculum that meets CEPH criteria.
81
2.3
Public Health Core Knowledge. All graduate professional public health degree
students must complete sufficient coursework to attain depth and breadth in the five
core areas of public health knowledge.
The areas of knowledge basic to public health include the following:
Biostatistics – collection, storage, retrieval, analysis and interpretation of health
data; design and analysis of health-related surveys and experiments; and concepts
and practice of statistical data analysis;
Epidemiology – distributions and determinants of disease, disabilities and death in
human populations; the characteristics and dynamics of human populations; and
the natural history of disease and the biologic basis of health;
Environmental health sciences – environmental factors including biological,
physical and chemical factors that affect the health of a community;
Health services administration – planning, organization, administration,
management, evaluation and policy analysis of health and public health programs;
and
Social and behavioral sciences – concepts and methods of social and behavioral
sciences relevant to the identification and solution of public health problems.
2.3.a. Identification of the means by which the program assures that all graduate
professional public health degree students have fundamental competence in the
areas of knowledge basic to public health. If this means is common across the
program, it need be described only once. If it varies by degree or specialty area,
sufficient information must be provided to assess compliance by each.
All MPH students are required to take 15 credit hours specific to the 5 core areas of
knowledge basic to public health. The 5 courses are identified in Table 2.3.a. Syllabi for
these core courses (as well as for courses noted in Table 2.1.b) are available in the
Resource File.
Table 2.3.a. Required Courses Addressing Public Health Core Knowledge Areas for MPH Degree
Core Knowledge Area
Course Number & Title
Credits
Biostatistics
PUBH 6000 Biostatistics
3
Epidemiology
PUBH 6100 Epidemiology
3
Environmental Health Sciences
PUBH 6125 Environmental Health Issues
3
Social & Behavioral Sciences
PUBH 6150 Theory in Health Education
3
82
Table 2.3.a. Required Courses Addressing Public Health Core Knowledge Areas for MPH Degree
Health Services Administration
MHSA 6000 Health Care Financing and Delivery
Systems
3
2.3.b. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the
program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.
This criterion is met.
Strengths: The MPH program requires successful completion of courses in each of the
five core areas of public health knowledge.
Weaknesses: None
Future Plans: The MPH program will maintain the requirement for students to take 15
credit hours specific to the 5 core areas of knowledge basic to public health, per CEPH
criteria.
83
2.4
Practical Skills. All graduate professional public health degree students must
develop skills in basic public health concepts and demonstrate the application of
these concepts through a practice experience that is relevant to students’ areas of
specialization.
The required program of study for all MPH students assures that students will be exposed
to the concepts and knowledge needed in community health education. Because students
are required to maintain a 3.0 GPA throughout their program, they will have had to apply
themselves to their course of study. The practicum experience is an opportunity to apply
the classroom learning, validate it in a practical setting and communicate it verbally and
in written form. The comprehensive assessment is the ultimate opportunity for students
to apply and integrate information learned in the areas of public health and community
health education in a comprehensive manner within accepted parameters.
2.4.a. Description of the program’s policies and procedures regarding practice
placements.
The practicum is generally undertaken during one of the last two semesters prior to
graduation. Because of this, students have completed the majority of their coursework by
the time they reach their practicum. The purpose of the practicum experience is to give
students the opportunity to apply the knowledge and skills that they have gained during
their coursework.
Each MPH student must successfully complete a minimum of 150 hours of practicum as
part of the degree requirement. Prior to the semester the practicum is to be taken, the
student must select a practicum director from eligible faculty. Eligible faculty members
are those MPH faculty with full or associate graduate faculty status at AASU or, in some
cases, a faculty who has received permission to direct a practicum at the request of the
MPH Coordinator.
The practicum director and student will decide upon the frequency of collaboration
between the student and the practicum director.
Students are expected to spend a minimum of ten hours a week "on site” if appropriate.
All practica may not fit this format. If there is any question about time requirements for a
practicum, they are addressed with the practicum director. Upon written approval of the
practicum, the practicum director will signal the acceptance of the practicum as
conforming to the appropriate format, content mastery, and standards set by the MPH
program.
If human subjects are involved in the practicum and approval is needed to achieve the
objectives of the practicum, the student must submit a request for Internal Review Board
(IRB) approval. The IRB, a federally mandated board that monitors the use of human
84
and animal subjects in research, meets monthly. Protocols requiring full board review are
due by noon ten working days before the IRB meeting each month.

Selection of sites
Students are encouraged to select a practicum site, which will allow them to gain
experience and apply knowledge in an area of public health, which is of special
interest to them. Once a site is chosen by the student, he or she meets with the
practicum faculty supervisor to determine eligibility of the site and to discuss
potential objectives for the practicum. These objectives are more fully developed
with the practicum site supervisor and submitted to the practicum Advisor for
approval. Students may complete their practicum at their place of employment
with the understanding that the practicum activities are not part of the student’s
current job description and with the approval of the practicum faculty supervisor.
It is up to the practicum site if the student will receive payment for practicum
hours spent on site.

Methods for approving preceptors
The site supervisor may be selected by the student or the practicum faculty supervisor
(with approval of the practicum site administration). The site supervisor must be
approved by the MPH coordinator with input from the practicum faculty supervisor
prior to the start of the practicum. In addition, the site must have a current MOU with
the program. These MOUs are maintained in the College of Health Professions
Dean’s Office for all programs in the College. The site supervisor of the practicum
committee has the responsibility to:
o determine that the practicum objectives are feasible
o inform the student of institutional policies and procedures as they relate to the
use of human and animal subjects for research proposes
o contact the faculty director if any concerns regarding the student’s
performance should arise
o develop the work site schedule
o assist in the evaluation of the student’s performance

Opportunities for orientation and support for preceptors
New preceptors are provided with orientation materials via excerpts from the MPH
Handabook/Practicum Guidelines (see Resource File). The preceptor will sign and
receive a copy of the MPH Practicum Responsibilities Form. He/she will assist the
student in completing the Practicum Site and Supervisor Information Form,
Practicum Objectives and Work Schedule Form, and Ethical Guidelines Contract. In
addition, each faculty advisor is available on an ongoing basis to meet with the
preceptor via direct and electronic telecommunication.
85

Approaches for faculty supervision of students
The MPH Student chooses his/her faculty supervisor for the practicum. The
frequency of meetings between the faculty director and the student is determined on
an individual basis. The site supervisor undertakes the daily supervision of the
student. Regular meetings between the faculty advisor and the student keep the
faculty apprised of the progress of the practicum.

Means of evaluating student performance
The practicum is presented in a written format as well as an oral format. The
requirements for the written format are similar to those of a thesis. The MPH
Practicum Guidelines (see Resource File) provides a detailed set of practica criteria
for the student. The practicum director should be consulted for any deviation from
this format.
Students are evaluated based on their achievement of practicum objectives, written
(written objectives are evaluated by the faculty practicum supervisor)and oral
presentation (the oral presentation is evaluated by MPH faculty), site supervisor
evaluations (accomplished by the site supervisor at the conclusion of the practicum),
and ability to address issues related to their practicum at the conclusion of the oral
presentation. Evaluation rubrics are included in the MH Practicum Guidelines. (see
Resource File).

Means of evaluating practice placement sites and preceptor qualifications
MPH students can choose a practicum site and site supervisor from an existing approved
list of practicum sites/site supervisors or a new site/supervisor can be recommended by
the student or an MPH faculty member. When a new site is recommended, the MPH
Coordinator contacts the site and discusses MPH practicum requirements with the
nominated site supervisor or site administrator. If the site/site supervisor is deemed
acceptable and is willing to mentor MPH practicum students, the MPH Coordinator
submits a request for an MOU to the office of the Dean of Health professions. When the
formal MOU has been completed, it is added to the list of current MOUs for clinical and
practicum sites and maintained in the office of the Dean of Health Professions. To further
evaluate the sites/site supervisors, each MPH Practicum student is required to complete
an assessment of the practicum site and site supervisor at the conclusion of the practicum.
Student concerns re the site/site supervisor are monitored by the MPH Coordinator.
Minor concerns are addressed between the site and the MPH Coordinator. If a pattern of
significant student concerns develops, it can lead to a site/site supervisor being eliminated
as an acceptable practicum site.
86

Criteria for waiving, altering or reducing the experience, if applicable.
Because the practicum is such an integral experience in the MPH program, waivers
are not given for this experience. All students must successfully complete the
practicum in order to graduate.
2.4.b. Identification of agencies and preceptors used for practice experiences for
students, by specialty area, for the last two academic years.
The following sites are approved for practice experiences for MPH students, per
MOU agreement. Refer to Reference File for additional details regarding the
sites.
ACCESS Network Inc.
Anytime Fitness
Appling Health Care System
Baptist Medical Centers
Bay Pines
bluknowledge LLC
Bryan County Health & Rehabilitation
Candler County Hospital
Chatham County Health Department
Chatham County Board of Public Education
Chatham County Government
Chatham County Mosquito Control
Childspring International
Coastal Health District (includes 8 county
health departments)
Community Health Mission
D-1 Sports Training & Therapy
Duval County Health Department
Effingham Hospital
Phoebe Putney Memorial Hospital
Piedmont Healthcare
Planned Parenthood of GA
Rape Crisis Center
Recovery Place
Ron Alt – Master Addiction Counselor
Savannah Commons
Savannah Rehab & Nursing Center
Savannah Specialty Care Center
Fort Stewart-4IBCT Fitness Center
Gateway Behavioral Health Services
Georgia Health Sciences Health System
Girls on the Run
Grady Memorial Hospital
HealthSouth Corporation
Hodge Memorial Daycare Center
Hospice Savannah
Innovative Therapy Concepts LLC
JC Lewis Healthcare System
Ledesma Sports Medicine
Liberty Regional Medical Center
Medical University Hospital Authority
Memorial University Medical Center
Medical University of SC
Naval Hospital Beaufort SC
Northeast Georgia Health System
Oconee Regional Medical Center
Optim Healthcare
Savannah Volunteer Dental Clinic
Shepherd Center
SouthCoast Medical Group
Southeast Georgia Health System
Southern Regional Medical Center
St. Joseph’s/Candler Health System
St. Mary’s Health Care System
Strategic Healthcare Partners
United Hospice of Savannah
2.4.c. Data on the number of students receiving a waiver of the practice experience
for each of the last three years.
This criterion is not applicable (refer to Criterion 2.4).
2.4.d. Data on the number of preventive medicine, occupational medicine,
aerospace medicine and general preventive medicine and public health residents
87
completing the academic program for each of the last three years, along with
information on their practicum rotations.
This criterion is not applicable.
2.4.e. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the
program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.
This criterion is met.
Strengths: The required program of study for all MPH students assures that they will be
exposed to the concepts and knowledge needed in community health education. The
practicum experience is an opportunity to apply the classroom learning, validate it in a
practical setting and communicate it verbally and in written form. Practicum sites
identified in table 2.4.b. with which the university has formal agreements, are diverse and
offer the students excellent opportunities to apply public health concepts. The program
has excellent relationships with site supervisors who serve as mentors for the students.
The comprehensive assessment is the ultimate opportunity for students to apply and
integrate information learned in the areas of public health and community health
education in a comprehensive manner within accepted parameters. The MPH Alumni
survey results report that for the Years 2010-2012 100% of the responders rated the value
of the practicum experience as good or excellent.
Weaknesses: None.
Future Plans: The MPH program will continue to assess the effectiveness of the
practicum experience via feedback collected during each student’s experience, including
the student’s Self Evaluation, the Supervisor Evaluation of the Practicum Student, the
MPH Practicum Student Evaluation of the Site and the MPH Student Exit Questionnaire
(refer to Resource File). Results will be used to further strengthen the practicum
experience and the overall program of study as needed.
88
2.5
Culminating Experience. All graduate professional degree programs identified in
the instructional matrix shall assure that each student demonstrates skills and integration
of knowledge through a culminating experience.
2.5.a. Identification of the culminating experience required for each professional
public health degree program. If this is common across the program’s professional
degree programs, it must be described only once. If it varies by degree or specialty
area, sufficient information must be provided to assess compliance by each.
All MPH students must successfully pass 5 pre-requisite core courses, including MHSA
6000 Finance/Delivery, PUBH 6000 /Biostatistics, PUBH 6100 Epidemiology, PUBH
6150 Theory in Health Education, and PUBH 6175 Research Methods, prior to enrolling
in the program’s capstone course, PUBH 7500 Public Health Planning and Evaluation.
As new students begin the MPH program each semester, they are advised at orientation to
prioritize the 5 pre-requisite courses early in their program of study in order to be
prepared to take PUBH 7500 during their last or next to last semester prior to graduation.
Faculty advisors work with their advisees on an ongoing basis to oversee appropriate
course sequencing in order to prevent delays in graduation due to not having completed
the pre-requisites in a timely manner. Refer to the New MPH Handbook (in Resource
File) for recommended course sequencing schedule.
All MPH students are required to successfully PUBH 7500 Public Health Planning and
Evaluation. This course requires the student to apply public health concepts from all
previous core courses as they plan and evaluate a public health program, including needs
assessment, behavioral and educational assessment, administrative assessment, writing of
measurable and realistic objectives, and process, impact and evaluation methods.
The primary course project is the development of a health promotion program proposal
using the PRECEDE/PROCEED planning model as a guide. The project facilitates the
learning of PRECEDE/PROCEED as a health promotion and education planning model,
learning and applying the process of public health program proposal development,
development of grant writing skills, and the opportunity to present the final plan, with
peer review. The final proposal functions as a comprehensive capstone assessment for
the MPH degree because it requires the application of a full complement of core public
health core competencies and skills. The final proposal (paper) is evaluated by the course
instructor, utilizing a grading rubric (refer to Resource File). The final proposal
presentation is evaluated by both the course instructor and peer review from all students
in the class, utilizing a grading rubric (refer to Resource File).
Refer to Table 2.5.a in Resource File for larger version of the schematic illustration
planning model below.
89
Table 2.5.a. Application of core public health concepts for capstone project
Note: Courses in yellow font are pre-reqs for PUBH 7500; remaining courses in white
font are required for MPH program of study but are not pre-reqs for PUBH 7500. A
more readable version of this schematic is in the Resource File.
2.5.b. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the
program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.
This criterion is met with commentary.
Strengths: The capstone project enables students to demonstrate skills and integrate core
public health knowledge from all previous MPH core courses as they plan, evaluate, and
present a public health program that includes a needs assessment, behavioral and
educational assessment, administrative assessment, measurable and realistic objectives,
and process, impact and evaluation methods.
Weaknesses: Historically the capstone project has been assessed by the course
instructor, with peer review contributions for presentation of the final plan. Other MPH
faculty members have not had the opportunity to participate in the evaluation process.
90
Future Plans: The MPH program of study will continue to utilize PUBH 7500 as the
capstone project. Beginning in Fall 2013, all MPH faculty will be included in the
evaluation of each student’s final plan by attending the presentation session and
completing a grading rubric (refer to Reference File) that will be utilized in final grade
calculation for the project. This will foster a more robust assessment of the capstone
project.
91
2.6
Required Competencies. For each degree program and area of specialization within
each program identified in the instructional matrix, there shall be clearly stated
competencies that guide the development of degree programs. The program must
identify competencies for graduate professional, academic and baccalaureate public
health degree programs. Additionally, the program must identify competencies for
specializations within the degree programs at all levels (bachelor’s, master’s and
doctoral).
2.6.a. Identification of a set of competencies that all graduate professional public
health degree students and baccalaureate public health degree students, regardless
of concentration, major or specialty area, must attain. There should be one set for
each graduate professional public health degree and baccalaureate public health
degree offered by the program (eg, one set each for BSPH, MPH and DrPH).
The MPH degree program requires a set of basic core public health competencies that all
students must achieve upon successful completion of all MPH core courses. The basic
core competencies are based on competencies prescribed by the Competency-Based
Framework for Health Educators (2006), Association of Schools of Public Health, and
the Council on Linkages between Academia and Public Health Practice (2010). Students
demonstrate their competence in the five areas basic to public health through passing the
five core courses. The core competencies are further strengthened through additional
required courses and successful completion of the practicum field experience and
capstone project. The MPH program core competencies are as follows:
Biostatistics
Identify and apply appropriate statistical methods to analyze and describe a public health
problem.
Environmental Health
Understand the relationship between environmental factors and community health;
discuss remediation for environmental health problems.
Epidemiology
Use epidemiologic methods to analyze patterns of disease and injury; discuss application
to address problems.
Health Services Administration
Demonstrate the ability to apply principles of leadership, policy development, budgeting,
and program management in the planning, implementation, and evaluation of health
programs for individuals and populations.
92
Social and Behavioral Sciences
Address behavioral, social, and cultural factors that impact individual and population
health and health disparities over the life span.
2.6.b. Identification of a set of competencies for each concentration, major or
specialization (depending on the terminology used by the program) identified in the
instructional matrix, including professional and academic graduate degree curricula
and baccalaureate public health degree curricula.
The Armstrong MPH program has only one track of concentration in Community Health
Promotion. There are no other concentrations, majors or areas of specialization. All
MPH students are required to complete the same program of study. In addition to the
basic core competencies identified in Section 2.6.a, the MPH program has established
other public health-related competencies required of all students prior to graduating.
These additional competencies are based on competencies prescribed by the
Competency-Based Framework for Health Educators (2006), Association of Schools of
Public Health, and the Council on Linkages between Academia and Public Health
Practice (2010). Students demonstrate their competence in these additional competencies
through successful completion of all MPH core and required courses. Competence is
further strengthened through successful completion of the practicum field experience and
capstone project. The additional program competencies are as follows:
Communication
Convey public health information using a variety of approaches.
Analytic/Assessment
Identify and utilize public health data to assess health status of populations.
Administration and Management
Describe organizational structures, functions, and authorities of local, state, and federal
public health agencies.
Community Culture and Diversity
Recognize the role of cultural, social, and behavioral factors in the accessibility,
availability, acceptability, and delivery of public health services.
Basic Public Health Sciences Skills
Describe scientific evidence related to a public health issue, concern, or intervention.
93
Policy Development and Program Planning
Gather information that will inform policy decisions, and describe implications of policy
options.
Leadership and Ethics
Participate with stakeholders in identifying key public health values and a shared public
health vision as guiding principles for community action.
2.6.c. A matrix that identifies the learning experiences (e.g,. specific course or
activity within a course, practicum, culminating experience or other degree
requirement) by which the competencies defined in Criteria 2.6.a and 2.6.b are met.
If these are common across the program, a single matrix for each degree will suffice.
If they vary, sufficient information must be provided to assess compliance by each
degree or specialty area. See CEPH Data Template 2.6.1.
R
R
R
R
P
R
P
R
P
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
P
R
PUBH 7675
PUBH 6200
R
PUBH 7600
PUBH 6175
R
PUBH 7500
PUBH 6150
R
PUBH 7250
PUBH 6125
P
PUBH 6050
PUBH 6100
Biostatistics
Identify and apply appropriate statistical
methods to analyze and describe a public
health problem.
Environmental Health
Understand the relationship between
environmental factors and community health;
discuss remediation for environmental health
problems.
Epidemiology
Use epidemiologic methods to analyze
patterns of disease and injury; discuss
application to address problems.
Health Services Administration
Demonstrate the ability to apply principles of
leadership, policy development, budgeting,
and program management in the planning,
implementation, and evaluation of health
programs for individuals and populations.
Social and Behavioral Sciences
Address behavioral, social, and cultural
factors that impact individual and population
health and health disparities over the life span.
P=Primary, R=Reinforcing
PUBH 6000
Core Competency
MHSA 6000
Table 2.6.c.i. Identification of Learning Experiences by which Core Competencies are met (Core
courses in bold font; Course titles noted at bottom of table)
R
R
R
R
94
MHSA 6000 Finance/Delivery
PUBH 6000 Biostatistics
PUBH 6050 Health Communication
PUBH 6100 Epidemiology
PUBH 6125 Environmental Health Issues
PUBH6150 Theory in Health Education
PUBH 6175 Research Methods
PUBH 6200 Methods of Health Promotion
PUBH 7250 Health/Illness Continuum
PUBH 7500 Public Health Planning & Evaluation (capstone)
PUBH 7600 Special Topics: Leadership & Ethics
PUBH 7675 Public Health Practicum
MHSA 6000 Finance/Delivery
PUBH 6000 Biostatistics
PUBH 6050 Health Communication
PUBH 6100 Epidemiology
PUBH 6125 Environmental Health Issues
PUBH6150 Theory in Health Education
PUBH 6175
PUBH 6200
R
R
R
R
P
R
R
R
R
R
R
P
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
P
R
R
R
R
R
R
P
R
R
R
PUBH 7675
PUBH 6150
R
PUBH 7600
PUBH 6125
P
PUBH 7500
PUBH 6100
R
PUBH 7250
PUBH 6050
Communication
Convey public health information using a
variety of approaches.
Analytic/Assessment
Identify and utilize public health data to assess
health status of populations.
Administration and Management
Describe organizational structures, functions,
and authorities of local, state, and federal
public health agencies.
Community Culture and Diversity
Recognize the role of cultural, social, and
behavioral factors in the accessibility,
availability, acceptability, and delivery of
public health services.
Basic Public Health Sciences Skills
Describe scientific evidence related to a public
health issue, concern, or intervention.
Policy Development and Program Planning
Gather information that will inform policy
decisions, and describe implications of policy
options.
Leadership and Ethics
Participate with stakeholders in identifying
key public health values and a shared public
health vision as guiding principles for
community action.
P=Primary, R=Reinforcing
PUBH 6000
Additional Competency
MHSA 6000
Table 2.6.c.ii. Identification of Learning Experiences by which Additional Competencies are met
(Core courses in bold font; Course titles noted at bottom of table)
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
P
R
R
R
P
R
R
PUBH 6175 Research Methods
PUBH 6200 Methods of Health Promotion
PUBH 7250 Health/Illness Continuum
PUBH 7500 Public Health Planning & Evaluation (capstone)
PUBH 7600 Special Topics: Leadership & Ethics
PUBH 7675 Public Health Practicum
95
2.6.d. Analysis of the completed matrix included in Criterion 2.6.c. If changes have
been made in the curricula as a result of the observations and analysis, such changes
should be described.
The completed matrices included in Criterion 2.6.c demonstrate a comprehensive
approach to incorporate all basic core and additional competencies into the MPH program
of study. Recent curricula changes have included the addition of PUBH 7600 Special
Topics in Public Health Leadership and Ethics and PUBH 7250 Health/Illness
Continuum to broaden curriculum content. These two new required courses replaced
PUBH 8861 Public Health Management and a second Practicum course.
2.6.e. Description of the manner in which competencies are developed, used and
made available to students.
In 2010 MPH Faculty had their initial meeting to review and upgrade competencies. The
Armstrong MPH competencies are based on competencies prescribed by the
Competency-Based Framework for Health Educators (2006), Association of Schools of
Public Health, and the Council on Linkages between Academia and Public Health
Practice (2010). They are interwoven into the framework of MPH core courses that all
students are required to complete. MPH faculty members, primary and other faculty
reviewed competencies from the above mentioned organizations. Competencies were
matched to the course(s) in the MPH Program of Study. The MPH Advisory Committee
(with MPH student representation) reviewed the competencies and provided feedback to
the MPH faculty. A second round of meetings took place where the faculty prioritized the
competencies for each course and deleted competencies that were redundant or received
low priority. In 2012 and 2013 the competencies and the MPH Program of Study were
again reviewed as a function of the CEPH Self-Study. As a result, the competencies were
again prioritized and matched with the MPH courses, then sent to the MPH Advisory
Committee for feedback. The competencies were refined to the version seen in this selfstudy.
Students may access information pertaining to the competencies via the MPH Student
Handbook, MPH program webpage, and course syllabi (see Resource File).
2.6.f. Description of the manner in which the program periodically assesses
changing practice or research needs and uses this information to establish the
competencies for its educational programs.
A formal review occurs on a two-year cycle, with input from sources including but not
limited to student course evaluations, student exit interviews, practicum site supervisor
evaluations, MPH faculty input, and suggestions by the MPH Advisory Committee. In
addition to these sources, a variety of national sources are used to assess the changing
96
needs of public health practice: Council on Linkages Objectives and Strategies and Core
Competencies for Public Health Professionals, American Schools of Public Health.
As mentioned earlier in 2.6.d, recent curricula changes have included the replacement of
two courses, PUBH 8861 Public Health Management and a second Practicum course,
with the addition of PUBH 7600 Special Topics in Public Health Leadership and Ethics
and PUBH 7250 Health/Illness Continuum to broaden curriculum content, based upon
feedback obtained from the above-mentioned sources. In addition, starting Fall Semester
2013, the practicum experience (PUBH 7675) will increase the minimum number of site
contact hours from 150 to 225 to expand the field learning experience for students and
will utilize a revised scoring rubric for the presentation requirement (refer to MPH
Student Handbook in Resource File for details).
During the summer of 2013, the Council on Linkages began soliciting input from the
public health community on the Core Competencies for Public Health Professionals to
determine whether revisions are needed to keep pace with changes in the field of public
health. The MPH program coordinator and faculty are following this initiative, and will
assess any recommended changes as appropriate for the program in the future, with input
from MPH faculty, students, and the MPH Advisory Committee.
2.6.g. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the
program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.
This criterion is met.
Strengths: The Armstrong MPH program has a clear set of five basic core and seven
additional competencies that are interwoven throughout the twelve required courses,
providing a fundamental and comprehensive framework that is grounded in public health
skills and knowledge. The course content and the learning objectives ensure that students
have a strong foundation in Public Health with an emphasis in Community Health
Education. The competencies are consistent with the mission and goals of the MPH
Program. Additionally, there is strong agreement between the emphasis areas of CEPH
and the MPH program at AASU. The faculty members are committed to on-going
excellence in the MPH program and instituting changes as needed.
Weaknesses: None
Future Plans: The MPH program will continue to monitor changing practice and
research needs per input from key stakeholders, including faculty, students, and alumni.
Feedback will be utilized to further strengthen and enhance program quality.
97
2.7
Assessment Procedures. There shall be procedures for assessing and documenting
the extent to which each student has demonstrated achievement of the competencies
defined for his or her degree program and area of concentration.
2.7.a. Identification of a set of competencies that all graduate professional public
health degree students and baccalaureate public health degree students, regardless
of concentration, major or specialty area, must attain. There should be one set for
each graduate professional public health degree and baccalaureate public health
degree offered by the program (eg, one set each for BSPH, MPH and DrPH).
Note: Refer to Addendum A on page 171.
2.7.b. Identification of outcomes that serve as measures by which the program will
evaluate student achievement in each program, and presentation of data assessing
the program’s performance against those measures for each of the last three years.
Outcome measures must include degree completion and job placement rates for all
degrees included in the unit of accreditation (including bachelor’s, master’s and
doctoral degrees) for each of the last three years.
The successful completion of the core courses in the MPH program at a level of, at least,
3.0/4.0 cumulative grade point average assures that the student has been exposed to all
criteria addressed in the learning objectives. Also, students must successfully complete a
practicum experience and report.
The practicum course, PUBH 7675, is required courses for all MPH students. This
course gives students the opportunity to synthesize and apply their learning experiences.
During this experience students are able to practice a number of skills that may include
information search and retrieval, data collection, application of research methodologies
and data analysis, and the ability to determine results and discuss them comprehensively.
This opportunity allows for a thorough evaluation of the competency of each student.
If degree completion rates in the maximum time period allowed for degree
completion are less than the thresholds defined in this criterion’s interpretive
language, an explanation must be provided. If job placement (including pursuit of
additional education), within 12 months following award of the degree, includes
fewer than 80% of graduates at any level who can be located, an explanation must
be provided.
The normal time period for degree completion is seven years. There have been 88
graduates of this MPH program since 2006, and nearly 100 percent of all MPH students
have completed the degree in seven years or less. Degree completion rates are
satisfactory . See Table 2.7.1 for degree completion rate. Degree completion rates for
2006-2007 are lower as this was the year we announced that the on-line program would
98
be discontinued in 2010. A significant number of students dropped out of the program as
they felt they could not complete it or transferred to another program.
Table 2.7.1 Degree completion
Table 2.7.1. Students in MPH Degree, By Cohorts Entering Between 2006-07 and 2012-13
Cohort of Students
2006-07
# Students entered
# Students withdrew, dropped, etc.
# Students graduated
Cumulative graduation rate
2007-08
# Students continuing at beginning of
this school year
# Students withdrew, dropped, etc.
# Students graduated
Cumulative graduation rate
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
201213*
# Students continuing at beginning of
this school year
# Students withdrew, dropped, etc.
# Students graduated
Cumulative graduation rate
# Students continuing at beginning of
this school year
# Students withdrew, dropped, etc.
# Students graduated
Cumulative graduation rate
# Students continuing at beginning of
this school year
# Students withdrew, dropped, etc.
# Students graduated
Cumulative graduation rate
# Students continuing at beginning of
this school year
# Students withdrew, dropped, etc.
# Students graduated
Cumulative graduation rate
# Students continuing at beginning of
this school year
# Students withdrew, dropped, etc.
# Students graduated
Cumulative graduation rate
200607
200708
200809
200910
201011
201112
201213*
27
4
0
0.0%
23
36
8
1
3.7%
2
0
0.0%
14
34
20
2
5
22.2%
1
10
27.8%
3
0
0.0%
7
23
17
6
0
3
33.3%
3
16
72.2%
1
6
30.0%
1
0
0.0%
4
4
10
15
23
0
1
37.0%
0
1
75.0%
1
5
55.0%
3
5
31.3%
0
0
0.0%
3
3
4
7
23
32
0
0
37.0%
0
1
77.8%
0
3
70.0%
0
5
62.5%
1
8
34.8%
2
0
0.0%
3
2
1
2
14
30
12
0
3*
48.1%
0
2*
83.3%
0
0*
70.0%
0
2*
75.0%
0
11*
82.6%
1
0
0.0%
0
0
0.0%
Table is based on an allowable time to graduation of seven years; add or delete rows and columns as appropriate.
Student cohorts should be tracked vertically down each column. *Anticipated graduation Spring 2013.
99
Table 2.7.2 Graduates’ Employment
Table 2.7.2.a. Destination of Graduates by Employment Type in 2010 (n=25)
Gov’t
NonProfit
Health
Care
Private
Practice
University
Research
Proprietary
Further
Education
9 (47%)
2 (10%)
1 (<1%)
1 (<1%)
3 (15%)
0 (0%)
1 (<1%)
NonHealth
Related
2 (10%)
Not
Employed
6 (31%)
Table 2.7.2.b Destination of Graduates by Employment Type in 2011 (n=28)
Employed
50%
Continuing education/training (not employed)
10%**
Actively seeking employment/further education
10%**
Not seeking employment (not employed and not continuing education/training, by choice)
3%
Unknown
25%
Total
100%
**Results were obtained via the MPH Alumni Survey for MPH students who graduated in the
2010-2011 academic year.
Table 2.7.2.c Destination of Graduates by Employment Type in 2012 (n=18)
Employed
61%
Continuing education/training (not employed)
17%**
Actively seeking employment/further education
11%**
Not seeking employment (not employed and not continuing education/training, by choice)
0%
Unknown
11%
Total
100%
**Results were obtained via the MPH Alumni Survey for MPH students who graduated in the
2011-2012 academic year. Of the students responding to the alumni survey, 11% (n=2) were
actively seeking employment. Seventeen percent (n=3) are continuing their education pursuing
the doctoral degree. The alumni survey for graduates 2013 will be distributed in early 2014.
2.7.c. An explanation of the methods used to collect job placement data and of
graduates’ response rates to these data collection efforts. The program must list the
number of graduates from each degree program and the number of respondents to
the graduate survey or other means of collecting employment data.
100
Job placement data was collected via electronic survey administered once per year in
January for the previous year (i.e., included May, August, and December graduates for
the previous year).
2.7.d. In fields for which there is certification of professional competence and data
are available from the certifying agency, data on the performance of the program’s
graduates on these national examinations for each of the last three years.
MPH students are encouraged to take certification exams such as CHES and CPH;
however, since this is not a program requirement, data is not collected on this indicator.
2.7.e. Data and analysis regarding the ability of the program’s graduates to
perform competencies in an employment setting, including information from
periodic assessments of alumni, employers and other relevant stakeholders.
Methods for such assessment may include key informant interviews, surveys, focus
groups and documented discussions.
On the Alumni Survey, students are asked for permission to contact their supervisors.
This has not been effective due to the low return rate on the alumni surveys and the
employer surveys. Therefore, additional methodologies have been put in place to obtain
feedback to assess our graduates’ ability to perform competencies in an employment
setting. The MPH advisory committee members are often employers of our MPH
graduates. They give input at meetings as well as on practicum site supervisor
evaluations. All MPH practicum site supervisors complete an evaluation of the student’s
performance on site.
2.7.f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the
program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.
This criterion is met with commentary.
Strengths: All MPH graduates must successfully complete the core courses in the MPH
program with at least a 3.0 GPA, assuring exposure to all criteria addressed in the
learning objectives. In addition, all graduates must successfully complete a practicum
experience and a capstone project, demonstrating competency in the learning objectives.
Weaknesses: The commentary pertains primarily to the low response for the alumni
survey. Due to the low response rate, responses may not be reflective of all MPH
graduates. Assessment of graduates’ performance and ability to perform competencies
after graduation is more difficult to measure. In an effort to increase the return rate the
alumni survey was converted to an electronic format which is delivered to the alumnus
via email. Still, the electronic survey process does not yield a high response from
graduates, so responses may not be representative for all graduates.
101
Future plans: The MPH program will continue to assess student achievement utilizing
established performance outcomes. A more aggressive follow-up (as possible) for alumni
surveys may boost response rates, yielding representative feedback from the graduates as
well as for the employers of the graduates.
102
2.8. Bachelor’s Degrees in Public Health.
N/A
2.9 Academic Degrees. If the program also offers curricula for graduate academic degrees,
students pursuing them shall obtain a broad introduction to public health, as well as an
understanding about how their discipline-based specialization contributes to achieving the
goals of public health.
N/A
2.10 Doctoral Degrees. The Program may offer doctoral degree programs, if consistent
with its mission and resources.
N/A
2.11 Joint Degrees. If the program offers join degree programs, the required curriculum
for the professional public health degree shall be equivalent to that required for a separate
public health degree.
N/A
2.12. Distance Education of Executive Degree programs.
N/A
103
3.0
Creation, Application and Advancement of Knowledge
3.1
Research: The program shall pursue an active research program, consistent with its
mission, though which its faculty and students contribute to the knowledge base of the
public health disciplines, including research directed at improving the practice of public
health.
3.1.a. Description of the program’s research activities, including policies, procedures and
practices that support research and scholarly activities.
Research activities in the MPH program are undertaken by the department’s faculty and students
with support from the university administration. Faculty members are expected to conduct
research in their respective public health fields, and students must show a mastery of research
abilities in order to complete the MPH program. Faculty research effectiveness is not equated
with amassing dollar amounts, journal articles, or presentations; rather, success is measured by
the faculty member’s participation in scholarly activities that help the MPH program meet its
research goals and that contribute to the program’s positive impact upon our service area.
For faculty and students, the institutional approval process is a necessary step that must be taken
before applying for research funding (AASU Faculty Handbook,
http://www.armstrong.edu/images/academic_affairs/Faculty_Handbook.pdf Resource File).
Completion of a two-page form entitled “Approval to Submit Proposal for External Funding” is
required by the university (see Contracts Manual, Resource File,
http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/grants/grants_contracts_manual). All faculty and
students also are required to complete the National Institutes of Health’s online “Protecting
Human Research Participants” training module prior to conducting a research project.
As explained above, faculty members in the MPH program have access to specific funds
dedicated to faculty teaching and research through the AASU Faculty Development Committee,
in conjunction with the AASU Research and Scholarship Committee, which awards AASU
faculty grants for teaching, research, and scholarship projects. These awards generally range up
to $2,500. Even though AASU provides these small grants for scholarly endeavors,
departmental travel budgets and operational budgets have been significantly cut in the past four
years. On a positive note, the Grants Office does regularly send information on grant
opportunities in public health to MPH faculty and MPH faculty members get some support from
the COHP Dean, who can provide some course relief for faculty who have received a grant.
The Master of Public Health degree at Armstrong specializes in Community Health Education.
Its mission of the MPH program at Armstrong Atlantic State University is to support and
enhance public health for the Georgia Coastal Region through workforce development, research,
and community service. This is consistent with the proposed mission of the College of Health
Professions (to improve the health and wellness of our culturally diverse communities by
educating team-oriented, evidence-focused, and compassionate health care professionals) as well
104
as Armstrong’s mission as stated in the AASU Strategic Plan (to be teaching-centered and
student-focused, providing diverse learning experiences and professional programs grounded in
the liberal arts). Moreover, the mission of the MPH program is congruent with AASU Strategic
Goals; Armstrong will impart the skills and habits of mind to motivated students that help them
realize their potential as productive citizens of the world and Armstrong will build upon and
strengthen its foundational commitment to teaching, ensuring that transformative student
learning occurs inside and outside the classroom.
The following systems presently are in place to facilitate research in the MPH program:
For faculty and students, the Institutional Approval process is a necessary step that must be taken
before applying for research funding. Completion of a two-page form entitled "Approval to
Submit Proposal for External Funding" is required by the university (Contracts Manual- see
Resource File http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/grants/grants_contracts_manual).
Persons conducting research involving human subjects in the MPH program have an ethical as
well as professional obligation to ensure the safety, protection and rights of participants. It is the
intent of Armstrong Atlantic State University through the IRB to assist those engaged in human
subject research to conduct their research along ethical guidelines reflecting professional and
community standards.
All research in the MPH program must have Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval if it
involves human subjects in any way. IRB “approval" simply means that the IRB rules that the
potential risks to human subjects are, in its opinion, acceptable. It does not mean that a project
has departmental or institutional approval and the proper procedures for obtaining such approval
should be followed. NIH certification is required for students and faculty who are involved with
research.
Faculty members in the MPH program have access to specific funds dedicated to faculty research
through the AASU Grants Office. The Research and Teaching Grants Committee awards AASU
Faculty Grants for research and scholarship projects. These awards are generally for up to $2,500
and are published by the Committee in the annual report entitled Excellence in Research and
Scholarship, a publication highlighting research and scholarship activity on campus. The Regents
also make monies available through their Faculty Research Grants.
Students in the MPH program have access to specific funds dedicated to student research through
the AASU School of Graduate Studies Coordinating Council (GSCC) . With faculty advisor
approval, MPH students apply for funding which is decided upon by the GSCC. No restrictions
exist on the status of the MPH student in the application process. Additional student funding may
be made available from the discretionary funds of the Dean of Health Professions and the V.P.
for Academic Affairs.
105
3.1.b. Description of current research activities undertaken in collaboration with local,
state, national or international health agencies and community-based organizations.
Formal research agreements with such agencies should be identified.
Each college within the university determines its faculty’s criteria for annual performance
reviews. Programs can develop additional policies that meet or exceed college policies. Each
college’s criteria are consistent with those of the other colleges, but none are identical. In the
College of Health Professions, each graduate faculty member is expected to have a record of
ongoing scholarly activity. Usually, this results in a peer-reviewed publication. However, it may
also result in scholarly activity of another sort. The extent to which a faculty member meets his
or her research expectations is described in his or her Annual Performance and Academic
Review (APAR) and subsequently reflected in the faculty member’s annual evaluation (AFE).
Faculty are encouraged to integrate students into their research activities. In addition, the quality
and quantity of faculty research are significant factors in whether or not a faculty member
receives tenure and/or promotion. Currently, MPH faculty are engaged in a wide variety of
research projects related to their given fields of expertise. The COHP maintains current MOUs
with community-based organizations in which MPH faculty conduct their research.
The following is a comprehensive list of faculty publications and presentations:
Publications
Peer-Reviewed Articles (2010-2013)
Plaspohl, S., Dixon, B., Streater, S., Hausauer, E., Newman, C. & Vogel, R. (2013). Impact of School Flu
Vaccine Program on Student Absences. The Journal of School Nursing, Sage Publications (online) April. 30, 2013, DOI: 10.1177/1059840513487750 2013.
Simmons, J., &Rich, L., (2013). Feminism ain’t funny: Woman as ‘fun-killer’, mother as monster in the
American sitcom. Advances in Journalism and Communication, 1(1). Doi:
10.4236/ajc.2013.11001.
daCruz, J., & Rich, L., (2013 under review). Misleading metaphors and marginalization: Risks, ethics,
and public health imperatives of HIV and prisoners in Brazil. International Social Science
Review.
Luczak, J., Bosak, A., Riemann, B., (2013) Shoulder muscle activation of novice and experienced weight
lifters during dumbbell press exercises. Journal of Sports Medicine; Article ID 612650.
Riemann, B., Congleton, A., Ward, R., Davies, G., (2013) Biomechanical Comparison of Forward and
Lateral Lunges at Varying Step Lengths. Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness
2013;53(2): 130-138.
106
Buelow, J., McAdams, R., Riemann, B.L. (2012) What Do Healthcare Management Students Think
About Interprofessional Teams and How Do They Compare to Their Clinical Peers? Journal of
Health Administration Education 2012:29(2):99-120.
Plaspohl, S., Parrillo, A., Vogel, R., Tedders, S., & Epstein, A. (2012). An Assessment of America’s
Tobacco-Free Colleges and Universities. Journal of American College Health, Volume 60 (2),
162-167.
Rich, L. E. (2012). The Church of Scientology: A history of a new religion. [Review of the book The
Church of Scientology: A history of a new religion by Hugh B. Urban.] Journal of Bioethical
Inquiry, 9(4). doi: 10.1007/s11673-012-9409-4.
Rich, L. E. (2012). Eggsploitation. [Review of the film Eggsploitation directed by Justin Baird and
Jennifer Lahl and written by Jennifer Lahl and Evan C. Rosa.] Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 9(1),
105–107. doi: 10.1007/s11673-011-9337-8.
Rich, L. E., & Simmons, J. (2011). Heidegger and ‘House’: The twofold task in working out the question
of American medicine. Film and Philosophy, 15, 49–69.
Tran, D; SM Edenfield; K Coulton; D Adams, (2010) “Anxiolytic Intervention Preference of Dental
Practitioners in the Savannah, Chatham County, Area: A Pilot Study,’ Journal of Dental Hygiene
(Summer 2010): 123-128.
Buelow, J. R., McAdams, R., Adams, A., & Rich, L. E. (2010). Interdisciplinary teamwork: Student
differences and teaching implications. The American Journal of Health Sciences, 1(1), 11–22.
Non-Peer Reviewed Articles
Rich, L. E. (2013). Cloning. In M. Brennan (Ed.), A-Z of death and dying: Social, cultural
and medical aspects (pp. forthcoming). Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.
Rich, L. E. (2013). Cryonics. In M. Brennan (Ed.), A-Z of death and dying: Social, cultural
and medical aspects (pp. forthcoming). Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.
Rich, L. E. (2013). Immortality (including life preservation). In M. Brennan (Ed.), A-Z of
death and dying: Social, cultural and medical aspects (pp. forthcoming). Santa
Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.
Rich, L. E., & Ashby, M. A. (2013). "Speak what we feel, not what we ought to say":
Moral distress and bioethics. Journal of Bioethicallinquiry, 10(3), pages and doi
forthcoming.
Ashby, M.A., & Rich, L. E. (2013). Eating people is wrong ... or how we decide morally
what to eat. Journal of Bioethicallnquiry, 10(2), 129-131. doi: 10.1007/s11673-0139444-9
Rich, L. E., & Ashby, M.A. (2013). From personal misfortune to public liability: The ethics,
limits, and politics of public health saving ourselves from ourselves. Journal of
Bioethical Inquiry,10(1), 1-5. doi: 10.1007/s11673-013-9427-x
107
Ashby, M. A., & Rich, L. E. (2012). Editorial: Signposts in a familiar land? A second (or third or fourth)
look at lingering bioethical concerns. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 9(2), 119–124. doi:
10.1007/s11673-012-9371-1
Ashby, M. A., & Rich, L. E. (2012). Editorial: Cases and culture: The benefits and risks of narrating “life
as lived.” Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 9(4). doi: 10.1007/s11673-012-9408-5
Rich, L. E., Ashby, M. A., & Méthot, P.-O. (2012). Editorial: Rethinking the body and its boundaries.
Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 9(1), 1–6. doi: 10.1007/s11673-011-9353-8
Rich, L. E., & Ashby, M. A. (2012). Editorial: Today’s ‘Sexmission’: Bioethics and the quest for greater
understanding of sexual and gender diversity. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 9(3), 229–233. doi:
10.1007/s11673-012-9385-8
Ashby, M. A., & Rich, L. E. (2011). Editorial: Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 8(2), 109–111.
Ashby, M. A., & Rich, L. E. (2011). Editorial: Discussing difference and dealing with desolation and
despair. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 8(4), 315–317.
Rich, L. E., & Ashby, M. A. (2011). Editorial. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 8(3), 221–224.
Simmons, J., & Rich, L. E. (2010). Heidegger and ‘House’: The twofold task in working out the question
of American medicine. House M.D. Professional Magazine, 1(2), 25–47.
Non-Peer Reviewed Book Chapters
Rich, L. E. (2013). Cloning. In M. Brennan (Ed.), A–Z of death and dying: Social, cultural and medical
aspects (forthcoming). Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.
Rich, L. E. (2013). Cryonics. In M. Brennan (Ed.), A–Z of death and dying: Social, cultural and medical
aspects (forthcoming). Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.
Rich, L. E. (2013). Immortality (including life preservation). In M. Brennan (Ed.), A–Z of death and
dying: Social, cultural and medical aspects (forthcoming). Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.
Peer-Reviewed Books
D Adams. (accepted 2013) Infectious Disease Epidemiology in Public Health Practice (John Wiley,
forthcoming, 2014).
108
Presentations (2010– through June 1, 2013)
Peer-Reviewed International
DaCruz, J., & Rich, L., (2013). Misleading metaphors and marginalization: Risks, ethics, and public
health imperatives of HIV and prisoners in Brazil. Paper presented at the Americans Council’s
16th Annual Conference on the Americas, Atlanta, GA, February 2013)
M Reams, D Adams, and S Plaspohl (2011) “Reflections of Australian Military Chaplains in Southeast
Asia, 1962-1972,” Annual Meeting of the International Society of Traumatic Stress Studies,
Baltimore, MD, November 2011.
Reams M., Adams, D., Plaspohl, S. (2010) Reflections of Australian Military Chaplains in
Southeast Asia, 1962-1972. International Society of Traumatic Stress Studies, Baltimore, MD,
2010.
Invited International
Rich, L. E. (2012, June). Risk, intent, and P3Ps: Bodies and body boundaries in the age of biotechnology.
Paper presented at the Philosophy of Medicine and Humanistic Health Research Group at Aarhus
University, Aarhus, Denmark.
Peer-Reviewed National
Plaspohl, S. (2013). Reporting Conflict of Interest. Invited speaker at the National Association of IRB
Leaders Annual Conference, Atlanta, GA, May 9, 2013.
Plaspohl, S., & Dixon, B., (2013). Lessons Learned: Impact and Benefits of School-Located Influenza
Vaccine program on reducing Student Absenteeism. Accepted for presentation at 2013 National
Association of City and County Health organizations Conference, Dallas, TX, July 12, 2013.
Plaspohl, S., & Dixon, B. (2013) Community Partnership to Promote Influenza prevention and academic
Success Among Elementary School Students. Accepted for presentation at 2013 American Public
Health Association Annual Conference, Boston, MA, November 4, 2013.
Adams, D., Adedokun, A. (2012) Hepatitis Mortality among US Troops in SE Asia: The Role of the
Medevac, 1965-1975. American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, Atlanta, GA,
November 2012.
Chanthavong, B., Adams, D. (2012) Evaluation of Arbovirus Surveillance Protocols as Predictors of
Chikungunya Virus Re-Emergence. American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene,
Atlanta, GA. November 2012.
109
Adams, D, A Adedokun, M Osman, (2012) “Medevacs as Reservoirs of Hepatitis Infection in Vietnam,
1965-1973,” Annual Meeting of the American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene,
Atlanta, GA, November 2012.
Plaspohl, S., O’Mallon, M., Taggart, H., & Bacon, J. (2012). Western Students Meet Eastern Medicine:
Impact of Study Abroad Experience on Perceptions of Chinese Culture and Traditional Chinese
Medicine (TCM). Poster presentation exhibited in “Alternative and Complementary Health
Practices” session at 2012 American Public Health Association Annual Conference, San
Francisco, CA, October 28, 2012.
Plaspohl, S. (2012). Changes in the Air: Insight from Key Stakeholders at Tobacco-Free Colleges.
Summit on Tobacco Policy, National Center for Tobacco Policy Annual Conference, Kansas
City, MO, October 5, 2012.
Plaspohl, S. (2012). Creating Our Tobacco-Free Campus: No Butts About It! Summit on Tobacco
Policy, National Center for Tobacco Policy Annual Conference Kansas City, MO, October 5,
2012.
Plaspohl, S.,& O’Mallon, M. (2012). Western Students Meet Eastern Medicine: Lessons Learned from a
Study-Abroad Trip to China. American College Health Association’s Annual Meeting, “College
Health: Architects of Change”, Chicago, IL, May 29, 2012.
Chanthavong, B., and D Adams, (2012) “Evaluation of Arbovirus Surveillance Protocols As Predictors of
Chikungunya Virus Re-Emergence,” Annual Meeting of the American Society of Tropical
Medicine and Hygiene, Atlanta, GA, November 2012.
Adams, D, Plaspohl, S, Reams, M, & Hardy, D. (2011). Dying With Their Boots Off: Non-Traumatic
Deaths Among American Troops in Vietnam, 1960-1975. Poster presentation exhibited at
American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 60th Annual Meeting, Philadelphia, PA,
December 5, 2011.
Adams, D., Plaspohl S., Reams, M., Hardy., D. (2011) Dying with Their Boots Off: Non-Traumatic
Mortality among US Service Personnel in Vietnam, 1960-1965. American Society of Tropical
Medicine and Hygiene, Philadelphia, PA, December 2011.
McAdams, R., Adams, A., & Buelow, J. (2011) Association of University Programs in Health
Administration Annual Meeting. Presentation/Workshop: Moving From Static Case Studies to
Dynamic Interactive Simulations. With Alice Adams and Janet Buelow. Charleston, SC. June
2011.
Plaspohl, S. (2011). An Assessment of America’s Tobacco-Free Colleges and Universities:
Policies,Procedures, Practices, and Adherence to ACHA’s 2009 Guidelines and
Recommendations. American College Health Association 2011 Annual Meeting, Phoenix, AZ,
June 3, 2011.
110
Plaspohl, S. (2011). Lessons Learned from Tobacco-Free U.S. Colleges and Universities. Poster
presentation exhibited in “Tobacco Free U: College Aged and Young Adults” session at 2011
American Public Health Association Annual Conference, Washington, DC, October 31, 2011.
Reams, M., Adams, D., & Plaspohl, S. (2011). Reflections of Australian Military Chaplains in Southeast
Asia, 1962-1972: A Case Study in Oral History. Poster presentation exhibited at International
Society for Traumatic Stress Studies 27th Annual Meeting, Baltimore, MD, November 5, 2011.
Rich, L. E. (2010). Supervisor but no super genius: Gender, race, and ratiocination in American
television. Poster session presented at the meeting of the American Public Health Association,
Denver, CO.
McAdams, R., B Reimann, and D Adams (2010). “Do Environmental Factors Relate to Critical Access
Hospital Profitability?" Annual Meeting of the National Rural Health Association, Savannah,
GA, May 2010.
Edwards, K., Limbaugh, G.K., Riemann, B.L. (2010) Kinematic Analysis of Heel Raise Exercise with
Three Foot Positions. 2010 Annual Meeting of the American College of Sports Medicine,
(poster), Baltimore, MD, June 3, 2010, Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise,
2010;42(5):S352.
McAdams, R., Riemann, B.L. (2010) Do Environmental Factors Related to Critical Access
Hospital Profitability? National Rural Health Association’s 32nd Annual Conference (poster),
Savannah, GA. May 18, 2010.
Adams, D, & Plaspohl, S (2010). Dust-Off: Predictors of American Medevac Losses during the Vietnam
War. Poster presentation exhibited at American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 59th
Annual Meeting, Atlanta, GA, November 3-7, 2010.
Rich, L. E., Mink, M., & Streater, S. (2010). The painful lessons of online learning: An unwitting casecontrol study of two graduate programs. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American
Association of University Professors, Washington, DC.
Invited National
Plaspohl, S. (2012). An Assessment of America’s Tobacco-Free Colleges and Universities. Invited
keynote speaker for presentation at American Lung Association Minnesota, Tobacco-Free
Campus: A Leap for Health! Earle Brown Heritage Center, Minneapolis, MN, March 27, 2012.
Plaspohl, S. (2012). Institutional Conflict of Interest. Invited speaker for presentation at National
Association of IRB Leaders Annual Conference, Atlanta, GA, May 10, 2012.
Plaspohl, S. (2012). IRB Member Educational Retreat. East Texas Medical Center, Tyler, Texas,
November 8, 2012.
Plaspohl, S. (2011). Undergoing an FDA Inspection. National Association of IRB Leaders Annual
Conference, Atlanta, GA, April 28, 2011.
111
Plaspohl, S. (2011). Tobacco-Free is No Panacea. Inside Higher Ed:
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/06/06/health_educators_discuss_tobacco_free_colleg
e_and_university_policy_compliance_at_acha_conference. Web coverage, including interview,
regarding 6/3/11 ACHA presentation, published June 6, 2011.
Plaspohl, S. (2011). Tobacco-Free Campuses. Radio interview #821 on College Connection, Oklahoma
State Regents for Higher Education, broadcast June 25, 2011 to 13 radio stations in Oklahoma
and Texas. http://www.okhighered.org/college-connection/audio.shtml
McAdams, R. (2010) National Rural Health Association Annual Meeting. Poster Presentation:
Identification of Critical Success Factors for Project Management in Critical Access Hospitals.
With Janet Buelow, Alice Adams and Joey Crosby. Savannah, GA, June 2010.
McAdams, R. (2010) National Rural Health Association Annual Meeting. Poster Presentation: Do
Environmental Factors Relate to Critical Access Hospital Profitability? With Bryan Riemann and
David Adams. Savannah, GA. June 2010.
McAdams, R. (2010) American Association of Schools of Health Professions Annual Meeting. Poster
Presentation: Learning Interdisciplinary Teamwork Using Online and Workshop Experience.
With Janet Buelow and Richard St. Pierre. Charlotte, NC. October 2010.
Patterson, T., Duff, L., Holbert, T., & Plaspohl, S. (2010). Tobacco-Free Hospitals Panel, Center of
Excellence for Tobacco-Free Campus Policy, 7th Annual Tobacco-Free Campus Workshop,
Springfield, MO, May 27, 2010.
Plaspohl, S. (2010). An Assessment of America’s Tobacco-Free Colleges and Universities: Policies,
Procedures, Practices, and Adherence to ACHA’s 2009 Guidelines and Recommendations.
Center of Excellence for Tobacco-Free Campus Policy, 7th Annual Tobacco-Free Campus
Workshop, Springfield, MO, May 26, 2010.
Riemann, B.L. (2010) Interpreting common statistical procedures reported in the Journal of Athletic
Training. 2010 N.A.T.A. Annual Meeting- Workshop. Philadelphia, PA, June 26, 2010.
Peer-Reviewed Regional
Wimer, G., Good, J., Baird, W., Riemann, B., (2013) Effect of wearing a cooling vest on
thermoregulation and run interval performance in the heat. 2013 Southeast American College of
Sports Medicine Annual Meeting (poster), Greenville, SC, Februdary6 15, 2013.
Rich, L. E. (2011, March). Supervisor but no supersleuth: Gender, race, and ratiocination in American
television. Paper presented at the meeting of the Southeast Women’s Studies Association,
Atlanta, GA.
Peer-Reviewed State
Plaspohl, S., Dixon, B., Streater, S., Hausauer, E., & Newman, C. (2013). Do School Flu Vaccine
Programs Impact Student Absenteeism? Georgia Public Health Association Annual Conference,
Atlanta, GA, April 22, 2013.
112
Wilson, N., &Plaspohl, S., (2013) Demography of Pediatric Patients at Dental Clinics. Georgia Pubic
Health Association Annual Conference, Atlanta, GA, April, 22, 2013.
Johnstone, E., Rich, L., Plaspohl, S. Alvarado, C., Sams, A., & Bruce, D. (2013). The Percentage of
University Students With and Without Insurance Coverage at an Urban Public Institution.
Georgia Public Health Association Pre-Conference, Atlanta, GA April, 1, 2013.
Mitchell, R., Plaspohl, S., & Rich, L. (2012). Combating the Freshman 15: The Effects of Weight
Perception on Weight Loss in College Freshmen. Georgia Public Health Association Annual
Conference, “Building Healthy Communities in GA: Academic and Practice Partnerships”,
Atlanta, GA, April 12, 2012.
Plaspohl, S. (2012). Lessons Learned: Transitioning to a 100% Tobacco-Free University Campus.
Georgia Public Health Association Annual Conference, “Building Healthy Communities in GA:
Academic and Practice Partnerships”, Atlanta, GA, April 12, 2012.
Plaspohl, S. (2011). Lessons Learned from Georgia’s Tobacco-Free Colleges. Georgia Public Health
Association 82nd Annual Conference, Atlanta, GA, April 13, 2011.
Invited State
Dixon, B., & Plaspohl, S. (2012). School-Located Influenza Vaccination Programs (SLIV): Impact on
Absenteeism. Georgia School-Based Flu Stakeholders Meeting, Atlanta, GA, September 26,
2012.
Dixon, B., Plaspohl, S., Streater, S., Hausauer, B., & Newman, C. (2012). School-Located Influenza
Vaccination Programs (SLIV): Impact on Absenteeism. Georgia Public Health Immunization
Coordinators & Public Nurses, Macon, GA, September 14, 2012.
Mangrum, M. J., Hasic, M., Moultrie, R., Racine, D., Butler, S., Salazar, A. M., Sawi, A. E., & Rich, L.
E. (2010, May). Collaboration between law enforcement, victims, and non-government
organizations. Invited panelist at the Southern District of Georgia U.S. Attorney’s Office Human
Trafficking: Identification, Investigation, and Prosecution training, Statesboro, GA.
Peer-Reviewed Local
Hardy, D., & Plaspohl, S. (2012). Nursing Home Study on Infection Control Policies and Culture of
Patient Safety among Residents living with Diabetes Mellitus. Student Research Symposium,
Armstrong Atlantic State University, April 26, 2012.
Mitchell, R., Plaspohl, S., & Rich, L. (2012). Combating the Freshman 15: The Effects of Weight
Perception on Weight Loss in College Freshmen. Student Research Symposium, Armstrong
Atlantic State University, April 26, 2012.
Taggart, H., Plaspohl, S., & O’Mallon, M. (2011). Robert I. Strozier Faculty Lecture Series: Western
Students Meet Eastern Medicine, Student Union Ogeechee Theatre, Armstrong Atlantic State
University, Savannah, GA, September 28, 2011.
113
Invited Local
Plaspohl, S., & Newman, C. (2012). School-Located Influenza Vaccination Programs (SLIV): Impact on
Absenteeism. Effingham County Board of Education Superintendent’s Office, October 8, 2012.
Crosby, J., & McAdams, R. (2011) Faculty Forum Lecture entitled: “Not Your Father’s Medicare: The
Future of the Social Safety Net for Older Adults and the Disabled.” November 30, 2011.
Plaspohl, S. (2011). An Assessment of America’s Tobacco-Free Colleges and Universities: Policies,
Procedures, Practices, and Adherence to ACHA’s 2009 Guidelines and Recommendations.
Coastal Health District Public Health Ambassador Program, Savannah, GA, September 29, 2011.
Plaspohl, S. (2011). An Assessment of America’s Tobacco-Free Colleges and Universities: Policies,
Procedures, Practices, and Adherence to ACHA’s 2009 Guidelines and Recommendations.
Coastal Health District Public Health Ambassador Program, Savannah, GA, July 11, 2011
Plaspohl, S. (2010). Human Subject Protections and IRB: Getting Friendly with the Research Process for
Nurse Residents, Memorial Health University Medical Center, Savannah, GA, December 10,
2010.
Plaspohl, S. (2010). Tobacco-Free Colleges and Universities: Trends & Lessons Learned, Armstrong
Atlantic State University Faculty Senate, Savannah, GA, November 15, 2010.
Plaspohl, S. (2010). Institutional Review Boards, Research Infrastructure in Minority Institutions (RIMI)
Seminar Series, Savannah State University, Savannah, GA, September 29, 2010.
Plaspohl, S. (2010). Residents’ JUMP START for Research, Human Subject Protections and Informed
Consent Process, Memorial Health University Medical Center, Savannah, GA, August 19, 2010.
Plaspohl, S. (2010). Residents’ JUMP START for Research, Human Subject Protections and Informed
Consent Process, Memorial Health University Medical Center, Savannah, GA, July 16, 2010.
Rich, L. E. (2012, October). Political Smackdown 2012. Member of panel of questioners (representing
health care) at the Inkwell and Student Government Association debate, Savannah, GA.
Rich, L. E. (2012, March). Miss Representation. Invited speaker to introduce the film and lead the
question and discussion session following the screening for Armstrong Atlantic State University’s
Gender and Women’s Studies Program, Savannah, GA.
Rich, L. E. (2011, July). Risk and intent: An ethical, legal, and social analysis of body boundaries in the
age of biotechnology. Paper presented at the Foundation Brocher, Geneva, Switzerland.
Rich, L. E. (2011, June). Supervisor but no supersleuth: Gender, race, and ratiocination in American
television. Paper presented at the Kansas City University of Medicine and Biosciences, Kansas
City, MO.
Rich, L. E. (2011, May). Kashrut law and culture boundaries. Scholar-in-residence presentation for
Congregation Agudith Achim, Savannah, GA.
114
Rich, L. E. (2011, May). To what extent does my body belong to me? Scholar-in-residence presentation
for Congregation Agudith Achim, Savannah, GA.
Rich, L. E. (2010, September and October). Cultural competence in the medical setting. Invited speaker
for St. Joseph’s/Candler Cultural Competence and Health Outcomes workshops, Savannah, GA.
Yount, L., Simmons, J., Skees, M., & Rich, L. E. (2010, April). Philosophical Exchanges: ‘Examined
Lives’ screening and discussion. Invited panelist at this event funded by an Armstrong Atlantic
State University-Savannah State University Collaborative Teaching and Research Grant,
Savannah, GA.
3.1.c A list of current research activity of all primary and secondary faculty identified in
Criteria 4.1.a and 4.1.b., including amount and source of funds, for each of the last three
years. These data must be presented in table format and include at least the following: a)
principal investigator and faculty member’s role (if not PI), b) project name, c) period of
funding, d) source of funding, e) amount of total award, f) amount of current year’s award,
g) whether research is community based and h) whether research provides for student
involvement. Distinguish projects attributed to primary faculty from those attributed to
other faculty by using bold text, color or shading. Only research funding should be
reported here; extramural funding for service or training grants should be reported in
Template 3.2.2 (funded service) and Template 3.3.1 (funded training/workforce
development).
During the past three years, MPH faculty and students have been actively involved in
community-based research activities that impact the residents of the Savannah–Chatham County
area as well as South Georgia. All grants funded, not funded, and pending are reported below
(see Table 3.1.c.).
Table 3.1.c.
Research Activity
Project
Name
Principal
Physiologica
l and
Hormonal
Levels of
isoflavoneprotein
formula on
athletes
R Lefavi
Invest.
Fund
Source
Fund
Period
Start/
End
Cytodyne.
Tech.
20112013
Amt.
Total
Awd
$30,000
Amt.
2010
Amt.
2011
Amt.
2012
Amt.
2013 as
$10,000
$10,000
$10,000
of 6/1/13
Comm
.
Based
N
Student
Participation
Y
115
Table 3.1.c.
Research Activity
Amt.
Total
Awd
Amt.
2010
Amt.
2011
Amt.
2012
Amt.
2013 as
$3,333
$6,666
Principal
Flexible
WorkSchedule
Options:
Finding
Feasible
Solutions to
Keep
Women
Physicians
in the
Workplace
Tobacco Use
Prevention
Needs
Assessment
for Long
County,
Georgia
Effect of
Massage
Therapy on
the SelfIdentified
Concerns
And WellBeing of
Patients with
Breast,
Gynecologic
, Lung, or
Colorectal
Cancer
An
Assessment
of America’s
TobaccoFree
Colleges and
Universities:
Policies,
Procedures.
Practices
and
Adherence
to ACHA’s
2009
Guidelines
and
Recommend
ations
Relationship
Between
SchoolLocated
L. Denton,
S.
Plaspohl,
L. Rich
AMA
20112013
$10,000
C. PasaGibson, M.
Mink, L.
Rich, and
B.
Reimann
CDC
20092010
$15,000
G. Petruzzi,
J. Currin,
L. Rich,
and S.
Plaspohl
Georgia
Cancer
Coalition/
Georgia
Cancer
Alliance
20112013
$50,000
S. Plaspohl
Jiann-Ping
Hsu
College of
Public
Health
2010
$300
$300
N/A
N/A
S. Plaspohl
AASU
2012
$1,865
N/A
N/A
$1,500
Invest.
Fund
Source
Fund
Period
Start/
End
Project
Name
of 6/1/13
$15,000
$50,000
$385
Comm
.
Based
Student
Participation
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
116
Table 3.1.c.
Research Activity
Fund
Source
Fund
Period
Start/
End
Amt.
Total
Awd
Amt.
2010
Amt.
2011
Amt.
2012
M. Reams,
D. Adams,
S. Plaspohl
AASU
2011
$1,000
N/A
$1,000
N/A
N
Y
L. Rich
Foundation
Brocher
2011
5831
2915.50
2915.50
N/A
N
N
B.
Reimann,
G. Davies
Private
Sponsor
(Propriet.)
2011
$79,245
N/A
$79,245
N/A
N
Y
S. Streater
&, N.
Oretzki
AASU
and
Savannah
State
University
2011
$2,500
N/A
$2,500
N/A
Y
Y
Free to
Breath Clean
Air on
Campus
S. Plaspohl
N/A
2011
Not
Funded
Not
Funded
Not
Funded
Not
Funded
Not
Funded
Not
Funded
The “Secret
of Life”?
Popular
L. Rich
N/A
2011
Not
Funded
Not
Funded
Not
Funded
Not
Funded
Not
Funded
Not
Funded
Project
Name
Influenza
Vaccination
(SLIV)
Programs
and Student
Absenteeism
Reflections
of Australian
Military
Chaplains
who Served
in Southeast
Asia, 19621972: A
Case Study
in Oral
History
Stupendous
Whole:
Body
Boundaries
in the Age of
Technology
A TripleBlinded
Placebo
Controlled
Clinical
Trial
Evaluating
the Effects
of
(Undisclose
d Product)
on Balance
and
Muscular
Strength and
Endurance
in Healthy
Adults
Health Care
Reform
Seminar
Principal
Invest.
Amt.
2013 as
of 6/1/13
Comm
.
Based
Student
Participation
117
Table 3.1.c.
Project
Name
Perceptions
of Genetics
and Related
Biotechnolo
gy
Supervisor
but no
Supersleuth:
Gender,
Race, and
Ratiocinatio
n in
American
Television
Research Activity
Principal
Invest.
L. Rich
Fund
Source
Fund
Period
Start/
End
N/A
2013
Amt.
Total
Awd
Not
Funded
Amt.
2010
Amt.
2011
Amt.
2012
Amt.
2013 as
of 6/1/13
Not
Funded
Comm
.
Based
Not
Funded
Student
Participation
Not
Funded
Note: For all grants listed above, annual disbursement of funds equals Total Funds/Years of Funds. Shading =
primary MPH Faculty, Shading = additional MPH Faculty..
3.1.d. Identification of measures by which the program may evaluate the success of its
research activities, along with data regarding the program’s performance against those
measures for each of the last three years. For example, programs may track dollar amounts
of research funding, significance of findings (e.g., citation references), extent of research
translation (e.g., adoption by policy or statute), dissemination (e.g., publications in peerreviewed publications, presentations at professional meetings) and other indicators.
Each College within the university determines its faculty’s criteria for annual performance
reviews. Each College’s criteria are consistent with those of the other Colleges, but none is
identical. In the College of Health Professions, each graduate faculty member is expected to
have a record of on-going scholarly activity. Usually, this results in a peer-reviewed publication.
However, it may also result in scholarly activity of another sort. These research goals and
objectives are determined prior to each year by the Department Chair and each faculty member.
The extent to which a faculty member meets his/her goal for research is described in his/her
Annual Professional Activities Report (APAR), and subsequently reflected in his/her annual
evaluation (see Table 3.1d).
In addition, the quality and quantity of faculty research is a significant factor in whether or not a
faculty member receives tenure and is promoted. Faculty who are successful in research
endeavors are often highlighted on the University’s webpage.
3.1.d. Identification of measures by which the program may evaluate the success of its
research activities
118
Table 3.1.d. Outcome Measures for Judging the Qualifications of MPH Faculty Complement
Outcome Measure
As of 6/1/13
Target
2010
2011
2012
2013
Number* of grants or contracts submitted
for funding for research and/or service
activities expressed as a percentage of the
MPH faculty complement. .(annually)
30%
53.5% (7/13)
76.9% (10/13)
50.0% (8/16)
13.0% (2/16)
Number* of refereed or invited scholarly
presentations at state, regional, national,
or international scientific meetings and/or
professional conferences expressed as a
percentage of the MPH faculty
complement. (annually)
75%
107.7% (14/13)
92.3% (12/13)
100% (16/16)
50.0% (8/16)
Number* of publications (as author or
co-author) in an appropriate area of
expertise in a refereed journal or a nonrefereed publication that is disseminated
at the state, regional, national, or
international level expressed as a
percentage of the MPH faculty
complement. .(annually)
25%
23.1% (3/13)
30.8% (4/13)
68.8% (11/16)
31.0% 95/16)
*Note: Outcome measures for numbers of grants, presentations, and publications are calculated using MPH total faculty (n=5)
only. For a complete list, see Resource File.
3.1.e. Description of Student Involvement in Research.
All MPH students are expected to be involved in some form of experimental or applied research
both within specific graduate courses and as a separate part of their MPH curriculum. Each
graduate student also must successfully complete a practicum in the community. After the
completion of the practicum, the student must present this research in written and oral formats.
Faculty members meet every semester to evaluate the nature of the MPH research projects. The
MPH program has recently begun to hold roundtable discussions that give students and faculty
an opportunity to, among other things, become familiar with common research interests.
Students are encouraged to work with faculty on research projects.
The Master of Public Health program provides an array of research opportunities in which
students can participate. First, MPH students are often involved in research projects in their
curriculum or with faculty mentors (see Table 3.1.e. Second, Graduate Assistants are regularly
involved in faculty research as part of their job. Third, some MPH students select gerontological
courses, in which practica and research projects are often a part. Finally, each MPH student must
choose a practicum for himself/herself. MPH students present their research in their oral
defenses, faculty forums, University research symposiums, and Public Health meetings.
119
As of
6/1/13
Table 3.1.e. Student involvement in Research
Student
Faculty
Project
2010
2011
2012
Dying with Their Boots Off: NonTraumatic Mortality among US
Service Personnel in Vietnam,
1960-1965
Reflections of Australian Military
Chaplains in Southeast Asia,
1962-1972: A Case Study in Oral
History
Dying with Their Boots Off: NonTraumatic Mortality among US
Service Personnel in Vietnam,
1960-1965
Medevacs as Reservoirs of
Hepatitis Infection in Vietnam,
1965-1973
Evaluation of Arbovirus
Surveillance Protocols as
Predictors of Chikungunya Virus
Re-Emergence
Nursing Home Study of Infection
Control Policies and Culture of
Patient Safety among Residents
Living with Diabetes Mellitus
Combating the Freshman 15: The
Effects of Weight Perception on
Weight Loss in College Freshmen
N
Y
N
N
Y
N
N
Y
N
N
N
Y
N
N
Y
N
Y
N
N
Y
N
N
Y
Y
N
Y
N
Leigh
Rich
Leigh
Rich and
Sara
Plaspohl
Sara
Plaspohl
Relationship between SchoolLocated Influenza Vaccine (SLIV)
Programs and Student
Absenteeism
Western Students Meet Eastern
Medicine: Impact of Study
Abroad Experience on Perceptions
of Chinese Culture and Traditional
Chinese Medicine (TCM). Poster
presentation exhibited in
“Alternative and Complementary
Health Practices”
Public Health Media Center
Research
The Percentage of University
Students With and Without Health
Insurance Coverage at an Urban
Public Institution
Perinatal Case Management for
Public Health Nurses
N
Y
N
N
N
N
Y
N
N
N
Y
Sara
Plaspohl
Demography of Pediatric Patients
at Dental Clinic
N
N
N
Y
Melissa
Reams
David
Adams
Melissa
Reams
David
Adams
DeShannon
Hardy
David
Adams
Ade
Adedokun
David
Adams
Bounphone
Chanthavong
David
Adams
DeShannon
Hardy
Rachel
Mitchell
Chris
Newman
Jessica
Bacon
Jane
Mackenzie
Edward
Johnstone,
Jr.
Jennifer
Beryl
Brooks
Nancy Lyn
Wilson
Sara
Plaspohl
Sara
Plaspohl
and Leigh
Rich
Sara
Plaspohl
and Sandy
Streater
Sara
Plaspohl
2013
120
3.1.f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the
program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.
This criteria is met.
Strengths: Faculty members are actively involved in research projects at a variety of levels that
range from local to international. Moreover, students and faculty have been able to collaborate
on a number of research projects.
Weaknesses: The mission of AASU emphasizes teaching over research. As such, faculty
teaching loads are heavy, 4/4, and can impede scholarly activity.
Future Plans: The MPH program should continue to seek collaborative research partnerships
that address eliminating health disparities associated with minority status.
121
3.2
Service: The program shall pursue active service activities, consistent with its
mission, through which faculty and students contribute to the advancement of public
health practice.
3.2.a. Description of the program’s service activities, including policies, procedures and
practices that support service. If the program has formal contracts or agreements with
external agencies, these should be noted.
The mission of the MPH program at Armstrong Atlantic State University is to enhance the
quality of human health status and public health practice through community-based health
promotion and education initiatives, workforce development, and scholarly activities that are
responsive to the behavioral, ecological and dynamic determinants of health. Formal contracts
(i.e., MOUs) are maintained with a variety of local and state agencies and organizations.
This mission is consistent with the mission of the College of Health Professions and Armstrong
Atlantic State University. Faculty members in the Department of Health Sciences view the
service component of the MPH program as a critical element of its mission. AASU, the College
of Health Professions and the Department of Health Sciences have specific policies, procedures
and practices in place to support and recognize faculty service activities. For example, teaching,
scholarly activities and service activities are evaluated and used for promotion, tenure and
retention, the annual faculty evaluation (AFE), and the Annual Professional Activities Report
(APAR).
Faculty in the Department of Health Sciences have developed partnerships and collaborative
working relationships with different organizations such as governmental agencies, non-profit
organizations, educational institutions, and the private sector (Faculty CV's - see Resource File).
The College of Health Professions maintains numerous formal contracts (i.e., MOUs) with
external official and voluntary agencies for practicum sites (see Resource File).
The faculty members of the Department of Health Sciences have been very active providing
consultation, leadership and service to the community and the university. For more detailed
information, (see Faculty CVs in the Resource File). Activities should reflect the needs (as
identified by the MPH Program Advisory Board) of local organizations. The department's faculty
and students have consistently engaged in numerous service activities that benefit the university,
the community, and the profession of Public Health.
3.2.b. Description of the emphasis given to community and professional service activities in
the promotion and tenure process.
One of the priorities of the MPH program is to provide expertise and assistance to community
based health activities and organizations. The program faculty are also actively engaged in
service to the University through committees, project volunteerism and student organizations.
122
They are expected to engage in community service, service which is evaluated annually in
APARs, AFEs, and Tenure/Promotion.
The MPH program maintains close ties with a variety of community organizations with which
Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) exist to facilitate these relationships. Community service
represents an integral part of the Annual Performance and Review and Tenure and Promotion
process. Students and faculty actively engage in activities such as the Graduate Student
Coordinating Council, Health Science Student Association, Armstrong Day, allied health honor
societies (e.g., Delta Omega) Gerontology Mentoring Conference, etc.). Faculty community
service is expected and evaluated accordingly.
3.2.c. A list of the program’s current service activities, including identification of the
community, organization, agency or body for which the service was provided and the
nature of the activity, over the last three years. See CEPH Data Template 3.2.1. Projects
presented in Criterion 3.1 should not be replicated here without distinction. Funded service
activities may be reported in a separate table; see CEPH Template 3.2.2. Extramural
funding for research or training/continuing education grants should be reported in
Template 3.1.1 (research) or Template 3.3.1 (funded workforce development), respectively.
Community service represents an integral part of the Annual Professional Activities Report and
Tenure and Promotion process. The MPH faculty engage in a wide range of local, state, national,
international service activities (see Table 3.2c). The following materials highlight service
projects that contribute to the HS, COHP and AASU strategic plans, values and strategic goals:
Table 3.2.c.
Service Activities
Faculty
Member
Role
Organization
Activity or
Project
Year(s)
Sandy Streater
Board of Directors
Board of Directors
2010-Present
Sandy Streater
Community
Advisory Board
Member
J. C. Lewis Health
Center
Savannah State
University
2010-Present
Sandy Streater
Advisory Committee
The Community
Health Partnership (in
conjunction with
Savannah Business
Group
RIMI Grant ($4
million) National
Center for Minority
Health Disparities
Advisory Committee
Sandy Streater
Advisory Board
Member
Health Care Georgia Partner Up For Public
Health – Georgia
Division of Public
Health – Strategic
Partner
Advisory Board
Member
2010-Present
Sandy Streater
Member
Partners in Health
Member
2010-Present
2010-Present
123
Table 3.2.c.
Service Activities
Faculty
Member
Role
Organization
Activity or
Project
Year(s)
Sandy Streater
Member Core Area 1
Member
2010-Present
Sandy Streater
Member
Member
2010-Present
Sandy Streater
Advisory Committee
Advisory Board
Chair
Advisory Committee
Member
Advisory Board
Member
2010-Present
Sandy Streater
ASPH Undergraduate
Public Health Learning
Outcomes Project –
resource Learning
Group
St. Jose/Candler
African American
Men’s Health Initiative
– Council
AMERIGROUP
Community Care
Therapeutic Foster
Care Committee,
Coastal Harbor Health
Systems
Sandy Streater
Member
Greater Savannah
Coalition on Aging
Member
2010-Present
Sandy Streater
Advisory Committee
SAFE Kids Savannah
Advisory Committee
2010-Present
Sandy Streater
Consultant
Consultant
2010-Present
Sandy Streater
Consultant
Consultant
2010-Present
Sandy Streater
Consultant
Savannah Business
Group
Chatham County
Safety Net Planning
Council
Savannah Teen Maze
Consultant
2010-Present
Sandy Streater
Member
USG Board of
Regents,
Administrative
Committee on Public
Health (ACOPH)
Member
2010-Present
Sandy Streater
Member
Sandy Streater
Member
Member
2010-Present
Sandy Streater
Advisory Board
Member
Member
2012
Sandy Streater
Advisory Board
Member
Member
David Adams
Member
American Public
Health Association
Society for Public
Health Education
Partner Up! for Public
Health Advisory Board
NCHEC (National
Commission for
Health Education
Credentialing) Ethics
Initiative
NCHEC (National
Commission for
Health Education
Credentialing) Ethics
Member
2012
2010-Present
2012
124
Table 3.2.c.
Faculty
Member
Service Activities
Role
Organization
Activity or
Project
Year(s)
American Society of
Tropical Medicine and
Hygiene
The Annals of
Pharmacology
Member
2010-Present
Peer Reviewer
2010-Present
Clinical Infectious
Diseases
Eco-Health
Peer Reviewer
2010-Present
Peer Reviewer
2010-Present
Annals of Family
Medicine
Journal of Traumatic
Stress Studies
American Public
Health Association
Good Samaritan Clinic
Peer Reviewer
2010-Present
Peer Reviewer
2010-Present
Member
2010-Present
Volunteer
2010- Present
Georgetown
Elementary School
Georgetown
Elementary School
Savannah Ogeechee
Regional Science and
Engineering Fair
Bioethics Committee,
St Joseph/Candler
Hospital
Bioethics
Subcommittee, St
Joseph Candler
Hospital
Hospice
Subcommittee, St.
Joseph Candler
Hospital
POLST Subcommittee,
St. Joseph’s Candler
Hospital
POLST Committee, St.
Joseph Candler
Hospital
General Institutional
Review Board,
Memorial Health
University Medical
Center
Judge
2010-Present
Volunteer
2010-Present
Judge
2010-Present
Member
2010-Present
Member
2010-Present
Member
2011-Present
Member
2012-Present
Member
2012-Present
Member
2010-Present
Initiative
David Adams
Member
David Adams
Peer Reviewer
David Adams
Peer Reviewer
David Adams
Peer Reviewer
David Adams
Peer Reviewer
David Adams
Peer Reviewer
David Adams
Member
David Adams
Volunteer
David Adams
Science Fair Judge
David Adams
David Adams
DARE Parade
Mascot,
Science Fair Judge
David Adams
Member
David Adams
Member
David Adams
Member
David Adams
Member
David Adams
Member
David Adams
Member
125
Table 3.2.c.
Service Activities
Faculty
Member
Role
Organization
Activity or
Project
Year(s)
David Adams
Member
Member
2010
David Adams
Consultant
Community Outreach
Committee, Memorial
University Medical
Center
Ashtree Organization
Consultant
2012
David Adams
Board Member
Board Member
2010-Present
David Adams
Member
Member
2010-Present
David Adams
Editorial Board and
Reviewer
Prevention
Credentialing
Consortium of Georgia
(PCCG)
American Friends of
the London School of
Hygiene and Tropical
Medicine
Food and Public
Health
Peer Reviewer
2010-Present
David Adams
Editorial Board and
Reviewer
Journal of Applied
Sociology
Peer Reviewer
2010-Present
David Adams
Editorial Board and
Reviewer
Sociological Research
Peer Reviewer
2010-Present
David Adams
Editorial Board and
Reviewer
Public Health
Research
Editorial Board
2012-Present
Leigh Rich
Editor in Chief
Journal of Bioethical
Inquiry
Editor in Chief
2012 – Present
Leigh Rich
Co-Editor in Chief
Journal of Bioethical
Inquiry
Co-Editor in Chief
2011-2012
Leigh Rich
Member
International Advisory
Board Journal of
Medical Law and
Ethics
Member
2011-Present
Leigh Rich
General Member
Planned Parenthood
Advisory Council
Member
2009-Present
Leigh Rich
Planning Committee
Member
Savannah Area GIS –
Annual GIS Day
Member
2010-July 2011
Sara Plaspohl
Member
Member
2012-Present
Sara Plaspohl
Member
Community
Immunization
Coalition, Savannah,
GA
Chatham County
Safety Net Coalition,
Savannah, GA
Member
2012-Present
126
Table 3.2.c.
Service Activities
Faculty
Member
Role
Organization
Activity or
Project
Year(s)
Sara Plaspohl
Distinguished Judge
Member
2012
Sara Plaspohl
Distinguished Judge
Research Day
activities, Memorial
Health University
Medical Center,
Savannah, GA
Research Day
activities, Memorial
Health University
Medical Center,
Savannah, GA
Member
2011
Sara Plaspohl
Community Member
Member
2011-Present
Sara Plaspohl
Community Member
Member
2011-Present
Sara Plaspohl
Board of Directors
Member
2010-2011
Sara Plaspohl
Abstract Reviewer
Member
2013
Sara Plaspohl
Team member
Member
2012
Sara Plaspohl
Abstract Reviewer
Member
2011-2012
Sara Plaspohl
Team member
Member
2011
Sara Plaspohl
Textbook Reviewer
Member
2011
Sara Plaspohl
Textbook Reviewer
Memorial Health
University Medical
Center General
Institutional Review
Board,
Memorial Health
University Medical
Center Oncology
Institutional Review
Board,
Community Health
Mission, Savannah,
GA
Submissions for
Georgia Public Health
Association Annual
Conference
Council for Education
on Public Health
accreditation site visit
for Missouri State
University
2012 American
College Health
Association Annual
Meeting
Council for Education
on Public Health
accreditation site visit
for Charles R. Drew
University of Medicine
and Science
Jones & Bartlett
Publishers, Essentials
of Human Disease
1st Edition
Jones & Bartlett
Publishers, An
Introduction to Human
Disease: Pathology
Member
2010
127
Table 3.2.c.
Service Activities
Faculty
Member
Role
Organization
and Pathophysiology
Correlations,
8th Edition
Jones & Bartlett
Publishers, Field
Epidemiology in
Public Health Practice
National Association
of IRB Managers
(NAIM) Certification
Committee
Council on Education
for Public Health
Activity or
Project
Year(s)
Member
2010
Member
2010
Member
2012
Board of Trustees
2011-2012
Executive
Committee
2010-2012
Sara Plaspohl
Textbook Reviewer
Sara Plaspohl
Member
Sara Plaspohl
Site visit
accreditation team
member
Richard St. Pierre
Board of Trustees
Richard St. Pierre
Executive
Committee
Southeast Georgia
Cancer Alliance
Southeast Georgia
Cancer Alliance
Richard St. Pierre
Membership
Committee
Southeast Georgia
Cancer Alliance
Committee Chair
2010
Richard St. Pierre
Member
Task Force Member
2010-2012
Richard St. Pierre
Member
Community Liaison
2010-2012
Richard St. Pierre
Member
Coordinated
Speaker’s Bureau
2011
Richard St. Pierre
Member
Savannah Chapter of
the National Kidney
Foundation
Coastal Georgia Area
on Aging
Operation Stroke,
American Heart
Association
Georgia Regional
Development Center
Membership
Committee
2010
Richard St. Pierre
Advisor
College Students
Against Cancer
Faculty Advisor
2011-2012
Community service represents an integral part of the Annual Professional Activities Report and
Tenure and Promotion process. The MPH faculty engages in a wide range of local, state,
national, and international service activities. The following materials highlight service projects
that contribute to the HS, COHP and AASU strategic plans, values and strategic goals:
Local Community Service:
At the local level, the Department of Health Science has provided service to the following
organizations: J. C. Lewis Health Center, Savannah State University, St. Joseph/Candler African
128
American Men’s Health Initiative – Council, Chatham County Safety Net Planning Council,
Administrative Committee on Public Health (ACOPH), Good Samaritan Clinic, Georgetown
Elementary School, Savannah Ogeechee Regional Science and Engineering Fair, Bioethics
Committee, St Joseph/Candler Hospital, Bioethics Subcommittee, St Joseph Candler Hospital,
Hospice Subcommittee, St. Joseph Candler Hospital, POLST Subcommittee, St. Joseph’s
Candler Hospital, POLST Committee, St. Joseph Candler Hospital, General Institutional Review
Board, Memorial Health University Medical Center, Community Outreach Committee,
Memorial University Medical Center, Ashtree Organization, Planned Parenthood Advisory
Council, Savannah Area GIS – Annual GIS Day, Community Immunization Coalition, Chatham
County Safety Net Coalition, Research Day activities, Memorial Health University Medical
Center, Savannah, GA, Memorial Health University Medical Center General Institutional
Review Board, Memorial Health University Medical Center Oncology Institutional Review
Board, Community Health Mission, Savannah, GA.
Statewide Service:
At the state level, faculty and students have been involved in the following: Georgia Public
Health Association; Prevention Credentialing Consortium of Georgia, Northeast Kansas Hospital
Network Consultant, USG Board of Regents Administrative Committee on Public Health, Health
Care Georgia - Partner Up For Public Health – Georgia Division of Public Health – Strategic
Partner.
National Service:
American Public Health Association; American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene;
Society for Public Health Education; The Annals of Pharmacology, Clinical Infectious Diseases,
Annals of Family Medicine, Journal of Applied Sociology, Sociological Research, Public Health
Research.
International Service:
American Friends of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (member); Journal
of Bioethical Inquiry (Editor in Chief); World Health Organization’s Regional Office for Europe
and its Country Relations and Corporate Communication Web Team (intern)
3.2.d. Identification of the measures by which the program may evaluate the success of its
service program, along with data regarding the program's performance against those
measures over the last year.
The following outcome measures have been developed to evaluate faculty participation in
community service activities. AASU, the College of Health Professions and the Department of
Health Sciences have specific policies, procedures and practices in place to support and
129
recognize faculty service activities. This information is part of the consideration for promotion,
tenure and retention. AASU, the College of Health Professions and the Department of Health
Sciences service contributions at the local, state and national level have been acknowledged in
several formats including media releases, awards and citations (see Table 3.2d).
Table 3.2.d. Outcome Measures for judging the success of the MPH service
expectations
Outcome Measure
Objective
2010
2011
MPH faculty
will provide
leadership,
expertise, and
assistance in public
health education
and promotion that
responds to
changing
community health
needs.
The program will
maintain an advisory
council that
comprises
representatives from
nonprofit, public, and
for-profit agencies
with a concern for
local public health
issues.
Met :100%
Met: 100%
The program
maintains an
advisory council
that comprises
representatives
from nonprofit,
public, and forprofit agencies
with a concern for
local public health
issues.
MPH faculty
will serve in a
significant
consulting capacity
in their area of
expertise that
supports local,
state, national,
and/or international
agencies or
organizations.
50% of MPH
faculty will serve in a
significant consulting
capacity in their area
of expertise that
supports local, state,
national, and/or
international agencies
or
organizations.
MPH faculty
will maintain
membership in
national, regional,
and/or state
professional
organizations.
75% of faculty
will maintain
membership in
national, regional,
and/or state
professional
organizations.
MPH faculty
will satisfy service
requirements to
maintain graduate
faculty status
100% of faculty
will satisfy service
requirements to
maintain university
graduate faculty
status.
2012
As of 6/1/13
2013
Met: 100%
Met: 100%
The program
maintains an
advisory council
that comprises
representatives
from nonprofit,
public, and forprofit agencies
with a concern for
local public health
issues.
The program
maintains an
advisory council
that comprises
representatives
from nonprofit,
public, and forprofit agencies
with a concern
for local public
health issues.
The program
maintains an
advisory council
that comprises
representatives
from nonprofit,
public, and forprofit agencies
with a concern
for local public
health issues.
Met: 100% (5/5)
of MPH faculty
serve in a
significant
consulting capacity
in their area of
expertise that
supports local,
state, national,
and/or
international
agencies or
organizations.
Met: 100% (5/5)
of faculty maintain
membership in
national, regional,
and/or state
professional
organizations.
Met: 100% (5/5)
of MPH faculty
serve in a
significant
consulting capacity
in their area of
expertise that
supports local,
state, national,
and/or
international
agencies or
organizations.
Met: 100% (5/5)
of faculty maintain
membership in
national, regional,
and/or state
professional
organizations.
Met: 100% (5/5)
of MPH faculty
serve in a
significant
consulting
capacity in their
area of expertise
that supports
local, state,
national, and/or
international
agencies or
organizations.
Met: 100% (5/5)
of
faculty maintain
membership in
national, regional,
and/or state
professional
organizations.
Met 100% of
faculty satisfy
service
requirements to
maintain university
graduate faculty
status.
Met 100% of
faculty satisfy
service
requirements to
maintain university
graduate faculty
status.
Met 100% of
faculty satisfy
service
requirements to
maintain
university
graduate faculty
status.
Met: 100%
(5/5) of MPH
faculty serve in a
significant
consulting
capacity in their
area of expertise
that supports
local, state,
national, and/or
international
agencies or
organizations
Met: 100%
(5/5) of faculty
maintain
membership in
national,
regional, and/or
state
professional
organizations
Met 100% of
faculty satisfy
service
requirements to
maintain
university
graduate faculty
status
*Note: Outcome measures for service activity are calculated using MPH total faculty (n=5) only
130
3.2.e. Description of student involvement in service, outside of those activities
associated with the required practice experience and previously described in Criterion
2.4.
All students are encouraged to become involved in service projects in the community. Some
students become engaged in service activity on a voluntary basis entirely while others
become involved as a result of class assignments or through faculty service activity (see
Table 3.2e). A representative list of student service activity for the past three years follows:
Obesity in Chatham County, St. Mary’s Health Center, Good Samaritan Health Center, Teen
Maze, Ashtree Organization.
As of 6/1/13
Table 3.2.e. Student Involvement in Faculty Service
Student/Faculty
Project
2010
2011
2012
2013
Y
Carol Gerrin/David
Adams
Ashtree
Organization Data
Analysis
N
N
Y
Dana Huffman/David
Adams
Ashtree
Organization Data
Analysis
N
N
Y
Laura Cahill/David
Adams
Good Samaritan
Clinic
N
Y
N
N
Y
N
Center for Public
Health Media and
Research
N
N
Y
Coastal Health
District Adolescent
Health and Youth
Development
Program
N
N
Y
Childhood Obesity
in Chatham County
N
Y
Y
Y
N
Holly Arena/David
Adams
Melissa Reams/Leigh
Rich
Kayla Knight/Sandy
Streater
Chris Newman/Sandy
Streater
Good Samaritan
Clinic
N
Y
Y
Y
131
3.2.f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and analysis of the program’s
strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.
This criteria is met.
Strengths: The department's faculty members have consistently engaged in a wide range of
service activities that benefit the university, the community, and the profession of Public Health.
Moreover, students have participated in these activities as appropriate. The MPH practicum
experience gives students the opportunity for hands-on experience of specific health aspects in a
public health environment. During the MPH practicum, students are also exposed to different
working environments related to public health.
Weaknesses: None
Future Plans: MPH faculty and students should continue to maintain close ties with
community-based organizations that are engaged in public health activities.
132
3.3
Workforce Development: The program shall engage in activities other than its
offering of degree programs that support the professional development of the public health
workforce.
3.3.a. Description of the ways in which the program periodically assesses the continuing
education needs of the community or communities it intends to serve. The assessment may
include primary or secondary data collection or data sources.
The MPH Advisory Committee, which consists of faculty, students, and community stakeholders
reviews community-based workforce development needs, e.g., collaboration with Savannah State
University (an HBCU institution), and the Partner Up! For Public Health Campaign, etc. The
MPH Program coordinator serves as a member on the Community Advisory Board for the
Savannah State University, National Institutes of Health, Research Infrastructure in Minority
Institutions (RIMI) Grant, which assesses programs that deal with minority public health issues.
For the past five years, the MPH Coordinator has served on the Board of Advisors for Partner
Up! for Public Health Campaign which is a non-governmental source of information about
public health in Georgia which is supported by the Healthcare Georgia Foundation. The
Campaign’s primary platform for this year is ‘Connecting the Dots: Community Health &
Economic Vitality”. Partner Up holds regular meetings, conference calls, and email
correspondence to communicate the organization’s objectives and the assessment of said
objectives.
The MPH program also works closely with ACOPH (Administrative Committee on Public
Health). ACOPH consists of a consortium of all programs and schools of Public Health in the
University System of Georgia. The Public Health Programs/Schools represented in this
consortium are: Armstrong Atlantic State University, Fort Valley State University, The Regents
University of Georgia (formerly the Medical College of Georgia), Georgia Southern University,
Georgia State University, and The University of Georgia. ACOPH holds regular meetings and/or
conference calls in which consortium members share information and provide feedback on
activities sponsored by each consortium member.
The MPH program at AASU has worked closely with the University of Georgia’s School of
Public Health, Workforce Development Center. The Workforce Development Center which is
funded partially with a grant that all ACOPH consortium members supported has sponsored
summer internships for Armstrong MPH Students as well as public health students from other
ACOPH consortium institutions. The University of Georgia conducted a workforce needs
assessment for the state of Georgia on behalf of all the ACOPH institutions. Emory University
Rollins School of Public Health was also a partner in this needs assessment (see Resource File).
3.3.b. A list of the continuing education programs, other than certificate programs,
offered by the program, including number of participants served, for each of the last three
years. Funded training/continuing education activities may be reported in a separate table.
133
The program has sponsored and/ or collaborated with community-based educational efforts as
listed in Table 3.3b below:
Table 3.3.b. Continuing Education Initiatives
Program
Attendance
Year(s)
The Americans with Disability Act: Then and Now
~50
2012
AASU Smoking Cessation Classes
20
2010-2013
Chatham County Obesity Report
~100
2012
Center for Public Health Media Research Seminar: The
Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks
55
2010-2012
Center for Public Health Media Research Seminar: Screening
of Not Yet Rain
35
2012
Long County Smoking Cessation Project
~50
2010-2011
Affordable Care Act Seminar with Savannah State
University and AASU
26
2012
Youth Risk Behavior Survey
~50
2010
Public Health Ambassador Program
15
2010-2013
Human Trafficking Awareness Partnership
~200
2011
GIS Faculty Workshop
~30
2011
Red Cross Caring Conference
52
2010
3.3.c. Description of certificate programs or other non-degree offerings of the programs,
including enrollment data for each of the last three years.
Prior to 2010, a Graduate Certificate in Public Health was offered. In 2010, the year in which the
On-Line MPH Program was discontinued, the Graduate Certificate in Public Health was also
discontinued. Plans are presently in place to reintroduce the Graduate Certificate in Public Health
by January 2014.
3.3.d. Description of the Program’s Practices, Policies, Procedures, and Evaluation that
Support Continuing Education and Workforce Development Strategies.
The guiding policy for the MPH Program to support continuing education and workforce
development is the MPH Mission Statement which states, the “The mission of the MPH program
at Armstrong Atlantic State University is to support and enhance public health for the Georgia
coastal region through workforce development, research and community service.”
134
The MPH program looks for appropriate opportunities to collaborate with other institutions and
organizations. The MPH Coordinator is a member of the Administrative Committee on Public
Health (ACOPH) for the University System of Georgia units that offer the public health degree.
ACOPH completes a public workforce needs assessment for the state of Georgia. This needs
assessment helps units determine which continuing education/workforce development strategies
are needed. Several workforce development initiatives have occurred as collaboration between
units, for example, summer intern programs for graduate students are awarded and students go
into underserved communities to assist public health workers in expanding their capabilities.
3.3.e. A list of other educational institutions or public health practice organizations, if any,
with which the program collaborates to offer continuing education.
The MPH collaborates actively with the following local, regional, and state organizations, e.g.,
Savannah State University, American Red Cross, Long County Health Department, Coastal
Health District, ACOPH, Chatham County Safety Net, etc. (See Table 3.3b above).
3.3.f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the
program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.
This criterion is met with commentary.
Strengths: The department's faculty members have consistently engaged in a wide range of
workforce development initiatives that benefit the university, the community, and the profession
of Public Health. Moreover, students have participated in these activities as appropriate.
Weaknesses: At the present time, AASU does not have an established department of continuing
education which does not facilitate the MPH Program offering formal CEU or CME
opportunities that generate revenue.
Future Plans: The MPH Program will take steps to reintroduce the Public Health Certificate by
January 2014. The MPH Program will continue to looks for opportunities to collaborate with
other institutions and organizations for CE and workforce development.
135
4.0
Faculty, Staff and Students
4.1
Faculty Qualifications: The program shall have a clearly defined faculty which, by
virtue of its distribution, multidisciplinary nature, educational preparation, practice
experience and research and teaching competence, is able to fully support the program’s
mission, goals and objectives.
There are five faculty members in the AASU Department of Health Sciences who are primarily
assigned to the MPH program (although Dr. Sandy Streater’s assignment to the program, due to
his duties as chair of the department, is apportioned at 50 percent, thus making for a total of 4.5
faculty members). Two additional faculty members in the Department of Health Sciences teach
at least one required MPH course as well as elective courses. Five other Health Sciences faculty
members have expertise in areas related to public health and contribute to the MPH program by
teaching electives. Five members in the community serve as part-time faculty who
predominantly teach electives in the MPH program (and occasionally a required course) and also
often serve as public health practicum site supervisors.
Table 4.1 Faculty Members
Primary MPH Faculty
Primary assignment in the MPH program
David Adams
Ph.D.
August 2001–Present
Sara Plaspohl
Dr.P.H.
August 2010–July 2011 (temporary); August 2011–Present (tenure-track)
Leigh Rich
Ph.D.
August 2005–Present
Richard St. Pierre
Ed.D.
August 1999–December 2012 (retired)
Sandy Streater
Ed.D.
August 1988–Present (MPH assignment time apportioned at 50 percent)
Nandi Marshall
Dr.P.H.
August 2013
Additional Health Sciences Department Faculty
Primary assignment in a program other than MPH but teach a core course or elective course used by MPH students
Alice Adams
Ph.D.
August 2003–December 2012 (retired)
Andy Bosak
Ph.D.
August–December 2012 (temporary); January 2013–Present (tenure-track)
Janet Buelow
Ph.D., R.N.
January 2007–Present
Robert LeFavi
Ph.D., C.S.C.S.
August 1993–Present
Rod McAdams
Ph.D.
August 2001–Present (teaches one MPH core course twice a year)
Bryan Riemann
Ph.D., A.T.C.
August 2006–Present
136
Linda Wright
Ph.D.
August 1995–Present (will retire in December 2013)
Michael Mink
Ph.D.
August 2005-2010
Andrea Thomas
Ph.D.
August 2013
Part-Time Faculty
Teach either a core course or an elective course in the MPH program
Ron Alt
M.H.S.
1996-Present
Betty Dixon
Dr.P.H.
2012-Present
Paula Reynolds
M.D., Ph.D.
2007-2012
Linda Samuel
Ph.D.
2012-Present
Erika Tate
Ph.D.
2012-Present
137
4.1.a. A table showing primary faculty who support the degree programs offered by the program. It should present data effective at the
beginning of the academic year in which the self-study is submitted to CEPH and should be updated at the beginning of the site visit.
Table 4.1.a. Primary Faculty Supporting the MPH Program
Title/
Academic
Rank
Name
David Adams
Associate
Professor
Tenure
Status or
Classificatio
n
Tenured
FTE or
% Time
to
Progra
m
96%
Gende
r
Race
Degrees
M
C
B.A.
M.A.
Ph.D.
M.P.H.
M.Sc.
Institutions
Where Degrees
Were Earned
Emory U
Washington U (St.
L)
U of Florida
Ohio State U
U of London
Disciplines in Which
Degrees Were Earned
History
History
History/Medical
Sociology
Epidemiology
Infectious Diseases
(LSHTM)
Sara Plaspohl
Assistant
Professor
TenureTrack
96%
F
C
A.S.
B.S.
M.H.S.
Dr.P.H.
Leigh Rich
Associate
Professor
Tenured
96%
F
C
B.A.
M.A.
Ph.D.
Armstrong State
U
Armstrong State
U
Georgia Southern
U
Georgia Southern
U
U of Colorado
U of Arizona
U of Colorado
Dental Hygiene
Dental Hygiene Education
Health Sciences
Public Health
Cultural Anthropology
Cultural/Medical
Anthropology
Health/Behavioral
Sciences
Courses Taught
 Epidemiology
 Environmental Health
 Health/Illness
Continuum
 International Health
 Advanced
Epidemiology
 Zoonotic/Vector
Diseases
 MPH Practicum
 Biostatistics
 Research Methods
 Health Promotion
Mthds
 Planning and
Evaluation
 Nutrition
 MPH Practicum
Epidemiology
Infectious Diseases
Environmental Health
International Health





Bioethics
Health and Law
Gender, Race and
Media
Media Analysis
Qualitative Data
Analysis
Telemedicine


Sandy Streater
13
8
Professor
HS Dept
Chair
MPH Coord
Tenured
55%
M
C
B.A.
M.Ed.
Ed.D.
U of South
Carolina
U of South
Carolina
U of South
English Literature
Audiology
Health
Promotion/Education
Research Interests



Health Communication
Theory in Health Educ
Research Methods
Leadership and Ethics
Women/Minority
Health
C Read Women’s
Health
Manag/Biomedical
Ethics
MPH Practicum
Nutrition
MPH Practicum
IRB Policy
Tobacco Policy
Biostatistics
Program Planning
Research Methods
Immunizations a
Primary Prevention
Adolescent Health
Behav
Health Promotion
Primary Prevention
Table 4.1.a. Primary Faculty Supporting the MPH Program
Title/
Academic
Rank
Name
Tenure
Status or
Classificatio
n
FTE or
% Time
to
Progra
m
Gende
r
Race
Degrees
Institutions
Where Degrees
Were Earned
Disciplines in Which
Degrees Were Earned
Courses Taught
Research Interests
Carolina
Nandi Thomas
(hired August 5th
2013)
13
9
Assistant
Professor
Tenure
Track
96%
F
AA
B.A.
MPH
Dr.PH
Spellman College
East Stroudsburg
Univ.
Georgia Southern
University
Religious Studies
Public Health
Public Health
 Theory and Public
Health
 Planning
 Sexuality
Community Health
Education
4.1.b. Summary data on the qualifications of other program faculty (adjunct, part-time, secondary appointments, etc.). Data should be
provided in table format.
Table 4.1.b. Other Faculty Used to Support the MPH Program (adjunct, part-time, secondary appointments, etc.)
Degrees
Institutions Where
Degrees Were
Earned
C
B.S.
M.H.S.
AASU
AASU
Psychology
Health Science
 Strats for the
Prevention of
Chemical Dependency
Substance Use
Prevention
Drug-Free Workplaces
F
C
A.B.
M.B.A.
M.S.H.A
.
Ph.D.
Duke U
Tulane U
U Alabama (Birm)
U Alabama (Birm)
Political Science
Business
Administration
Health Administration
Health Administration
 Org Theory and
Behavior
 Leadership Seminar
Leadership
Organizational Identity
Client Satisfaction
9%
M
C
B.S.
M.S.
Ph.D.
W Kentucky U
W Kentucky U
U Alabama
Exercise Science
Exercise Science
Human
Perf/Kinesiology
 Physical Activity and
Aging Across the
Lifespan
 Human Growth and
Development
 MPH Practicum
Health/Human
Performance
Exercise as Medicine
AASU
Health Sciences
MHSA
Program
9%
F
C
B.S.
M.S.N.
M.P.H.
Ph.D.
Loma Linda U
Loma Linda U
U Illinois Chicago
U Illinois Chicago
 Organization
Theory/Organizational
Behavior
 Human Resources
Mgmt
Nursing and
Clinical
Director
Coastal Health
District 9-1
.12%
F
C
B.S.N.
M.H.S.A
.
Dr.P.H.
Valdosta State U
AASU
Georgia Southern
U
Nursing
Nursing
Public Health/Health
Admin
Public Health/Health
Admin
Nursing
Health Administration
Public Health
Long-Term Care
Collaborative Hospital
Management
Health of Older Adults
Inter-Professional
Training
Perinatal Case Mgmt
School-Based Health
Vaccination
Scoliosis
Title/Academ
ic Rank
Title & Current
Employer
Ron Alt
Part-Time
Instructor
Alice Adams
(Retired 2012)
Assistant
Professor
Tenured
Master
Addiction
Counselor
ALTernatives
AASU
Health Sciences
MHSA
Program
Andy Bosak
Assistant
Professor
Tenure-Track
Janet Buelow
Betty Dixon
Name
14
0
FTE or
%
Time to
Progra
m
.06%
Gende
r
Race
M
9%
AASU
Health Sciences
MSSM
Program
Associate
Professor
Tenured
Part-Time
Instructor
Disciplines in Which
Degrees Were Earned
Courses Taught
 Leadership Seminar
 Organizational Theory
 Women/Minority
Health
Research Interests
Table 4.1.b. Other Faculty Used to Support the MPH Program (adjunct, part-time, secondary appointments, etc.)
FTE or
%
Time to
Progra
m
18%
Degrees
Institutions Where
Degrees Were
Earned
H
B.S.
M.B.A.
Ph.D.
U of Florida
Nova U
Auburn U
Health Education
Business
Administration
Health/Human
Performance
M
C
B.A.
M.A.
Ph.D.
Emporia State U
U of Kansas
U of Kansas
Political Science
Planning and Policy
American Studies
.12%
F
C
B.S.
M.D.
M.P.H.
Biology
Medicine
Public Health
9%
M
C
B.S.
M.A.
Ph.D.
Emory U
Medical College
GA
Mercer U
West Chester U
UNC–Chapel Hill
U of Pittsburgh
Assistant
Professor of
Social Work
Savannah State
University
.12%
F
AA
B.S.
M.S.W.
Ph.D.
Grad.Cer
t.
Part-Time
Instructor
CEO/President
bluknowledge
.06%
F
AA
Linda Wright
Professor
Tenured
AASU
Health Sciences
27%
F
C
Sc.B.
M.A.
Ph.D.
B.S.
M.S.
Ph.D.
Andrea
Assistant
AASU Health
9%
F
AA
South Carolina St
U
U of South
Carolina
Clark Atlanta U
U of Georgia
Brown U
U of Cal Berkeley
U of Cal Berkeley
East New Mexico
U
AASU
Texas Tech U
Nova S. Eastern
Title/Academ
ic Rank
Title & Current
Employer
Gende
r
Race
Robert LeFavi
Professor
Tenured
AASU
Health Sciences
MSSM
Program
M
Rod
McAdams
Associate
Professor
Tenured
AASU
Health Sciences
MHSA
Program
48%
Paula
Reynolds
Part-Time
Instructor
SafetyNet Exec
Director
Coastal Health
D
AASU
Health Sciences
MSSM
Program
Bryan
Riemann
Associate
Professor
Tenured
Linda Samuel
Part-Time
Instructor
Erika Tate
Name
14
1
D.H.S.
Disciplines in Which
Degrees Were Earned
Courses Taught
Research Interests
 Health/Human
Perform
 Comp/Alt Health
Practice
 Health Prom in
Worksite
 Spirituality and Health
 HC Finance/Delivery
Sys
 Human Resources
Mgmt
 Manag/Biomedical
Ethics
 Women/Minority
Health
 Epidemiology of
Cancer
Health/Human
Performance
Comp/Alt Health
Practices
Athletic Training
Sports Medicine
Sports Medicine
 Biostatistics
Social Welfare
Social Work
Social Work
Gerontology
 Survey of Gerontology
Biomechanics of
Obesity
Postural Control
Neuromuscular Control
of Joint Stability
Medical Social Work
Aging
Rural Health
Health Disparities
EE/Computer Engineer
Math, Science, Tech
Math, Science, Tech
Psychology
Physical Therapy
Experiment Psychology
 Health Promotions
Mthds
 Health and Human
Development
 Biostatistics
Community
Organization
Capacity Building
Health/Human
Development
Gerontology
Health Science
 Marketing
Health Management
Rural Health
Public Financing
Access to Care
Telemedicine
Health Policy
Health Care Disparities
Table 4.1.b. Other Faculty Used to Support the MPH Program (adjunct, part-time, secondary appointments, etc.)
Name
Thomas
(hired Aug.
2013)
14
2
Title/Academ
ic Rank
Title & Current
Employer
Professor
(Temporary)
Sciences
MHSA
Program
FTE or
%
Time to
Progra
m
Gende
r
Race
Degrees
MBA
MPH
BS
Institutions Where
Degrees Were
Earned
Nova S. Eastern
Florida
International
Howard College
Disciplines in Which
Degrees Were Earned
Health Administration
Health Administration
Biology
Courses Taught
 Organizational
Behavior
 PH Administration
Research Interests
Health Administration
4.1.c. Description of the manner in which the faculty complement integrates perspectives
from the field of practice, including information on appointment tracks for practitioners, if
used by the program. Faculty with significant experience outside of that which is typically
associated with an academic career should also be identified.
Faculty members serving AASU’s MPH program as well as the Department of Health Sciences
have a broad range of expertise and interests (see Tables 4.1.1 and 4.1.2 on the previous pages),
including both conducting academic research and scholarship and engaging in public health
practice and community service. The program’s faculty complement has been trained in a broad
array of disciplines that are associated with the interdisciplinary field of public health, and
several have worked or continue to work as public health professionals or in industries related to
public health. The faculty complement as a whole covers overlapping portions of the spectrum
of public health perspectives and fields of practice. For example:
Dr. Sandy Streater is Chair of the Department of Health Sciences and the Graduate Coordinator
for the Master of Public Health program at AASU. He is a Certified Health Education Specialist
(CHES). His research interests include community needs assessment, program planning
implementation and evaluation, and adolescent health behaviors. He has expertise in health and
human performance, theory in health education, public health planning and evaluation, nutrition,
health care concepts and delivery systems, and research methods. He has a record of attaining
extramural funding in the areas of public health education, experiential learning, public service
evaluation of HIV services, nutrition, and human performance. In the PUBH 5550 Nutrition and
PUBH 7675 Public Health Practicum courses, he shares his expertise in nutrition and community
needs assessments with his students, including projects in which he is involved such as the
Chatham County HIV Services Needs Assessment, the Chatham County Study on Ethnicity and
Health Care Seeking Behaviors, China’s Health Care System, and Teenage Health Risk
Behaviors. He recently developed a course on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act,
which was offered to students at AASU and Savannah State University as well as members of
the community at large. He is currently involved with the assessment of the efficacy of schoolbased flu inoculation programs.
Dr. David Adams is a tenured associate professor in the Department of Health Sciences and a
core MPH faculty member. His research interests include global health and the historical and
contemporary epidemiology of infectious diseases. In 2009, he completed an external M.Sc.
degree in Infectious Disease Epidemiology via the London School of Hygiene and Tropical
Medicine from which he applies concepts and content in a variety of courses (e.g., PUBH 6100
Epidemiology, PUBH 7260 Advanced Epidemiology, PUBH 5560 Introduction to International
Health, and PUBH 7675 Public Health Practicum). He is currently completing a textbook,
Infectious Disease Epidemiology in Public Health Practice, for John Wiley and Sons to be
published in 2014.
143
Dr. Sara Plaspohl is a tenure-track assistant professor in the Department of Health Sciences and
a core MPH faculty member. She is a Certified Health Education Specialist (CHES), Certified
IRB Manager (CIM), and Certified IRB Professional (CIP). Her current research interests
include college campus tobacco policy, influenza immunizations, college student health, primary
prevention, research ethics, and human subject protections. She teaches PUBH 6175 Research
Methods, PUBH 6000 Biostatistics, PUBH 6200 Methods of Health Promotion, and PUBH 7500
Public Health Planning and Evaluation, as well as supervises public health practicum
experiences. Her previous professional experience as a Research Ethics Officer at Memorial
University Medical Center enriches classroom discussion and serves as a networking resource
for connecting students with practicum opportunities throughout the local community. She also
maintains a faculty appointment as Assistant Professor of Community Medicine for Mercer
University School of Medicine.
Dr. Leigh E. Rich is a tenured associate professor in the Department of Health Sciences and a
core MPH faculty member. She is trained as a cultural and medical anthropologist, with an
emphasis in public health, health communication, bioethics, and the law. She graduated from an
interdisciplinary Health and Behavioral Sciences program that emphasizes mixed-methods
health-related research integrating theory from the humanities and the natural, social, and
behavioral sciences. Since January 2011, she has served as co-editor in chief and, since March
2012, as editor in chief of the Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, an international, peer-reviewed
publication born in Australasia, with a growing presence in North America, Europe, and other
parts of the globe. She is co-founder and co-director of the fledging Center for Public Health
Media and Research, whose mission is to examine the media’s influence on cultural discourse
and health behaviors and to develop media as tools for education and policy change. Because of
her interests in bioethics, health communication, and public health, she was a visiting researcher
at the Brocher Foundation in Geneva, Switzerland, in Summer 2011; she was an intern for the
Country Relations and Corporate Communication Web Team at the World Health Organization’s
Regional Office for Europe in Copenhagen, Denmark, in Summer 2012; and she was a visiting
researcher at the Institut für Bio- und Medizinethik (Institute for Biomedical Ethics) at the
University of Basel in Basel, Switzerland, in Summer 2013. She also has worked as qualitative
research consultant for five grant projects associated with Memorial University Medical Center
and the Georgia Coastal Health District and is a co-founder of Savannah Working Against
Human Trafficking. Prior to joining AASU’s MPH program, she taught two anthropology
courses in Moscow, Russia; completed a cultural anthropology field experience course in Dorf
Tirol, Italy; worked as a graduate assistant for the Center for Research in the Health and
Behavioral Sciences, the CDC’s Community Guide to Prevention, the University of Colorado
School of Medicine, the Arizona Program for Nicotine and Tobacco Research, and the National
Jewish Medical Center; worked as a part- and/or full-time journalist for several publications in
the United States and Russia; and served as the vice president of the Colorado Press Women.
Her interdisciplinary approach and background as a longtime cultural, health, and political
144
reporter and editor provide a classroom that emphasizes integrating academic fields and
communication skills.
Dr. Richard St. Pierre joined the Department of Health Sciences in 1999 and is a non-tenuretrack full professor (retired as of December 2012). He holds two degrees in Health Education as
well as an EdD. in Counseling. He brings a wide range of expertise to the courses he teaches in
the MPH program, including PUBH 5500 Survey of Gerontology, PUBH 5510 Healthy Aging,
and PUBH 7675 Public Health Practicum. His research interests include aging and health,
international health, and smoking behavior, and he has a record of attaining extramural funding
in these areas. He has worked with high-risk youth in community settings and has established
health education programs in an international context. These experiences have provided him
with insight into the factors influencing success and the failure of health education programming
efforts.
Dr. Alice Adams is a tenured assistant professor in the Department of Health Sciences (retired
December 2012) who has taught both core and elective courses in the MPH program as well as a
regular workshop on proper applications of Excel for the analysis and presentation of healthrelated data for all Health Sciences students. In her courses, she incorporates her research
interests in organizational identity, leadership in high-reliability organizations, and mediation
and collaboration among health professionals. This is accomplished by incorporating relevant
readings into the syllabus; relating findings or experiences from her research efforts in class
discussions and lectures; developing interactive, experiential, or film-based exercises and cases
based on research topics; and inviting research collaborators to speak to students in class. Her
research interests also include access to health services. She provides opportunities for students
to participate in these research projects, including survey design, data collection, data analysis,
and report creation.
Dr. Andy Bosak is a tenure-track assistant professor in the Department of Health Sciences who
oversees MPH practica, as appropriate, and teaches courses in Sports Medicine that MPH
students may use as electives.
Dr. Janet Buelow a tenured full professor in the Department of Health Sciences who teaches
courses in Health Administration that MPH students may use as electives (e.g., MHSA 6650
Human Resources Management in Health Care and MHSA 6100 Organization
Theory/Organizational Behavior).
Dr. Robert LeFavi is a tenured full professor in the Department of Health Sciences who teaches
courses in both Public Health and Sports Medicine that MPH students may use as electives (e.g.,
PUBH 6225 Health Promotion in the Worksite, PUBH 7300 Spirituality and Health Issues,
PUBH 7350 Selected Topics in Complementary and Alternative Health Practices, SMED 5090
Nutritional Issues in Sports Medicine, SMED 5555 Physical Activity in Disease
Prevention/Treatment, and SMED 5600 Healthy Weight Management and Body
145
Composition). He is CHES-certified and holds an M.B.A. in Business Administration and a
Ph.D. from Auburn University in Health and Human Performance. In his PUBH 6225 course
that focuses on worksite wellness programs, students visit corporate wellness sites and write a
business plan for the development of worksite program. In the PUBH 7350 course, students hear
from complementary health practitioners themselves about the inclusion of their therapies in
standard health care practices. He also uses his own experience as an ordained Anglican priest in
the spirituality module of this course and in the PUBH 7300 course. His background in human
performance informs his course material in both SMED 5555 and SMED 5600.
Dr. Rod McAdams is a tenured associate professor in the Department of Health Sciences who
teaches one core MPH course twice a year, MHSA 6000 Health Care Financing and Delivery
Systems, as well as an elective course, MHSA 6850 Managerial and Biomedical Ethics. His
research interests include rural health, policy, public financing of health care, access issues, and
telemedicine. In the MHSA 6000 course, he includes references to projects and grants in which
he is involved (e.g., a Robert Wood Johnson Foundation study on county-level funding and tax
support for hospitals, public health, emergency medical services, mental health, and long-term
care services) and he requires students to interview practicing health and public health
professionals about their training and experiences in our current health care system.
Dr. Bryan Riemann, Ph.D., ATC, FNATA, is a tenured associate professor in the Department
of Health Sciences who regularly teaches one core MPH course, PUBH 6000 Biostatistics, as
well as courses in Sports Medicine that MPH students may use as electives. He also currently
serves as the Coordinator of the Master of Science in Sports Medicine Program and Director of
the Biodynamics and Human Performance Center at Armstrong Atlantic State University. He
earned a bachelor’s degree in Athletic Training from West Chester University, a master’s degree
in Sports Medicine from the University of North Carolina–Chapel Hill, and a doctoral degree in
Sports Medicine from the University of Pittsburgh. He has conducted research in various areas
surrounding functional joint stability, postural control, and the biomechanics of exercise and
therapeutic exercise. Additional research interests include providing scientific evidence to
support exercise prescription, the efficacy of clinical orthopedic rehabilitation procedures, and
the role of proprioception in functional joint stability. His work has won several manuscript
awards and has appeared in numerous international and national sports medicine journals and
textbooks. In April 2010, he was awarded the Kristina C. Brockmeier Faculty Award for
Teaching and, in June 2011, he was named a Fellow of the National Athletic Trainers’
Association.
Dr. Linda Wright is a tenured full professor in the Department of Health Sciences who
regularly teaches one elective MPH course, PUBH 5580 Health and Human Development. She
has a Ph.D. in Experimental Psychology with a major in Lifespan Development and a minor in
Statistics. In PUBH 5580, students identify, research, and discuss real world health and
prevention issues over the lifespan. Students develop Fact Sheets and Research Updates on the
issues they identify and also participate in discussions of the issues about which their classmates
146
have written. Graduate students write research proposals to further the knowledge about a health
issue at one phase of the lifespan. As a graduate student, Dr. Wright published eleven research
articles in Psychology. She then did five years of postdoctoral research in Developmental
Neurobiology and continued this work during her tenure at Boston University School of
Medicine, with fifteen additional publications. While teaching at Armstrong, she earned a
master’s degree in Physical Therapy and has published five articles in this field. She currently
also teaches human anatomy, kinesiology, and neuroscience in the Doctor of Physical Therapy
program.
Mr. Ron Alt is a part-time instructor in the Department of Health Sciences who regularly
teaches one elective MPH course, PUBH 5565 Strategies for the Prevention of Chemical
Dependency. He has a master’s degree in Health Science Education from Armstrong Atlantic
State University and has worked in the substance abuse field for the past 35 years. He is
presently owner and operator of ALTernatives, a drug-free workplace training and
counseling business. He also works within the criminal justice system performing clinical
evaluations for DUI and other drug offenders. As a Master Addiction Counselor under
NAADAC, he also delivers individual counseling and interventions to substance abusers. After
graduating with his master’s degree in 1990, he operated the Housing Authority of Savannah’s
Drug Elimination Program for 18 years. He also implemented and coordinated an Intensive
Residential Substance Abuse Treatment Program for two years at the height of the “crack
epidemic. Mr. Alt often serves as a consultant in the field of substance abuse prevention and
treatment and has received numerous awards, especially for his work in prevention.
Dr. Betty Dixon is a part-time instructor in the Department of Health Sciences who teaches three
courses in both Public Health and Health Administration that MPH students may use as
electives: PUBH 5570 Women’s and Minority Health Issues, MHSA 6100 Organization
Theory/Organizational Behavior in Health Care, and MHSA 7100 Leadership Seminar. She also
has served as an MPH public health practicum site supervisor. As the Director of Nursing and
Clinical Services for the Coastal Health District, she exposes students during their practicum
experience to real public health issues and encourages them to find solutions to local public
health problems.
Dr. Paula Reynolds is a part-time instructor in the Department of Health Sciences who regularly
teaches two elective MPH courses, PUBH 5570 Women’s and Minority Health Issues and PUBH
5800 Epidemiology of Cancer. She is a medical doctor with a Master of Public Health degree
who until December 2012 was the executive director of SafetyNet at the Coastal Health District.
Dr. Linda Samuel is a part-time instructor in the Department of Health Sciences who regularly
teaches one elective MPH course, PUBH 5500 Survey of Gerontology. She is an Assistant
Professor of Social Work at Savannah State University in Savannah, Georgia. She is also a
Licensed Master Social Worker (LMSW), with more than 20 years of professional experience.
She holds a Ph.D. in Social Work form Clark Atlanta University (completed in 2007) and a
147
Graduate Certificate in Gerontology from the University of Georgia (also completed in 2007). In
addition, she has a Master of Social Work degree from the University of South Carolina (1990)
and a bachelor’s degree in Social Welfare from South Carolina State University. Her area of
professional experience includes medical social work in public health and health care as both a
home health and oncology social worker. Her research interests include: aging, rural health, and
health disparities.
Dr. Erika Tate is a part-time instructor in the Department of Health Sciences who regularly
serves as an MPH public health practicum site supervisor and teaches one core MPH course,
PUBH 6200 Methods of Health Promotion. She is the founding CEO and president of
bluknowledge (word fusion: blueprint + knowledge), a social-justice design and research firm
resolved to end health and scientific inequities through empowering community education and
advocacy (http://www.bluknowledge.com/).
148
4.1.d. Identification of measureable objectives by which the program assesses the
qualifications of its faculty complement, along with data regarding the performance of the
program against those measures for each of the last three years.
The MPH program has developed the following set of strategies for the assessment of faculty
achievement of program goals related to teaching, research, and service.
Table 4.1.d. Outcome Measures for Judging the Qualifications of MPH Faculty Complement
Outcome Measure
As of 6/1/13
Target
2010
2011
2012
2013
Proportion of MPH faculty complement
who hold terminal degrees (i.e., doctorallevel degrees).
75%
92.3% (12/13)
92.3% (12/13)
93.8% (15/16)
93.8%
(15/16)
Proportion of MPH faculty complement
who hold Graduate Faculty status (as
approved by the Graduate Affairs
Committee).
100%
100% (13/13)
100% (13/13)
100% (16/16)
100%
(16/16)
Proportion of MPH faculty complement
who serve in a significant consulting
capacity in their area of expertise that
supports local, state, national, and/or
international agencies or organizations.
This role may involve applied
research.(annually)
50%
100% (13/13)
92.3% (12/13)
87.5% (14/16)
87.5%
(14/16)
Number* of grants or contracts submitted
for funding for research and/or service
activities expressed as a percentage of the
MPH faculty complement.(annually)
50%
53.5% (7/13)
76.9% (10/13)
50.0% (8/16)
13% (2/16)
Number* of refereed or invited scholarly
presentations at state, regional, national, or
international scientific meetings and/or
professional conferences expressed as a
percentage of the MPH faculty
complement. (annually)
75%
107.7%
(14/13)
92.3% (12/13)
100% (16/16)
50% (8/16)
Number* of publications (as author or coauthor) in an appropriate area of expertise
in a refereed journal or a non-refereed
publication that is disseminated at the state,
regional, national, or international level
expressed as a percentage of the MPH
faculty complement.(annually)
25%
23.1% (3/13)
30.8% (4/13)
68.8% (11/16)
31% (5/16)
*Note: The denominator is the total number of faculty in the MPH Program. However, numerators reflect outcome measures for
numbers of grants, presentations, and publications are calculated using only MPH primary faculty (n=5). For example in line 5,
2010, there were 13 total MPH faculty, however, the 5 primary MPH faculty had a total of 14 refereed or invited scholarly
presentations at state, regional, national, or international scientific meetings and/or professional conferences i.e.14/13 = 107.7%.
For a complete list, see Resource File.
149
4.1.e. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the
program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.
This criterion is met.
Strengths: The MPH program has an adequate faculty complement with appropriate training,
research, and practice experience. The MPH faculty members provide expertise that
comprehensively covers the areas of knowledge basic to public health, with a focus on
community health education. Additional content areas of interest to MPH students also are
offered as electives. The faculty members make linkages with real-world situations, expertise,
and contacts in their courses. This faculty complement is fully able to support the program’s
mission, goals, and objectives. The MPH program has established quantifiable outcome
measures that assess the qualifications of the MPH faculty. The faculty complement possesses a
wide range of expertise related to public health that reflects the multidisciplinary nature of the
profession. Ongoing part-time instructors with significant practice experience also contribute
regularly to the program. The distribution of scholarly output of the core MPH faculty has
increased significantly. Outcome measures for numbers of grants, presentations, and publications
were met using MPH total faculty (n=5) only. If the full complement of MPH faculty were used,
outcomes would greatly exceed targets.
Weaknesses: In order for the faculty to generate more grants and publications, adjustments need
to be made in teaching loads.
Future Plans: The MPH Program will continue to look for knowledgeable practitioners and
part-time (adjunct) faculty to augment faculty content knowledge.
150
4.2
Faculty Policies and Procedures: The program shall have well-defined policies and
procedures to recruit, appoint and promote qualified faculty, to evaluate competence and
performance of faculty, and to support the professional development and advancement of
faculty.
4.2.a. A faculty handbook or other written document that outlines faculty rules and
regulations.
The policies, procedures, and operational guidelines for faculty rules and regulations are included
in the AASU Faculty Handbook (revised May 15, 2012), which is accessible to all faculty via
downloadable PDF (see Resource File and/or the following link at
http://www.armstrong.edu/images/academic_affairs/Faculty_Handbook.pdf). The Faculty
Handbook covers policies and procedures related to the following issues:
101 Administrative Organization
102 Academic Units
103 Governance
103.1 Faculty Senate
103.2 Constitution of the Armstrong Faculty Senate
103.3 Bylaws of Armstrong Faculty Senate
104 Standing Committees of the University
105 Evaluation Policies and Procedures
105.1 Policy on Evaluation of Administrators
105.2 Faculty Evaluation
106 Faculty Rights and Responsibilities
106.1 Academic Freedom
106.2 Teaching and Advising Expectations
106.3 Outside Activities
106.4 Professional Expectations
106.5 Workplace Expectations
107 Employment Policies
107.1 Hiring Policies
107.2 Appointment to the Faculty
107.3 Contracts
107.4 Faculty Personnel Actions and Tenure
107.5 Termination of Employment
107.6 Other Policies
4.2.b. Description of provisions for faculty development, including identification of
support for faculty categories other than regular full-time appointments.
Armstrong Atlantic State University makes available developmental activities related to
teaching, research and funding for all faculty members regardless of type of appointment (part151
time or full-time). Three divisions within the university are principally tasked with faculty
development and include:



The Office of Faculty Development, which is informed by the University Faculty
Development Committee
(http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/faculty_development/faculty_development_
welcome);
Grants and Sponsored Programs
(http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/grants/grants_welcome); and
The Office of Online and Blended Learning
(http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/office_online_learning/online_blended_wel
come).
Developmental activities provided by the University include an array of teaching resources and
seminars;1 internal and collaborative research and teaching grants;2 grant opportunities and grant
writing resources;3 faculty awards;4 technical support;5 and professional development funds.
Multiple seminars related to teaching are offered annually through the Offices of Faculty
Development and Online and Blended Learning. These include Friday Faculty Forums, Faculty
Reading Roundtables, Faculty Learning Communities, and online and blended learning
workshops and boot camps for faculty and students on new technologies that can be used in the
classroom. All of these programs are intended to assist faculty in traditional and online course
development and the continued improvement and adaptation of teaching techniques, particularly
as educational tools and technologies change. Moreover, the Office of Online and Blended
Learning specifically supports online course development and delivery, assisting faculty with the
attainment of E-faculty status and conducting online course reviews.
Through the Office of Faculty Development, AASU also sponsors annual internal grant
competitions that support the development of proposals and/or seed money for projects in
teaching and learning, research and scholarship, and leadership activities. Additionally, Grants
and Sponsored Programs assists faculty with locating appropriate external funding sources and
grant solicitations in their areas of expertise. This is carried out on an ongoing basis, and faculty
members are notified via e-mail or through the university mail system. Grants and Sponsored
1
http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/faculty_development/faculty_development_teaching_resources and
http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/office_online_learning/online_blended_professional_development.
2
http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/faculty_development/faculty_development_internal_grants_and_collaborati
ve_grants.
3
http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/faculty_development/faculty_development_grant_writing_resources;
http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/grants/grants_funding_opportunities; and
http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/grants/grants_proposal_development.
4
http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/faculty_development/faculty_development_faculty_awards.
5
http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/grants/grants_training and
http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/office_online_learning/online_blended_faculty_staff_resources.
152
Programs also offers one-on-one tutorials and grant writing workshops to assist faculty, staff and
students in developing skills needed to create competitive proposals.
Both full- and part-time faculty, as well as alumni and staff members, are honored every year
with awards recognizing exemplary teaching and mentoring and distinguished service to the
University, the academic discipline, and the community.
The AASU Foundation makes available endowment funds that are granted to faculty members
for assistance in projects that will directly benefit the university. Applications for these grants
are made in writing to the President and are evaluated on the basis of their academic merit. The
Health Sciences Department Foundation fund is another source for faculty development
activities on an ad hoc basis.
Faculty members also have access to multiple sources of funding for travel to professional
meetings (including departmental stipends as well as some resources from the Dean’s Office, the
Office of International Studies, and the Office of the Provost and Vice President for Academic
Affairs). The University provides transportation support for attending meetings located outside
of the Savannah area. Transportation may include a state car paid for by the University or an
employee car for which the University reimburses at the official mileage rate.
Finally, AASU makes available summer salary support for those faculty members who wish to
teach during this period. This support has to be approved by the Department Chair, the Dean,
and the University President. A separate contract is provided to faculty for this period and salary
is calculated according to the number of courses and total credit hours taught.
4.2.c. Description of formal procedures for evaluating faculty competence and
performance.
The purpose and intent of faculty evaluation is to provide a regular, systematic evaluation on
performance; to encourage professional development and renewal; to assess progress toward
tenure and promotion; to encourage individual excellence and achievement; to encourage
activities that contribute to the missions and goals of the University, the College of Health
Professions, and the Department of Health Sciences; to provide a basis for merit salary increases;
and to help those who are not achieving at satisfactory levels to do so. The evaluation process
encourages excellence in both traditional and innovative approaches with regard to teaching,
research and service.
Armstrong Atlantic State University has several methods to evaluate faculty competence and
performance. Faculty members are evaluated in the areas of teaching, research and service. The
performance of each faculty member is reviewed annually and judged as not meeting
expectations, meeting expectations, or exceeding expectations. The primary methods used to
evaluate faculty performance are the Annual Professional Activities Report (APAR) and the
Annual Faculty Evaluation (AFE); however, additional measures include pre- and post-tenure
review, reappointment ballots, Faculty Peer Evaluation (FPE), graduate faculty status, and
153
student Faculty and Course Evaluations (known as FACE; see Criterion 4.2.d below for more
information).
The Annual Professional Activities Report (APAR) is a portfolio that explains and highlights
faculty members’ activities with respect to teaching (60 percent), scholarship (20 percent),
service (20 percent), and any other appropriate activity faculty wish to submit. This report is
completed by faculty every January and includes all activities in which faculty members have
engaged during the prior calendar year (from January to December). Supporting documents and
materials, including data from student course FACE evaluations, must be included. The APAR
is submitted directly to the Department Chair, who reviews the contents and evaluates faculty
members’ performance on each of the criteria. The Chair then meets with faculty members
individually to discuss the APAR. The completed APAR with the Chair’s written assessments
becomes the Annual Faculty Evaluation (AFE), which is submitted to the Dean of the College of
Health Professions and subsequently to the University Provost and Vice President for Academic
Affairs.
Each College within the University determines its faculty’s criteria for annual performance
reviews. Each College’s criteria are consistent with those of the other Colleges, but none are
identical. In the College of Health Professions, each graduate faculty member is expected to
have a record of ongoing scholarly activity. Usually, this results in a peer-reviewed publication;
however, it may also result in scholarly activity of another sort. The extent to which a faculty
member meets his or her research expectations is described in the candidate’s Annual
Performance and Academic Review (APAR) and subsequently reflected in the faculty member’s
Annual Faculty Evaluation (AFE). In addition, the quality and quantity of faculty research are
significant factors in whether or not a faculty member receives tenure and/or promotion.
All faculty members being reviewed for tenure and promotion are evaluated according to the
Department of Health Science’s (see Resource File) and College of Health Professions’
(http://www.armstrong.edu/Health_professions/deans_office/chp_tenure_promotion) guidelines,
consistent with the AASU Faculty Handbook (see Criterion 4.2.a above) and USG Board of
Regents policies and without prejudice from prior applications. Those applying for tenure
undergo both pre-tenure and post-tenure review. Pre-tenure review takes place in the third year
of a tenure-track position; post-tenure review takes place the year after tenure has been granted.
Tenure and promotion portfolios are reviewed by the Department Chair, in conjunction with the
Department’s Tenure and Promotion Committee members, followed by a review by the
College’s Tenure and Promotion Committee in light of the College’s criteria. Recommendations
are returned to the Dean, who then evaluates the portfolio independently. Candidates whose
applications for tenure and/or promotion are rejected may appeal through the appropriate
procedures of the University.
An additional evaluation method may include Faculty Peer Evaluation (FPE) (see Resource
File). Faculty members—particularly non-tenured or pre-tenured faculty being reviewed for
154
reappointment—are required to undergo evaluation by their peers each year prior to being
granted tenure. During this process, annual retention ballots are distributed to departmental
colleagues. The Department Chair reviews these ballots and departmental members’ feedback
and then makes a recommendation to the Dean.
Graduate faculty also must maintain graduate faculty status. Every three to five years after the
initial appointment (based upon a candidate’s graduate faculty rank), graduate faculty are reevaluated by the Graduate Faculty Status Subcommittee of the University Graduate Affairs
Committee to ensure maintenance of graduate faculty status. (see Resource File - Graduate
Faculty Status Criteria)
http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/faculty_senate/senate_graduate_affairs_committee_byla
ws).
4.2.d. Description of the processes used for student course evaluation and evaluation of
instructional effectiveness.
Teaching effectiveness is a component of faculty evaluation. Evaluation of this component
includes faculty members’ expertise to communicate subject matter to students via methods such
as lecturing; supervision and training in a laboratory or clinical setting; collection and
development of subject materials for courses; guidance of students in practicum experiences,
independent studies and research; and ongoing academic advisement.
All faculty and the courses they teach are evaluated by students in those courses at the close of
each term according to a University-wide evaluation process (Faculty and Course Evaluation,
known as FACE). This assessment tool questions teaching adequacy, accessibility and efforts to
help students understand the topics being taught. In addition, an opportunity is given for openended student comments. The FACE process is overseen by the University’s Office of
Institutional Research
(http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/institutional_research/institutional_research_face).
Data are collected and reported to each faculty member, the Department Chair, and the Dean at
the end of every term; annual compilations of this data also are provided. (Evaluation forms for
courses with less than five students are evaluated only at the departmental level.) FACE data
must be included in faculty members’ APAR and AFE reports. (see Resource File or
http://www.armstrong.edu/images/institutional_research/eFace_Questions.pdf for copies of the
University FACE form.)
The MPH program also utilizes additional forms of assessment so that students may provide
input regarding program curriculum, resources, faculty competence, students’ own professional
growth and students’ practicum experiences. These assessments include the MPH Student Exit
Questionnaire, the MPH Practicum Student Evaluation of the Site, the MPH Initial and Final
Competency Self-Evaluation Surveys, and the MPH Alumni Survey. This information is
155
collected by the MPH program and is reviewed by the MPH Coordinator and faculty and used to
make program decisions.
The MPH Student Exit Questionnaire (see Resource File) is a survey that all graduating MPH
students complete in an anonymous manner. It includes both quantitative and qualitative
questions regarding the MPH program curriculum (in general as well as core courses), the
practicum experience, MPH faculty, and program and institutional facilities. It also asks students
to comment on the major strengths and weakness of the program and its faculty and to suggest
improvements.
The MPH Practicum Student Evaluation of the Site (see Resource File) asks students to rate their
practicum site and practicum site supervisor using five-point Likert scales and open-ended
comment sections. This assessment tool requests that students to reflect upon the quality,
availability and professionalism of their site supervisor as well as the practicum site’s
contribution to the attainment of practicum objectives and to the student’s professional potential.
The MPH Competency Self-Evaluation Surveys (see Resource File) are administered to students
at two times: new student orientation (pre-survey) and prior to graduation during the PUBH 7500
capstone course (post-survey). This tool asks students to reflect on and evaluate their current
proficiencies in several competencies: communication, analytical assessment,
administration/management, cultural competencies and community, basic public health sciences
skills, policy development/program planning, and leadership and ethics. Although these are
student self-evaluations, this assessment assists the MPH program and its faculty in refining
instruction, evaluation and the curriculum to best meet the professional development needs of
students and the discipline of public health.
Lastly, the MPH Alumni Survey (see Resource File) obtains information about graduates’
impressions of how the program and program of study prepared them for their professional lives.
The tool seeks information about whether students are employed in public health positions, how
long it took to secure employment, what sector(s) of public health they work in, how well the
AASU MPH program in general prepared them for this work, and to what extent they use
competencies addressed in the MPH program of study (particularly core courses and the
practicum experience).
4.2.e. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the
program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.
This criterion is met.
Strengths: The University, College and Department have clearly defined policies and
procedures that allow the program to recruit, appoint, evaluate, promote and tenure qualified
faculty. The University, College and Department also provide multiple avenues of opportunity
for the development of faculty members and the evaluation of courses, faculty and the program
156
by current and graduated students. The University, College and Department have clearly defined
policies and procedures that allow the program to recruit, appoint, evaluate, promote and tenure
qualified faculty. Performance policies and criteria are reviewed by Departmental and College
committees and are accessible online and/or within the Department of Health Sciences. Faculty
evaluations are conducted annually and are reviewed by the Department Chair, Dean and
Provost. The University, College and Department provide opportunity for the development of
faculty members. The MPH program provides multiple avenues of evaluation of courses, faculty
and the program by current and graduated students.
Weaknesses: The level of financial support for research, scholarship and creative endeavors is
considered to be inadequate. Even though AASU provides small grants for scholarly endeavors,
operational budgets and departmental travel budgets have been significantly cut in the past
several years. Classroom, meeting and office facilities for graduate courses, graduate students
and Department of Health Sciences faculty also are considered to be inadequate. Classrooms
geared toward graduate education and dedicated meeting spaces for faculty to meet with
graduate students do not currently exist. Dedicated office space for MPH faculty members is
inadequate.
Future Plans: The MPH Program will seek additional opportunities and additional funding to
compliment faculty development activities.
157
4.3
Student Recruitment and Admissions: The program shall have student recruitment
and admissions policies and procedures designed to locate and select qualified individuals
capable of taking advantage of the program’s various learning activities, which will enable
each of them to develop competence for a career in public health.
4.3.a. Description of the program’s recruitment policies and procedures.
The College of Health Professions, the Department of Health Sciences and the MPH program
recruit students at the local level via personal referral and marketing linkages as well as at the
national, regional and state levels via meetings and print and online promotion. Recruiting
efforts are overseen primarily by the College of Health Professions and its Coordinator of
Recruitment and Retention. Recruiting methods include up-to-date websites
(http://www.armstrong.edu/Health_Professions/Health_Sciences/healthsciences_master_of_publi
c_health) and social media groups (e.g., http://www.linkedin.com/groups/Armstrong-MasterPublic-Health-4754771); billboards and other displays; printed brochures; booths at meetings;
visits and presentations to local and state campuses and health-related organizations; and
personal contact (e.g., with faculty members as well as “PIER” Leaders; see
http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/Alumni/alumni_recruit_students). Recruitment also is
enhanced by efforts of the University’s School of Graduate Studies (which subscribes to listserves that allow interested individuals access to graduate program information and which
produces a brochure that illuminates each graduate program at AASU), the Office of Alumni
Relations (which oversees PIER Leaders;
http://www.armstrong.edu/index.php/Departments/Alumni/alumni_welcome), and the Office of
Advancement
(http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/external_affairs/external_affairs_welcome).
Recruitment efforts have been so successful that the MPH program is continuously
accommodating the maximum number of students. To date, personal referral and online
promotion have been the most successful marketing approaches.
Scholarship funds for MPH students include funds from the Scholarships for Disadvantaged
Students (SDS). Dr. Streater, Coordinator of the MPH Program, in conjunction with the Grants
and Sponsored Research Office and the College of Health Professions Dean’s Office, competed
for and was awarded Scholarships for Disadvantaged Students (Grant Award T08HP25216-0100) in the amount of $240,000/year for the years 2012-2015. Qualified students may receive up
to $15,000 per year or $7,500 per semester based on financial need.
4.3.b. Statement of admissions policies and procedures.
For admission to the MPH program, students must complete a general application to AASU’s
School of Graduate Studies as well as supplemental application materials specific to the MPH
program. A list of MPH program-specific materials can be found on the AASU School of
Graduate Studies website
158
(http://www.armstrong.edu/Admissions/graduate2/graduate_program_requirements) as well as
the Department of Health Sciences website
(http://www.armstrong.edu/Health_Professions/Health_Sciences/healthsciences_apply).
Application packets are available from the School of Graduate Studies as hard-copies or
electronically
(http://www.armstrong.edu/Admissions/graduate3/admissions_apply_aasu_graduate). The
general Graduate Studies application can be requested in person or by mail on hard-copy;
downloaded and completed on hard-copy; or accessed and completed online. The MPH
program-specific application materials can be requested in person or by mail on hard-copy or
downloaded and completed on hard-copy (see
http://www.armstrong.edu/Admissions/graduate3/graduate_forms).
All applications to the MPH program are submitted (or forwarded, in the case of transcripts and
test scores) directly to AASU’s School of Graduate Studies and must include:








Graduate Studies application form
$30 non-refundable application fee
Immunization form
Two (2) official transcripts of all post-secondary education
Letter of intent
Two (2) completed reference forms
Completed work experience form
Official GRE or MAT scores (required for degree-seeking students only).
Copies of completed applications are then provided by the School of Graduate Studies to the
MPH Program Coordinator, who uses the MPH Program Admission Score sheet (see Resource
File) to evaluate materials and assess whether applicants should be admitted. Requirements for
admission to the MPH program are as follows:






Baccalaureate degree from a regionally accredited institution
Minimum overall undergraduate GPA of 2.8
Minimum score ≥ 70 for applicant’s letter of intent
Minimum score ≥ 70 for personal references
Minimum test score for one of the following:
o GRE ≥ 286 (verbal + quantitative; formerly 800) or
o MAT ≥ 400
Public health-related work experience is also factored in
While there are minimum scores for all the above criteria (except work experience), it is the total
score that considered for admission to the program. Applicants with an overall score of 2000 or
higher are accepted for regular admission to the MPH program. Applicants who score a
minimum of 1785 may still be considered; the MPH Coordinator consults with the MPH faculty
for further guidance about these applicants.
159
New students are admitted to the MPH program on a rolling basis at the beginning of every term
(Fall, Spring and Summer). If more applicants are approved for admission than slots are
available for a specific term, acceptances for students who applied last are delayed one semester.
The MPH program conforms to all AASU School of Graduate Studies admission and
progression criteria. Course offerings are designed to accommodate full-time or part-time
students. Courses are also offered in the evenings, and some are in hybrid form or online to
accommodate traditional and non-traditional students.
4.3.c. Examples of recruitment materials and other publications and advertising that
describe, at a minimum, academic calendars, grading and the academic offerings of the
program. If a program does not have a printed bulletin/catalog, it must provide a printed
web page that indicates the degree requirements as the official representation of the
program. In addition, references to website addresses may be included.
Armstrong Atlantic State University publishes its Graduate Catalog on a yearly basis
(http://www.armstrong.edu/images/academic_affairs/current_graduate_catalog.pdf (see
Resource File). In the catalog, each graduate program offered by the University is described in
detail, including admission requirements, the program of study, and standards of progression and
graduation. This document is always available to students, staff and faculty electronically via a
link on the School of Graduate Studies home page. The academic calendar for all three terms in
the specified academic year is included on the second page of the Graduate Catalog, and
information about AASU’s Honor Code and Code of Conduct and academic policies related to
grades, grade reporting, academic standing, academic dismissal due to low grades, and course
load and limitations are included. Additionally, via the AASU University Registrar website
(http://www.armstrong.edu/index.php/Departments/registrar/registrar_welcome), students can
access academic calendars, course schedules, final exam schedules, policies about GPA changes
and withdrawals, and the Graduate Catalog. Under “Academic Resources” on the Registrar’s
home page, students also can locate academic policies
(http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/registrar/registrar_academic_policies) and policies
about academic standing
(http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/registrar/registrar_academic_standing).
Program details regarding the MPH degree—including admission requirements, the program of
study, graduate assistantships, and the program’s mission, vision and goals—and selected
resources related to careers in public health also are provided through the Health Sciences
website, which is updated as needed
(http://www.armstrong.edu/Health_Professions/Health_Sciences/healthsciences_master_of_publi
c_health). Materials related to technical standards, grade expectations and degree progression,
and suggested MPH course sequences are given to all MPH students during new student
orientation (see Resource File).
160
4.3.d. Quantitative information on the number of applicants, acceptances and enrollment,
by concentration, for each degree, for each of the last three years. Data must be presented in
table format.
Over the past three academic years, 189 students have applied to the MPH program. Of that
number, 111 were admitted and 62 enrolled.
Table 4.3.d. Quantitative Information on Applicants, Acceptances, and Enrollments, Fall
2010 to Spring 2013
2010
2011
2012
2013
Total
As of 6/1/13
Community
Health
Education
Applied
42
63
84
21
210
Accepted
25
35
51
16
127
Enrolled
17
19
26
13
75
4.3.e. Quantitative information on the number of students enrolled in each specialty area of
each degree identified in the instructional matrix, including headcounts of full- and part-time
students and an FTE conversion, for each of the last three years. Explain any important
trends or patterns, including a persistent absence of students in any degree or specialization.
Data must be presented in table format.
Over the past three academic years, the number of students in the MPH program, both full-time
and part-time, has increased (41, 50 and 65, respectively).
Table 4.3.e. Student Enrollment Data from fall 2010 to spring 2013
2010
HC
MPH: Community Health
Education
2011
FTE
25 FT
HC
2012
FTE
36 FT
34
16 PT
As of 6/1/13
HC
FTE
35 FT
44
14 PT
2013
HC
41
53
30 PT
FTE
54
23
4.3.f. Identification of measurable objectives by which the program may evaluate its success
in enrolling a qualified student body, along with data regarding the performance of the
program against those measures for each of the last three years.
The outcome measures used to evaluate success in enrolling quality students into the MPH
program include the following measures, as identified in each applicant’s completed application
packet and assessed using the MPH Program Admission Score Sheet (see 4.3.b above):
161
Table 4.3.f. Outcome Measures for Judging the Qualifications of MPH Students
Outcome Measure
Target
GPA (undergraduate)
≥ 2.8
GRE (verbal)
GRE (quantitative)
MPH Application Letter of Intent Score
MPH Application Professional References
Scores
MPH Program Admission Score (total)
As of 6/1/13
2010
2011
2012
2013
87.0% (20/23)
91.7% (22/24)
93.3% (28/30)
92% (11/12)
x̄ 3.12
x̄ 3.07
x̄ 3.24
x̄ 3.19
63.2% (12/19)
50% (11/22)
60% (18/30)
67% (8/12)
x̄ 467
x̄ 422
442
x̄ 414
78.9% (15/19)
68.2% (15/22)
66.7% (20/30)
83% (10/12)
x̄ 482
x̄ 493
x̄ 477
x̄ 479
100% (23/23)
100% (25/25
100% (30/30
100%
(12/12)
x̄ 90
x̄ 90
x̄ 90
100% (46/46)
100% (50/50)
98.3% (59/60)
x̄ 51
x̄ 52
x̄ 54
90.9% (20/22)
100% (24/24)
100% (29/29)
x̄ 2182
x̄ 2212
x̄ 2131
≥ 400
≥ 400
≥ 70
≥ 35
(each)
≥ 1785
x̄ 85
100%
(12/12)
x̄ 52%
100%
(12/12)
x̄ 2118
4.3.g. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the program’s
strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.
This criterion is met.
Strengths: The admission and recruitment policies followed by the MPH program ensure that
qualified applicants are identified and selected for admission and that students have access to
information about the program as well as performance and progression expectations. The MPH
program continues to recruit and admit qualified students every year. The use of the MPH Program
Admission rubric allows flexibility for applicants with real potential for a successful career in public
health who may not necessarily “fit” the traditional model. HRSA funding for qualified but
financially disadvantaged students will ensure that admission into the MPH program will not be
limited by socioeconomic status. Information about admission policies, academic calendars, the
162
program of study, and grade expectations are available in multiple places (both electronically and on
hard-copy).
Weaknesses: The MPH program is continuously accommodating the maximum number of students
and sometimes must delay acceptances by one semester. The ability to grow in capacity is dependent
upon increasing more faculty and infrastructural resources. Supplemental application materials
specific to the MPH program, while available online for download, currently cannot be completed
online, and links to these materials are difficult to find on the Office of Graduate Studies website.
163
4.4
Advising and Career Counseling: There shall be available a clearly explained and
accessible academic advising system for students, as well as readily available career and
placement advice.
4.4.a. Description of the program’s advising services for students in all degrees and
concentrations, including sample materials such as student handbooks. Include an
explanation of how faculty are selected for and oriented to their advising responsibilities.
Armstrong Atlantic State University has established two official advisement periods that last four
weeks every Fall (e.g., Monday, March 26, to Friday, April 20, 2012) and four weeks every
Spring (e.g., Monday, March 25, to Friday, April 19, 2013) and are listed on the University’s
academic calendars. Additionally, two advisement days occur on the last two business days
before the first day of every term (Fall, Spring and Summer). During official advisement
periods, students may request appointments with their faculty advisors to discuss upcoming
schedules and other academic concerns. MPH faculty typically will advise students outside of
these periods as well when requested. The University also has an Office of Academic
Orientation and Advisement, with resources for both traditional and non-traditional students (see
http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/advising/advising_advisement_and_course_selection),
and the College of Health Professions has a dedicated Coordinator of Recruitment and Retention
who may advise students as necessary.
Both the Office of Graduate Studies and the MPH program offer orientation sessions for students
at the beginning of every term (Fall, Spring and Summer). The Office of Academic Orientation
and Advisement also offers a seminar for faculty on an ongoing basis (at least once per year) on
best practices for advising. Additionally, the MPH Program Coordinator and senior Health
Sciences faculty informally mentor junior faculty in advising.
MPH students are initially assigned a faculty advisor by the MPH Program Coordinator based on
their admission application letter of intent. The MPH Program Coordinator tries to match
students’ interests in public health with faculty areas of expertise and research. Once in the
program, however, students may select a different advisor, if they so choose, at any time. All
MPH students are first advised during the new student orientation session, attended by all MPH
faculty, or, if the student is absent, by the MPH Program Coordinator. Graduate students are not
required by the University to make advising appointments during the remainder of their
matriculation, but they are strongly encouraged to do so by the MPH program and its faculty.
Approximately two to three weeks prior to official advisement periods, all MPH students are
contacted via e-mail to remind them of advisement dates and procedures. Students sign up for
advisement slots by stopping by or calling the front desk of the Health Sciences office.
For efficacy reasons and to establish strong working relationships between students and faculty,
in-person advisement is recommended, but advisement also may take place by telephone or
online if a student prefers.
164
At the MPH orientation sessions, students are provided the MPH Student Handbook and other
informational materials, including (among other items) information about the University, campus
life and Lane Library; general academic and financial resources; the MPH program’s mission,
vision, goals and strategies, student learning outcomes, technical standards and Mandala
Movement; progression and graduation policies; the MPH program of study; and suggested MPH
course sequences (see Resource File). Students’ official MPH program of study, documenting
their progression through the program, is kept in their departmental file and is shared with the
student and updated by the faculty advisor during advisement.
4.4.b. Description of the program’s career counseling services for students in all degree
programs. Include an explanation of efforts to tailor services to meet specific needs in the
program’s student population.
The MPH program page on the Department of Health Sciences website includes a selected list of
career resources related to public health as well as information on credentialing, CHES
certification, and other web sites related to public health
(http://www.armstrong.edu/Health_Professions/Health_Sciences/healthsciences_master_of_publi
c_health); additionally, AASU MPH students can join a LinkedIn group that enables current
students and graduate students to connect with one another and potentially other public health
professionals (http://www.linkedin.com/groups/Armstrong-Master-Public-Health-4754771).
When members of the public health community contact MPH faculty regarding internships,
fellowships and jobs, these notices are sent to the Secretary of the Department of Health
Sciences, who maintains a list of all MPH students and sends this information out in an e-mail.
The MPH program has written small grants and been awarded graduate assistantships that are
specifically devoted to community projects. These assistantships place MPH students with
public health-related sites directly in the community and occasionally evolve into employment
opportunities. Likewise, students’ required MPH practicum experiences have served as a
relatively regular vehicle for employment, and MPH faculty encourage and assist students with
finding appropriate practicum sites that match students’ public health career goals. Community
practitioners are also utilized in a career-advising capacity through classroom presentations and
other public health-related events (e.g., programs hosted by the Department of Health Sciences,
the MPH program, and/or the Center for Public Health Media and Research).
MPH students have the opportunity to serve in various public health leadership roles by
participating as a member or an officer of the Health Sciences Student Association and its
programs and events (e.g., AASU Day, Light the Night, etc.); as the official MPH liaison for
AASU’s Graduate Student Coordinating Council (GSCC); and/or as a student liaison or
volunteer for the Georgia Public Health Association or American Public Health Association.
These opportunities can assist students with networking; moreover, the GSCC offers monetary
assistance to graduate students to attend conferences.
165
Both the Office of Graduate Studies and the University’s Career Services
(http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/career_services/career_welcome) offer workshops on
job search strategies, resume writing, interviewing skills, and business and social etiquette as
well as career placement counseling, job listings and referrals, and job fairs. The University also
offers confidential counseling services to students via its Counseling Center for issues related to
setting goals or resolving personal issues
(http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/counseling_center/counseling_welcome).
4.4.c. Information about student satisfaction with advising and career counseling services.
Each semester, student exit surveys are administered by the MPH program (see Resource File
and 4.2.d above, and 4.4.d below). The MPH Student Exit Questionnaire is a mandatory survey
that all MPH students complete in an anonymous manner at the close of their practicum
experience. (For ease of dissemination and collection, this survey is provided to students in the
MPH Practicum Guidebook and collected following the MPH Practicum Presentation session.
Because the survey is mandatory and is collected at the time of the oral practica presentations,
the return rate is 100%). It includes both quantitative and qualitative questions regarding the
MPH program curriculum (in general as well as core courses), the practicum experience, MPH
faculty, and program and institutional facilities. It also asks students to comment on the major
strengths and weakness of the program and its faculty and to suggest improvements. Two
questions on this questionnaire addressed student impressions as to the quality of MPH
advisement and the student’s perception of their academic preparation.
Survey Item
Target
2010
2011
2012
Advisement was
80% responses
90.5%
93.3%
75.1%
adequately provided
good and/or
throughout my
excellent
100%
100%
100%
program
I feel that I am
80% responses
academically well
good and/or
prepared for the career
excellent
I plan to enter.
Note: There is not data for 2013 as we do not assess 2013 until January 2014.
The University’s Office of Institutional Review in conjunction with Alumni Services, Career
Services and the Student Union also administers an exit questionnaire to AASU graduate
students each term. Students complete these assessments, which address the quality of
counseling services, advising and career services, among other issues, at the end of their
matriculation and prior to graduation. The University’s Office of Institutional Review
disseminates its exit survey to all graduating students every semester, obtaining a list of
166
graduating students and their e-mail addresses from the graduate applications that students
submit to Graduate Studies. An e-mail that contains a Survey Monkey link to the questionnaire
is sent to students. Students also may fill out the survey using a kiosk set up at the University’s
graduation fair. Small incentives (e.g., entry into a drawing for a prize) are used to encourage
completion of the survey. If students indicate on their survey that their responses may be shared,
Institutional Review provides reports to Alumni Services, Career Services and the Student
Union. This exit survey reveals that approximately 95% of all graduate students who report
utilizing the Career Services Department say they are satisfied with the service per Elizabeth
Wilson, Director of the AASU Career Services Department.
4.4.d. Description of the procedures by which students may communicate their concern to
program officials, including information about how these procedures are publicized and
about the aggregate number of complaints and/or student grievances submitted for each of
the last three years.
At any time during their program, students may file formal complaints and/or appeals. Students
may initiate appeals for admission, progression and graduation decisions. The process for
appeals is included in the Armstrong Graduate Catalog
(http://www.armstrong.edu/images/academic_affairs/current_graduate_catalog.pdf, page 20); the
form is available on the School of Graduate Studies website
(http://www.armstrong.edu/images/graduate/Appeal%20Form%20Revised%20May%2020123.pdf); and the process is explained to MPH students during the new student orientation session.
Appeals must be submitted prior to mid-term of the next regular semester, and students must
complete a Graduate Student Appeal Form and submit appropriate documentation related to their
appeal. The procedure for appeals is as follows:
1. Student submits completed appeal form and supporting documentation to the
appropriate Program Coordinator.
2. The appeal is then forwarded to the Department Chair and/or Dean for
recommendation.
3. The appeal is returned to Graduate Studies and the student is notified of the
decision.
If a student wishes to dispute the result of the appeal, the following procedure takes place:
1. Student submits a formal letter to Graduate Studies to request a hearing with the
Graduate Student Appeals subcommittee, an elected standing committee of the
Graduate Coordinating Council.
2. The chair of the Graduate Student Appeals subcommittee calls a meeting.
3. A representative from the Department and the student attend the hearing to
petition the committee to adjudicate the departmental decision.
4. The Graduate Appeals Committee submits a recommendation to the Provost/Vice
President for Academic Affairs.
167
5. All decisions made by the Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs are final
and will be returned to Graduate Studies.
6. Graduate Studies will notify the student of the final decision.
Similarly, grade appeals may be initiated through the Chair of the appropriate academic
department prior to midterm of the semester after the grade was received, in accordance with the
regulations of Armstrong Atlantic State University. The procedure for appeals is as follows:
1. The student discusses the contested grade with the instructor involved.
2. If the grade dispute remains unresolved, the student meets with the Department
Chair and the instructor. If the grade dispute is with the Department Chair, the
student meets with the Dean of the College and the Department Chair. A
memorandum for the record is prepared by the Department Chair (or Dean) that
includes the substance of the conversations during the meeting. The student will
receive a copy upon request.
3. If the grade dispute remains unresolved, the student will present his or her appeal
in writing to the Department Chair or the Dean of the College, as applicable, who
will then appoint a review board to hear the appeal.
4. The review board hears the grade appeal and presents its findings to the Dean.
5. If the Dean denies the appeal, the student may continue the appeal to the Vice
President and Dean of Faculty. This appeal must be in writing and must be filed
within five days of notification from the Dean.
Informal complaints and/or appeals are directed to the MPH Graduate Coordinator or individual
MPH or Health Sciences faculty members during informal or formal advising appointments.
As noted in 4.2.d above, students play a significant role in program, course and faculty
evaluation. To summarize, students provide regular feedback using the following tools:
 University-wide Faculty and Course Evaluation (FACE) protocol, administered at
the end of every course, with feedback shared with the faculty member of record,
the Department Chair, and the Dean (see
http://www.armstrong.edu/Departments/institutional_research/institutional_resear
ch_face and
http://www.armstrong.edu/images/institutional_research/eFace_Questions.pdf).

MPH Competency Self-Evaluation Surveys (see Resource File), administered to
students at the new student orientation session (pre-survey) and just prior to
graduation during the PUBH 7500 capstone course (post-survey). This tool asks
students to reflect on and evaluate their current proficiencies in several
competencies: communication, analytical assessment,
administration/management, cultural competencies and community, basic public
health sciences skills, policy development/program planning, and leadership and
168
ethics. Although these are student self-evaluations, this assessment assists the
MPH program and its faculty in refining instruction, evaluation and the
curriculum to best meet the professional development needs of students and the
discipline of public health.

MPH Practicum Student Evaluation of the Site (see Resource File), administered
at the close of a student’s practicum experience. This tool asks students to rate
their practicum site and practicum site supervisor and reflect upon the quality,
availability and professionalism of their site supervisor as well as the practicum
site’s contribution to the attainment of practicum objectives and to the student’s
professional potential.

MPH Student Exit Questionnaire (see Resource File), a survey that all MPH
students complete in an anonymous manner at the close of their practicum
experience. (For ease of dissemination and collection, this survey is provided to
students in the MPH Practicum Guidebook and collected following the MPH
Practicum Presentation session). It includes both quantitative and qualitative
questions regarding the MPH program curriculum (in general as well as core
courses), the practicum experience, MPH faculty, and program and institutional
facilities. It also asks students to comment on the major strengths and weakness
of the program and its faculty and to suggest improvements.

MPH Alumni Survey (see Resource File), publicized via direct e-mail every year
to MPH graduates and administered via Survey Monkey, obtains information
about graduates’ impressions of how the program and program of study prepared
them for their professional lives. The tool seeks information about whether
students are employed in public health positions, how long it took to secure
employment, what sector(s) of public health they work in, how well the AASU
MPH program in general prepared them for this work, and to what extent they use
competencies addressed in the MPH program of study (particularly core courses
and the practicum experience).
Data from these tools are collected by the MPH program and reviewed by the MPH Graduate
Coordinator and faculty in order to make program decisions and improvements. Students are
also represented on MPH faculty search committees.
Students can provide input into program policies and issues through the MPH Advisory Council
and AASU’s Graduate Student Coordinating Council (GSCC). The MPH Advisory Council,
which includes student representatives, makes recommendations concerning program curriculum
issues, policies and overall program functioning. The GSCC serves several purposes, including
“to represent the graduate student body in all matters concerning academics, welfare,
administration, and services; to assist graduate students by providing professional development
169
activities that make them more employable; to promote closer graduate student–faculty–
administration relations; and to work with Graduate Studies, the Division of Student Affairs, and
other campus offices to promote greater recognition of graduate education on and off the
campus” (2012–2013 Graduate Catalog, p. 44).
Over the past three academic years, no formal grievances have been filed in relation to the MPH
Program. Only one informal complaint was lodged in relation to one instructor’s teaching
methodologies. Per University, College and Departmental policies, this complaint began at the
program level and was subsequently resolved. Only matters that reach the College level in the
grievance protocol are considered “formal” grievances.
4.4.e. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the
program’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.
This criterion is met.
Strengths: Students have access to one-on-one formal and informal academic advising at
minimum nine weeks out of every year and theoretically year-round. They also have access to
multiple formal and informal opportunities for career counseling and networking. Formal
advising periods are available to students nearly nine weeks of every year, with informal
advising available practically year-round. Projected goals regarding adequacy of advisement
were surpassed for 2010 and 2011. Students’ perceptions of their academic preparation for their
career surpassed goal. Formal and informal procedures for students to provide program feedback
and/or submit grievances are in place, and information about these mechanisms is available
through the Graduate Catalog and MPH new student orientation sessions.
Weaknesses: Even though the format of the MPH Alumni Survey has been changed, the
response rate (although improved slightly from prior years) continues to be less than desirable.
Student responses to quality of advisement in 2012 was 4.9% lower than the established goal.
Future Plans: The MPH Program will monitor the Alumni Survey to determine if advisement
dissatisfaction is a trend or an aberration. MPH faculty members will determine whether course
advisement for each term will become mandatory for MPH students.
170
Addendum A
2.7.a. Description of the procedures used for monitoring and evaluating student progress in
achieving the expected competencies, including procedures for identifying competency
attainment in practice and culminating experiences.
Competency Assessment via Curriculum
The instructional matrices as identified in Tables 2.6.c.i and 2.6.c.ii were designed to insure that
each core course contributes to specific competencies to be achieved by the student during their
tenure in the program. The program defines the public health competencies that students are to
attain. Course materials and assignments satisfy learning experiences associated with each
competency. The student’s performance is assessed in the form of grades. In addition, the
program utilizes expanded assessment tools to further evaluate student progress in achieving
competencies.
Additional Competency Assessment
Beginning spring 2012, each student is required to complete a self-assessment at the orientation
session prior to beginning the MPH program. Incoming students are asked to reflect and evaluate
their current proficiency in each of the program’s competency areas on a scale from 1 to 5; 1
meaning they feel they are not at all proficient, and 5 meaning they feel that they possess a very
high level of proficiency. The results of this self-assessment will be compared to students’ postassessment results which is a program requirement at the completion of the capstone course.
Results can be compared to those of previous academic years to assess trends. The primary MPH
faculty review the findings during annual retreat each January to evaluate any areas in need of
improvement. (Refer to Resource File for a copy of pre and post self-assessment tools.)
In addition to the above-mentioned assessment, each student is required to anonymously
complete a Student Exit Questionnaire which allows the student to assess their perceived value
of the program regarding courses, faculty and facilities. Students may also respond to openended questions regarding program strengths and weaknesses. The primary MPH faculty review
the findings during annual retreat each January to evaluate any areas in need of improvement.
(Refer to MPH Student Handbook for a copy of the Student Exit Questionnaire.)
The MPH Alumni Survey provides an additional vehicle for post-graduation feedback as to the
student’s perceived proficiency in the program’s competencies as applicable to their current job
requirements. The primary MPH faculty review the findings during annual retreat each January
to evaluate any areas in need of improvement. (Refer to on-site Resource File for a copy of the
MPH Alumni Survey.)
171
Competency Assessment via Culminating Experiences
Culminating experiences include the capstone course (PUBH 7500 – Planning and Evaluation) as
well as the practicum (PUBH 7675). For full explanations of the culminating experiences please
refer to Criteria 2.4 and 2.5.
Capstone Project (PUBH 7500): The program establishes the objectives for the capstone
course/project which are based on programmatic competencies. The syllabus for the course lists
the objectives students are expected to have attained at the end of the course (refer to syllabus for
PUBH 7500 in Resource File). Please refer to Table 2.5.a. for the Capstone Schematic which
illustrates the interface between core public health courses and the program competencies within
the capstone project (a larger more legible version is available in Resource File). The
programmatic competencies demonstrate that the student is able to synthesize and integrate
knowledge acquired through the MPH program into an applied experience (refer to Goal 1 in
criteria 1.1.c. and 1.1.d.). The primary MPH faculty review the findings during annual retreat
each January to evaluate any areas in need of improvement.
Practicum (PUBH 7675): Before enrolling in the practicum, each student is required to develop
objectives in consultation with a site supervisor and a faculty supervisor. Upon completion of the
practicum (after 225 hours on-site), the student submits an executive summary that summarizes
this applied practice experience. They are also required to present the practicum orally. The
executive summary, the oral presentation and the site supervisor evaluation are evaluated by
primary MPH faculty using rubrics established by the program (refer to MPH Student Handbook
in Resource File for MPH practicum evaluation instruments). The primary MPH faculty review
the findings during annual retreat each January to evaluate any areas in need of improvement.
172