HEALTH PROMOTION: PEER REVIEW Christine Johnston, MPH Assistant - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
HEALTH PROMOTION: PEER REVIEW Christine Johnston, MPH Assistant Director, Alcohol & Other Drug Education and Health Promotion Springfield College Emily Pagano, MS Introductions Alcohol and Other Drug Education Coordinator University
Christine Johnston, MPH
Assistant Director, Alcohol & Other Drug Education and Health Promotion Springfield College
Emily Pagano, MS
Alcohol and Other Drug Education Coordinator University of Connecticut
Tara R. Schuster, MS, MCHES
Coordinator of Health Promotion Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
Colby Zongol Joleen Nevers Ryan Travia Fran Taylor Michelle Mandino Claudia Trevor-Wright
promotion specialists to provide expert assistance and guidance.
process.
review of work submitted by peers.
review
(20 minutes each)
Evaluation by others in the same field to maintain or enhance the quality of the work or performance.
★ Utilizes the independence of the reviewers to obtain an unbiased evaluation ★ Helps maintain and enhance quality by detecting areas for improvement
★ Accreditation ★ Best Practices ★ Strengthens program development skills ★ Enhances quality and integrity of programs ★ Provides differing points of view for consideration ★ Helps to engage stakeholders ★ Role-models professionalism
★ Standards of Practice in Health Promotion in Higher Education ★ Council for the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education ★ BACCHUS Peer Education ★ Healthy People 2020 ★ CHES/MCHES
★ Campus Stakeholders ★ Local & Area Connections ★ Peer & Aspirational Schools ★ National Connections ★ Professional Consultation ★ Face-to-Face ★ Email/Listservs ★ Skype ★ Conference Calls
★ Trust is key ★ Acknowledge vulnerabilities ★ Be open to receiving feedback ★ Provide constructive feedback
○ Start with the positive and move to areas of improvement
★ Ask lots of questions, especially open-ended ones ★ Try to suspend judgement ★ Maintain confidentiality
○ Be clear with your colleague(s) about what is/is not ok to share outside of peer review. ○ If you don’t know, ask.
★ Check-in with your colleague
○ How are you feeling about this? Is this helpful?
★ Only share examples of your own work when asked
★ Solicited, not imposed ★ Descriptive, not evaluative ★ directed towards something Actionable ★ Considerate of the needs of the giver and receiver ★ Well-timed ★ Confirmed to ensure clear communication
★ Tell reviewers
○ about the work you want reviewed ○ what feedback you want
★ Provide example(s) of what you want reviewed ★ Allow time for them to process ★ Accept feedback ★ Ask follow-up questions
★ Listen to what the person is asking to have reviewed ★ Ask clarifying questions to understand what feedback is being
solicited:
○ How can I help? ○ What have you done so far? ○ What do you see as obstacles?
★ Provide feedback professionally
○ Be mindful of the person’s feelings and expectations of the process
★ Only provide examples of your own work when asked
VOLUNTEERS NEEDED: Note taker; Time keeper
Jamie Bentley, MPH
Coordinator of Wellness Education Castleton University
Tiffany Mathews, MS
Coordinator of Wellness Education Keene State College
★ What was most helpful? ★ Describe one take-away. ★ What would have worked better?
★ Values that contribute to a culture of peer review: ○ Excellence ○ Collaboration/Community ○ Student-Centeredness ○ Professional Development ★ Others?
★ Case discussions/review (UConn) ★ Peer review forms (Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute) ★ Student Health Integration Team (Springfield College) ★ Other examples?