University of Alberta

Course Guide for SPH 610 Winter 2015 (Campus)

Applied Engaged Scholarship: Principles to Specific Research Projects Thursday 2:00 – 2:50 p.m. ECHA 1-451

Instructor:

Candace Nykiforuk, PhD, CE Phone: (780) 492-4109 Email: [email protected] Office: ECHA 3-291

Course Description [U of A Calendar]

Credit: 1 (fi 2) (either term, 0-1s-0). This course will apply engaged scholarship concepts and principles to the development of the student’s specific thesis research. This course is the second of two required seminars in Engaged Scholarship for Health for PhD students in the School of Public Health. Prerequisites: SPH 607, and selection of thesis topic and methodology. Note: Credit may not be obtained for both PHS 608 and SPH 610. Students cannot receive credit for both SPH 602 and SPH 610.

Objectives

Upon completion of this course, students will be able to: 1. Demonstrate an ability to integrate the philosophical, ethical, and logistical issues integral to engaged scholarship into a research project of their interest. 2. Discuss benefits and challenges of engaged scholarship from academic, health system, and community perspectives. 3. Demonstrate knowledge and skills in planning for the development of research partnerships in their area of interest. 4. Identify resources to support engaged scholarship activity. 5. Demonstrate an ability to present clearly, facilitate discussion, and respond to queries related to Engaged Scholarship.

Competencies

•

• • • • •

Library

(Apply) knowledge related to the information needs for policy development, including scientific evidence and other important inputs, to proposed research. (Match) research questions with appropriate methodologies and approaches. (Understand) the needs of specific audiences and strategies for tailoring messages to them. (Manage) time in order to meet deadlines. (Address) ethical issues related to engaged scholarship. (Demonstrate) the essential elements, principles, and strategies for creating effective partnerships for research.

The University of Alberta library system’s website www.library.ualberta.ca details the range of services offered to students on and off campus. If you need further information or assistance, contact the Library's Electronic Reference Desk at www.library.ualberta.ca/ereference/index.cfm or call 1-800-207-0172.

SPH 610 [W-2015] Course Syllabus

University of Alberta, School of Public Health Page 2

Course Evaluation Mid Point Evaluation:

Final Course Evaluation:

As is the case with all SPH instructors, I am interested in improving the course. I need to hear from you in order to do that well. I will gather feedback and recommendations from you at the mid-point of the course, by asking a student to administer and deliver an anonymous course evaluation back to the instructor(s). Following completion of the course, you will receive a standardized summative evaluation. Course evaluations will be done online by Test Scoring and Questionnaire Services. An invitation to participate in the survey is emailed to each student. One email will be sent for each start date, i.e., if a student has surveys with different start dates, they will receive multiple messages. Note that the message includes a login button.

Student Evaluation Assignment/Exams 1. Participation in preparatory work and in-class activities

Percentage

Date 20%

All classes

2. Final paper

40%

Thursday, April 9 2:00 p.m. (in class)

3. Presentation of thesis proposal, including preparation for and leadership of seminar session

30%

One of: Mar 5, Mar 12, Mar 19, Mar 26, or Apr 2 Students will sign-up for presentation date on Jan 8th

4. Constructive participation in reflection on and review of peer presentations

10%

All of: Mar 5, Mar 12, Mar 19, Mar 26, and Apr 2

Evaluation of Course Work Each assignment/activity will be graded individually out of the total assigned mark. Students must achieve a passing mark on each assignment to obtain a final Pass grade. As this is a credit/non-credit course, the final grade for the course will be assessed as Pass/Fail. Late assignments will be penalized 5% per day, including weekends. Incomplete or missing assignments will assigned a mark of zero, and will be included as part of the assessment for the final grade.

SPH 610 [W-2015] Course Syllabus

University of Alberta, School of Public Health Page 3

Evaluation Criteria for Specific 1. Participation in Preparatory and In-Class Activities Assignments & Activities Students will be expected to read the assigned readings prior to class and to apply these readings to classroom and small group discussions. Students will be expected to prepare for and participate in discussion each class. Quality is preferred over the quantity of contribution, and participation should facilitate both group and individual learning. Participation grades will be assigned based on an assessment of preparation and contributions, as well as attendance in class. Evaluation criteria: • Attends and participates in all classes, and is punctual. • Comes prepared, having read the assigned readings and completed all tasks required for in-class activities, and developed ideas to share with the class. • Has done additional reading on the subject (i.e., optional readings or identified own sources of information). • Makes an effort to relate the required reading to previous learning or work experience. • Contributes relevant comments, or asks pertinent questions during class. • Respects diverse styles of participation. • Does not dominate small group or full class discussions: facilitates participation of others in discussions. Total: 20 marks 2. Final paper The purpose of this assignment is for students to apply their understanding of the concepts and principles of engaged scholarship (and related constructs) as it relates to their own thesis research. The paper should be in the form of a research proposal for the student’s proposed research, and be written in the required format of the selected research funding body. In addition, the proposal is to incorporate the principles of engaged scholarship as appropriate for their particular research study. It is recognized that given time and funding constraints, and the fact that many students are conducting research that is one component of their supervisor’s work, not all students will be in a position to incorporate engaged scholarship principles in the way that they may like to. For this reason, SPH 610 [W-2015] Course Syllabus

University of Alberta, School of Public Health Page 4

students are required to include along with their final proposal, a critique of it from an engaged scholarship perspective. This critique should include: a) a discussion of the extent to which the proposal incorporates engaged scholarship principles; b) explanation of any limitations and discussion of the proposal could be improved from an engaged scholarship perspective; and, c) a discussion of potential differences in research topic and question, implementation, interpretation, and use between the proposed, and potentially more fully engaged, approach. Please note that while the focus of the course, the assignment, and marking is on the appropriateness of the engaged scholarship strategy for the proposed research, students are expected to consult with their supervisor to ensure that the proposed methodology is appropriate for the proposed study. Evaluation criteria: • Integration of principles of engaged scholarship into the proposal and the associated critique. Engaged scholarship strategies should be appropriate to the student’s research project. Appropriate use of engaged scholarship (and related) terms and concepts will be assessed. (15 marks) • Through the associated critique, presentation of either: a) a justification of the strategies used from an engaged scholarship proposal; or (only if the proposal is for a project where ‘engagement’ is not optimized), b) a clear rationale for why ES elements are not included; potential ameliorating strategies; **The critique should also discuss possible impacts on the research topic/question, implementation, findings, and use by knowledge users. Any ethical issues specific to engaged scholarship only (as related to the proposal) should be identified and discussed. (10 marks) • Provides criteria for identified funding agency and funding opportunity by the required deadline, and then correctly uses that prescribed format for the proposal. (10 marks) • Clarity of writing, including appropriate spelling, grammar, and referencing. (5 marks) Total: 40 marks

SPH 610 [W-2015] Course Syllabus

University of Alberta, School of Public Health Page 5

3. Presentation of thesis proposal, including preparation for and leadership of the seminar session Each student will present his or her thesis proposal in class, and from an engaged scholarship perspective. The purpose of this assignment is to: a) provide an opportunity for students to critically apply the concepts of engaged scholarship to their particular research area; b) develop skills in presenting and leading discussion on a topic of engaged scholarship; c) practice responding to questions and challenges related to engaged scholarship; and, d) provide an opportunity for students to practice and model engaged scholarship principles in their response to diverse perspectives. Presentation of the thesis proposal will follow the form of Three Minute Thesis (3MT®). For rules and judging criteria, which will be used to assess the presentation for this class, refer to: http://threeminutethesis.org/rules-judgingcriteria. Accordingly, each student’s presentation time will be limited to 3 minutes. Following the presentation, the student will facilitate a 10-minute question period. One week prior to their presentation, students will be expected to research and provide (to the class and instructor) 2 supplementary readings appropriate to their thesis presentation topic and the presentation audience. Evaluation criteria: • Supplementary research conducted to support presentation, including appropriateness of selected resources. (5 marks) • Critical application of engaged scholarship concepts to the topic of presentation, including response to questions. (15 marks) • Clarity and appropriateness of presentation for audience, according to the 3MT® criteria. (5 marks) • Discussion facilitation skills. (5 marks) Total: 30 marks

SPH 610 [W-2015] Course Syllabus

University of Alberta, School of Public Health Page 6

4. Constructive participation in reflection on and review of peer presentations Students will be expected to: a) participate in constructive review of their classmates’ presentations, and b) provide a brief written reflection, from an engaged scholarship lens, on each presentation. Constructive review: quality of feedback is preferred over the quantity of contribution. Participation should occur both in written form (using the scheme provided) and as questions posed to the presenter following the presentation. Written reflection: a half-page reflection for each presentation should incorporate engaged scholarship concepts or principles and should demonstrate familiarity with the readings/resources circulated by the presenter, as well as the presentation. Reflections must be submitted to the instructor no later than 1-week following the presentation. Evaluation criteria: • Provision of constructive feedback to peers, even outside familiar research topics/areas, and models respect and valuing of different perspectives. (5 marks) • Through questions to presenters and the written reflections, demonstrates the ability to use diverse perspectives to achieve a greater level of understanding of engaged scholarship. (5 marks) Total: 10 marks

Grading

See ‘Assignments and Marking Criteria’.

University of Alberta Calendar Section 23.4 Regulations and Information for Students Evaluation Procedures and Grading System The University of Alberta Grading System The University of Alberta uses a letter grading system with a four-point scale of numerical equivalents for calculating grade point averages. Grades reflect judgments of student achievement made by instructors. These judgments are based on a combination of absolute achievement and relative performance in a class. Some instructors assign grades as intervals during the course and others assign marks (e.g. percentages) SPH 610 [W-2015] Course Syllabus

University of Alberta, School of Public Health Page 7

throughout the term and then assign a letter grade at the end. Instructors must adapt their approaches to reflect the letter grading system. Grade distribution should reflect those shown in this document. (EXEC 03 FEB 2003) Descriptor

Grading in Graduate Courses Letter Grade Grade Point Value

Excellent

Good Satisfactory Failure

A+ A AB+ B BC+ C CD+ D F

4.0 4.0 3.7 3.3 3.0 2.7 2.3 2.0 1.7 1.3 1.0 0.0

Marks (for conversion purposes only) 90-100 86-89 82-85 78-81 74-77 70-73 66-69 62-65 58-61 54-57 50-53 0-49

Academic Integrity Plagiarism is a serious offence. The University of Alberta is committed to the highest standards of academic integrity and honesty. Students are expected to be familiar with these standards regarding academic honesty and to uphold the policies of the University in this respect. Students are particularly urged to familiarize themselves with the provisions of the Code of Student Behaviour (online at www.ualberta.ca/CodeofStudentBehaviour) and avoid any behaviour which could potentially result in suspicions of cheating, plagiarism, misrepresentation of facts and/or participation in an offence. Academic dishonesty is a serious offence and can result in suspension or expulsion from the University. University of Alberta policy about course outline can be found in Section 23.4(2) of the University Calendar. (GFC 29 SEP 2003)

SPH 610 [W-2015] Course Syllabus

University of Alberta, School of Public Health Page 8

DETAILED COURSE OUTLINE BY WEEK Class 1: Introduction to SPH 610 January 8, 2015 Instructor: C. Nykiforuk Learning Objectives: Students will: • Review and clarify course objectives, outline, expectations, and assignments, including seminar sessions. • Identify specific student objectives for SPH 610. • Discuss working definitions of engaged scholarship, knowledge translation, and related concepts. • Contribute to a positive, respectful, and scholarly co-learning environment. Required Reading: • SPH 610 [W-2015] Course Syllabus.

SPH 610 [W-2015] Course Syllabus

University of Alberta, School of Public Health Page 9

Class 2: Operationalizing Course Focus: ‘Engagement in Specific Research Projects’ January 15, 2015 Instructor: C. Nykiforuk Learning Objectives: Students will: • Share their thesis projects (or research interests) with others in the class. • Participate in collegial critique of peers’ proposal plans, from an engaged scholarship (and related concepts) perspective. • Contribute to a positive, respectful, and scholarly co-learning environment. Assignment Due In Class: Students will arrive prepared with a brief outline of their proposed thesis research. Topics to be covered include: a) activities completed to date; b) research question and objectives; c) proposed methodology; d) engaged scholarship strategies; e) challenges expected or encountered (according to current stage of research); f) topics and issues on which the student would like to focus; g) proposed funding agency; and h) supervisor suggestions about the proposal. Page Format and Length: student-determined. Outline format is strongly encouraged. Please bring 2 copies: 1 to submit to the instructor (for reference), and 1 to use during in-class activities throughout the term. Readings for Review (from SPH 607): • Canadian Institutes of Health Research. (2012). Guide to Knowledge Translation Planning at CIHR: Integrated and End-of-Grant Approaches. Available at: http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/45321.html

SPH 610 [W-2015] Course Syllabus

University of Alberta, School of Public Health Page 10

Class 3: Engaged Scholarship Principles and Challenges January 22, 2015 Instructor: C. Nykiforuk Learning Objectives: Students will: • Identify specific engaged scholarship principles and challenges related to their thesis research. • Discuss strategies for promoting ethical and engaged research in their area of focus. • Identify resources and supports needed to complete their engaged scholarship project. • Contribute to a positive, respectful, and scholarly co-learning environment. Assignment Due In Class: Students will identify a specific funding agency and research grant opportunity suitable to their proposed thesis research (e.g., CIHR, NSERC, AIHS, etc.). The format and requirements of the chosen funding agency and opportunity will serve as the requirement for the student’s final paper (see Final Paper assignment details on pages 4-5). The grant opportunity does not have to be currently ‘live’ (e.g., the deadline can be past), but the proposal requirements (often titled “how to apply”) must be accessible to the student and the instructor. Submit the criteria for identified funding agency and specific funding opportunity to instructor, via email, prior to today’s class. Readings for Review (from SPH 607): • Canadian Institutes of Health Research (2014). More About Knowledge Translation at CIHR. Available at: http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/39033.html • Bowen, S., Botting, I., Roy, J.P. (2011). Promoting action on equity issues: a knowledge-to-action handbook. Edmonton: School of Public Health, University of Alberta. Available at: http://www.wrha.mb.ca/professionals/language/files/EquityIssuesHandbook.pdf

SPH 610 [W-2015] Course Syllabus

University of Alberta, School of Public Health Page 11

Classes 4 & 5: Planning Research for Impact January 29 & February 5, 2015 Instructor: C. Nykiforuk Learning Objectives: Students will: • Discuss similarities and differences of engaged scholarship activities at policy, planning, and practice levels, including implications for public health. • Identify and describe 6 phases for moving knowledge into action. • Identify common barriers to and facilitators of engagement, at various levels. • Identify additional reading/resources needed for individual projects. • Differentiate between replicability and transferability. • Discuss current issues related to research impact and research impact assessment. • Contribute to a positive, respectful, and scholarly co-learning environment. Assignment Due In Class, January 29th: Students will arrive prepared with a brief description of the knowledge users concerning their thesis research. Topics to be covered include: a) the direct knowledge users for their proposed research, and any other interested or affected parties; b) the potential impact of their research on knowledge users; c) appropriate timing and strategies for engaging knowledge users; and d) facilitators and barriers to engaging knowledge users in their research. Page Format and Length: student-determined. Outline format is strongly encouraged. Please bring 2 copies: 1 to submit to the instructor (for reference), and 1 to use during in-class activities today (Jan 29th) and next week (Feb 5th). Readings for Review (from SPH 607): • Graham, I. D., Logan, J., Harrison, M. B., Straus, S. E., Tetroe, J., Caswell, W., & Robinson, N. (2006). Lost in knowledge translation: time for a map?. Journal of continuing education in the health professions, 26(1), 13-24. Required Readings: • Frank, C., & Nason, E. (2009). Health research: measuring the social, health and economic benefits. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 180(5), 528-534. • Bhattacharyya, O. K., Estey, E. A., & Zwarenstein, M. (2011). Methodologies to evaluate the effectiveness of knowledge translation interventions: a primer for researchers and health care managers. Journal of clinical epidemiology, 64(1), 32-40. • Murphy, K., & Fafard, P. (2012). Taking power, politics, and policy problems seriously. Journal of Urban Health, 89(4), 723-732. (continued next page) SPH 610 [W-2015] Course Syllabus

University of Alberta, School of Public Health Page 12

•

Ellen, M. E., Léon, G., Bouchard, G., Ouimet, M., Grimshaw, J. M., & Lavis, J. N. (2014). Barriers, facilitators and views about next steps to implementing supports for evidence-informed decision-making in health systems: A qualitative study. Implementation Science, 9(1), 179.

Recommended Readings/Resources: • Lencucha, R., Kothari, A., & Hamel, N. (2010). Extending collaborations for knowledge translation: lessons from the community-based participatory research literature. Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice, 6(1), 61-75. • Kitson, A. L. (2009). The need for systems change: reflections on knowledge translation and organizational change. Journal of advanced nursing, 65(1), 217-228. • Van Eerd, D., Cole, D., Keown, K., Irvin, E., Kramer, D., Gibson, J., Kohn, M., Mahood, Q., Slack, T., Amick, B.C., Phipps, D., Garcia, J., & Morassaei, S. (2011). Summary: Finding tools to measure KTE activities. Available at: http://www.iwh.on.ca/sysreviews/kte-evaluation-tools • Bowen, S., Erickson, T., Martens, P. J., & Crockett, S. (2009). More than “using research”: the real challenges in promoting evidence-informed decision-making. Healthcare Policy, 4(3), 87.

SPH 610 [W-2015] Course Syllabus

University of Alberta, School of Public Health Page 13

Classes 6 & 7: End-of-Project Dissemination / Action February 12 & 26, 2015 Instructor: C. Nykiforuk NOTE: NO CLASS ON FEB 19TH DUE TO READING WEEK Learning Objectives: Students will: • Differentiate between knowledge utilization, knowledge sharing, knowledge mobilization, diffusion, passive dissemination, and active dissemination. • Discuss key concepts in implementation research and the application of those concepts to (a) Public Health and (b) student-specific research projects. • Discuss key principles promoting effective dissemination and use of research findings. • Identify and discuss ethical issues related to dissemination activities. • Discuss the role of researchers, and the potential of engaged scholarship, to promote appropriate dissemination and knowledge utilization. • Draft an initial integrated and end-of-project KT plan appropriate for their research. • Contribute to a positive, respectful, and scholarly co-learning environment. Assignment Due In Class, February 12th: Students will arrive prepared with a brief outline of a preliminary plan for the end-of-project dissemination/actions concerning their thesis research. Topics to be covered include: a) consideration of modes of dissemination appropriate for different knowledge user audiences; b) strategies for dissemination, detailing: who, what, when, where, how, how long, and why disseminate/take action at the end of a project; c) researcher, knowledge user, and possible partner roles in dissemination/action; d) facilitators and barriers to dissemination/action; and e) the role of integrated knowledge translation activities in support of end-of-project dissemination/action. Page Format and Length: student-determined. Outline format is strongly encouraged. Please bring 2 copies: 1 to submit to the instructor (for reference), and 1 to use during in-class activities today (Feb 12th) and next class (Feb 26th). Required Readings/Resources (continued next page): • Frankfurt H. On Bullshit, Parts 1 and 2. (On Youtube). Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1RO93OS0Sk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hp_c8-CfZtg • Tabak, R. G., Khoong, E. C., Chambers, D. A., & Brownson, R. C. (2012). Bridging research and practice: models for dissemination and implementation research. American journal of preventive medicine, 43(3), 337-350. • Black, N. (2001). Evidence based policy: proceed with care. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 323(7307), 275. SPH 610 [W-2015] Course Syllabus

University of Alberta, School of Public Health Page 14

Recommended Readings/Resources: • David H. Peters, Nhan T. Tran, Taghreed Adam. (2013). Implementation Research In Health: A Practical Guide. Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research, World Health Organization. Available at: http://www.who.int/alliancehpsr/resources/implementationresearchguide/en/ • Wilson, P. M., Petticrew, M., Calnan, M. W., & Nazareth, I. (2010). Disseminating research findings: what should researchers do? A systematic scoping review of conceptual frameworks. Implementation Science, 5(1), 91. • Chambers, D., Glasgow, R., & Stange, K. (2013). The dynamic sustainability framework: addressing the paradox of sustainment amid ongoing change. Implement Sci, 8(1), 117. • Review examples and resources on the website: http://www.ces4health.info

SPH 610 [W-2015] Course Syllabus

University of Alberta, School of Public Health Page 15

Classes 8-12: Engagement in Specific Research Projects: Proposal Presentations Weekly: March 5 - April 2, 2015, inclusive Instructors: C. Nykiforuk, assigned students Learning Objectives: Students will: • Demonstrate an ability to apply the principles of engaged scholarship (and related concepts) to a specific research project in their area of interest (i.e., their thesis proposal). • Identify, and propose appropriate responses to, specific challenges related to engaged scholarship in a specific area of expertise. • Practice presenting on, and responding to questions about, topics of engaged scholarship in a specific area of expertise. • Practice reflective and critical evaluation skills in reviewing engagement strategies from projects in diverse research areas. • Contribute to a positive, respectful, and scholarly co-learning environment. Assignment Due In Class / Required Readings: Each student is expected to provide 1-2 additional readings/resources related to their presentation. Citation information (or copies of resources if not available online) is to be provided to the instructor and classmates a minimum of 1 week before the presentation. The purpose of the readings is to provide peers with needed background to constructively critique each student’s proposal. Presenting students are encouraged to use creativity in planning for selecting resources (which need not be limited to the peer-reviewed literature) for this particular audience. Observing students are expected to prepare for their peers’ presentations by reviewing these resources carefully before class. Recommended Resources: • Overview of the Three Minute Thesis (3MT®) program: http://threeminutethesis.org/index.html • Examples of winning presentations: http://threeminutethesis.org/index.html?page=191541&pid=193447 • Mewburn, I. How to talk about your thesis in 3 minutes: https://prezi.com/jwhwyydfzqxo/how-to-talk-about-your-thesis-in-3-minutes/ • Three Minute thesis tips and resources, presented by Simon Fraser University: http://www.sfu.ca/dean-gradstudies/events/three-minute-thesis/3MT-tips.html

SPH 610 [W-2015] Course Syllabus

University of Alberta, School of Public Health Page 16

Class 13: Engaged Research Careers April 9, 2015 Instructor: C. Nykiforuk Learning Objectives: Students will: • Identify the challenges and benefits of an engaged scholarship career. • Identify and discuss options for careers in engaged scholarship and resources to support them, relevant to their specific fields of interest. • Assess appropriate strategies for promoting engagement within their specific research areas of interest. • Discuss challenges within academia to recognition of engaged scholarship activities, along with strategies for addressing these challenges. • Identify and analyse a recent collaborative research activity to identify strengths, challenges, and strategies related to collaborative research approaches. • Contribute to a positive, respectful, and scholarly co-learning environment. Assignment Due In Class: Students will identify and critique, according to potential career implications of engaged scholarship, a “real-life” example of a research collaboration in their specialization area. Then, based on assigned readings, peer experience, and their chosen “real-life” example, students will discuss in-class: a) implications of engaged scholarship for research in their area of specialization; and b) strategies for developing and managing research collaborations. Students are also encouraged to come to class prepared with at least one question related to the topic of “engaged careers”. Required Readings/Resources: • Calleson, D. C., Jordan, C., & Seifer, S. D. (2005). Community-engaged scholarship: Is faculty work in communities a true academic enterprise?. Academic Medicine, 80(4), 317-321. • Martin, S. (2010). Co-production of social research: strategies for engaged scholarship. Public Money & Management, 30(4), 211-218. • Please explore the website: Rewarding Community Engaged Scholarship http://engagedscholarship.ca Recommended Readings/Resources (continued next page): • Commission on Community-Engaged Scholarship in the Health Professions. (2005). Linking Scholarship and Communities: Report of the Commission on CommunityEngaged Scholarship in the Health Professions. Seattle: Community-Campus Partnerships for Health. • Jordan C (Editor). (2007). Community-Engaged Scholarship Review, Promotion & Tenure Package. Peer Review Workgroup, Community-Engaged Scholarship for Health Collaborative, Community-Campus Partnerships for Health. Available at: SPH 610 [W-2015] Course Syllabus

University of Alberta, School of Public Health Page 17

•

•

•

http://depts.washington.edu/ccph/pdf_files/CES_RPT_Package.pdf Clearinghouse and National Review Board for the Scholarship of Engagement. (n.d.) Evaluation criteria for the scholarship of engagement. Available at: http://schoe.coe.uga.edu/evaluation/evaluation_criteria.html Office of Community-Based Research, University of Victoria. (n.d.) Recognizing excellence in Community–Engaged Scholarship: Guidelines for Promotion and Tenure Decisions. Available at: http://communityresearchcanada.ca/res/download.php?id=4218 MacLean, R., & Tucker J. (2013). Evaluation of CIHR’s Knowledge Translation Program. Evaluation Report 2013. CIHR. Available at: http://www.cihrirsc.gc.ca/e/47332.html

SPH 610 [W-2015] Course Syllabus

University of Alberta, School of Public Health Page 18

Schedule at a Glance   Date Jan 8

Topic Introduction to SPH 610

Assignment Due In-Class Sign up for proposal presentation date

Jan 15

Operationalizing course focus: ‘engagement in specific research projects’

Submit short outline of your thesis research, prepared according to the guidelines in syllabus (will be used today & Jan 22 for in-class activity)

Jan 22

Engaged scholarship principles and challenges

Submit criteria for identified funding agency and funding opportunity to instructor by today’s class

Jan 29 & Planning research for impact Feb 5

Jan 29th: Submit brief description of the knowledge users for your thesis research, prepared according to the guidelines in this syllabus (will be used both weeks for in-class activity)

Feb 12

Submit preliminary plan for end-of-project dissemination / action for your thesis research, prepared according to the guidelines in syllabus

End-of-project dissemination / action – Part 1

Feb 19

Reading week – no class

Feb 26

End-of-project dissemination / action – Part 2

[Remember to bring your dissemination plan to class again today]

Mar 5, Mar 12, Mar 19, Mar 26, & Apr 2

Engagement in specific research projects: 3-minute thesis proposal presentations

1-week before presentation: Presenters circulate their selected readings to instructor and peers Week of presentation: Presenters present & then facilitate 10-min discussion; Peers participate in discussions & provide constructive feedback 1-week after presentations: Peers submit their reflections from previous week’s presentations

Apr 9 [Last class]

Engaged Research Careers

Arrive with example and discussion points for inclass activity, prepared according to the guidelines in syllabus Submit reflections from Apr 2nd presentations Submit final paper & accompanying critique, by 2:00 (in-class)

SPH 610 [W-2015] Course Syllabus

University of Alberta, School of Public Health Page 19