| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
LETTER |
Jane Ellery is a doctoral candidate at the College of Public Health, University of South Florida, Tampa.
Correspondence: Requests for reprints should be sent to Jane Ellery, MA, University of South Florida College of Public Health, Department of Community and Family Health, 13201 Bruce B. Downs Blvd, Tampa, FL 33612-3805 (e-mail: jellery{at}hsc.usf.edu).
The important information presented by Allegrante et al.1 is timely, offering an initial framework to assist in the planning and development of training opportunities to enhance the effectiveness of the public health education workforce. Unfortunately, input from the practicing health educators targeted for training appears to be missing from the discussion.
Although the competencies identified by the consensus panel are important to consider, continuing education programs have been shown to be most effective when tailored to suit the specific needs of the professionals participating in the training.2 Additionally, continuing education training differs from preservice training in that participants typically have on-the-job experience and have specific job-related tasks they are interested in improving. A panel may be able to address global issues related to health education job skill needs. However, for workforce training to be effective, emphasis must be placed on the wants and needs identified by currently employed health educators.
In addition to content, careful consideration must be given to identifying individuals and organizations responsible for developing and implementing training programs. An organized approach and the cooperation of many groups are important to the success of this type of effort. Workforce training comes from a less formalized training body than the university-based educational programs that teach entry-level and graduate competencies. Who will be responsible for addressing the continuing education needs of health educators? From where will the funding and motivation for delivering this type of program come? The success of health educators in addressing the changing needs of health education and health promotion in the 21st century relies heavily on the ability to provide a unified training focus.
Furthermore, consideration must be given to the multiple modes of delivery available for the instruction and facilitation of educational programs. In 1997, a report from the Public Health Functions Project3 suggested that public health workforce training programs should maximize the use of evolving technologies such as distance learning. However, as Ehrmann cautions, "If you’re headed in the wrong direction, technology won’t help you get to the right place." 4(p21) Little evidence-based research is available to draw from as health education workforce training programs are put into practice, and careful consideration must be given to the process to ensure movement in the right direction.
References
1.
Allegrante JP, Moon RW, Auld ME, Gebbie KM. Continuing-education needs of the currently employed public health education workforce. Am J Public Health.2001;91:1230–1234.
2. Swerissen H, Tilgner L. A workforce survey of health promotion education and training needs in the state of Victoria. Aust N Z J Public Health.2000;24:407–412.[Medline]
3. The Public Health Workforce: An Agenda for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: US Dept of Health and Human Services; 1997.
4. Ehrmann SC. Asking the right questions. Change.1995;27:20–27.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
