Developing a public health leadership graduate program responsive to a global perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to describe a new public health leadership graduate program, and the incorporation of a practical global perspective to health leadership education using contemporary organization development inquiry methods to develop a case‐based learning strategy using graduate student‐authored cases. Design/methodology/approach Case‐based curricula have been designed for the leadership and organizational change courses in the Public Health Leadership MPH Program that promote a global orientation and relevancy by having graduate students individually develop cases based on their experiences and observations in their own health care and social systems. They develop these cases using an extensive series of Appreciative Inquiry questions that focus on successful leadership practices, and the key stages involved in leading successful sustainable change. This method gives the students a framework to analyze leadership and leading change cases from the perspective of what the leaders they have observed did well and what they could have changed to have been more effective. Findings The student‐authored leadership and leading change case‐studies, based on an Appreciative Inquiry question strategy, indicate that this approach is indeed helpful in meeting the adopted mandate of making the leadership training curriculum relevant not only to Canadians, but also to those international graduate students who come from widely differing health and social systems. Practical implications The design of this leadership program appears to have real potential in facilitating graduate students to understand how leadership practices and leading change processes are applicable both within the context of their own health care and social systems, and through encouraging a class‐wide global perspective by learning from each other's unique case studies. Originality/value This paper illustrates how principles from organization development inquiry methods can be used to customize case‐study learning to bring global perspective to health leadership education.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".