Revised: March 25, 2008

School of Public Health

University of California, Berkeley

Second Year DrPH Seminar

PB HLTH 293-02, Spring, 2008

Course Control # 76349 (section 02)

Wednesday, 12:00 pm to 2:00 pm

Tolman 2523

Instructors:

Norman A. Constantine, PhD 237 University Hall (925) 284-8118 nconstantine@berkeley.edu http://sph.berkeley.edu/faculty/constantine.html

Cheri Pies, DrPH 237 University Hall (925) 313-6254 cpies@berkeley.edu http://sph.berkeley.edu/faculty/pies.html

Course Description

This course is the second of a two-semester seminar sequence for second year DrPH students. We will focus in more depth this semester on scientific foundations for research, research design and critical appraisal of evidence and of research validity, and application issues for a variety research methods. We also will focus on student completion and presentation of prospectuses and preparation for orals.

This is a 3 credit course, however students may enroll for more or fewer credits with special permission. Grading is Satisfactory/Unsatisfactory.

Competencies and Objectives

Participation in this course will provide an opportunity to partially master the following competencies:

1. Analyze issues and problems in public health employing critical appraisal of evidence, and applied qualitative and quantitative research methodology
2. Apply principles of scientific inquiry and scientific reasoning, validity evidence and threats to validity, plausible rival hypotheses, and specific qualitative and qualitative methods to critiquing and defending student’s own, and others’ research.
3. Clarify critical gaps in scientific knowledge that impede the resolution of public health problems
4. Initiate, organize and pursue the investigation of significant problems in public health practice
5. Identify policy issues in public health and contribute to rigorous policy analysis and decision-making
6. Critically review the literature and apply relevant theoretical, conceptual, and methodological approaches to analyze public health problems
7. Demonstrate critical thinking and mastery of concepts, theories, and the research literature in an area of concentration
8. Communicate and present rigorous research findings to professional and public audiences in a lucid and understandable manner

By the end of the semester, students will achieve the following objectives:

1. Complete a solid written draft of the dissertation prospectus.
2. Make a 15-minute presentation of the prospectus to the seminar, followed by a 30 minute discussion period.
3. Understand the guiding principles of rigorous scientific research, the fundamental roles of research questions and research methods, and the concepts of rival hypotheses and validity threats in quantitative and qualitative research
4. Finalize selection of Qualifying Committee members
5. Discuss the Qualifying Exam process with potential committee members

Class Assignments

Each of the eight methods sections has a set of assigned readings to be completed prior to the session. Short questions and scenarios to respond to will be assigned each week related to the readings and to students’ own research, to be turned in before class. A brief (approximately two single-spaced pages) methodological critique of a published article from the student’s dissertation literature review will be due by April 16.

Student prospectus presentations will involve 15 minute Power Point presentations followed by 30 minutes of questions and discussion. These will be scheduled for the last third of the semester. Key expectations for the presentations are (1) to plan and manage time appropriately so that the presentation ends within 15 minutes without a rush through the ending, (2) employment of Power Point slides in a lively and effective manner that includes good use of simple and compelling charts and pictures, and avoids too many slides, crowded slides, and slides with more than a few words of text.

For each of Norm’s eight methodological sessions, including the first session on January 23, students are expected to come prepared to class having completed the assigned readings and the short written exercise.

Class Schedule (tentative, subject to change)

January 23	Principles of scientific inquiry (review) Theoretical frameworks
January 30 (Cheri out)	Clues to the puzzle of scientific evidence Critical appraisal of evidence
February 6	Review of student prospectus progress Issues in causal inference
February 13	Case study methods: Keeping them rigorous Case study dissertation presentation by Heather (4+ student)
February 20	Qualitative research methods
February 27 (Norm out)	Review of student prospectus progress
March 5	· Mixed methods (qualitative and quantitative)
March 12	· Experimental, quasi-experimental, and correlational research designs
March 19	· Issues in significance testing, effect sizes, confidence intervals, and sample size estimation Power Pointing without yawns
March 26	Spring break, no class
April 2 (Cheri out)	One student presentation (Chih-Tao) Issues in multiple regression analysis and other linear models (part 1)
April 9	Two student presentations (Caricia, Charlotte)
April 16	One student presentation (Dawn) Issues in multiple regression analysis and other linear models (part 2)
April 23	Two student presentations (Terry, Donata)
April 30	Two student presentations (Kim, Laura) Methodological critique due
May 7 (Cheri out)	Review Course evaluations

Course Readings

A comprehensive resource list of research methods readings is maintained by Norm and can be accessed via: http://crahd.phi.org/PH293ReadingList.htm. Most articles and chapters on this list can be downloaded by clicking the appropriate reference on the list. Some are open access, some require that you be logged on through the University or proxy server, and others will require a separate class password to be provided at the first session. Many of the books listed can be checked out of the DrPH Seminars Library at the Health Research for Action Center on the 10^th floor of the Wells Fargo Building, see William Brown, HRA office manager.

Specific assigned readings for the research methods sessions are as listed below. These can be downloaded from the reading list or from the electronic version of this syllabus. Please study these materials carefully prior to the session for which they are assigned. Possible updates to these readings might be made as the class progresses.

January 23: Principles of scientific inquiry (review), and theoretical frameworks

Phillips, D.C. (2000). Chapter 8 (Popperian rules for research design). View

Green, J. (2000). The role of theory in evidence-based health promotion practice. [editorial]. Health Education Research, 15(2), 125-129. View

Review from last semester

Shavelson, R. & Towne, L. (Eds.) (2002). Guiding principles for scientific inquiry. In Scientific research in education. National Research Council Committee on Scientific Principles for Education Research, Washington, DC: National Academy Press. (Chapter 3). View

Recommended

Campbell, D. T. (1984) Can we be scientific in applied social science? In R. F. Conner and others (eds.), Evaluation Studies Review Annual. Vol. 9. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. View

Tebes, J.K. (2005). Community science, philosophy of science, and the practice of research. American Journal of Community Psychology, 35, 213-230. View. (recommended by Dawn)

January 30: Clues to the puzzle of scientific evidence, critical appraisal of evidence

Phillips, D.C. (2000). Preface, and Chapter 6 (New philosophy of science). View

Haack, S. (2003). Preface, and Chapter 3 (Clues to the puzzle of scientific evidence: A more so story). View

Gorman, D.M. (2003). Prevention programs and scientific nonsense. Policy Review, 117. View

Review from last semester

Campbell (1989/2003) and Yin (2000). Brief excerpts on Plausible rival hypotheses: Core of the scientific method. (2 pages) View

February 6: Issues in causal inference (download both)

Constantine, N. A & Braverman, M. T. (2004). Appraising evidence on program effectiveness. In M. T. Braverman, N. A. Constantine, and J. K. Slater (Eds.), Foundations and evaluation: Contexts and practices for effective philanthropy. (Chapter 12). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. View

Constantine, N. A. (2005). Do virginity pledges cause virginity? (Web discussion).

http://crahd.phi.org/VirginityPledgesFAQ.html

Rutter, M. (2003). Poverty and mental health: Natural experiments and social causation. (Editorial). Journal of the American Medical Association, 290, 2063-2064. View

Recommended classics

Hill, A. B. (1965). The environment and disease: association or causation? Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine, 58, 295-300. View

Cornfield, J. (1959) Smoking and lung cancer: recent evidence and a discussion of some questions. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 22, 173-203. http://crahd.phi.org/Cornfield1959SmokingLungCancer.pdf (large scanned pdf file, might take three or more minutes to download).

February 13: Case study methods

Yin, R. (1998). The abridged version of case study research: Design and method. In L. Bickman and D. Rog (Eds.), Handbook of applied social research methods. (pp. 229-259). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. View

Yin R. (2000) Rival explanations. In L. Bickman (Ed.) Validity and social experimentation: Donald Campbell’s legacy. (Vol. 1). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. View

Constantine, N. A. & Nevarez, C. R. (2006). Multiple-case study on evidence use in the sex education debates: The interacting roles of values, beliefs, and collateral information. (hypotheses and methods). Excerpts from funded proposal to the W.T. Grant Foundation. View

February 20: Qualitative research methods

Phillips (2000). Chapter 10: Qualitative research and its warrant. View

Maxwell, J. A. (1998). Designing a qualitative study. In L. Bickman and D. Rog (Eds.), Handbook of applied social research methods. (pp. 69-100). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. View

Review, from last semester

Maxwell, J. A. (2005). Chapter 6. Validity: How might you be wrong? View

Optional

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. (3^rd edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. (types of purposeful sampling: pp. 230-246). View (large scanned file)

March 5: Mixed methods (qualitative and quantitative)

Reichardt, C. S. & Rallis, S. F. (1994). The relationship between the qualitative and quantitative research traditions; Qualitative and quantitative inquiries are not incompatible. New Directions for Program Evaluation, 61, 5-11, 85-91. View

Letourneau, N. & Allen, M. (1999). Post-positivistic critical multiplism: a beginning dialogue. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 30, 623-630. View

Morgan, D. L. (1998). Practical strategies for combing qualitative and quantitative methods: Applications to health research. Qualitative Health Research, 8(3), 362-376. View

March 12: Experimental, quasi-experimental, and correlational research designs

Trochim, W. (Ed.), (1986). Editor's Notes: Advances in quasi-experimental design and analysis. New Directions for Program Evaluation Series, Number 31, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Link

Reichardt, C. S. & Mark, M. M. (1998). Quasi-experimentation. In L. Bickman & D. J. Rog (eds.), Handbook of applied social research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. (pp. 193-228).

March 19: Significance testing, effect sizes, confidence intervals, and sample size

Bower, B. (1997). Null science: Psychology’s statistical status quo draws fire. Science News, 151, 356-357. View

Cohen, J. (1994). The earth is round (p < .05). American Psychologist, 49, 997–1003. View

McCartney, K., & Rosenthal, R. (2000). Effect size, practical importance, and social policy for children. Child Development, 71(1), 173-180. View

Review of basics

Trochim, W. M. (2000). Hypotheses (Link); The T-Test (Link); Statistical Power (Link). The Research Methods Knowledge Base, (2nd Edition).

Optional

Bornstein, M., Rothstein, H., & Cohen, J. (2001). [Chapter 2 and glossary] Power and Precision (user’s manual). Englewood, NJ: Biostat, Inc.

Cohen, J. (1992). A Power Primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155-159. View

April 2/ April 16: Issues in multiple regression analysis and other linear models

Pedhazur, E. J. (1997). [Prediction and explanation (pp. 195-198, 211).] View

Victora, et al. (1997). The role of conceptual frameworks in epidemiological analysis: A hierarchical approach. International Journal of Epidemiology, 26(1):224-227. View

Osborne, J. & Elaine W. (2002). Four assumptions of multiple regression that researchers should always test. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation , 8(2). View

Review of basics (if needed)

Trochim, W. M. (2000). The general linear model. The Research Methods Knowledge Base, (2nd Edition). Link (very brief overview)

Trochim, W. M. (2000). Analysis of covariance designs. The Research Methods Knowledge Base, (2nd Edition). Link (very brief overview)

Optional readings and resources

Pedhazur, E. J. & Schmelkin, L. P. (1991). [Multiple regression analysis (pp. 413-428]. View

Garson, G. D. Multiple regression. In Statnotes: An Online Textbook, View

On the Web …

This syllabus is posted at: http://crahd.phi.org/PH293-02Syllabus.htm

The research methods readings list is posted at: http://crahd.phi.org/PH293ReadingList.htm