Cited by 9Public Health Policies and EducationHealth and Medical EducationCommunity Health and Development

Doctoral students as agents for change: shaping our public health training environment

McSorley, Anna-Michelle M., Manalo-Pedro, Erin, Bacong, Adrian Matias·2021·Pedagogy in Health Promotion

Abstract

This reflective article describes how we, a trio of doctoral students, applied critical pedagogical approaches to identify gaps in our public health training, reflect on the value of our lived experiences and ancestral histories, and take action toward advancing change within our School of Public Health. Additionally, we argue that our future effectiveness in leading systemic change toward health justice requires our public health training institutions to deliver course content that addresses racism and other systemic forms of oppression, largely responsible for reproducing health inequities. We also reflect upon how our efforts to find spaces in which to critically engage with content related to social and structural determinants of health transformed into a collaborative learning opportunity that has served to strengthen our skills as public health researchers, advocates, and future educators. We conclude by calling upon our schools of public health to take the lead in preparing the public health workforce of tomorrow for the challenges of addressing systemic causes of health inequities. Our goal is to share our experiences so that graduate students across public health training institutions may look to this piece as a concrete example of how we can shape our schools of public health to meet our needs.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/23733799211042642

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Only four included articles had an explicit positionality statement by the author(s); two of these had ambiguity about whether the positionality was the author(s)' or the instructor's.

    “Only four articles had an explicit positionality statement by the author(s) (43–46); however, two of these had some relative ambiguity whether the positionality reported was that of the author(s) or if it was simply relaying the positionality of the instructor they were reporting on.”
  • McSorley and colleagues' work validated these recommendations as an organic, positive consequence of engaging with peers, proposing counter-curriculums, and fostering safe counter-spaces, and they created a working group of more than 10 graduate students that developed a counter-curriculum including U.S. colonial history, historical trauma, theories of embodiment, and alternative methodologies.

    “In doing so, they created a working group of more than 10 graduate students that developed a counter-curriculum that included content on the theoretical and methodological topics currently omitted within public health curriculum such as U.S. colonial history, historical trauma, theories of embodiment, and alternative methodologies.”
  • The snowballing methodology used in this scoping review produced only one additional article, likely because four of the ten articles identified as "ideal candidates" have not received any reported citations.

    “Due to the late onset of these publications, the snowballing methodology used in this scoping review produced only one additional article likely due to four of the ten articles identified as “ideal candidates” have not received any reported citations (43, 45, 46, 52).”
  • Several authors approached cultivating inclusive and safe learning environments by collaborating with their students at the start of the course, while others recognized the importance of fostering these environments to foster candid sharing and reflection among peers.

    “Due to this scoping review focusing on institutions of higher education, several authors approached cultivating inclusive and safe learning environments by collaborating with their students at the start of the course (52, 59), while others recognized the importance of fostering these environments to foster candid sharing and reflection among peers (46, 53).”
  • More than half of the identified articles were published after 2020.

    “It is essential to recognize that more than half of the identified articles were published after 2020 (45, 46, 50, 51, 59, 62, 63, 65, 66, 68).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McSorley, A.-M. M., Manalo-Pedro, E., & Bacong, A. M.
Affiliations
University of California, Los Angeles (US)
Corresponding author
McSorley, Anna-Michelle M.
Venue
Pedagogy in Health Promotion
Published
2021-12
Volume
7
Issue
4
Pages
299-303
ISSN
  • 2373-3799 (ISSN-L)
  • 2373-3802
OpenAlex
W4200576952
Cited by
9
References
3
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1
FWCI
1.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Pedagogy in Health Promotion (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Public Health Policies and Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health and Medical Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Community Health and Development
Keywords
doctoral students, public health education, critical pedagogy, health justice, health disparities, racism, structural determinants of health, social determinants of health, ancestral history, lived experience, systemic change, public health workforce, cooperative learning

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review