Roe, K. (2009).  Infusing public health education into undergraduate curriculum: The experience of a comprehensive university.  Association of American College& Universities, 11(3), 19-22.

Hovland, K., Kirkwood, B.A., Ward, C., Osterweis , M. , Silver, G.B. ( 2009) Liberal education and public health: Surveying the landscape. Association of American College& Universities,11(3), 5-8.

Fass, M.F., Krusko, N. (2009). The evolution of the interdisciplinary health major at Beloit college.  Association of American College& Universities, 11(3), 12-14

The above mentioned articles demonstrate the need, rational and popularity of implementing public health degrees at the undergraduate level.  Local, state, federal and private organizations are increasing seeking graduates with a unique set of public health skills.   Perhaps the focal of these unique skills may be the ability to critically read, think and write on issues dealing with identification and prevention of population health threats.   S such, the above mentioned articles suggest that new courses in medial anthropology, medical sociology, biomedical ethics and biology of disease be adapting at the departmental level.  Yet, because of the interdisciplinary undertone of public health, there should perhaps be a larger focus on the different types of writing that would be required of these students.  In fact, there was no mention in any of the above mentioned articles, about the specific writing criteria that would be to be investigated for this specific population.; suggesting that general education requirement are sufficient for the new brand of student.

The majority of medical schools require the MCAT examination as a predictor of medical student success.  One third of the MCAT is dedicated to writing skills.  There are continuous and existing debates on the sensitivity of the MCAT results and their subsequent ability to predict academic success.  As we foresee an increasing need for public health trained students, perhaps investigating and revising the writing needs of these students need be explored.

The introduction section of Gottsehalk and Hjortshoj , and the chapter three handout entitled “How Our Informants teach  students write” uncover a brief history on the evolution of collegiate writing and possible explanations for inadequacies.  In academia, there is an unnerving sense that students are less inept to handle basic writing assignments.  Students may find themselves in the cross fires of begin improperly trained, being uncertain of instructors exact expectations, and unable to critically dissect the scenarios they are ask to react to.  In interim, professors of varied discipline may request a wide range of different types of writing assignments, and may also be undertrained on developing individual students writing skills.  Both the above mentioned readings suggest these inconsistencies may be the source of demise for writing at the undergraduate level.

The inconsistencies and dilemmas indentified in the student and professor populations may create a false conception of reality.  This false sense of reality is magnified via weakness of professors and students ability to express their expectations.   As such, Gottsehalk and Hjortshoj , outline the ground rules of implementing meaningful writing in the classroom.  This chapter should resonate mostly for the entry level college educator whom may not feel confident with coaching students to become better writers.  As a teacher in that category, I find myself relating to Rose, Gottschalk and Hjortshoj.  Perhaps I’m guilty of assignment writing assignments to students, just to assign them.  Or maybe I assign writing assignments to see if I can capture the non-test taker type; allowing student to demonstrate their intellectual ability through different portals.   As such, the take-home message for me from these three readings is that I need to set up an outline on my expectations as an evaluator, my expectations of students, and my students’ expectations of my feedback as a tool for growth and development.

The chapter sheds lights on several shortcomings in higher education.  First, there appears to be a decline in the quality of critical literacy among students entering undergraduate (and probably graduate too) programs.  Second, there appears to be tremendous amount of oversight and/or missed opportunities in correcting this critical literacy problem in higher learning institutions at large.   Consequently, the results of these shortcomings may ultimately resonate through the higher learning experience.  As a result, rather than producing great thinkers, perhaps colleges and universities are graduating average memorizers.  The source of this decline may be the result of inefficient pedagogical and andragogical learning/teaching methods.  The initiation of this decline is most often occurring at the elementary school level and progressing to the high school level and beyond.  Unfortunately the source of this decline may be the result of a combination of issues such a socioeconomic disparities and academic territorialism.

As a new faculty, I was hired with the intention of starting a new health science degree program.  In designing the program, I suggested a core course in the Philosophy of Science.  This is a course that York College offers in their catalog, but it not utilized as often as it probably should.  Not that one course is the end all, but the philosophy of science, in its truest realm, explores the process of thinking.

As a clinical doctorate, with expertise in subjects such as anatomy and physiology, I found that I was a good learner in  graduate school, but a much better thinker after schooling.  My professors used to preach to us that it would come together one day.  Their predictions seemed to bear some truth for me, in that one-day subjects like biomechanics of the spine seemed to have made a whole lot of sense to me.  I dot know if maybe it was because I couldn’t understand the texts books, and therefore,  I was indirectly forced to think about it so much. However, now I could see it in my minds eye.   As a new faculty member and a PhD candidate, I found that I had this unrelenting urgency to teach, and can almost see this urgency in my mind’s eye.  I selected the college level, because as a former high school teacher, I found that my duties included more of a disciplinary role, as a opposed to a teaching role.   So I stand here, finding myself at the cross roads that Mike Rose describes in Chapter 14.  How can I improve my leadership and management skills within the classroom, to foster and nurture creative intelligence and critical thinking?