Advocacy and Public Policy Perceptions and Involvement of Master Certified Health Education Specialists

Abstract

Master Certified Health Education Specialists (MCHES; n = 186) participated in a mail survey on advocacy and public policy. Over half of participants reported that they had contacted a public official or provided policy-related information to consumers or other professionals. Participants identified barriers and benefits to influencing public policy. The greatest benefit was identified as improving the health or welfare of the public while the greatest barrier was that they were busy with other priorities. Participants also described their level of involvement, knowledge, training in advocacy, and their self-efficacy in performing various advocacy activities. Most MCHES reported voting and other basic advocacy functions while far fewer had participated in more advanced advocacy activities. Although nearly 73% had formal training on advocacy and policy, only 26% received it through college coursework. Factors predictive of advocacy and policy involvement were determined through a stepwise regression analysis. Five independent variables predicted the total number of advocacy activities and when combined accounted for nearly 61% of the variance. Government-level health educators' misconception that they cannot participate in advocacy and public policy issues should be dispelled. Health education specialists with the MCHES credential need coursework and additional training on how to effectively influence public health policy.

Advocacy and Public Policy Perceptions and Involvement of College Health Promotion Students

“…The regression analysis in this study showed that students with greater perceived advocacy/policy-related knowledge, self-efficacy, number of trainings, and perceived benefits participate in more advocacy/policy activities. Our findings are comparable to those of Kerr and colleagues (2017), who found that number of training sources, self-efficacy, perceived benefits, knowledge, perceived barriers, and age were predictors of advocacy/public policy activities among MCHES professionals. Frequent opportunities to engage in advocacy or advocacy/public policy-related skill development can result in mastery experiences that build self-efficacy and engagement (Bandura, 1977; Bliss & Dressner, 2015).…”

“…Prior studies of primarily health education professionals indicated that respondents engaged in basic advocacy participation such as voting, while fewer engaged in more influential, higher level activities that require more time and effort (Holtrop, Price, & Boardley, 2000; Kerr et al, 2017; Mahas, Van Wasshenova, Everhart, Thompson, & Boardley, 2016). One of the most commonly cited barriers to participation found in multiple studies is being busy with other priorities (Holtrop et al, 2000; Kerr et al, 2017; Mahas et al, 2016; Thompson, Boardley, Kerr, Greene, & Jenkins, 2009), along with a general lack of training or specific training received through college coursework (Holtrop et al, 2000; Kerr et al, 2017; Mahas et al, 2016; Radius, Galer-Unti, & Tappe, 2009). Studies assessing advocacy and policy involvement of college students indicated a lack of participation, knowledge, self-efficacy, and training (Cooper, 1986; Cox et al, 2014).…”

“…In an examination of advocacy activity and self-efficacy among health educators, Bliss and Dressner (2015) asserted that a reported lack of advocacy-related knowledge and skills were significant factors impeding self-efficacy, while hands-on experience was a significant facilitator. Other professionals are in agreement and suggest that key factors encouraging participation in advocacy include adequate training (specifically college coursework), self-efficacy to perform public policy activities, and reducing barriers (Holtrop et al, 2000; Kerr et al, 2017; Radius et al, 2009; Tappe, Galer-Unti, & Radius, 2007).…”

Demystifying Public Health Policy Through Service-Learning Pedagogy

“…Few public health practitioners are comfortable with policy concepts, especially in the public sphere (Hernandez, Rosenstock, & Gebbie, 2003). They report limited engagement with (Kerr et al, 2017) and sometimes an aversion to public policy (McFarlane & Gordon, 1992). Perceived barriers to public health policy engagement include scarce resources and also a lack of familiarity with policy, limited confidence in advocacy skills, and frustration with policy processes (Mahas, Van Wasshenova, Everhart, Thompson, & Boardley, 2016; Moreland-Russell, Zwald, & Golden, 2016).…”

A Right to Vote: A Case Study in Nursing Advocacy for Public Policy Reform

“…Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to present a particular case of nursing advocacy around voting rights to explore both the challenges inherent in this competency and to provide practical suggestions to support nurses who seek to enact public policy advocacy for social justice. Providing recommendations to overcome the challenges of public policy advocacy can begin to fill the gaps in health professional education (Kerr, et al, 2017).…”