SCHOOL-BASED HEALTH PROGRAMS AND HEALTH CARE SERVICES

For this assignment, you will respond to questions regarding school health programs. Please answer these questions:

1. Discuss the strengths and weaknesses of school-based health programs. Be sure to distinguish the difference between a basic, expanded, and comprehensive school health program.
2. List “the 8” components of coordinated school health programs. How are they interconnected and why are they important?
3. Define the roles of Education and Public Health Departments. Should Public health departments provide primary medical care? How “bright” is the line between public health and personal health within the context of a public school district? Do they or should they overlap?
4. Discuss the new directions of school-based health care services and the key programmatic characteristics of school-based health care services.
5. Generally discuss how the Healthy People 2020 goal to “Increase the quality, availability, and effectiveness of educational and community-based programs designed to prevent disease and improve health and quality of life” impacts the role of education and public health departments to work with the schools.

Length: Your paper should be 4-5 pages, APA format, requires scholarly sources, use subheadings.

(see attachment for required sources to be used in the paper)

Must Use and Cite the following Resources :

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (n.d.). Educational and community-based programs. Healthy People 2020. Retrieved from  http://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/topicsobjectives2020/overview.aspx?topicid=11

Geary, R. S., Gomez-Olive, F. X., Kahn, K., Tollman, S., & Norris, S. A. (2014). Barriers to and facilitators of the provision of a youth-friendly health services programme in rural South Africa. BMC Health Services Research, 14(1), 259.

Hudson, P., Arenson, M., Lee, N., & Lai, B. (2019). The Evidence on School-Based Health Centers: A Review – Michael Arenson, Philip J. Hudson, NaeHyung Lee, Betty Lai, 2019. Retrieved from https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2333794X19828745

Langford, R., Bonell, C., Jones, H., Pouliou, T., Murphy, S., Waters, E., Komro, K., Gibbs, L., Magnus, G., & Campbell, R. (2015). The World Health Organization’s Health Promoting Schools framework: a Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC public health, 15(1), 130.

Micha, R., Karageorgou, D., Bakogianni, I., Trichia, E., Whitsel, L. P., Story, M., Penalvo, J., & Mozaffarian, D. (2018). Effectiveness of school food environment policies on children’s dietary behaviors: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PloS one, 13(3), e0194555.

Steinberg, A., Griffin-Tomas, M., Abu-Odeh, D., & Whitten, A. (2018). Evaluation of a Mobile Phone App for Providing Adolescents With Sexual and Reproductive Health Information, New York City, 2013-2016. Public Health Reports, 133(3), 234-239.

For this benchmark, you will create a unit plan containing three individual lesson plans designed for the students outlined in the “Class Profile.” Choose a grade level for the students, then select an NGSS from the physical, life, or earth/space sciences, as well as a health/nutrition standard from your state, for the 3-lesson unit. You may adapt any previous assignments in the creation of this mini-unit plan, as long as the three lessons form a planned, cohesive unit.  Use the 5E lesson plan template for each of the three lesson plans.

In your unit, design the three lesson plans so that they:

1. Use a variety of teaching strategies and technologies that encourage the students’ development of critical thinking and problem solving.

2. Use strategies that create opportunities for students’ active engagement in their learning and promote a supportive learning environment.

3. Incorporate the use of digital resources to promote effective verbal, nonverbal, and media communication techniques while creating opportunities for active inquiry, collaboration, and supportive interaction in the elementary classroom.

4. Integrate formative and summative assessment techniques that measure all four DOK levels, and provide students feedback on their learning so that they can make adjustments; and

5. Use differentiated strategies to meet the needs of all students in the “Class Profile.”

Along with the unit, submit a 250-500 word rationale describing your reasoning for your instructional choices, your use of the 5E model, and how you connected the content to student learning needs.

Class Profile

 

 

Student Name	ELL/ Proficiency Level	Socioeconomic Status	Race/ Ethnicity	Native Language	Gender	IEP/ 504	Other	Age	Reading Performance Level/Score*	Math Performance Level/Score*
Arturo	Yes – 4	Low	Mexican	Spanish	Male	No	Glasses	Grade level	One year below grade level/98	At grade level/151
Bertie	Yes – 5	Low	Vietnamese	Vietnamese	Female	No	None	Grade level	One year above grade level/210	At grade level/108
Beryl	No	Mid	White	English	Female	No	None	Grade level	Two years above grade level/268	At grade level/163
Brandie	Yes – 4	Low	Liberian	Liberian English	Female	No	None	Grade level	At grade level/178	One year below grade level/79
Dessie	Yes – 4	Mid	Russian	Russian	Female	No	None	Grade level	At grade level/113	One year below grade level/65
Diana	Yes – 4	Low	Mexican	Spanish	Female	No	None	Grade level	One year below grade level/79	At grade level/198
Donnie	No	Mid	African American	English	Female	Yes	Hearing Aids	Grade level	At grade level/150	At grade level/124
Eduardo	Yes – 5	Low	Puerto Riccan	Spanish	Male	No	Glasses	Grade level	One year below grade level/88	At grade level/101
Emma	No	Mid	White	English	Female	No	None	Grade level	At grade level/124	At grade level/135
Enrique	No	Low	Mexican	English	Male	ADHD	None	One year above grade level	One year below grade level/45	At grade level/163
Fatma	Yes – 5	Low	Mexican	Spanish	Female	No	Glasses	Grade level	One year below grade level/21	One year above grade level/289
Frances	No	Mid	Mexican	English	Female	No	Diabetic Glasses	Grade level	At grade level/116	At grade level/114
Francesca	Yes – 5	Low	Mexican	Spanish	Female	No	None	Grade level	At grade level/162	At grade level/178
Fredrick	No	Low	White	English	Male	Learning Disabled	None	One year above grade level	Two years below grade level/285	Two years below grade level/15
Ines	Yes – 4	Low	Mexican	Spanish	Female	Learning Disabled	Glasses	Grade level	One year below grade level/50	One year below grade level/55
Jade	No	Mid	African American	English	Female	No	None	Grade level	At grade level/183	One year above grade level/224
Kent	No	High	White	English	Male	ADHD	Glasses	Grade level	At grade level/178	One year above grade level/208
Lolita	Yes – 5	Low	Navajo	Navajo	Female	No	None	Grade level	At grade level/110	At grade level/141
Maria	No	Mid	Mexican	Spanish	Female	No	NOTE: School does not have gifted program	Grade level	At grade level/139	Two years above grade level/296
Mason	Yes – 4	Low	Vietnamese	Vietnamese	Male	Yes	High Func-tioning Autism	Grade level	At grade level/154	At grade level/138
Nick	No	Low	White	English	Male	No	None	Grade level	One year above grade level/205	At grade level/180
Noah	No	Low	African American	English	Male	No	Glasses	Grade level	At grade level/193	At grade level/177
Sharlene	No	Mid	White	English	Female	No	None	Grade level	One year above grade level/110	At grade level/125
Sophia	Yes – 5	Mid	Guatamalan	Spanish	Female	No	None	Grade level	At grade level/129	At grade level/152
Stuart	No	Mid	White	English	Male	No	Allergic to peanuts	Grade level	One year above grade level/231	At grade level/116
Terrence	No	Mid	African American	English	Male	No	None	Grade level	At grade level/189	At grade level/192
Wade	No	Mid	White	English	Male	No	Glasses	Grade level	At grade level/179	One year above grade level/223
Welington	Yes – 3	Low	Cuban	Spanish	Male	Learning Disabled	Glasses	Grade level	One year below grade level/82	Two years below grade level/24
Wendell	Yes – 2	Low	Somalian Refugee	Somali	Male	No	None	Grade level	One year below grade level/51	Two years below grade level/45
Yung	Yes – 4	Low	Burmese	Burmese	Male	No	None	One year below grade level	One year below grade level/98	Two years below grade level/65

 

 

*Scaled Scores Key: Above Grade Level = 200 +, At Grade Level = 100-199, Below Grade Level = 0-99

 

 

 

© 2018. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.