Schools of public health in the United States of America

1993 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-19
Author(s):  
Michael N. Bates ◽  
Rainer Fehr
Author(s):  
Edmund Ramsden

This article begins with great optimism expressed by Tocqueville for America's future as the embodiment of the democratic state. It discusses the opportunity to express the liberal political ideals, arguing that its success was based on a community of common sensibility. An understanding of society and politics endowed the historian with the power to help remake health care. This article explores and compares the ways in which medicine is developed and applied in a number of different social, cultural, and physical contexts. It shows rapid growth, from a period in which European ideas, methods, and structures were adapted to the American context, to one in which the United States is at the forefront of large-scale initiatives in public health, disease control, and innovation in the biomedical sciences. Finally, it mentions the contradiction, most notably between profound faith in the technical capacities of medical science and equally profound dissatisfaction with the provision of health care.


2021 ◽  
pp. 003335492110487
Author(s):  
Ella August ◽  
Laura Power ◽  
Emily J. Youatt ◽  
Olivia S. Anderson

Objectives The clinical professor track has expanded and reflects a trend toward hiring non–tenure-track faculty in public health; however, little is known about this track. We documented characteristics of clinical faculty at US schools of public health. Methods We surveyed clinical faculty at Council on Education for Public Health–accredited schools of public health in the United States in 2019, identified via each school’s website. We invited faculty (n = 264) who had the word clinical in their title (ie, apparently eligible faculty), had a working email address, and were not authors of this article to provide information about their rank, degree credentials, expectations for teaching, service, research and practice, and promotion criteria at their institution. In addition, we used open-ended responses to explain and contextualize quantitative data. Results Of 264 apparently eligible faculty surveyed, 88 (33.3%) responded. We included 81 eligible clinical faculty in our final sample, of whom 46 (56.8%) were assistant professors and 72 (88.9%) had a terminal degree; 57 of 80 (71.3%) had an initial contract of ≤2 years or no contract. Most clinical faculty listed service (96.2%), teaching (95.0%), and student advising/mentoring (86.3%) as duties; fewer clinical faculty reported research (55.0%), practice (33.8%), or clinic (7.5%) duties. Only 37.1% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that promotion policies for clinical track faculty were clear. Conclusions If most clinical faculty are at the lowest academic rank, with short contracts and unclear expectations, it will be difficult for clinical faculty to advance and challenging for schools of public health to benefit from this track. Clear institutional expectations for scope of work and promotion may enhance the contribution of clinical faculty to schools of public health and help define this track.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document