Website: www.hpsa-africa.org
Twitter: hpsa_africa
Ghana curriculum development
workshop report
August 2012
Ghana curriculum development workshop report
By the Consortium for Health Policy and Systems Analysis in Africa (CHEPSAA)
is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.5
South Africa License. Please see http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/za/
for terms and conditions.
Suggested citation: CHEPSAA. 2012. Ghana curriculum development workshop report. August. Accra.
Consortium for Health Policy & Systems Analysis in Africa.
This document is an output from a project funded by the European Commission
(EC) FP7-Africa (Grant no. 265482). The views expressed are not necessarily those
of the EC.
1. Purpose:
The purpose of the workshop was to support and strengthen staff of University of Ghana School of
Public Health (UG-SPH) knowledge and skills in curriculum development. This was done by sharing
the knowledge, skills and materials from the CHEPSAA curriculum development workshop held in
Cape Town in May 2012 with faculty of the School of Public Health.
2. Specific Objectives
(1) To present, discuss and assess relevance and applicability to UG-SPH MPH curricula
development and revision theory related to learning, assessments and curriculum
development
(2) To initiate discussions on the process of applying the theory to analyze and as indicated
review the MPH courses we teach
(3) To initiate discussions on the process of harmonizing the core courses taught in the MPH
curriculum by the different departments to complement and work together to achieve
common agreed student competencies and learning outcomes
3. Participants and venue
In addition to all staff in the Health Policy Planning and Management department who are engaged
in any way in student teaching and supervision there were two participants invited from each of the
departments of the school namely:





Epidemiology and disease control
Biostatistics (includes the health informatics group)
Social and Behavioral science
Biological environmental occupational and health sciences
Family and Reproductive health
The detailed list of those who attended the workshop is attached as part of the appendices.
Rather than organize a residential workshop that would have been much more expensive, the
workshop was organized as non residential. The workshop was held in one of the classroom
/seminar rooms of the School of Public Health. However since most faculty live off campus and it
was still during recess, a daily travel and transport allowance was provided to participants to
facilitate their on time daily attendance.
However, our observation was that being so close to the departments made it possible for
participants’ attention to be distracted by issues in their department or the school in general.
Despite the added cost, it will be probably be better to maximize concentration and participation; to
organize future workshops away from the school and make them residential – if budget permit.
2
4. Facilitation and organization
The workshop was facilitated by the CHEPSAA team members who participated in the Cape
Town curriculum development workshop in May. These were Irene Akua Agyepong and
Genevieve Cecelia Aryeetey. Additionally support was provided by the head of department Dr.
Moses Aikins and Mr. Kojo Anniah supported the pre, intra and post workshop organization and
administration.
5. Group work and exercises
The diagram summarizing the process towards curriculum development from the Cape Town
workshop was used as the framework on which the two day workshop program was developed
and also presented as a guide /checklist to use in curriculum development and review. The
diagram can be found in the appendix.
Focus for the group work and discussions was the application of the theory to the MPH program
in general and curricula /courses taught in each of the participating departments to use for the
learning and applied exercises. The MPH is a program all departments in the school have in
common, and also a program in which Health Policy and Systems Research and Analysis
(HPSR&A) is a core part. The multi-disciplinary nature of HPSR&A means potentially the
methods of the core disciplines in any of the departments could become relevant depending on
the question being asked.
The participants as part of an application of the materials did discussions and a brain storm to
develop a draft statement of a Proposed Charter of Graduate Attributes for the UG-SPH to share
with the rest of the school and the Dean and finalize as a Charter of Graduate Attributes for the UGSPH. The draft is in box 1 below.
3
Box 1 – Draft of Proposed Charter of Graduate Attributes for UG-SPH August 2012
1. CRITICAL THINKING AND ANALYSIS
Graduates of the UG-SPH must be able to demonstrate analytic and critical thinking as
demonstrated by high quality informal reasoning and argumentation, open mindedness
and ability to self assess, and a striving to engage in life long learning and to continuously
improve their knowledge and thinking skills. They must be able to link and transform
theory into effective practice; and demonstrate application of these skills to problem
identification, assessment, solution/strategy development in the field of Public Health and
its associated disciplines.
2. TEAM WORK AND MULTI-DISCIPLINARITY
Graduates of the UG-SPH must have an appreciation of the multi-disciplinary nature of
public health and be able to work productively in multi-disciplinary teams. They also need
to be able to appreciate the efforts of others and the fact that achievement in public health
practice will often require harmonized inter and multi-disciplinary skills and efforts.
3. COMMUNICATION
Graduates of the UG-SPH must have the ability to express themselves clearly and also
listen to, understand and critically and objectively analyze and respond to the viewpoints
and perspectives of others, even if they do not agree with them.
4. LEADERSHIP SKILLS
Graduates of the School of Public Health must demonstrate the ability to provide
leadership in the attainment of the mission of Public Health to fulfill society’s interest in
assuring the conditions in which people can be healthy.
6. Workshop follow up
1. Discussion of the draft charter of graduate attributes with the Dean and all faculty to finalize
and use it
2. Follow up with the Departments about how they have applied the materials in any revisions
of their core MPH courses
3. Within the HPPM department, initiate discussions about the courses we currently teach and
any application of the materials to revision or new course design
4
7. Appendices
7.1 Process towards curriculum development
Process towards curriculum
development
What is
the field
Learning
outcomes
Threshold
concpets
OER
Graduate
A ributes
Authen c
learning
principles
Topics
Teaching
ac vi es
Target
audience
Assessment
prac ce
Group
ac vi es
& cases
Sequencing
and me
alloca on
7.2 Time table
Time
Topics
Tuesday
9.00 – 9:30
Welcome, introduction, workshop goals and overview
Introduction to CHEPSAA and HPSR&A
9.30 – 10.30
Setting the agenda:
 What is the field of instruction
o MPH broadly will be used as the example for
group work and discussions
o What is public health, what is its vision and
mission, what are its core functions, do we agree
with the IOM definitions, would we like to
modify them, how, why?
o How does what we teach in our department in
the MPH curriculum relate to this.
 What is the Target Audience for the MPH and their
learning needs in each field /area
Facilitator/
Plenary chair
Irene /Moses
Irene
5
Time
Topics
10.30 –
11.00
11.00 –
11.30am
11:3012:00pm
Open access Educational Resources
12.00 –
12.30pm
12:302:00pm
2.00pm
Wednesday
9.00 –
9.30am
9.30 –
10.30am
10:30-11:00
Facilitator/
Plenary chair
Genevieve
BREAK
Framing the curriculum
Irene
What topics do we cover /want to cover and why?
What values and attributes do we want the curriculum to
convey and represent? e.g. social justice, equity, public good,
multi-disciplinarily
Graduate attributes.
Purpose: To frame how we then think about learning
outcomes, content, assessment etc. i.e. whether the curriculum
conveying these values and attributes?
Learning Outcomes: How do we think about learning
Genevieve
outcomes? What are they?
Activity: Group work: Think about attributes and values
students should bring to the field and how these translate into
learning outcomes; how would you know that learning
outcomes have been achieved?
Activity: start of practical work to define curriculum frame
and learning outcomes
Group work in departments with Plenary presentation
Select one core course and look at the issues discussed in
relation to the course. Present in plenary on proposed
values and attributes and topics and learning outcomes
Lunch and close
Plenary chair:
Reuben/Moses
Introduce notion of threshold concepts; what are threshold
concepts in field?
Purpose: to delineate and focus key concepts in the field which
we think should be developed in course; understanding most
influential concepts; and so what is key course content?
To think about – What are threshold concepts that may be of
relevance to what you teach?
Group work and Plenary presentation on attributes, values,
threshold concepts, learning outcomes
Irene
Input:
Authentic Learning (AL) principles; learning process;
approach to assessment practice; time spent
AL principles will help frame course, learning processes and
materials, assessment practices; will provide “template”
against which to review quality, attributes, and outcomes.
Genevieve
Teaching activities
Sequencing & time allocation
Group activities and cases studies
Input: What are core building blocks of the course you
teach?
Irene
Moses /Reuben
6
Time
Topics
Facilitator/
Plenary chair
Covering e.g. notional hours, contact vs non-contact time,
teaching activities and style, use of participant experience
Assessment practice
What forms of assessment do we want to use?
11:00-11:30
Wednesday
11:301:00pm
Tea break
Group work and Plenary – Assessment practice
Input: What are core building blocks of the course you
teach?
Covering e.g. notional hours, contact vs non-contact time,
teaching activities and style, use of participant experience
Irene
Reuben /Moses
Assessment practice
What forms of assessment do we want to use?
1.00 –
2.00pm
Reflection on workshop – what has been learned/moving
forward
2.00pm
Lunch and Close
7.3 List of participants
Health Policy, Planning and Management (HPPM)
1. Dr Moses Aikins – Facilitator
2. Dr. Reuben Esena
3. Dr Augustine Adomah-Afari
4. Mr Justice Nonvignon
5. Mr Prince Boni
6. Ms. Genevieve C. Aryeetey (Facilitator)
7. Mr. Kojo Anniah (Administrative coordinator)
8. Prof. Irene A. Agyepong (Facilitator)
Epidemiology and Disease Control (EPDC)
9. Dr S.O. Sackey
10. Dr. Francis Anto
11. Dr. Patricia Akweongo
Population Family and Reproductive Health (PFRH)
12. Mrs Margaret Attuahene
Social and Behavioural Sciences (SOBS)
13. Dr Phyllis Dako-Gyeke
Biological, Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences (BEOHS)
14. Prof Isabella Quakyi
15. Dr Julius Fobi
Biostatistics
16. Mrs. Baaba Vroom
17. Mr Samuel Dery
7