Section outline

  • Lecture:  Community Engagement methods

    Theory and practice of community-based participatory research, including its challenges and benefits.

    Faculty:  Brittany Chambers

    Location:       Mission Hall 1407

    • Session Audio/Video Recording (Access restricted to registered students):

    • Watch URL
      Not available unless: You belong to a group in Registered Students Only

    • Required Reading:

    • Vasquez CBPR File
      Not available unless: Your ID number contains 02
    • Andrews CBPR File
      Not available unless: Your ID number contains 02
    • Minkler CBPR File
      Not available unless: Your ID number contains 02

    • Optional Reading:

    • Yeary CBPR File
      Not available unless: Your ID number contains 02
    • Comm Engaged Research Guide USC File
      Not available unless: Your ID number contains 02
    • Wallerstein and Duran 2010 File
      Not available unless: Your ID number contains 02
    • AJPH.2014 Cacari Wallerstein Garcia Minkler File
      Not available unless: Your ID number contains 02

    • Assignment:

      Please consider these questions below when reading each article. If you are unable to attend the class session, please post answers to these questions to the forum by midnight on the 25th.

      Minkler:

      • What do you think of the claimed benefits of CBPR?
      • Which challenges in doing CBPR  do you think are most significant?
      • What do you think Minkler means by “systems development and local community capacity development”? How can this be accomplished?

      Andrews:

      • What do you think of the “origin story” of this collaboration?
      • What do you think of how CBPR principles were applied in this project?
      • How did the use of CBPR influence the intervention development? The study design?
      • How did they address sustainability?

      Vasquez:

      • What do you think of how CBPR principles were applied in this project?
      • What challenges did they face? How did they address them?
      • How was this project effective in changing policy? What aspects of this could be generalized to other projects?
      • What do you think of the academic partner’s statement that “the motivation for involvement did not lie in identifying policy goals but rather in trying to fill scientific gaps”?