The Center for Family and Community Medicine is pleased to invite you to join us for a discussion on "Tradition and Innovation in Generalism," with Kevin Grumbach, M.D., professor and chair of the Department of Family and Community Medicine at the University of California, San Francisco and chief of Family and Community Medicine at San Francisco General Hospital.
Date: Thursday, November 29, 2007
Time: 4 - 6 p.m. Refreshments will be served.
Location: Russ Berrie Science Pavilion, 1st floor
(1150 St. Nicholas Avenue @ 168th Street)
For more information or to RSVP, please contact Ashley Cross at 212-304-7455 or ac2738@columbia.edu.
Background of guest speaker:
Kevin Grumbach, M.D. is professor and chair of the Department of Family and Community Medicine at the University of California, San Francisco and chief of Family and Community Medicine at San Francisco General Hospital. He is the director of the UCSF Center for California Health Workforce Studies, co-director of the UCSF Center for Excellence in Primary Care, and co-director of the Community Engagement Program for the UCSF Clinical Translational Science Institute. His research on topics such as primary care physician supply and access to care, racial and ethnic diversity in the health professions, and the impact of managed care on physicians have been published in major medical journals such as The New England Journal of Medicine and JAMA, and cited widely in both health policy forums and the general media. He co-authored the best-selling textbook on health policy, "Understanding Health Policy - A Clinical Approach," and the recent book, "Improving Primary Care - Strategies and Tools for a Better Practice." Dr. Grumbach is co-chair of the UCSF University-Community Partnership Council, and a founding member of the California Physicians' Alliance, the California chapter of Physicians for a National Health Program.
This is the second lecture in the 2007-2008 "Discovering the Primary Care Imperative" series, hosted by the Center for Family and Community Medicine. www.columbiacfcm.org
Showing posts with label course announcements. Show all posts
Showing posts with label course announcements. Show all posts
Monday, November 12, 2007
Tuesday, October 9, 2007
Feedback for Maternal Health, Family Planning, and Safe Birth
• Excellent presentation covering a very broad set of issues. Over dependency on PowerPoint at times. Good class discussion with issues and questions, well handled. Jeopardy game was great fun!
• We did great – What else am I supposed to say?
• Good balance of student participation, professor commentary and presenter facilitation.
• Very well planned and thought-out. Good responses with own knowledge to questions and inquiries.
• Awesome presentation!
• Well thought out and presented. C-section discussion strayed towards domestic (developed countries concerns) but overall excellent. Game was fund and involved the class.
• Great presentation.
• Presenter #1: Excellent delivery – defined key concepts, engaged class and I think did a great job of connecting comments made to her slides (throughout). A bit graph heavy, but that said appropriately picked graphs.
• Presenter #2: Good delivery – very us focused when discussing requirements for clinical workers – would have been good to see comparison. Would have liked to hear a bit about the men’s role in family planning. Would have liked to also learn more about ways to incorporate post-natal and pre-natal care options (clinical & not).
• Presenter #1: Excellent overall delivery.
• Presenter #2: Great presentation, excellent delivery; however, too much medical info.
• Great speakers! Funny game too.
• We did great – What else am I supposed to say?
• Good balance of student participation, professor commentary and presenter facilitation.
• Very well planned and thought-out. Good responses with own knowledge to questions and inquiries.
• Awesome presentation!
• Well thought out and presented. C-section discussion strayed towards domestic (developed countries concerns) but overall excellent. Game was fund and involved the class.
• Great presentation.
• Presenter #1: Excellent delivery – defined key concepts, engaged class and I think did a great job of connecting comments made to her slides (throughout). A bit graph heavy, but that said appropriately picked graphs.
• Presenter #2: Good delivery – very us focused when discussing requirements for clinical workers – would have been good to see comparison. Would have liked to hear a bit about the men’s role in family planning. Would have liked to also learn more about ways to incorporate post-natal and pre-natal care options (clinical & not).
• Presenter #1: Excellent overall delivery.
• Presenter #2: Great presentation, excellent delivery; however, too much medical info.
• Great speakers! Funny game too.
Wednesday, October 3, 2007
Feedback on Immunizations and Infections presenters
• The presentations are very good, appropriate and relevant to the topic.
• Talabi used tables in small print – very had to grasp. Time management was a problem.
• Not enough time allowed for student speakers.
• The group appeared to not have prepared together. Low energy level of presenters. Fantastic guest speaker involvement.
• General comments: Speaker 2/3: need to talk about what diseases are more than just the symptoms/vaccines. Too much talking during presentations, conflicts with presenters’ ability to get through their information – this applies to all presentations. Maybe fewer slides – more discussion? Articles need to be posted earlier. Speaker #1: good delivery of material – answered questions appropriately.
• Speaker #3: try to maintain eye contact with group, look at PowerPoint less, project voice forward. All: have another member of team handle the PowerPoint slides so that presenter can move away from the computer/podium and make better use of space.
• Speaker #2: Lots of good information but try not to read from the notes.
• Speaker #1: Good eye contact with group, good voice projection, seemed like #1 had a smaller portion of overall presentation.
• All: Very good information (lots of it) but at times there was too much info on slides (charts difficulty to read)
• All: need more student participation; perhaps there were some discussion points built in that were dropped to make room/time for guest speaker and doctor comments.
• Speaker #2: reads entirely from notes – perhaps could engage more with audience/class and be more assertive about time management. Participation from guests/professors, while very interesting, mess up flow of presentation – perhaps better to have a dedicated discussion section?
• I think its difficulty for the presenter with constant discussion. Perhaps discussions should be limited to after completion of sections. Also, I think it is difficulty for the students to participate; perhaps it is the structure through which the discussions materialize.
• Reyes: Delivery required more eye contact. Too many graphs. Would have preferred to go into more details about diseases, etc. Found graphs unnecessary. Good organization of content on PowerPoint.
• Talabi: Presentation of content was confusing. Delivery could have been more interactive.
• Bennett: Good delivery – good explanations. Slides were difficult to read – wish he had summarized all the graphs, etc within PowerPoint.
• Over-use and overdependence on PowerPoint slides. The presenters lost control of their presentation with too many interruptions. Some slides were too small to read.
• Reyes: Soft voice (speak louder but good job on cutting off discussion to move on. Guests provided great information but monopolized presenters’ time!
• Items too small on slides.
• Increase font size on PowerPoint.
• Talabi used tables in small print – very had to grasp. Time management was a problem.
• Not enough time allowed for student speakers.
• The group appeared to not have prepared together. Low energy level of presenters. Fantastic guest speaker involvement.
• General comments: Speaker 2/3: need to talk about what diseases are more than just the symptoms/vaccines. Too much talking during presentations, conflicts with presenters’ ability to get through their information – this applies to all presentations. Maybe fewer slides – more discussion? Articles need to be posted earlier. Speaker #1: good delivery of material – answered questions appropriately.
• Speaker #3: try to maintain eye contact with group, look at PowerPoint less, project voice forward. All: have another member of team handle the PowerPoint slides so that presenter can move away from the computer/podium and make better use of space.
• Speaker #2: Lots of good information but try not to read from the notes.
• Speaker #1: Good eye contact with group, good voice projection, seemed like #1 had a smaller portion of overall presentation.
• All: Very good information (lots of it) but at times there was too much info on slides (charts difficulty to read)
• All: need more student participation; perhaps there were some discussion points built in that were dropped to make room/time for guest speaker and doctor comments.
• Speaker #2: reads entirely from notes – perhaps could engage more with audience/class and be more assertive about time management. Participation from guests/professors, while very interesting, mess up flow of presentation – perhaps better to have a dedicated discussion section?
• I think its difficulty for the presenter with constant discussion. Perhaps discussions should be limited to after completion of sections. Also, I think it is difficulty for the students to participate; perhaps it is the structure through which the discussions materialize.
• Reyes: Delivery required more eye contact. Too many graphs. Would have preferred to go into more details about diseases, etc. Found graphs unnecessary. Good organization of content on PowerPoint.
• Talabi: Presentation of content was confusing. Delivery could have been more interactive.
• Bennett: Good delivery – good explanations. Slides were difficult to read – wish he had summarized all the graphs, etc within PowerPoint.
• Over-use and overdependence on PowerPoint slides. The presenters lost control of their presentation with too many interruptions. Some slides were too small to read.
• Reyes: Soft voice (speak louder but good job on cutting off discussion to move on. Guests provided great information but monopolized presenters’ time!
• Items too small on slides.
• Increase font size on PowerPoint.
Feedback on Breastfeeding and Weaning presenters
• It was good to have breastfeeding mothers attend the presentation. Good coverage of an important topic. Good discussion, but no class activity.
• I felt bad for the presenters because of the time constraints, on the upside the class participated. I think both presenters were weak (not terribly) on delivery. They seemed seem to have sufficient knowledge on the topic, but I wish they had presented a bit more on the next best alternatives if unable to breastfeed. Perhaps a bit more on breastfeeding as a choice, such as the factors that surrounds that issue. I would have also been more interested to know a bit more on the breakdown, altitudes, adaptation of breastfeeding globally. I am sure it varies drastically from country to country.
• Very nice job handling transition between professor/guest speaker comments and your own presentation
• For both presenters – very nice job. One suggestion – move away from podium (let other person manage PowerPoint slides. If you are out in front of class, the focus is more on you and less on slide.
• Good discussion facilitation – good use of guest speakers – very interesting presentation.
• I really liked this format – student presentation, guest speaker (expert) and professor participation. I felt like I got a lot out of this class.
• Great presentation, thanks to full participation!
• The guest speakers were very informative. The concepts were delivered clearly.
• Very informative presentation!
• Difficult to assess because so much class discussion.
• Very interactive but structure, time use got out of hand. Excellent contributions by invited experts, Annie Feighery and Maria Elena Ballesteros.
• Would have liked to see a more balanced discussion – is formula milk all bad? Even in societies w/clean water? Great presentation overall – good detail presented. Good discussion from class was promoted.
• Great discussion. Effective use of personal experience.
• I felt bad for the presenters because of the time constraints, on the upside the class participated. I think both presenters were weak (not terribly) on delivery. They seemed seem to have sufficient knowledge on the topic, but I wish they had presented a bit more on the next best alternatives if unable to breastfeed. Perhaps a bit more on breastfeeding as a choice, such as the factors that surrounds that issue. I would have also been more interested to know a bit more on the breakdown, altitudes, adaptation of breastfeeding globally. I am sure it varies drastically from country to country.
• Very nice job handling transition between professor/guest speaker comments and your own presentation
• For both presenters – very nice job. One suggestion – move away from podium (let other person manage PowerPoint slides. If you are out in front of class, the focus is more on you and less on slide.
• Good discussion facilitation – good use of guest speakers – very interesting presentation.
• I really liked this format – student presentation, guest speaker (expert) and professor participation. I felt like I got a lot out of this class.
• Great presentation, thanks to full participation!
• The guest speakers were very informative. The concepts were delivered clearly.
• Very informative presentation!
• Difficult to assess because so much class discussion.
• Very interactive but structure, time use got out of hand. Excellent contributions by invited experts, Annie Feighery and Maria Elena Ballesteros.
• Would have liked to see a more balanced discussion – is formula milk all bad? Even in societies w/clean water? Great presentation overall – good detail presented. Good discussion from class was promoted.
• Great discussion. Effective use of personal experience.
Monday, September 24, 2007
did you add the class late?
If you missed the first week of class click here and watch this video to catch up!
Thursday, September 20, 2007
Comments for ORT/Water Presentation
• Good coverage of important information; only class exercise was “the drinking” of ORS. Overuse of PowerPoint. Family feud questions was a good way to involve class.
• Presenters were really well informed. I thoroughly enjoyed the case studies end the tie-ins to the presentation before.
• Great presentation. Wish you would have put more online ahead of time.
• The treatment of this topic was a little shallow, and #1 – while it was interesting, depended a little too much on personal/family anecdotes.
• ORT should have been defined a bit more clearly (in retrospect) very broad topic. Perhaps should be broken in two days so greater detail could be added.
• Clear, well-organized presentation. Utilizing the game facilitating learning. Fun!
• Abbas: breakdown the information prior to presenting. Excellent delivery.
• Reyes: Excellent delivery – good use of experience, examples, pictures.
• The professors were engaging but maybe the students need to speak out more.
• Presenters were really well informed. I thoroughly enjoyed the case studies end the tie-ins to the presentation before.
• Great presentation. Wish you would have put more online ahead of time.
• The treatment of this topic was a little shallow, and #1 – while it was interesting, depended a little too much on personal/family anecdotes.
• ORT should have been defined a bit more clearly (in retrospect) very broad topic. Perhaps should be broken in two days so greater detail could be added.
• Clear, well-organized presentation. Utilizing the game facilitating learning. Fun!
• Abbas: breakdown the information prior to presenting. Excellent delivery.
• Reyes: Excellent delivery – good use of experience, examples, pictures.
• The professors were engaging but maybe the students need to speak out more.
Wednesday, September 5, 2007
class updates
I'm so glad some of you are already finding your way around Blogger. Another tool to acquaint yourself with is the Blog This button. This is a browser add-in to your bookmarks tool bar that makes posting articles during your research very fast.
Yesterday Dr. Brown brought up Mr. Condom, the famous sex educator in Thailand. The NYTimes profiled Mechai Viravaidya in 1992. This interview covers his big return to public life in 2005. In an unusual case of promoting Best Practices research, India is now looking for their own brand of Mr. Condom.
Yesterday Dr. Brown brought up Mr. Condom, the famous sex educator in Thailand. The NYTimes profiled Mechai Viravaidya in 1992. This interview covers his big return to public life in 2005. In an unusual case of promoting Best Practices research, India is now looking for their own brand of Mr. Condom.
Tuesday, September 4, 2007
The Great Debate readings
Readings from the booklist (on the sidebar, scroll down) relevant to today's class debate on vertical versus horizontal public health interventions:
Just and Lasting Change (Taylor): pages 8-30, 62-68, 308-321
My Name is Today (Morley): 177, 190-202, 203-235, 250-253, 352
Pedagogy of the Oppressed (Freire): 52-62
The Myth of Development (DeRivero): 1-10
Friday, August 31, 2007
Welcome to our class blog!
If you aren't sure what a blog is, click here first.
Generally, blogs post new entries (called posts) at the top of the page and older entries can be found as one scrolls down the page. Each entry is delineated by the bold heading and each day's entries are delineated by the section break. Bloggers set a number of entries to display on the front page and after that number is exceeded, older entries can be found in the archives along the sidebar.
Underneath each post are links that contain information regarding the entry. First is the entry's author (I'm annie). Most useful, is the comments button. This button allows you-the-reader to comment on the entry, which initiates the interaction that makes blogs so great. Some posts also have a category that each post falls into, like maternal health or course announcements. If you are interested in the post topic, you can click on the category to read more like it.
The time stamp makes the web address in the URL window into a permalink, which is a permanent link to that post on its own page that never scrolls with future entries. Because blogs change every day, if you want to link to a blogger's post, it's best to link to it via the post's permalink so readers will be directed to exactly the entry you refer to in your blog. Some blogs' permalinks are a number sign (#) at the bottom of the post, and some are a time stamp (3:54 p.m.) either under the entry heading or at the bottom of the entry.
Class members can begin participating in this blog by sending their email address to Annie. You will be invited to create a Google account, if you don't already have one. Then, you can begin commenting on existing posts and making your own!
Generally, blogs post new entries (called posts) at the top of the page and older entries can be found as one scrolls down the page. Each entry is delineated by the bold heading and each day's entries are delineated by the section break. Bloggers set a number of entries to display on the front page and after that number is exceeded, older entries can be found in the archives along the sidebar.
Underneath each post are links that contain information regarding the entry. First is the entry's author (I'm annie). Most useful, is the comments button. This button allows you-the-reader to comment on the entry, which initiates the interaction that makes blogs so great. Some posts also have a category that each post falls into, like maternal health or course announcements. If you are interested in the post topic, you can click on the category to read more like it.
The time stamp makes the web address in the URL window into a permalink, which is a permanent link to that post on its own page that never scrolls with future entries. Because blogs change every day, if you want to link to a blogger's post, it's best to link to it via the post's permalink so readers will be directed to exactly the entry you refer to in your blog. Some blogs' permalinks are a number sign (#) at the bottom of the post, and some are a time stamp (3:54 p.m.) either under the entry heading or at the bottom of the entry.
Class members can begin participating in this blog by sending their email address to Annie. You will be invited to create a Google account, if you don't already have one. Then, you can begin commenting on existing posts and making your own!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)