Degree | Type | Year | Semester |
---|---|---|---|
4314949 General Health Psychology | OB | 1 | 2 |
There are no prerequisites, but will assume the knowledge and skills acquired throughout modules 1 and 2 of the first semester.
Nonetheless, it would be desirable if students were familiar with basic knowledge and skills of modules 1 and 2 from the first semester.
Once finished the module, the student should be able to:
• Conceptually define prevention and health promotion. Identify the different levels of each of these.
• Identify the different determinants that influence risk behaviours and behaviours promoting health.
• Prepare a psychosocial diagnosis of health problems.
• Apply the main models of planning, design and evaluation of promotion and education programmes for individual, group and community health.
• Critically analyse different education, health promotion and prevention programmes.
The methodology of the subject will be based on the serial and coordinated development of different activities (directed, supervised and autonomous) that will guide the student towards achieving the results.
Directed activity
Teaching sessions will be carried out in
1/2 Groups: Master classes with or without multimedia with group discussions.
1/4 Groups: Classes in small groups. In these sessions, the students must work in small groups and under the principle of problem-based learning (PBL). The task to be carried out will be the development of an intervention project in the field of prevention and health promotion. This activity will take place performing alternate face-to-face sessions (9 in total), and the autonomous work of the group.
Supervised activity
Tutorial attendance: Monitoring of the development of the project through the Moodle platform and at scheduled office hours.
Autonomous activity
Comprehensive reading of texts: comprehensive and synthetic reading of both secondary sources and primary sources to prepare the project.
Development of the work: writing of the content of the project as well as of the support material (power point or others) that will have to be used in the presentation of the project during the last session.
Study: confrontation of the material provided to the master class and conferences with manuals of the matter. Elaboration of summaries, diagrams, conceptual maps, etc.
Annotation: Within the schedule set by the centre or degree programme, 15 minutes of one class will be reserved for students to evaluate their lecturers and their courses or modules through questionnaires.
Title | Hours | ECTS | Learning Outcomes |
---|---|---|---|
Type: Directed | |||
Classes in small groups | 20 | 0.8 | |
Master classes | 36 | 1.44 | |
Type: Supervised | |||
Supervised activity | 11 | 0.44 | |
Type: Autonomous | |||
Comprehensive reading | 50 | 2 | |
Development of project | 76 | 3.04 | |
Study | 20 | 0.8 |
Evaluation activities of individual learning:
EV1a - This is a written test related to the content on gender violence, with a value of 15% of the final grade that will taken out the week 11.
EV1b - This is a written test related to the content on occupational health, with a value of 5% of the final grade that will take out the week 12.
EV1c - This is a written test related to the content on prevention of substance use, with a value of 10% of the final grade that will take out the week 13.
EV1d - This is a written test related to the content on health promotion through FA and diet, with a value of 10% of the final grade that will take out the week 14.
Evaluation activities of group learning:
EV2 - The written presentation of the intervention project developed in a group manner during the PBL sessions will be evaluated. It will have a value of 30% in the final grade of the subject. The delivery of this evidence will be done week 15 through the classroom moodle of the subject.
EV3 - The delivery within the established deadlines of the minutes of all sessions and the two control reports of the project developed will be evaluated. It will have a value of 10%.
EV4 - The oral presentation of the intervention project developed will be evaluated. This evidence is subdivided in two subevidences:
EV4a - The tutors will evaluate the oral presentation of the project that the group will carry out during week 15. It will have a 15% value in the final grade of the subject.
EV4b - The peers will evaluate the oral presentation of their classmates' project. It will have a value of 5% in the final grade of the subject.
Definition of avaluable student: The student who has given learning evidence with a weight equal to or greater than 4 points (40%), shall be considered as "evaluable".
In case of being considered evaluable, will be rated with a 0 the evidence has not been submitted.
Definition of passed subject:
End Note = [(Note EV1a × 0.15) + (Note EV1b × 0.05) + (Note EV1c × 0.10) + (Note EV1d × 0.10) + (Note EV2 × 0.3) + (Note EV3 × 0.1) + (Note EV4a × 0.15) + (Note EV4b × 0.05)]
In order to pass the course, the weighted average must be greater or equal than 5.
Retake Process
To participate in the retake process it is required that the student to have achieved and average grade between 3,5 and 4,9. Additionally, it is required to have been evaluated in all evaluation activities. The retake process will consist of a written test. Evidence 2, 3 and 4 can be retrieved. The recovery note will always be a 5, in case that this is overcome and in no case the recovery will serve to raise the grade if the subject is approved
Title | Weighting | Hours | ECTS | Learning Outcomes |
---|---|---|---|---|
EV1a- Written Test. Gender violence | 15 | 2 | 0.08 | 11, 12, 9, 14, 6, 5, 15 |
EV1a- Written Test. Occupational health | 5 | 2 | 0.08 | 11, 9, 14, 6, 5, 15 |
EV1c- Written Test. Prevention of substance abuse | 10 | 2 | 0.08 | 11, 10, 13, 9, 14, 6, 5, 15 |
EV1d- Written Test. Health promotion through physical activity and diet | 10 | 2 | 0.08 | 11, 9, 14, 6, 5, 15 |
EV2- Written Presentation of the Intervention Project | 30 | 0 | 0 | 1, 8, 14, 2, 3, 7, 4, 16 |
EV3- Delivery of minutes of sessions and the Control Reports 1 and 2. | 10% | 0 | 0 | 1, 11, 14, 2, 3, 6, 7, 15, 16 |
EV4a Intervention Project - Oral Presentation. Tutors evaluation | 15% | 2 | 0.08 | 1, 8, 2, 3, 7, 4, 16 |
EV4b Intervention Project - Oral Presentation. Peers evaluation | 5% | 2 | 0.08 | 1, 8, 2, 3, 7, 4 |
Anguera, Maria Teresa, Chacón, Salvador. y Blanco, Angel. (Eds.) (2008). Evaluación de programas sociales y sanitarios: Un abordaje metodológico. Madrid: Síntesis.
Bartholomew, L.Kay; Parcel, Guy.S.; Kok, Gerjo; & Gottlieb, Nell.H. (2000). Intervention Mapping. New York: Mcgraw Hill.
Chacón, Salvador., Anguera, Maria Teresa., Pérez-Gil, Jose Antonio y Hogado, Fco Pablo (2002). A Mutual Catalytic Model of Formative Evaluation: The Interdependent Roles of Evaluators and Local Practitioners. Evaluation. The International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice, 8 (4). 413-432.
Chacón-Moscoso, Salvador, Sanduvete, Susana, Portell, Mariona, y Anguera, Maria Teresa (2013). Reporting a program evaluation: Needs, program plan, intervention, and decisions. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 13(1), 58-60.
Fantova, Fernando (2003): Perspectivas en gestión de servicios sociales. En: http://www.bolunta.org/publicaciones/
Fernández-Ballesteros, Rocio (Ed) (1995). Evaluación de programas. Una guía práctica en ámbitos sociales, educativos y de salud. Madrid: Síntesis (CAP. 2)
Green, Lawrence W. & Kreuter, Marshall W. (1991). Health Promotion Planning. An Educational and Environmental Approach. Mountain View: Mayfield Publishing Company
Guba, Egon G., & Lincoln, Yvonna S. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Morrison, Val; Bennett, Paul (2008). Psicología de la Salud. Madrid: Pearson Educación. Prentice Hall.
Pawson, Ray; Tilley, Nick (1997) Realistic Evaluation, Sage.
Veney, James E. y Kaluzny, Arnold D. (2004). Evaluation and decision making for health services. Washington: BeardBooks.
Villamarin, Francisco; Alvarez, Maria (1998). Modelos sociocognitivos en promoción de la salud: un analisis conceptual. Psicologemas, 12 (24), 161-204.
Wholey, Joseph S., Hatry, Harry P. & Newcomer, Kathryn E. (Eds.) (2004). Handbook of practical program evaluation. San Francisco
No specific software is used in this module