Figure 1
Adoption and Diffusion process for the Global Health Starter Kit curriculum. Adapted from Rogers, E. (2003). The Diffusion of Innovations. Fifth Edition. The Free Press, New York [18].
Figure 2
Innovation framework for adoption process and diffusion analysis. Adapted from People and Technology in the Workplace, Figure 1 page 136 [3233].
Table 1
Early Adopter Interview Qualitative Analysis of codes categorized into themes under three major domains. N = 6.
| DOMAIN | THEME | CODE | QUOTES |
|---|---|---|---|
| Curriculum/ Innovation Factors | Content (conceptually) | Already complete, some exercises too advance or less connected to our school, higher level than students would appreciate, serves as an intro to public health and global approaches, good quality, meets a need and is addressing a knowledge gap | Great material especially as a training before going to a field project! It really targets specific things, like the SDG’s, oral health and how it connects with general health and universal care |
| Materials (physical presentation) | Limited by English, need all open access readings (no paywalls/subscriptions), good use of PowerPoint, videos, and written explanations, interactive, missing take home assignments, takes advantage of technology, good to have video for teacher and other for student, friendly for a teacher, quizzes were instrumental to measure success, needs experiential component, ability to adapt/integrate/merge into existing curriculum | Though the video transcripts were available for help, the course delivery could have been slightly slower especially considering a large number of non-native English speakers who would benefit from the course | |
| Delivery | Delivery shows passion and how much instructor knows, engaging to watch, great opportunity to share through open access, good platform and position to share with others (website), user friendly/easy to find and access materials | Very useful for us both in terms of content and how the learning activities are structured and organized | |
| Educator and Learner Factors | Prior learner experience | Lacked global oral health education, want better public health foundation, no epidemiology background, want more preparation before global service-learning trip, learners currently focused on boards | When students graduate and practice in the field, they are lacking in leadership in global oral health and that is why it is important for the students to have it correctly so that when they graduate as a dentist, they can practice efficiently |
| Impact on student learning | Broader perspective, digestible for students, use concepts to improve actual outreach programs, better prepared for global service learning trips, students learned a lot, brings level of discussion higher and depth increases, expanded beyond dental students to broader audience, if students across the globe could take this together it would add discussion and a new peer to peer experience | We have received emails from the students who are excited about this and some of them are now applying to oral internship programs | |
| Educators | Accepted by faculty, current curative mindset, faculty need to be brought up to speed on these principles/faculty development, lack of global health faculty | This is a great opportunity and makes professors have a good tool to strengthen their way to teach these issues and introduce the part of community work fields | |
| Institutional and Structural Factors | Institutional acceptance | Accepted by faculty and dean, approved through curriculum, needs to understand why GHSK is relevant | I talked to the associate dean for curriculum, and she saw that it was a very good idea The leadership needs to understand why this is relevant |
| CODA | Can’t alter curriculum during accreditation, not required by CODA | This is essential in the curriculum of the dental schools | |
| Integration into current curriculum | Convert materials from one platform to another, want to integrate into first year so all students receive this education, using in classroom and field setting, merged into what we teach, spread throughout years for the students, worked with scheduler to change the time of the class | What we are able to do at the moment is to integrate the GHSK into public health curriculum, but I think the GHSK should not only be in dental public health curriculum, it should be in all departments | |
| Institutional Marketing | Created awareness about merging with Harvard curriculum, good internal promotion | You have to PR your course and make it in social media in such a way that the message gets to the students you are targeting | |
| Interprofessional usage | Taught to public health students | I believe this is a great opportunity to have both sets, school of public health and school of dentistry, so they can do interprofessional collaboration |
Figure 3
Educator and learner respondents who rated “strongly agree” with each GHSK Curriculum/Innovation Factor. N = 27.
Figure 4
Educator ratings of their level of agreement with specific statements about the Educator and Learner Factors and Institutional and Structural Factors. N = 14.
Figure 5
Breakdown of GHSK users’ level of agreement for factors facilitating their use of the GHSK. N = 27.