Allan Steckler

Bio: Allan Steckler is an academic researcher from University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. The author has contributed to research in topics: Health promotion & Health education. The author has an hindex of 38, co-authored 88 publications receiving 11192 citations. Previous affiliations of Allan Steckler include California State University, Northridge.

An Ecological Perspective on Health Promotion Programs

Abstract: During the past 20 years there has been a dramatic increase in societal interest in preventing disability and death in the United States by changing individual behaviors linked to the risk of contracting chronic diseases. This renewed interest in health promotion and disease prevention has not been without its critics. Some critics have accused proponents of life-style interventions of promoting a victim-blaming ideology by neglecting the importance of social influences on health and disease. This article proposes an ecological model for health promotion which focuses attention on both individual and social environmental factors as targets for health promotion interventions. It addresses the importance of interventions directed at changing interpersonal, organizational, community, and public policy, factors which support and maintain unhealthy behaviors. The model assumes that appropriate changes in the social environment will produce changes in individuals, and that the support of individuals in the population is essential for implementing environmental changes.

Process evaluation for public health interventions and research

Abstract: Foreword (Barbara A. Israel). Preface. The Editors. The Contributors. 1. Process Evaluation for Public Health Interventions and Research:An Overview (Laura Linnan and Allan Steckler). PART ONE: COMMUNITY-RELATED PROCESS EVALUATION EFFORTS. 2. Process Evaluation of an Asset-Based Teen PregnancyPrevention Project: Healthy, Empowered, and ResponsibleTeens of Oklahoma City (Michelle C. Kegler, Vicki Harris Wyatt, and Sharon Rodine). 3. Process Evaluation of Implementation and Dissemination of aSun Safety Program at Swimming Pools (Karen Glanz, May Rose L. Isnec, Allan Geller, and Kathy J. Spangler). 4. Process Evaluation of the Adolescent Social Action Programin New Mexico (Deborah L. Helitzer and Soo-Jin Yoon). 5. Process Evaluation of the Church-Based PRAISE! Project:Partnership to Reach African Americans to IncreaseSmart Eating (Alice Ammerman). PART TWO: WORKSITE-RELATED PROCESS EVALUATION EFFORTS. 6. The Working Well Trial: Selected ProcessEvaluation Results (Laura Linnan, Beti Thompson, and Erin N. Kobetz). 7. Health Works for Women: Process Evaluation Results (Irene Tessaro, Marci Kramish Campbell, and Salli Benedict). PART THREE: SCHOOL-RELATED PROCESS EVALUATION EFFORTS. 8. Safer Choices, a School-Based HIV, STD, and PregnancyPrevention Program for Adolescents: Process Evaluation IssuesRelated to Curriculum Implementation (Christine M. Markham, Karen Basen-Engquist, Karin K. Coyle,Robert C. Addy, and Guy S. Parcel). 9. Using Children as Change Agents to Increase Fruit andVegetable Consumption Among Lower-Income AfricanAmerican Parents: Process Evaluation Results of the Bringing ItHome Program (Marsha Davis, Tom Baranowski, Marilyn Hughes, Carla L. Warneke,Carl de Moor, and Rebecca M. Mullis). 10. Lessons Learned from the Pathways Process Evaluation (Allan Steckler, Becky Ethelbah, Catherine Jane Martin, Dawn D. Stewart,Marla Nahmabin Pardilla, Joel Gittelsohn, Elaine J. Stone, David C. Fenn,Mary Smyth, and Maihan B. Vu). PART FOUR: NATIONAL OR STATE PROCESS EVALUATION EFFORTS. 11. STEPES: The Development and Testing of a Database ProgramMonitoring Tool (Therese M. Blaine, D. Knight Guire, and Jean Forster). 12. Developing a Process to Evaluate a National Injury PreventionProgram: The Indian Health Service Injury Prevention Program (Carolyn E. Crump and Robert J. Letourneau). 13. Tracking the Process and Progress of the National FolicAcid Campaign (Katherine Lyon Daniel, Christine E. Prue, and Michele Volansky). Name Index. Subject Index.

Toward Integrating Qualitative and Quantitative Methods: An Introduction:

Abstract: Both the qualitative and quantitative paradigms have weaknesses which, to a certain extent, are compensated for by the strengths of the other. As indicated in this article, the strengths of quantitative methods are that they produce factual, reliable outcome data that are usually generalizable to some larger population. The strengths of qualitative methods are that they generate rich, detailed, valid process data that usually leave the study participants' perspectives in tact. This article discusses how qualitative and quantitative methods can be combined and it introduces the articles included in this issue.

A description of the social–ecological framework used in the trial of activity for adolescent girls (TAAG)

Abstract: Social–ecological (SE) models are becoming more widely used in health behavior research. Applying SE models to the design of interventions is challenging because models must be tailor-made for each behavior and population, other theories need to be integrated into multilevel frameworks, and empirical research to guide model development is limited. The purpose of the present paper is to describe a SE framework that guided the intervention and measurement plans for a specific study. The trial of activity for adolescent girls (TAAG) is a multi-center study of interventions to reduce the decline of physical activity in adolescent girls. The TAAG framework incorporates operant learning theory, social cognitive theory, organizational change theory and the diffusion of innovation model in a multi-level model. The explicit and practical model developed for TAAG has already benefited the study and may have elements that can generalize to other health promotion studies.

The importance of external validity.

Abstract: How are research results translated to public health practice? What is the responsibility of researchers, funding agencies, and journals in facilitating the use of research results in public health programs or policies? We address selected aspects of these questions and announce a new emphasis of the Journal on external validity for appropriate manuscripts.

An Ecological Perspective on Health Promotion Programs

Abstract: During the past 20 years there has been a dramatic increase in societal interest in preventing disability and death in the United States by changing individual behaviors linked to the risk of contracting chronic diseases. This renewed interest in health promotion and disease prevention has not been without its critics. Some critics have accused proponents of life-style interventions of promoting a victim-blaming ideology by neglecting the importance of social influences on health and disease. This article proposes an ecological model for health promotion which focuses attention on both individual and social environmental factors as targets for health promotion interventions. It addresses the importance of interventions directed at changing interpersonal, organizational, community, and public policy, factors which support and maintain unhealthy behaviors. The model assumes that appropriate changes in the social environment will produce changes in individuals, and that the support of individuals in the population is essential for implementing environmental changes.

Diffusion of Innovations in Service Organizations: Systematic Review and Recommendations

Abstract: This article summarizes an extensive literature review addressing the question, How can we spread and sustain innovations in health service delivery and organization? It considers both content (defining and measuring the diffusion of innovation in organizations) and process (reviewing the literature in a systematic and reproducible way). This article discusses (1) a parsimonious and evidence-based model for considering the diffusion of innovations in health service organizations, (2) clear knowledge gaps where further research should be focused, and (3) a robust and transferable methodology for systematically reviewing health service policy and management. Both the model and the method should be tested more widely in a range of contexts.

기독교 사역과 Leadership

Abstract: Building Leadership Effectiveness This program encourages leaders to develop practices that transform values into action, vision into realities, obstacles into innovations, and risks into rewards. Participants will be introduced to the five practices of exemplary leadership: modeling the way, inspiring a shared vision, challenging the process, enabling others to act, and encouraging the heart Coaching & Communicating for Performance Coaching & Communicating for Performance is a highly interactive program that will give supervisors and managers the opportunity to build skills that will enable them to share expectations and set objectives for employees, provide constructive feedback, more effectively engage in learning conversations, and coaching opportunities. Skillful Conflict Management for Leaders As a leader, it is important to understand conflict and be effective at conflict management because the way conflict is resolved becomes an integral component of our university’s culture. This series of conflict management sessions help leaders learn and put into practice effective strategies for managing conflict.

Review of community-based research: assessing partnership approaches to improve public health.

Abstract: Community-based research in public health focuses on social, structural, and physical environmental inequities through active involvement of community members, organizational representatives, and researchers in all aspects of the research process. Partners contribute their expertise to enhance understanding of a given phenomenon and to integrate the knowledge gained with action to benefit the community involved. This review provides a synthesis of key principles of community-based research, examines its place within the context of different scientific paradigms, discusses rationales for its use, and explores major challenges and facilitating factors and their implications for conducting effective community-based research aimed at improving the public’s health.