Am J Epidemiol. 2023 Aug 4;192(8):1231-1237. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwad124.
Despite the high burden of injury and violence globally and disproportionate burden on marginalized communities, few US schools of public health and departments of epidemiology offer classes focused on injury and violence, and even fewer are taught with an antiracist or anti-oppression framework. Recent years have brought renewed focus to incorporating antiracist and anti-oppression principles to pedagogy. Public health professionals have increasingly grappled with how we teach, conduct research, and advocate for just policies, which are shaped by interlocking systems of oppression. Although all areas of epidemiology are shaped by these structures, motivations for those who study injury and violence ought to be especially keen. In this commentary, we illustrate how anti-oppression can be integrated into course development and delivery with a case study of a graduate-level course at the University of Washington School of Public Health on injury and violence epidemiology. We include feedback from an epidemiology faculty reviewer, as well as narratives from students describing what worked and what did not. We offer our reflections and lessons learned, hoping to encourage others within public health and epidemiology to adopt an anti-oppression framework in developing classes and programs, particularly those related to injury and violence.
尽管全球范围内的伤害和暴力负担沉重,边缘化社区的负担不成比例,但很少有美国公共卫生学院和流行病学系开设专门针对伤害和暴力的课程,即使有,也很少有以反种族主义或反压迫框架教授的课程。近年来,人们重新关注将反种族主义和反压迫原则纳入教学法。公共卫生专业人员越来越多地思考我们如何教授、开展研究和倡导公正的政策,这些政策是由相互交织的压迫制度塑造的。尽管流行病学的所有领域都受到这些结构的影响,但研究伤害和暴力的人的动机应该更加敏锐。在这篇评论中,我们通过华盛顿大学公共卫生学院一门关于伤害和暴力流行病学的研究生课程案例研究,说明了如何将反压迫纳入课程开发和实施。我们包括了一位流行病学教师评审员的反馈,以及学生们描述有效和无效的叙述。我们提供我们的反思和经验教训,希望鼓励公共卫生和流行病学领域的其他人在开发课程和项目时采用反压迫框架,特别是与伤害和暴力相关的课程和项目。