Legislative Advocacy: Undergraduate and Graduate Student Learning Outcomes

Abstract

Purpose: Legislative advocacy provides an avenue through which oral health disparities and alternative methods of delivering oral health care to underserved populations can be addressed. The purpose of this study was to assess advocacy knowledge, values, actions and perceived barriers of undergraduate and graduate students enrolled in a leadership course with a Legislative Advocacy Project (LAP).

Methods: A pre-test/post-test online questionnaire was administered to a convenience sample of undergraduate and graduate dental hygiene students to measure advocacy knowledge, values, and actions resulting from participation in a LAP (n=38). Descriptive statistics assessed the average responses of perceived barriers. Two open-ended questions asked about participation in advocacy and providing feedback regarding the LAP.

Results: Both groups (undergraduate, n=25; graduate, n=13) demonstrated a statistically significant change from the pre-test/post-test assessment of knowledge, values, and actions (p<0.001). No statistically significant differences were identified when comparing undergraduate and graduate level responses, pre-test and post-test scores and undergraduate and graduate level responses, and perceived barriers. The three greatest barriers were lack of time to participate in legislative activities, lack of comfort speaking to legislators and testifying before legislators. Responses to the open-ended questions suggested learning in the three lower levels of the affective domain.

Conclusions: Knowledge, values, and actions were increased following the LAP. Strategies to address ongoing barriers should be implemented in advocacy curricula. The LAP was influential in integrating cognitive knowledge and changing receiving, responding, and valuing levels of the affective domain. An Affective Advocacy Model was developed based on the analysis of responses to the open-ended questions and current literature.