A survey of dental schools in the European Union was carried out for two main reasons. Firstly to promote the exchange of information in respect of curriculum objectives in the different countries and secondly to ascertain the differences in the interpretation of the 1978 EU sectoral directives for dental education and training. Out of 127 schools, only 30 responded, yet the information provided is of considerable importance. It demonstrates wide divergence in the interpretation of the 1978 Directives and methods of assessment of clinical competence. There is a considerable difference throughout Europe in hours devoted to the various subjects included in the Dental Directives. There is little evidence of convergence in methods of assessment or quality assurance. The survey demonstrates the difference in resources, levels of staff, availability of clinical training places, output in research and patient treatments throughout the European Union. The results question the effectiveness of the 1978 Dental Directives in promoting convergence of standards. As there is free movement of dentists throughout the European Union, it is concluded that a different approach may be necessary to ensure that all European Union dental graduates achieve comparable standards in their education and training.

No abstract

The Advisory Committee on the Training of Dental Practitioners of the EU (ACTDP) in order to ensure a comparably demanding standard in dental education, recommended in 1986 a self-assessment system, and visitations to dental training establishments. After some visitations in EU member countries, a visit was organized to the Dental Faculty, Semmelweis University of Medicine, Budapest, at the request of the Hungarian institution. The completion of the self-assessment questionnaire, and the organization of the visit occurred according to the general guidelines. The visit took place in September 1994, by a team consisting of 4 members. The results of the 3-day visit, and recommendations of the visitation team were presented in a written report, approved by the leaders of the Hungarian Faculty. As a consequence, a curriculum reform was elaborated at the visited Dental School, following the guidelines given by the visitation team, approved by the Faculty in 1996. Summarizing the outcome of the visit, this seemed to be very useful for the visited Dental Faculty, and helped to overcome difficulties in establishing a new curriculum, with better harmonization to EU standards. However, benefits may also derive from these visits for EU countries as well, for convergence in oral health education is of mutual importance for both sides.

Policy advocacy is increasingly recognized as a crucial component of the training provided to health educators but relatively few universities offer advocacy training as part of their professional preparation programs for health educators. Historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs) represent a natural setting for creating strong Black leaders in tobacco policy advocacy. This case study focuses on experiential education at an HBCU to develop advocacy skills around tobacco issues among Black college students. The authors describe the structure and content of two tobacco policy courses, their efforts to evaluate these courses, and the lessons they learned planning and conducting them. They believe their experience can prove useful to others developing curricula for teaching policy advocacy skills to health education students.

Background:The Georgia Youth Tobacco Survey (YTS) is a survey of public middle school (MS) and high school (HS) students. The Georgia YTS was first conducted in 2001. According to YTS, students who attended a tobacco free schools' youth summit were significantly more likely to be aware of students who use tobacco products (MS: 21% for smoking and 20% for smokeless tobacco; HS: 42% for smoking and 39% for smokeless tobacco) on school property than students who did not attend a tobacco free schools' youth summit (MS: 10 % for smoking and 9 % for smokeless tobacco; HS: 32 % for smoking and 35 % for smokeless tobacco.