“What we learn today is how we behave tomorrow”: a study on satisfaction level and implementation of environmental health ethics in Nigeria institutions

Raimi Morufu Olalekan
{"title":"“What we learn today is how we behave tomorrow”: a study on satisfaction level and implementation of environmental health ethics in Nigeria institutions","authors":"Raimi Morufu Olalekan","doi":"10.15406/oajs.2020.04.00156","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background The professionalism of environmental health practitioners (EHPs) has been an emerging trend in Nigeria and is governed by the EHORECON, though the EHPs are aware of their professional responsibilities but are concerned about the lack of active engagement with their professional board. Whilst empirical research was undertaken to comprise a case study of a group of EHPs practising to assess the “reality”, on the ground, in terms of the level of awareness and understanding among EHPs about their ethical and professional responsibilities and related challenges. Objective This study assesses the level of satisfaction with the implementation of the Environmental Health Ethics in institutions in Nigeria. Methods Online google form was used to access a large group of EHPs. One hundred and thirty-nine (139) questionnaires were settled for, as the sample size for the study through an adapted and validated questionnaire instrument. Data collected were analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 20 software. Results Most of the practitioners, in general, were satisfied (85.6%) and the teaching method (54.0%) informed their decision. However, the ethical cases that were of the most concern to the majority of the practitioners (53.2%) were negligence. Conclusions This study contributes some ideological facts to the existing literature and practice in nature. Even though, to come to the generalization with the aid of the particular study findings is complex. The study found satisfactory perceptions that signal a need for increased communication between professional bodies, respective organization/institutions, and practitioners regarding applied ethics in environmental health practice so that curriculums could reflect both theory and application. Also, decision-making guides that are empirically informed and tailored for practitioners having some value should be emphasized upon.","PeriodicalId":19581,"journal":{"name":"Open Access Journal of Science","volume":"106 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Access Journal of Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15406/oajs.2020.04.00156","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background The professionalism of environmental health practitioners (EHPs) has been an emerging trend in Nigeria and is governed by the EHORECON, though the EHPs are aware of their professional responsibilities but are concerned about the lack of active engagement with their professional board. Whilst empirical research was undertaken to comprise a case study of a group of EHPs practising to assess the “reality”, on the ground, in terms of the level of awareness and understanding among EHPs about their ethical and professional responsibilities and related challenges. Objective This study assesses the level of satisfaction with the implementation of the Environmental Health Ethics in institutions in Nigeria. Methods Online google form was used to access a large group of EHPs. One hundred and thirty-nine (139) questionnaires were settled for, as the sample size for the study through an adapted and validated questionnaire instrument. Data collected were analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 20 software. Results Most of the practitioners, in general, were satisfied (85.6%) and the teaching method (54.0%) informed their decision. However, the ethical cases that were of the most concern to the majority of the practitioners (53.2%) were negligence. Conclusions This study contributes some ideological facts to the existing literature and practice in nature. Even though, to come to the generalization with the aid of the particular study findings is complex. The study found satisfactory perceptions that signal a need for increased communication between professional bodies, respective organization/institutions, and practitioners regarding applied ethics in environmental health practice so that curriculums could reflect both theory and application. Also, decision-making guides that are empirically informed and tailored for practitioners having some value should be emphasized upon.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
"今天学到的就是明天的行为":关于尼日利亚各机构环境卫生伦理的满意度和执行情况的研究
背景:环境卫生从业人员(EHPs)的专业性在尼日利亚已成为一种新兴趋势,并受EHORECON的管理,尽管环境卫生从业人员意识到他们的专业责任,但担心缺乏与专业委员会的积极参与。同时,我们进行了实证研究,包括对一组环境卫生专业人员的案例研究,以评估环境卫生专业人员对其道德和专业责任以及相关挑战的认识和理解程度。目的本研究评估尼日利亚各机构实施环境卫生伦理的满意度。方法采用在线google表单对大量EHPs进行访问。通过一种经过调整和验证的问卷调查工具,本研究的样本量为139份问卷。收集的数据使用社会科学统计软件包(SPSS) 20版软件进行分析。结果总体上,大多数从业人员对教学方法满意(85.6%),对教学方法满意(54.0%)。然而,大多数从业员(53.2%)最关注的道德个案是疏忽。结论本研究为现有文献和自然界的实践提供了一些思想事实。尽管如此,在特定研究结果的帮助下得出概括是复杂的。研究发现,令人满意的看法表明,需要加强专业团体、各自组织/机构和实践者之间关于环境卫生实践中的应用伦理学的沟通,以便课程能够反映理论和应用。此外,应该强调具有经验信息并为具有一定价值的从业者量身定制的决策指南。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Emancipated women in Cuba: strategies of freedom and motherhood inside of the conflict Educational management and schooling in crisis contexts and regulation Review of malformed frogs Lean manufacturing + healthcare= lean healthcare, a way to optimize efficiency in the healthcare sector Maracatu bodies: some reflections crossing in the light of the Laban/Bartenieff system
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1