Volume:6
Issue:1
Year:
2007
Michael Cooper1 BSc Grad.CIEH and Norman Parkinson1 MA Dip.EH Dip.HM FCIEH
1 Department of Public Health Sciences, School of Medicine, Kings College London, Capital House, Weston St, London SE1 3QD, United Kingdom
Correspondence: Norman Parkinson, Department of Public Health Sciences, School of Medicine, Kings College London, Capital House, Weston St, London SE1 3QD, United Kingdom, Email: norman.parkinson@kcl.ac.uk, Telephone: +44 (0)207 848 6618
Abstract
Applications to university programmes accredited by the UK Environmental Health Registration Board (EHRB) fell from a mean of c300 to a mean of c50 over the 5 years to 2001. This led to the closure of two programmes and put others under threat. In response, in 2002, the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health (CIEH) and government agencies introduced a range of remedial polices.
The purpose of this study is to clarify the trend in admissions and to better understand how entrants choose environmental health as a career, in the context of the remedial policies.
In March 2006, questionnaires were sent to under graduate programme leaders and students at six universities.
It was found that while there had been an overall increase in student numbers at the respondent universities, this was mainly owing to the opening of one new programme and a marked increase at one existing programme. This university had enrolled a large proportion of ‘unconventional’ students. This may have quality implications, and should be studied further. Some of the overall increase may have been a result of applicants switching owing to the closure of other programmes. The targeting of the existing technician workforce is identified as a mere short-term measure.
The major influences on the choice of EH by entrants are its desirable conditions of service and its altruistic characteristics. These factors coincide with the job characteristics ranked most desirable by all potential university applicants in other studies. Environmental Health is thus an attractive career option, but many young people are not receiving appropriate career information and guidance.
The percentage of entrants that comes straight from school is relatively low (c60%). This is because of the lack of paid placements, the limited number of universities offering undergraduate EH programmes, and the lack of information from school advisors
The CIEH initiatives have been useful to many entrants but have had relatively little influence on career choice. Recruitment activity should be targeted at raising awareness of the desirable job characteristics of an EHP through talks to schools by serving practitioners; through offering work experience, and via improved careers information and advice. The CIEH should lobby for all practical training to be publicly funded.
Key words: Accredited courses; careers; environmental health practitioners, environmental health officers, Environmental Health Registration Board; universities.
Introduction
Environmental health practitioners (EHPs) are employed by UK local authorities, other agencies of government, and the private sector. They fulfil regulatory and advisory public health roles in programmes such as food hygiene and food safety; health and safety in workplaces; improving housing conditions; disease and vector control; nuisances, and pollution control and environmental protection. The qualifications and training of EHPs and EH technicians in England, Wales and Northern Ireland are overseen by the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health (CIEH) and the Environmental Health Registration Board (EHRB). Applications to university courses accredited by the EHRB fell from a mean of c300 to a mean of c50 over the five years to 2001 (Harvey, 2000). This decline led to the closure of programmes at Greenwich, Edinburgh and, later, it was a factor in the closure of the undergraduate programme at King’s College London. It also put pressure on the remaining universities. Robinson (2001) reported that the number of students on accredited courses had fallen by 20%, and this despite the lowering of university entrance requirements. A fall in the number of graduates could lead to posts being left vacant, or to the employment of unqualified or under-qualified staff, which could put the public at risk. It was later reported that 63% of local authorities had recruitment difficulties (Employers Organisation for Local Government et al., 2002).
Nicholls and Parkinson (2002) suggested reasons for the decline, including: the reduced number of secondary students taking science Advanced Level subjects; national socio-economic factors such as the abolition of the student grant system and the introduction of university fees; low salaries; the ‘blame culture’ and a fall in the value that society accords to public service; a poor public image of EHPs; low public awareness; the rigorous professional qualification regime; the loss of local authority training places, the general failure of the employers to contribute adequately to the cost of training its future workforce; the widening gap between public and private sector pay, and structural changes in local government.
Their study, carried out in 2001, found that numerous and wide ranging characteristics influenced students’ choice of course and university. No single factor predominated. However, the four characteristics most frequently ranked by respondents as ‘most important’ were: Teaching and research reputation of the University, the nature of the course, the overall image of the University and the nature of the likely career. They stressed that these four factors must be accommodated in addressing the decline in applications to environmental health courses.
With regard to the nature of the likely career, they found that a lack of awareness of the EHP was not a major factor in the reduction in the number of applicants to EHP courses. However, potential applicants had a misconception of the EHP’s role; they were not aware that it has many desirable characteristics, and they incorrectly attributed to it some undesirable characteristics, probably as a result of the ‘A Life of Grime’ television programme. They also found that potential applicants were unaware that seven of the eight job characteristics most frequently cited as ‘desirable’ are indeed features of EHP work. They recognised that while the most frequently cited ‘desirable’ characteristic, ‘a high salary’, is unlikely ever to be a characteristic of local authority EHP posts, nevertheless market forces and the widening gulf between private and public sector salaries should be addressed. A wide range of negative influences on the number of potential applicants to environmental health courses was identified. They concluded that central government departments, local government employers and the professional bodies should adopt a strategy to ensure that the public is better informed of the training, qualifications and role of the EHP (Nicholls and Parkinson, 2002).
The CIEH commissioned Gaber and Wardle to investigate the problem and their ‘CLEAR Report’, (2002) suggested many reasons for the decline in student numbers and recommended three interventions:
- A media relations campaign would aim to raise awareness of the work of an EHP and the ways an EHP makes a significant difference in people’s lives.
- Working with schools and careers guidance professionals including the development of careers education and advisory resources.
- A Public Affairs Campaign to raise the general status of environmental health and to secure funding for additional training placements and the recruitment of new professionals by local government and the private sector. (Gaber and Wardle, 2002).
In July 2002, the CIEH revealed that local authorities in England and Wales were experiencing difficulties in recruiting environmental health officers, and yet all environmental health courses were classed as ‘at risk’ because of low entry levels. (CIEH, 2002) The CIEH subse - quently announced its package of remedial measures: _ A new careers pack and support materials for speakers and trainers;
- Redesigning the careers section on the CIEH website;
- Encouraging local authorities to provide work experience and sponsored training;
- A helpline to help with recruitment enquiries;
- Re-examining the core curriculum and training pathways, and
- Discussing recruitment issues with government, local authorities and members. (CIEH, 2002)
At the 2003 Local Government Association (LGA) conference in Harrogate, it launched a joint initiative with the LGA to tackle the recruitment and retention crisis. This focussed on making key decision makers aware of the role of local government in providing regulatory services such as environmental health. This was to be done by showing how environmental health contributes to the social and economic wellbeing of local communities. They would also lobby for external funding from central government for a bursary scheme for EHO students. (CIEH, 2003a)
In June 2003, the CIEH published a new Core Curriculum that, inter alia, would allow students to undertake more of their practical training in the private and non-profit sectors (CIEH, 2003b). This was aimed at reducing the burden of finding a local authority placement, which is a potential barrier to student entry.
In its Annual Report for 2002, the CIEH reported that the decline in student applications had been halted and that there had been a small increase at some universities. The CIEH pointed to its new careers website, that had had 40,000 ‘hits’ in its first six months, and new promotional material such as brochures, flyers, posters and exhibition material, and a CD-Rom with information on how to engage the enthusiasm of potential students. The CIEH had also been encouraging local authorities to provide more training places (CIEH, 2003c).
The purpose of this study is to clarify current trends in the recruitment of environmental health students, and to better understand how entrants choose environmental health as a career, in the context of the remedial policies.
Methods
Data were collected by literature review, personal communications with CIEH staff and questionnaire surveys of students and of university programme leaders.
In September 2005, 10 UK universities offered the EHRB accredited BSc in Environmental Health to new students. The University of Strathclyde was not included in the survey, because of the role of the Royal Environmental Health Institute of Scotland, and because the Scottish education system, local authorities and professional structure is different. Two universities declined to participate and one did not respond to a request; therefore questionnaires were sent to six universities. Few student questionnaires were received from two of the universities. There is no reason to believe that the respondent students were not representative of the student population at the six universities. In considering the results, one must bear in mind that one of the respondent universities was not typical, in that it had enrolled a relatively high proportion of 'unconventional' entrants.
Students from the intake of 2005 were chosen because the factors that influenced them to pursue a career in Environmental Health would still be fresh in their minds, and also because the changes initiated by the CIEH from 2002 would have had time to become established and therefore to have had an impact on students researching their career options in the two years prior to making their university applications.
The student questionnaires were sent to course leaders in March 2006 and they were then distributed to first year students. The questionnaires were self-administered and were of a simple, structured format, incorporating space for qualitative comments. The questionnaire covered: the student’s background; the student’s funding; factors that had influenced their choice of environmental health, and their suggestions for the better marketing of environmental health.
University programme leaders were asked to complete a separate questionnaire. Their questionnaire covered: the numbers of students recruited in 2002/3/4/5; the background of the students; their opinions on the reported upturn in recruitment numbers, and CIEH and other agencies’ policies, and their own efforts to increase recruitment.
Quantitative results were analysed using The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences.
Results
Student Survey
109 questionnaires were received from students at the six respondent universities. These universities had enrolled a total of 206 entrants in 2005. Confidence intervals for percentages of entrants are therefore based on a sample of 109 and a population of 206. One of the respondent universities had recruited for the first time in 2004.
Entrants’ background
About 60% of entrants to the respondent university programmes came straight from school (59%, p=0.05 CI 53–65%). About 10% (11%, p=0.05 CI 7–15%) came from higher education college/universities. 10% (p=0.05 CI 6–14%) of entrants were technicians, already working within local authorities. The remaining 20% (p=0.05 CI 15–25%) came from a wide variety of ‘other’ backgrounds, the most frequent of these being the food industry (n=5).
Funding of practical training
Three quarters of entrants were wholly or mainly selffunded for their practical training. About half of entrants (49%, p=0.05 CI 43–55%) were wholly self-funded, and a further quarter were self-funded but with an Employers Organization for Local Government bursary (27%, p=0.05 CI 21-33%). 15% (p=0.05 CI 10–20%) of entrants had fully or partly salaried practical training placements with a local authority. 7% (p=0.05 CI 4-10%) of entrants were technicians already working within local government.
Where entrants first heard about environmental health
About 20% of entrants first heard about environmental health through work experience in an environmental health department (19%, p=0.05 CI 14–24%). About 15% (16%, p=0.05 CI 11–21%) discovered environ - mental health in their previous employment.
15% of entrants first heard about environmental health through television programmes like ‘A Life of Grime’ (p=0.05 CI 10–20%). Personal recommendations stimulated 15% of entrants (p=0.05 CI 10–20%) and careers literature/guidance was responsible for about another 15% (14%, p=0.05 CI 10–18%). The CIEH CDRom (2%) and the ehcareers.org website (3%) accounted for very few entrants.
Figure 1.0 Entrants’ background
Influences on entrants’ choice of career in environmental health
The most frequent influences (total of major and minor) were desirable conditions of service: ‘Attractive salary’ Michael Cooper and Norman Parkinson (85%, p=0.05 CI 80–90%),; ‘Not office based’(80%, p=0.05 CI 75–85%); ‘Career progression’(78%, p=0.05 CI 73–83%), and ‘Job Security’ (75%, p=0.05 CI 69–81%). These were followed by altruistic characteristics: ‘improving public health’, ‘helping people’, and ‘protecting the environment’.
Figure 2.0 Funding of practical training
Figure 3.0 Where entrants first heard about environmental health
Figure 4.0 Influences on entrants’ choice of career in environmental health
Figure 5.0 Negative influences on entrants choice of environmental health
Figure 6.0 Important factors in the choice of a career in environmental health
The least frequent influences were the CIEH initiatives: CIEH CD Rom, ehcareer.org, ‘changes to the core curriculum and the ‘new log book’ (ELP).
The same desirable conditions of service were also the most frequent ‘major’ influences on career choice, and the CIEH initiatives were the least frequent ‘major’ influences, though each were at least ‘influential’ to over 40% of all entrants.
Negative influences on entrants’ choice of environmental health
The most frequent concern (31%, p=0.05 CI 25 – 37%) was the limited number of universities offering the BSc Environmental Health.
The second most frequent negative influence (28%, p=0.05 CI 22 – 34%) was the time taken to achieve the degree with integrated practical training. The third most frequent (16%, p=0.05 CI 11 – 21%) was the cost of the professional assessments.
Relatively low pay, difficult working conditions and unsocial hours, all negative aspects of the job itself, taken together accounted for nearly all (23%) of the remaining concerns to entrants.
Important factors in the choice of a career in environmental health
Respondents were able to select more than one factor. About half indicated that ‘councils providing work experience and sponsored training’ was an important factor (47%, p=0.05 CI 41 – 53%). The next most frequent choice was ‘a talk by an environmental health practitioner (35%, p=0.05 CI 29 – 41%).
The most frequent ‘Other’ factor was ‘career progression’ – all of these respondents (n=5) were existing technicians in environmental health departments who wished to progress to EHP status.
How entrants thought a career as an environmental health practitioner could have been better marketed
This was an open-ended question and 39 students responded with their suggestions.
22 respondents referred to a lack of information from schools and the careers service,
“At careers days there is no information about environmental health as a career.” (Student 86)
eleven respondents felt that there was a need for more marketing and promotion of EH careers
“The benefits of a career in environmental health need to be promoted i.e. there is lots of work available nationwide, challenging, variety in the work, good career prospects throughout the working life and helping the environment.” (Student 08)
“There needs to be a national campaign on television and in the press.” (Student18)
“There needs to be more awareness of the fact that its actually an attractive vocation.” (Student 84)
Eight stressed a need for more talks in schools by serving practitioners and two respondents felt that more local authorities should offer work experience. Four of the 38 respondents mentioned the CIEH initiatives.
Programme leader questionnaire survey
Five programme leaders responded to the questionnaire survey.
Students entering respondent programmes in 2002/03/04/05
The programme at university B commenced in 2004, so no data are shown for earlier years. The other four universities taken together showed an increase between 2002 and 2004 and then a small drop in 2005.
Reasons for the increase in intake
Respondents were told that the CIEH has stated that nationally there has been in increase in student numbers. They were asked to indicate the factors that felt may have contributed to this. Four out of the five programme leaders felt that the increase was owing to a better understanding among young people of the work of environmental health practitioners. Three felt that there had been better marketing of environmental health in schools. Two indicated an increase in the number of paid student placements and sponsorships. Two said that the CIEH offered more advice about the profession and “other” factors. One leader referred to “ a higher profile of EHPs in the media” and another to the “employers organisation providing funds to develop placements”.
Figure 7.0 Students entering respondent programmes in 2002/03/04/05
How students are hearing about environmental health?
The five programme leaders’ perceptions of how students were hearing of EH were: Work experience in an environmental health department 5
Personal recommendation 5
Talks by environmental health practitioner 3
Came across it in their current or previous work 3 TV programmes such as “A Life of Grime” 3
From the university of their choice 2 Careers literature guidance 1 Internet/ehcareers.org 1
These perceptions parallel the results of the student questionnaire.
Table 1.0 Percentage of 2005/2006 intake who were previously technicians, mature entrants, school leavers
What more the CIEH should do?
Four of the five programme leaders felt that more should be done to encourage practical training placements:
“Resources must be allocated to encourage placement opportunities with local authorities and ways should be sought to make professional training more flexible.” (Programme Leader S)
“The CIEH should be encouraging relevant industries and consultancies to take on students for practical training.” (Programme Leader P)
Three of the programme leaders felt that there should be more and better marketing of a career in EH:
“An introductory video presentation would be an effective way of showing prospective students what EHPs do, to counter the impression given by television documentaries.” (Programme Leader Q)
What more could be done by other agencies?
‘Other agencies’ included local government employers, central government agencies, etc.
The programme leaders at three universities stressed the need for more placements, and that the financial implications of training in EH put it at a disadvantage in comparison with other health professions.
What the universities have done to increase student numbers?
All five universities had taken a range of similar actions including: open days; attendance at career fairs; talks at schools, and meeting prospective students at the university. Two offered ‘taster courses’. They all try to emphasise the achievements of recent graduates, e.g. Ronald Williams Awards, and the career prospects in environmental health.
Discussion
Intake numbers
While there has been an overall increase in student numbers at the respondent universities, this was mainly owing to the opening of one new programme and a marked increase at University E. The increases at the other universities have been modest. Some of the overall increase may have been a result of applicants ‘switching’ owing to closure of other programmes. The overall increase merely compensates for the loss of the three programmes in 2001/2. University D is now running at full capacity.
University E, which has increased its intake by 92%, has adopted an atypical admissions policy. It appears to target ‘unconventional entrants’ and existing EH technicians (see Table 1.0). It initially enrols some students who do not qualify for entry to degree level study onto lower level programmes. Its intake figure includes all such students. Students enrolled on these sub-degree programmes may later transfer to the BSc. This policy has undoubtedly contributed to the increased intake, but may have quality implications, which should be the subject of further evaluation.
Entrants’ background
The proportion of school leavers overall was about 60% (59%, P=0.05 CI 53-65%), but the figure varies considerably between universities. At University D 93% of respondents were school leavers while at University E it was less than 25%.
No data on the percentage of school leavers in earlier intakes could be found, but the overall figure of c60% seems low, and this and the figure of 25% at University E, which is the only undergraduate programme in its region, suggests that work remains to be done to get school leavers interested in a career in environmental health, and that there is potential to develop this source of entrants.
The need to fund the practical training period is an obstacle to entry for school leavers. 88% of school leaver respondents had to fund their practical training themselves, though 17% of them were aided by a bursary. 9% students were salaried or otherwise part funded by a local authority. Only 3% students had a fully salaried student post, though this was the norm 25 years ago. Other health professionals do not fund their own practical training and the employers and government should look closely at the equity of the current arrangements in environmental health.
“More placements are desperately needed.” (Programme Leader P)
“It is up to the employers … paid sponsorships should be the norm.” (Programme Leader R)
“They should provide more placement opportunities.” (Programme Leader S)
University ‘top-up fees’ of up to £3,000 p.a. were introduced in September 2006, and the additional impact of this will need to be monitored.
One half of University E’s entrants were existing technicians. Over the five universities, about 10% of entrants were previously technicians. While this is an important source of entrants, and it is important that a career progression ‘bridge’ for technicians is maintained, the targeting of the existing technician workforce as an answer to shortages is a mere short-term measure, as the supply of suitable, willing technicians is finite.
How entrants first hear about environmental health
CIEH initiatives such as the CD-Rom and the ehcareers.org website accounted for very few entrants. The CIEH had 40,000 hits on its website in its first six months alone, raising questions about why the website seems to inspire so few entrants. Nevertheless, these resources are important secondary sources, being at least influential to about 40% of entrants. The problem appears to be that potential entrants are not aware of their existence until after their interest in EH has been raised.
“I had not heard of the new CIEH careers pack, the redesigning of the CIEH website, the new website to help recruitment enquiries and the CD-Rom.” (Student 12)
Raising that first interest in a career in EH is crucial, and yet careers information and guidance in schools, etc, is failing; it accounts for only 25% of school leaver entrants and 14% of all entrants. Respondents pointed to the need for more and better information. A recurrent theme was that while respondents later found that EH was the right career for them, they had not been told about it at school.
“Careers advisors should be better informed; the job fitted my needs perfectly but it was not mentioned as a possible career.” (Student 21)
The offer of work experience in an environmental health department accounted for 27% of school leaver entrants and is clearly a successful way of attracting potential EHPs. More EH departments should be encouraged to offer work experience opportunities (work experience is now mandatory within the national curriculum) and this could be linked with talks at schools from serving EHPs.
5% of entrants first heard of EH at ‘talks’ from serving EHPs, and for about 35% it was an important factor in their career choice. The need for more such ‘talks’ was stressed by eight of the 39 entrants who made suggestions for improved marketing of EH.
“A talk by an environmental health practitioner is a good way to learn about the job … they give a better insight.” (Student 43)
The importance of career talks was recognised by university programme leaders, and was accepted by the CIEH Working Group (2002c). The CLEAR report recommended that the CIEH should train volunteers to go into schools to talk to students and career advisors (Gaber and Wardle, 2002). The CIEH produced audiovisual resources for speakers, but:
“The current EH careers presentation is rather limited (though very well produced). A careers road show is another possibility.” (Programme Leader Q)
The CIEH should now encourage more of its members and local authorities to take on this task at a greater number of schools and colleges.
“There is a need for more interaction at a local level from environmental health practitioners.” (Student 41) “People should come into school and give a better explanation of the course and jobs afterwards.” (Student 71)
‘Passive’ sources such as personal recommendations or coming across EHPs in everyday life are important factors; they attracted about 30% of all respondents. This cannot be increased by policy initiatives, but presumably will continue to be a steady source of entrants. The high percentage of entrants who first heard of EH in this way says much about the ineffectiveness of other awareness initiatives. Despite evidence from Nicholls and Parkinson (2002) that the ‘A Life of Grime’ programme was responsible for misconceptions of the role of the EHP, it nevertheless raised the interest of about 15% of entrants.
“Surprisingly, some students have stated that the “A Life of Grime” TV documentary attracted them to the profession.” (Programme Leader P)
However, it is not known how many potential applicants were misinformed, or put off by these programmes.
The entrants’ choice of career
The most frequently cited influences on the choice of a career in EH were its desirable conditions of service, followed by its altruistic characteristics. This finding is important since it mirrors the findings of Nicholls and Parkinson (2002) that the characteristics of EH work are among the highest ranked desirable job characteristics cited by all potential university applicants. Environmental health is an attractive career option, but young people are not being told about it.
“More information should be given out to sixth formers. Some people have no idea this course exists.” (Student 53)
The task remains to make more potential applicants aware that EH work has the job characteristics that they are looking for.
“A campaign with career services and schools needs to be implemented…. the role and career structure of EH will sell itself. There are few jobs that offer such a range of daily opportunities or in which skills are so attractive to a wealth of employers.” (Course Leader T)
The CIEH marketing initiatives had relatively little influence on career choice, but they at least had minor influence on about 40% of entrants.
“I had not heard of the new CIEH careers pack, the redesigning of the CIEH website, the new website to help recruitment enquiries and the CD-Rom.” (Student 12)
The CD and website are useful to potential entrants who have already heard about EH, but it is not an effective first contact with potential entrants.
“More publicity on the actual career is needed. The website is very good; you just wouldn’t know to look there.” (Student 50)
The most frequent (48%, n=58) negative factor cited by school leaver entrants was the limited number of universities offering the programme. Seven Universities offer the BSc in England and one in each of Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales. In London and the South East of England, where there is the highest concentration of population in the UK, there is only one university offering the BSc, Greenwich and King’s College London having closed their BSc courses. Government policies have resulted in more students seeking a university education near their home, and so the relatively small number of universities offering the BSc is a handicap. University D is turning applicants away, but, as it is the only programme in its region, potential entrants are being lost. Universities will not establish new programmes unless there is a sufficient demand.
The second most frequent concern cited by entrants was the cost and time taken to obtain a degree in environmental health (44%) and then the professional fees (31%). In fact the time taken is no longer than for similar professions, but EH students do bear more of the costs of their training than other public health professionals and this inequitable situation requires further study.
“Key worker status could help…if EHPs are so important to the public health of the nation, then they should pay students to train – other public health workers are.” (Course Leader T)
In 2002 the CIEH lobbied for external funding from central government to continue and enhance the bursary scheme. The scheme has had some impact, but more work needs to be done to make paid placements the rule rather than the exception.
Adverse conditions of service, relatively low pay, difficult working conditions and unsocial hours, were of concern to 23% of respondents. While these factors were apparently not sufficient to have put them off, we don’t know their impact on those who chose not to enter EH.
Conclusions
- It was found while there had been an overall increase in student numbers at the respondent universities, this was mainly because of the opening of one new programme and a markedly increased intake at an existing programme. Some of the overall increase may have been a result of applicants ‘switching’ owing to the closure of other programmes.
- To increase its intake, one university had changed its admissions policy and had accepted a large proportion of ‘unconventional’ mature students. This may have quality implications, and should be studied further. The targeting of the existing technician workforce is identified as a mere short-term measure.
- The percentage of entrants that comes straight from school is relatively low (c60%). This is because of the lack of student funding opportunities, especially paid placements, the limited number of universities offering under - graduate EH programmes, and the lack of knowledge among school advisors of careers and degree programmes in environmental health.
- The major influences on the choice of EH by entrants are its desirable conditions of service and altruistic characteristics. These factors coincide with highest ranked desirable job characteristics cited by all potential university applicants. Environmental health is thus an attractive career option, but many young people are not receiving appropriate career information and guidance.
- The CIEH initiatives have been useful to some entrants but have had relatively little influence on career choice. The major thrust of future recruitment activity should be targeted at raising awareness of the desirable job characteristics of an EHP through talks to schools by serving practitioners; through offering work experience, and via more and better careers information and advice.
- The CIEH should lobby the local government employers and government departments to consider the equity of the current funding arrangements for practical training. The goal should be for all practical training to be publicly funded.
Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge the co-operation of the respondent universities and the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health.
References
CIEH (2002) ‘CIEH Drive to Lure Students’, in Hatchett W (Ed.) (2002) Environmental Health News, Vol.17, Issue 3, Chadwick House Group Ltd, London.
CIEH (2003a) ‘Recruitment Boost for Regulators’, in Hatchett W (Ed.) (2003) Environmental Health News, Vol.18, Issue 26, Chadwick House Group Ltd, London.
CIEH (2003b) CIEH Acts to Reposition the Environmental Health Profession with New Core Curriculum, Press Release (3rd September 2003), CIEH, London.
CIEH (2003c) Building a Healthier Future: CIEH Annual Report for the year ended 31st December 2002. CIEH, London.
CIEH (2006) Ehcareers.org at www.ehcareers.org [accessed 6th January 2006].
Employers Organisation for Local Government and Society of Environmental Health (2002) Environmental Health Workforce Survey 2002, EOLG, SEH & CIEH, London.
Gaber I and Wardle A (2002) – Increasing the Number of Applicants to Environmental Health Courses (The CLEAR Report). London, CLEAR Consultants.
Harvey H (2001) ‘Countering the Decline’. Environmental Health Journal, Vol.109, Issue 9: 266-269, CIEH, London.
Nicholls K and Parkinson N (2002), ‘University Applicants’ Perception of Environmental Health as a Career and Degree Subject’. Journal of Environmental Health Research, Vol.1, Issue1: 5-10, London.
Robinson P (2001) EHOs: A Species Under Threat. in Hatchett W (Ed) Environmental Health News, Vol.16, Issue 24, London, Chadwick House Group, Ltd. Michael Cooper and Norman Parkinson