| Course | PHE 489 Public Health Capstone Communication |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 1 |
| Paper type | undergraduate capstone discussion post on choosing and narrowing a topic |
| Length | About 340 words, 3 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Southern New Hampshire University |
| Program | BS Public Health |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for PHE 489 Module 1
Module One Discussion
Clear Water, Hidden Risk
My first capstone idea was drinking water safety. My instructor's feedback on a draft in another course had warned me about topics too big to finish, so I kept narrowing until I reached one I could handle: arsenic testing among private well owners in five rural towns in southern New Hampshire, where I have been volunteering with a regional public health network.
The issue is serious. Long-term exposure to arsenic in drinking water is linked to cancers of the skin, bladder and lung and to heart disease, diabetes and effects on children's development (Naujokas et al., 2013). It is also common. Ayotte et al. (2017) estimated that about 2.1 million people in the lower 48 states drink from household wells with arsenic above the federal limit of 10 micrograms per liter.
The issue is also invisible in two ways. Arsenic has no taste, color or smell, so clear water gives no warning. And private wells fall outside federal drinking water rules, so testing is left to each household. Zheng and Flanagan (2017) argued that this arrangement leaves screening far from universal, with lower-income households least likely to test or treat. In our towns, a regional survey found that fewer than half of well owners had ever tested for arsenic.
The topic fits the course. It has local data I can use, a solid body of peer-reviewed research and clear decision makers: homeowners, town health officers, the regional network and state legislators. It also gives me a real communication challenge, which suits a course on capstone communication: how do you persuade people to act on a danger they cannot sense?
Finally, it matters to me. Two families I met through the network learned of high arsenic only when selling their homes, after years of drinking the water. I want my capstone to help other families learn sooner. That is the goal I will measure the project against.
For classmates: how did you narrow your topic, and what did you have to leave out to make it fit?
References
Ayotte, J. D., Medalie, L., Qi, S. L., Backer, L. C., & Nolan, B. T. (2017). Estimating the high-arsenic domestic-well population in the conterminous United States. Environmental Science & Technology, 51(21), 12443-12454. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.7b02881
Naujokas, M. F., Anderson, B., Ahsan, H., Aposhian, H. V., Graziano, J. H., Thompson, C., & Suk, W. A. (2013). The broad scope of health effects from chronic arsenic exposure: Update on a worldwide public health problem. Environmental Health Perspectives, 121(3), 295-302. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1205875
Zheng, Y., & Flanagan, S. V. (2017). The case for universal screening of private well water quality in the U.S. and testing requirements to achieve it: Evidence from arsenic. Environmental Health Perspectives, 125(8), Article 085002. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP629
What the PHE 489 Module 1 instructions ask for
For Module One, PHE 489 asks you to introduce the public health issue you will develop through the capstone. Plan on roughly one page resting on two or three APA 7 sources, with replies to classmates afterward. Describe how you narrowed a broad interest to a focused problem in a defined population and place. Explain why the issue matters, using national data and, where possible, local figures. Show that the topic can be completed in eight weeks, that peer-reviewed research exists and that there are people who could act on your recommendations. Note the communication challenge the topic raises, then end by inviting peers to describe their own choices.
How this PHE 489 Module 1 discussion example is built
In this PHE 489 post, the student narrows drinking water safety to arsenic testing among private well owners in five southern New Hampshire towns. Naujokas and colleagues tie long-term arsenic exposure to cancers, heart disease and diabetes, and Ayotte and colleagues estimate 2.1 million Americans drink from high-arsenic wells. Arsenic cannot be tasted, and private wells are not covered by federal rules, which Zheng and Flanagan say leaves testing uneven. A regional survey found fewer than half of owners had tested. The post names homeowners, health officers and legislators as decision makers and asks peers how they narrowed topics. Personal motivation is stated briefly. Feasibility is shown through data.
Where the PHE 489 Module 1 rubric puts the points
Graders of the PHE 489 opening discussion generally look for a focused topic with a defined population and place, a clear explanation of significance with data, evidence that the topic is feasible within the course, identification of people who could act on the work and accurate APA 7 citations. Posts that score highest show the narrowing process and anticipate the communication challenge. Graders mark down topics that remain too broad or rest on opinion rather than evidence. Brevity and a closing question that draws genuine answers finish strong posts, and replies that help a classmate narrow a topic earn credit. A brief note on why the topic matters personally adds voice.
PHE 489 Module 1 help: the mistakes that cost points
Opening capstone posts for PHE 489 often lose points by choosing topics such as obesity or mental health without narrowing them, citing no local data or naming no one who could act. If you are still choosing, send the prompt and two or three ideas, and the post will narrow one to a focused, feasible problem with national and local evidence. Saying which earlier courses you enjoyed helps match the topic to your strengths. Our PHE 489 opening posts show the narrowing step by step and set up the problem statement that Milestone One will ask for, so the capstone starts on solid ground. A list of possible decision makers is included.
Get PHE 489 Module 1 written to your instructions
Share the PHE 489 Module 1 prompt along with the capstone ideas on your list. One will be narrowed to a focused problem, its importance shown with data, its fit to eight weeks confirmed and its decision makers named, with a closing question for peers. Turnaround is roughly two days, and a first sample is free. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Southern New Hampshire University document.
More PHE 489 papers and related BS Public Health samples
- PHE 327 Module 7 Project Two: The Assessment Report on Needs, Assets and Capacity
- PHE 340 Module 2 Health Belief Model Short Paper: Susceptibility on a Two-Mile Gravel Trip
- PHE 330 Module 2 Audience Short Paper: Who Is in the Water and How to Reach Them
- PHE 321 Module 4 Discussion: Kissing Bugs, Kennels and the Places Disease Lives
PHE 489 Module 1 questions, answered
Where can I find a free PHE 489 Module 1 Discussion sample?
This page carries the full PHE 489 Module 1 post narrowing a capstone topic to arsenic testing among private well owners in rural New Hampshire.
How narrow should a public health capstone topic be?
Narrow enough to cover one problem in one population and place, with data and research you can review within the course.
Why is arsenic in private wells a public health issue?
Long-term exposure raises the risk of several cancers and chronic diseases, and private wells are not covered by federal drinking water rules.
Who regulates private well water in the United States?
Federal drinking water rules cover public systems, not private wells, so testing and treatment are generally left to owners unless a state or town requires them.
What makes a capstone topic feasible?
Available local data, peer-reviewed research, a clear population and people who could act on the recommendations.