African Journal of Educational Vol. 5, No. 1, September, 2007.
AN EVALUATION OF THE SECONDARY
SCHOOLS HEALTH EDUCATION CURRICULUM
IN KWARA STATE, NIGERIA.
By
Dr. O. 0. Qyerinde & Odeniyi O. O.
Abstract
The paper investigated secondary schools health education curriculum in
Kwara State, Nigeria, The importance and responsibilities of health education
towards the health needs and promotion for school children was dully noted. A
descriptive research design of the survey type was adopted. A multistage sampling
technique was used to select 390 subjects comprised of students, principals and
teachers. A previously validated questionnaire was administered on the subjects to
collect data.
Results showed that subjects differ in their evaluation of the status
of health education in schools and the personnel for the teaching of Health
Education. They were however not different in their evaluation of
facilities and equipment for Health Education. Based on the findings, it was
recommended that advocacy must be conduct for principals and
professionalisation of the health education profession should be advocated.
1
African Journal of Educational Vol. 5, No. 1, September, 2007.
Introduction
Health Education, like many other fields of study has been defined by
many authors. This is not surprising when it is realized that all areas of life have
implications for health depending on the perspective or area of interest of the
person giving the definition. Therefore the meaning is tailored in line with his
reasoning. The social worker will define health differently from the medical
worker for examples. Again in relation to the family, it carries the implication for
family Health. Also at work, on the roads and at recreation grounds, there is the
implication for safely education while growth of human beings also carries with
it 'sex education' or "human sexuality" (Oyerinde 1992).
In the midst of the various meanings and definitions of health education,
those of Clark & Cundey (197 7), Last (1987), Layout (1981), Davies (1989),
Mondo (1998), and Wellness (2009) that health education is a process of
providing teaching and learning experiences and activities for the purpose of
influencing the knowledge, attitude, practices and conduct with regards to family,
individual, and community health by means of educational process is all inspiring
and agree in content and context with other authors. Generally and according
to Moronkola (1997), Alison, Angus, Roz, & Beth (2005) & American
Academy of child adolescent psychology (2008), health education is abridge
between the existing scientific know-how and how the knowledge can be properly
and effectively utilized for man's healthful living.
The primary responsibility of health education for health of the child rests on the
parents, but the school is in a strategic position to contribute effectively to the
health of every school age child (Oyerinde 1992, Fukumi, Narutriko & Atsuko
2002 and Odeniyi 2003). According to WHO (1996), the school can fortify and
supplement the parents efforts since there is no single method whereby the health
2
African Journal of Educational Vol. 5, No. 1, September, 2007.
message can reach all and sundry, the school has been seen by the World Health
Organization (WHO) (1971) & (2000) as the nearest medium through which it can
achieve children health education in all homes, villages and communities.
There is no gainsaying the fact that health Education is an important
subject which should be taught in schools. According to Green, Jones: &
Mariderscheid (1996), Lawrence (2006) & Euteach (2008) the standards of the
WHO that schools should ensure school health policy, good physical environment,
good social environment, development of personal health skills, community
relationship and health services. It is the presence of these that will ensure that the
school is providing a safe, secure and stimulating school environment which
encourage pupils to be health and safety conscious both in and out of school (Odeniyi
2003). It is because of the varied implications and needs for health that Oyerinde
(1991) recounted the Cohen report (1964) that health education should:
1.
Advice about specific measures for health promotion
2.
Advice
about
habits
and
attitudes
which
will
promote
health
3.
Educate
to
enable
people
o
understand
the
need
for
and
support measures for health promotion; and
4.
Educate
about
seeking
early
medical
advice
for
certain
conditions.
In his own contribution to health education and promotion Moronkola (2002)
feels that health Education and promotion must:
(a)
Create supportive environment for each segment of the
World to care for individuals, self and environment.
(b)
Strengthen community action through empowerment to
make decisions, plans and implement all programmes
that have direct bearing on the coimnunity's health
(c)
Develop personal skill through provision of information,
education for health, and skills in the home, school work
3
African Journal of Educational Vol. 5, No. 1, September, 2007.
and community settings,
(d)
Re-orientate health services to ensure that health services
is a joint responsibility of individuals, community, groups,
health professionals, institutions and government.
Whether the above is present in the school health
education programes is yet to be established as diseases are still with us, drug
addiction is with us, sexually transmitted diseases including HIV/AIDS are
steadily and rapidly taking their toll and environmental degradation is going on
unabated.
The present study therefore was muted to evaluate the status of secondary
schools health education and counseling as a beginning point, in Kwara State,
Nigeria. The following questions were answered by the study.
Is there a health education programme in the secondary schools of Kwara
State, Nigeria.
Is health education adequately provided for in terms o facilities and
equipment, books, personnel and teaching materials.
To resolve these questions, three hypotheses were generated that:
There is no significant difference in the evaluation of respondents of
school health education programme in Kwara State secondary schools.
There is no significant difference in the evaluation of respondents of the
facilities and equipment of health education in Kwara State, Nigeria.
There is no significant difference in the evaluation of respondents of the
provision of personnel for health education in Kwara State secondary school.
The study was significant in that suggestions on how to improve health
education programmes was offered. Also suggestions on provision of health
education needs was made for planners, health educators and programmes planners
in health education.
4
African Journal of Educational Vol. 5, No. 1, September, 2007.
Methodology
The research design type adopted was the descriptive survey type. All
schools in Kwara State formed the population for the study. Therefore, all
principals, staff, students and their parents formed the human population for the
study.
However, a multistage random sampling technique was used in selecting the
subjects used for the study. Only 15 schools in Kwara State were used using
purposive sampling method to pick only schools in Ilorin. All schools had their
names written and put in a box. 15 of these schools were randomly picked for the
study.
Thereafter, four hundred subjects were sampled for the study. These were
all principals, all RE and Health teachers, all games masters. All parents/teachers
association chairman and treasurers were sampled. For these categories of
subjects, total purposive sampling technique was used. However, for the
students, 10 students each from the SS II and SS III were systematically
sampled from each school used for the study hence, subjects in each of these
classes where picked based on how they appeared on the class registers. The first 5
male names and first 5 female names were picked from each of SSII and SS III
classes in each school. Hence 300 students were sampled along with 90 subjects
from the principals, Health Teachers, Games masters. PTA Chairman, PTA
treasures and 10 games misters.
A questionnaire designed by the researcher was used to collect data. The
items (20) were validated by specialists in health Education and later tested for
reliability at Ogbomosho high school, Oyo State, Nigeria using 30 Students. A
test-retest method was adopted with a 2 weeks interval. Data from the two tests were
correlated using Pearson, product moment correlation Co-efficient. The result
showed a reliability ratio of 0.70r.
5
African Journal of Educational Vol. 5, No. 1, September, 2007.
The hypotheses were tested using the ANOVA statistic at. 0.05 level of
significance. The Duncan multiple range test (DMRT) was used to show direction
of differences or agreement in the respondents' responses.
Results
Data Analysis And Discussion Of Findings
The hypothesis that there will be no significant difference in the respondents'
views about the standard of health education in the secondary school of Kwara State
was tested. Tables I and IT below show the variance in the response patterns of
subjects. Analysis ofvarian.ee on the subjects' responses on the status of school health
education in the secondary schools of Kwara State, Nigeria.
SOURCE
Respondents
Questions
Error
TOTAL
DF SUM OF
4
4
16
MEAN
SQUARE
SQUARE
0.4689
0.6200
0.4498
0.1174
0.1647
0.0279
F VALUE
PR,F
4.30
3.01
24
The calculated F ratio in tlie table-hows a higher value (4.10) than the table
value of 3.01. Here the hypothesis that there will be no significant difference i; the
respondents' views about the status of health education in ne secondary schools of
Kwara State, Nigeria was rejectee. Dmcan Multiple Range Test is presented below.
Table II:
DMRT of ANOVA result in table I
DUNCAN
A school Principals
A health Teachers
A PE Teachers
APIA Rep.
A Learners
GROUP
I
1
]
2
20
MEAN
1.9:8
2.04)
NUMBER
15
15
U2.2?8
15
30
300
2.U9
2.356
From Table 2 above, it is shown that significant difference exist in the
responses of the respondents used for the study i.e. the school principals, health
6
African Journal of Educational Vol. 5, No. 1, September, 2007.
and PE teachers, PTA representatives and students. The letter A shows the groups
that differ in their responses.
The second hypothesis was that there will be no significant difference
in the responses of respondents on the provision of facilities and equipment for
Health Education in the schools of Kwara State.
TABLE III:
ANOVA Result on provision of facilities and equipment
SOURCE
DF SUM
OF
MEAN
F VALUE
PR, F
SQUARE
Respondents 4 6 0.0310
SQUARE
0.0072
.0.57
2.78
Questions
24
0.0426
0.1822
Error
TOTAL
34
0.3844
0.0122
The table above shows that no significant difference exists in the responses
of subjects by groups on the provision of facilities and equipment for heath
education in the schools of Kwara State, Nigeria. The Table shows that the
calculated F, 0.57 is less than the table value 2.78. Hence the hypothesis was
accepted.
The third hypothesis that there is no significant difference in the responses of
respondents on the provision of health education personnel in the secondary
schools of Kwara State was also tested.
TABLE IV:
Analysis of variance on responses of respondents on provision of Health
Education personnel
SOURCE
DF SUM OF
SQUARE
Respondents 4
0.5334
Questions
16 0.9252
Error
0.4579
TOTAL
24
MEAN
SQUARE
0.1358
0.2174
0.0273
F VALUE
PR, F
4.79
3.01
!
J
I
7
African Journal of Educational Vol. 5, No. 1, September, 2007.
From the table, it is shown that alternative hypothesis that significant
difference exist in the responses of subjects by groups is accepted. The calculated
f. value of 4.76 is greater than the table value 3.01. the hypothesis was rejected.
The Duncan multiple range test data presented in table V below shows the
direction of differences.
Table V:
Duncan Multiple Range Test
DUNCAN
A school Principals
A health Teachers
A-PE Teachers
A PTA Rep.
A Learners
GROUP
1
1
1
2
20
MEAN
2.112
1.678
2.030
2.032
1.776
NUMBER
15
15
15
30
300
The data on table V shows that all the group of respondents, are tagged A which
means that their responses differ.
Discussion
The null hypothesis one was rejected and the alternative that there exists a
significant difference in the respondents' opinion of the status of school health
education in kwara state secondary schools. In the Duncan mean, the school
principals differed in their scores from all the other respondents who had a high
mean score. This may be because they are the administrators who are the
custodians of the schools' policies hence, to them the standards are sufficiently
high. The Health Teachers, physical education teachers, PTA representatives and
students are at the receiving end hence they perceived the standard of education
in the schools as been low. The implication of this is that the schools are not
operating at the WHO (1971) & (2000) level as rehearsed by Green, Jones and
Manderscheid (1996) that schools must ensure health policies, good physical
environment, good social environment, development of personal health skills and
community relation. Fukurni et al (2002) & Odeniyi (2003) stated unequivocally
8
African Journal of Educational Vol. 5, No. 1, September, 2007.
that it is the presence of the above that will ensure that the school is providing a
safe, secure and stimulating school environment that will enhance teaching and
learning of health education.
The hypothesis that there is no significant difference in the opinion of
respondents on the provision of facilities and equipment for health education was
sustained. This is because, respondents calculated F ratio was less than the table
ratio. Generally, respondents are agreed that facilities and equipment for health
teaching needs upgrading. Udoh (1980) and Moronkola (2002) are conclusive
in their works that teaching materials can be classified as audiovisual, visual aids,
school plants etc. they reiterated that all of these accelerate the rate at which
pupils learn and imprint a picture in their mind's about the topic taught. When
these are lacking according to them, health education, facilities and equipment
can be seen to be inadequate.
The third hypothesis was also rejected and replaced with the alternative
hypothesis. The calculated value 4.76 was higher than the table value of 3.01 at
0.05 level of significance. The Duncan mean score for the different groups
revealed that those for the health teachers and students were lower than those for
the health teachers and students were lower than those of the school
administrators, and PTA representatives. It is not surprising that the health
teachers and students are of this view especially that they are at the receiving ends
of the burden of lack of teachers and personnel for health education.
Oyerinde (1992), WHO (1996) & the American academy of child adolescent
psychology (2008) see the school as having the primary responsibility of health
education hence the problem of personnel should not hander this objectives.
As a recommendation in Oyerinde (1992) it was clarified that health education
should be handled by professionals and not just anybody. The high mean score
for the school principal, PTA representatives and PE teachers may be so
because the PE teachers and others like biology, home economics teachers, are
9
African Journal of Educational Vol. 5, No. 1, September, 2007.
subsisting to teach health collaboratively and incidentally. This situation is not the
best if the recommendation of Oyerinde (1992) is reckoned with and the general
education of the public and the government is stepped up so that while the former
is read to save money spent on curative medicine, the latter presides the fund
and environment for such optimal aim to be achieved.
Conclusions
Based on the findings of the study the following were concluded:
(1)
School
principals,
health
education
teachers, representatives of
PTA, physical education teachers and students are different in their
evaluation of the status and standard of health education in secondary
schools.
(2)
School principals,
health education teachers, representatives of
PTA, physical education teachers and students are not different in their
evaluation of the standard of Health education facilities and equipment in
the secondary schools of Kwara State, Nigeria.
(3)
School principals, health education teachers, physical education teachers
and representatives of PTA, and students differ in their evaluation of the
standard of health education personnel (in terms of quantity7 and quality) in the
secondary schools.
Recommendations
Based on the conclusions of the study the following were recommended:
(1)
That advocacy should be conducted on secondary school principals by
health education teachers. This should take place in all school type, levels
and at all levels of government. This will stem the careless posture of people
in authority on the issue of administration of school health education.
(2)
Professionalisation of health educators is imperative. This will stem the
practice of using non-professionals in teaching health education
10
African Journal of Educational Vol. 5, No. 1, September, 2007.
correlatively and incidentally in secondary schools.
(3)
Health education teachers should give necessary information to other
teachers and stakeholders in the school health programme. This is because
not all stake holders, principals and teachers are health educators. They
hence must be enlightened.
References
Alison, W. Angus, E, Roz, U. J. & Beth, M. (2005) A Coping Exercise: The
Nursing, Midwifery and Health Visiting Contribution to Child Health
Services, King's College, London.
American Academy of Child Adolescent Psychology (2008): Services in School for
Children with Special Needs: what parents need to know.
Clark, R.L & Cundey, R.W (1977) the book of 3rd Ed. New-York. Harcourt Brace
Jovial vickinc.
Cohen, D.A., Nsnani. M.. Brooks, B. and Marline, DH (2000). School based
screening for sexually transmitted Disease. Journal of State Medical
Sociology. 151. (2). 617-621.
Davies J.M. (1989) Community Health Preventive medicine and Social Services 6th
Ed. New York. Macmillan Publishing Ltd.
Euteach (2008) Health Education, Prevention and Health Promotion Including
School Health: www.euteach.com.
Fukumi, S., Narutriko, OJ & Atsuko, A. (2002) A Study of Significance on
Children's Life and Health under School Education: The Second Report
in Relation to the Responsibilities of Yogo Teachers.
Green L.W. (1990) Community Health. St. Louis, Times Mirror/ Mosby College.
Publishing.
Green, J. Jones B .K Manderscheid J.C. (1996) Health Promotion Effectiveness.
Journal of School Health, 5.5. 316-321.
Laoye, J. A. (19 81) Principles and Practice of Health Education. London. McMillan
Education.
Last, J.M. (1987) Public Health and Human Ecology Sydney. Prentice Hall
11
African Journal of Educational Vol. 5, No. 1, September, 2007.
Mondo, F. (1998): Online Medical Dictionary, www.moDdofacto.com.
Moronkola. O.A. (1997) Teaching Health Education Effectively in schools. Journal
of the Nigeria Association of Physical, Health Education and Recreation. Oyp
chapter (1) 1_48-55.
Moronkoia. O.A. (2002), Health Education or Health Promotion. What is in a name.
Health Education & Health Promotion. Z. Ademuwagun. Co.Ed. Royal
people (Nig.) Ltd.
Odeniyi (2003) The Status of School Health Services in Selected Post Primary
Schools in Offa and Local Government Areas of Kwara State. Unpublished
Master Dissertation.
Oyerinde, O. O. (1992) Health Education in the Unper Secondary Schools. A
programme for view under the 6-3-3-4 education system. Contemporary Issue
in Physical Education, Health & Fitness. A publication of the
Department of Exercise & Sport Science, University of Florida, Gainesville,
Florida, U.S.A.
Udoh, C.O. (1980) Physical and Health Education, Associate Certificate. Ibadan:
Publication Series, Institutte of Education, University of Ibadan.
Wass, A. (1995) Promoting Health: The Primary Care Approach. Sydney. Harcourt
Brace Company.
Wellness (2009): www.defmitionofwellness.com
Who (1996). Health Education of the Public. World Health Magazine 856.
WHO Information Series on School Health. (2000): Local Action: Creating
Health Promoting in Schools.
12