42 THE JOURNAL OF SCHOOL HEALTH

5. To a great extent, the success of this program is measured by the noticable decrease of toothache cases coming to the school health room.

6. Everyone in the school assists in promoting this program. This includes the secretaries, upon whom falls the burden of mimeographing thousands of forms, to our present principal, Mr. Martin Kesselman.

The generally low economic status and rapidly shifting school popuh- tion makes this dental program a continuing job of education. It is now in i!,s 8th year. * * * * *

HEALTH INTERESTS AFTER FIVE YEARS LEON GARRETT, Ed.D.

Memphis State University ROY PANOLE, Ed.D.

George Peabody College for Teachers

During the fall quarter 1964 students enrolled in the required course in health education at Peabody College responded routinely to an interest appraisal technique. Responses obtained were treated with the following purposes in mind: (a) to replicate an interest study** reported some five years earlier, (b) to identify and rank current areas of interest, and (c) to determine to what extent student interests have changed over the intervening five-year period. Students involved were predominantly freshman women, most of whom indicated that their most recent previous health instruction was taken at the junior and/or senior high school levels. All were enrolled in the course to meet requirements for graduation.

The appraisal technique used was then described in the study to be replicated. In brief , seventeen areas of health instruction are presented. From this list the student selects the areas which represent his first, second and third “interest” choices and they are designated accordingly. These choices, for all students, are weighed and an Interest Index for each area determined. This permits a ranking of areas on the basis of computed indices. Where other interest inventories (i.e. Cushman- Bennett Checklist) may be geared to a consideration of specific ques- tions, the Interest Index is concerned more with broad topical areas. (For a more complete description of the procedures involved the interested reader is directed to the original report.)

Presented below are the seventeen instructional areas embodied in the Interest Index appraisal technique. Opposite each area are to be found (a) the index value and rank obtained in the 1959 study, and (b) the index value and rank as reported in the present study (1964). Variations in magnitude of Interest Indices are intended to reflect, to some extent, the priority of student interest responses in that first, second and third preferences were weighed appropriately. Students represented in each study numbered 457 and 107 respectively.

*The authors are on the staff of the Department of Health and Physical Educa-

**Roy Pangle, “Health Interests and a Method of Appraisal,” Journal of School (Mimeographed copies of this report are available

tion of George Peabody College for Teachers in Nashville, Tennessee.

Health January 1959, pp. 12-14. from the author upon request.)

THE JOURNAL OF SCHOOL HEALTH 43

1959 1964 AREA OF INTEREST INDEX RANK INDEX RANK

Emotional Health Heredit Family Living Personal H y l t h Depressants Stimulants Exercise an Rest Nutrition Body Functions Social Health Home Nursing Sense Organs International Health Community Health School Health Consumer Health Occupational Health Current Health

715 1 162 1 580 2 127 3 556 3 125 2 478 4 83 4 411 6 66 6 _ _ ~~~

233 6 63 6 200 7 17 11 183 8 50 7 157 9 41 8 133 10 22 10 132 11 16 12 97 12 9 13 70 13 23 9 69 14 5 14 37 15 3 15 ~. ~~

37 15 2 16 34 1s 9 13

A comparison of the above rankings suggests the following conclusions: (1) Over the five-year period 1959-1964 health interests of Peabody

students enrolled in the required course in health education appear to be relatively stable. Particularly is this true of the top six areas of interest where the only change occurring waa a one rank reversal involving heredity and family living. Seven of the areas held identical ranks in both studies, while seven other areas deviated by a single rank.

(2) The only marked differences in rankings occurred in the areas of nutrition, community health and current health. The relatively poor response given to nutrition in 1959 has substantially waned five years later. An interesting inconsistency appears to be the apparent lack of student interests in areas where misconception studies reveal a marked incidence of misconceptions. This would certainly be true of consumer health .

(3) As has been often reported, emotional (mental) health, family living, heredity, personal health, and stimulants and depressants are areas of health instruction which continue to elicit the greatest amount of student interest.

* * * * *