Abstract
THE place of physiology and hygiene in general education has yet to be effectively established. Intellectual assent has been generally accorded to Herbert Spencer's dictum—that such a course of physiology as is needful for the comprehension of its general truths, and their bearings on daily conduct, is an all-essential part of a rational education—but those responsible for curricula have not so generally given practical effect to such assent. The subject has lately been investigated by Dr. J. P. Rogers for the United States Office of Education. In his report on “Instruction in Hygiene in Institutions of Higher Education” (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office. 10 cents), he observes that only a third of the colleges and universities require attendance at a course in hygiene by their students, and it is rare that any instruction concerning the human body is furnished in the last three years of secondary school work. He quotes some interesting criticisms by university authorities of the methods of instruction in use: one president remarks “my observation has been that this course has been too technical and not sufficiently practical. I have yet to find an instructor who can put the information in a practical way”. It takes an artist, says Dr. Rogers, to fill such a requirement, and the best teacher of hygiene is the master and not the servant of that body of tradition which passes for ‘science’ in his day.
Article PDF
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Physiology and Hygiene in Education. Nature 139, 664 (1937). https://doi.org/10.1038/139664c0
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/139664c0