Assessment of cultural appropriateness and readability in a mental health curriculum, indicating improved student mental health literacy.
Purpose This paper aims to evaluate the cultural appropriateness, readability and suitability of the school-based mental health curriculum, with the ultimate aim of promoting students’ mental health literacy. Design/methodology/approach This research was conducted in two stages. The first stage involved a panel of experts evaluating the cultural appropriateness and adaptation of the mental health curriculum to Iranian culture. The second stage involved randomly selecting the first secondary schools in Sirjan and assessing the curriculum’s readability and suitability. Five mental health counselors and 25 students were included in the study. Findings The results revealed that the cultural appropriateness and acceptability of the curriculum were verified following the implementation of cultural adjustments and reforms. The mean readability score for the mental health curriculum, measured by the readability of materials, was 13 before incorporating cultural appropriateness. After the inclusion of cultural appropriateness, the score improved to 16.5. Also, incorporating cultural appropriateness into the mental health curriculum increased the mean suitability of materials score from 62.7 to 87.2. Research limitations/implications Following the cultural appropriateness, the mental health curriculum was considered a superior medium due to its high score in cultural appropriateness, suitability and readability of materials. Practical implications Educational materials are recommended to be evaluated for appropriateness and readability before publication, and educational content should be tailored to the intended audience. Social implications Utilizing this program in schools can serve as a beneficial and efficient method to enhance students’ mental health literacy. Originality/value Education professionals should ensure that instructional materials are appropriate for the intended audience.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zeidabadi et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: