Application of KAP Model in Waste Management Education: A case study of Gujarat

Application of KAP Model in Waste Management Education: A case study of Gujarat | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Article Application of KAP Model in Waste Management Education: A case study of Gujarat Astha Garg astha, Dr. Urvashi Mishra urvashi This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-7513492/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Purpose : This study aims to assess the knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) regarding waste management among middle-stage students (6 th to 8 th grade in rural and urban schools of Halol taluka, Gujarat, and to examine the influence of demographic variables on these domains. Methods : A descriptive research design was employed, using a stratified random sampling to select 678 students from six purposively chosen schools. A structured questionnaire was validated through pilot testing, expert validation, and reliability to assess knowledge (85 statements), attitudes (25 statements), and practices (18 questions) related to solid waste management. Data were analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics with IBM SPSS version 20 and JAMOVI 2.6.44. Results : Urban students demonstrated significantly higher knowledge (M=37.25, SD=11.76) and better practices (M=47.60, SD=11.27), compared to rural students' knowledge (M=26.89, = SD=7.72) and practices (M=41.60, SD=6.46), with large effect size (Cohen's d = 1.30) and small effect size (Cohen's d = 0.30) in knowledge and practices, respectively. Attitude scores were similar across area (Urban: M=53.98, SD=5.15; Rural: M=52.03, SD=4.01). Females exhibited more positive attitudes (p=0.006) and better practices (p<0.001) than males. Knowledge and practices improved with age and grade, but attitudes remained consistent. Weak positive correlations were found between knowledge and attitude (r=0.156, p=0.007) and between knowledge and practice (r=0.289, p<0.001). Conclusion : This study reveals significant urban-rural disparities in knowledge and practices, influenced by age, gender, and grade. Social-learning theory-based educational intervention programs are needed to bridge these gaps, particularly in rural schools, to foster sustainable waste-management behaviours. Health sciences/Health care Health sciences/Medical research Environmental Education KAP model middle-stage rural urban waste management Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Introduction Environmental education is critical for fostering awareness and shaping students' perspectives toward sustainable development (Stevenson et al., 2013). Schools play a pivotal role in promoting eco-conscious behaviours from an early age, contributing significantly to building a sustainable future (Hungerford & Volk, 1990 ). Conservation, resource management, and environmental sustainability ideals are instilled when sustainability is incorporated into the school curriculum. Teaching students sustainable living practices prioritising recycling, resource reuse, and waste reduction is a key strategy for fostering responsible behaviours (Nabor & Ortega-Dela Cruz, 2022). Schools must set an example of sustainable behaviour by implementing waste reduction plans, renewable energy systems, and recycling efforts (Bui et al., 2020 ). Integrating environmental education into the curriculum prepares students to be responsible citizens, equipping the next generation to tackle urgent ecological issues and contribute to a sustainable future (Hungerford & Volk, 1990 ). Theoretical framework: The Knowledge, Attitude, and Practices (KAP) model The Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice (KAP) model is a widely used framework in social research to assess what individuals know, believe, and do regarding a specific issue (Ahmad et al., 2015 ). Rooted in Bandura's (1976) social learning theory, Ajzen's (1991) theory of planned behaviour, and Rogers' (1995) diffusion of innovation theory, the KAP model informs this study's examination of solid waste management behaviours. Bandura ( 1976 ) posits that behaviours are learned through social contexts, such as school environments, which shape students' waste management practices. (Ajzen 1991 ) theory links knowledge and attitudes to behavioural intentions, supporting the hypothesis that knowledge influences waste management practices. (Rogers 1995) diffusion of innovation theory suggests that knowledge acquisition precedes attitude formation and practice adoption, guiding the study's exploration of KAP correlations. The KAP model uses structured questionnaires to quantify knowledge, attitudes, and practices, identifying gaps that inform interventions (Andrade et al., 2020 ). In this study, the KAP model evaluates students' understanding of waste types, disposal methods, and recycling (knowledge), their beliefs about waste management (attitudes), and their engagement in sustainable practices (practices). By applying this framework, the study identifies urban-rural disparities and demographic influences on waste management behaviours, contributing to the design of targeted educational programs (Hungerford & Volk, 1990 ). A KAP survey should be conducted before an intervention or awareness campaign. The survey results will provide baseline data for future program success evaluations and the inputs required to develop an effective program. After the intervention, the same surveys should be conducted again to assess its effectiveness. If required, interim KAP assessments may also be planned to ascertain whether the program meets expectations and to implement adjustments as needed. Objectives To assess the extent of knowledge, attitudes, and practices scores regarding solid waste management among rural and urban, middle-stage school students. To assess the effect size of the independent variables (age, grade, gender, and area) on KAP scores. Hypotheses H1 : Significant variations in KAP scores exist among students based on selected independent variables (age, gender, grade, and area). H2 : A correlation exists between knowledge, attitude, and practices Methodology A descriptive and cross-sectional research design examined the knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) regarding solid waste management among middle-stage students in rural and urban schools. Six schools were purposively selected for the study: three urban and three rural schools. Within each selected school, stratified random sampling was used to ensure a proportional representation across all grades (6th, 7th, and 8th ). Approximately 30 students were selected through stratified random sampling from each grade, targeting 90 students in each school. The sample size was determined using Cochran's formula. 384 students were calculated with a 95% confidence level and 5% margin of error. However, a larger sample was collected to ensure robust representation across grades and areas. 720 questionnaires were distributed, and 678 complete responses were obtained (response rate: 94.2%), which exceeded the minimum required sample size and ensured the statistical validity of the findings. Post-hoc power analysis using G*Power 3.1.9.4 confirmed that this sample provided strong statistical power (> 99%) for detecting medium effect sizes (f = 0.25) in planned ANOVA comparisons across grade levels (α = 0.05), well above the conventional threshold of 0.80 (Cohen, 1988). Data Collection Tool A structured questionnaire was developed to assess the students' knowledge, attitudes, and practices. The data collection tool was divided into four sections: Demographic information, knowledge scale, attitude scale, and practices scale. The Delphi method was used to validate the questionnaire, and out of 197 generated items, 128 were finally selected. The reliability of the questionnaire was determined using JAMOVI 2.6.44. software. Knowledge scale (α = 0.88), Attitude scale (α = 0.86) and Practice scale (α = 0.91) as shown in Fig. 2 . Statistical Analysis Descriptive statistics (means, median, and standard deviations) were calculated. Inferential statistics were used to test hypotheses regarding the effects of demographic variables on students' KAP using SPSS software (ANOVA, t-tests, correlation analysis). Hypothetical Relationship between Variables: The schematic diagram in Fig. 3 shows the hypothetical relationship between selected independent and dependent variables. Findings The findings were obtained by analysing the data collected through a questionnaire. The questionnaire was divided into four sections: Section 1: Demographic Profile of Students Figure 4 shows that (56.34%) of the students were male and the rest were females, followed by the majority of the students aged 12-13 (68.14%). (35.25%) of the students were from grade 8 th , one-third from grade 7th, and 50% belonged to urban area schools. Section 2: Knowledge scale The solid waste management knowledge assessment comprised 85 statements on waste types, disposal methods, and waste management methods. The data showed disparities between rural and urban school students' performance. Urban students demonstrated significantly superior knowledge levels, with 70.20% of urban students achieving moderate knowledge scores, compared to only 41.00% of rural students. Conversely, 58.99% of rural students exhibited low knowledge levels, as compared to 25.36% of urban students as shown in Table 1. The mean knowledge scores further substantiated these disparities, with urban students achieving significantly higher scores (M = 37.25, SD = 11.76) than their rural counterparts (M = 26.89, SD = 7.72). When normalised to a 0-1 scale, urban students achieved 0.42 compared to rural students' 0.33, as shown in Table 4. Table 1: Distribution of Knowledge Scores by Area Area High Knowledge (%) Modera t e Knowledge (%) Low Knowledge (%) Urban 04.42 70.20 25.36 Rural 00.00 41.00 58.99 Section 3: Attitude Scale Attitude assessment revealed more homogeneous patterns, with most students demonstrating a neutral attitude towards solid waste management. Rural students showed 93.51% neutral attitudes compared to 77.87% among urban students. As shown in Table 2, 21.53% showed positive attitudes as compared to 05.89% in rural students. The mean attitude score was between urban (M = 53.98, SD = 5.15) and rural (M = 52.03, SD = 4.01). On the normalised 0-3 scale, urban students scored 2.15 compared to rural students 2.06, as shown in Table 4. Table 2: Distribution of A ttitude Scores by Area Area Posi tive A ttitude (%) Neutral A ttitude (%) Negative A ttitude (%) Urban 21.53 77.87 0.58 Rural 05.89 93.51 0.58 Section 4: Practice Scale Practice assessment demonstrated significant differences among area. Urban students exhibited better waste management practices, with 53.39% achieving neutral practice and 6.19% showing good practice. In contrast, 70.79% of rural students displayed poor practices, with none of them achieving good practice levels Table 3. The mean difference between urban (M = 47.60, SD = 11.27) and rural (M = 41.60, SD = 6.46) areas was significant. On the normalised 0-5 scale, urban students achieved 2.68 compared to rural students 2.33, as shown in Table 4. Table 3: Distribution of Practices Scores by Area Area Good Practices (%) Neutral Practices (%) Bad Practices (%) Urban 06.19 53.39 40.41 Rural 00.00 29.20 70.79 Table 4: Comparison of KAP scores between Urban and Rural KAP Domain Urban Mean Score Rural Mean Score Knowledge (Out of 1) 0.42 0.33 Attitude (Out of 3) 2.15 2.06 Practice (Out of 5) 2.68 2.33 Statistical Significance Testing Normality Assessment and Test Selection Normality testing was performed. Skewness and Kurtosis were analysed, revealing highly positive skewness and kurtosis for practice scores Table 5, which showed that knowledge and attitude scores were normally distributed, and practice scores were not. High skewness of practice scores could suggest inconsistent adoption of waste management behaviours in rural students, likely due to limited infrastructure, education, awareness, and resources. Table 5: Descriptive Statistics Test of KAP Scores and Normality KAP Domain Area Mean Score SD Skewness Kurtosis Statistics S.E. Statistic S.E. Knowledge Score Urban 37.25 11.76 0.42 0.94 -0.27 0.18 Rural 26.89 7.72 Attitude Score Urban 53.98 5.15 0.12 0.94 -0.87 0.18 Rural 52.03 4.01 Practice Score Urban 47.60 11.27 1.86 0.94 3.52 0.18 Rural 41.60 6.46 Testing of Research Hypotheses H01: There exists no variation in the extent of knowledge, attitude, and practices regarding solid waste management among the students of selected schools of Halol, Gujarat, due to their selected independent variables. To assess the gender and area-based differences among students regarding their knowledge and attitude t-test was applied, and a Mann-Whitney U test for practices Gender-based Differences Table 6 revealed differential patterns across the three KAP domains by gender. For knowledge scores, males showed slightly higher means, but the difference was not statistically significant (t = 1.68, df = 584.92, p = 0.093, Cohen's d = 0.20). However, significant gender differences emerged in attitude scores, with females demonstrating more positive attitudes toward solid waste management compared to males (t = -2.77, df = 587.93, p = 0.006, Cohen's d = 0.33), representing a medium effect size. Practice scores exhibited a highly significant gender disparity. The Mann-Whitney U test revealed females significantly outperformed males in waste management practices (U = 50,109.50, Z = -2.56, p = 0.011, Cohen's d = 0.10), with females achieving higher mean ranks (398.53) compared to males (280.47), with small effect sizes as shown in Table 7. Area-based disparity Table 6 t-test analysis revealed that urban students had substantially superior knowledge scores compared to rural school students (t = -13.51, df = 591.20, p < 0.001, Cohen's d = 1.30), with a mean difference of 10.45 points with large effect size. However, attitude scores showed no significant variation between urban and rural students (t = -0.56, df = 676, p = 0.575, Cohen's d = 0.04). Practice scores also revealed a significant difference favouring urban students (U = 37,451.00, Z = -7.90, p < 0.001, Cohen's d = 0.30), although with a small effect size Table 7. Table 6: t-Test for Gender-Area-based Differences in Knowledge and Attitude Scores Variable M.D. t-value df p-value Cohen's d Gender Male Female 1.50 1.68 584.92 0.093 0.20 Male Female -1.03 -2.77 587.93 0.006 0.33 Area Rural Urban -10.45 -13.51 591.20 < 0.001 1.30 Rural Urban -0.204 -0.56 676 0.575 0.04 NOTE: M.D. = Mean Difference, df = Degree of Freedom, Variance Assumption = Equal Variance Not assumed Table 7: Mann-Whitney U test for Gender and Area-Based Differences in Practice Scores Variable N Mean Rank Sum of Ranks U Z p-value Cohen's d Gender Male 382 322.68 123,262.50 50109.50 -2.56 0.11 0.10 Female 296 361.21 106,918.50 Area Rural 339 280.47 95,081.00 37451.00 -7.90 0.001 0.30 Urban 339 398.53 135,100.00 To assess the grade and age influence on knowledge and attitude, ANOVA was applied, and the Kruskal-Wallis H test for practices. Grade and Age Influences One-way ANOVA results Table 8 demonstrated significantly better knowledge scores Students in higher grades (F = 27.49, df = 2,675, p < 0.001, η² = 0.075), with 8 th grade students outperforming both 6 th (mean difference = 7.214, p < 0.001) and 7 th grade students (mean difference = 5.458, p < 0.001) with medium effect size However, attitude scores remained consistent across academic levels (F = 1.092, df = 2,675, p = 0.336). Table 8 showed significant age-related variations in both knowledge (F = 3.68, df = 2,675, p = 0.026, η² = 0.011) and attitude (F = 4.49, df = 2, 675, p = 0.012, η² = 0.013) scores with small size effect. Post-hoc analyses using Tukey HSD revealed that 8th-grade students performed better than 7th and 6th-grade students in knowledge. Older students (14-15 years) significantly outperformed younger students (10-11 years) in both knowledge (mean difference = 4.211, p = 0.022) and attitude components (mean difference = 1.922, p = 0.010), as shown in Table 9. Practice scores varied significantly by grade (χ² = 26.53, df = 2, p < 0.001), with progressive improvement from 6 th grade (mean rank = 285.93) to 8 th grade (mean rank = 376.75). However, age did not show significant results (χ² = 0.466, df = 2, p = 0.792) as shown in Table 10. Table 8: One-way ANOVA Results for Age and Grade Influence on Knowledge and Attitude Scores Variable Source SS df MS F p η² Knowledge Scores Grade Between Groups 6562.123 2 3281.061 27.49 < 0.001 0.075 Within Groups 80553.854 675 119.339 Age Between Groups 939.50 2 469.75 3.68 0.026 0.011 Within Groups 86176.47 675 127.68 Attitude Scores Grade Between Groups 48.552 2 24.276 1.092 0.336 0.003 Within Groups 15008.376 675 22.235 Age Between Groups 197.47 2 98.73 4.49 0.012 0.013 Within Groups 14859.46 675 22.014 Table 10: Kruskal-Wallis H Test for Grade and Age Influence on Practice Scores Practice Scores Variable Group N Mean Rank X 2 df p Grade 6 th Grade 221 285.93 26.53 2 0.00 7 th Grade 218 352.97 8 th Grade 239 376.75 Age (In years) 10-11 years 132 329.20 0.466 2 0.79 12-13 years 463 341.70 14-15 years 83 343.60 Table 9: Tukey HSD Post-Hoc Test for Grade and Age influence on Knowledge and a ttitude Domains Group Comparison Mean Diff Sig. (p) Significant Grade Knowledge 6 th vs 8 th Grade -7.214 0.000 0.05 7 th vs 8 th Grade -5.458 0.000 0.05 Age Knowledge 10-11 years vs 14-15 years -4.211 0.022 0.05 Attitude 10-11 years vs 14-15 years -1.922 0.010 0.05 12-13 years vs 14-15 years -1.431 0.029 0.05 H2: A correlation exists between knowledge, attitude, and practices of dependent variables. To test H2, Spearman's correlation coefficients were calculated for the KAP scores. The analysis revealed significant but weak positive associations between the knowledge and attitude domains (r = 0.156, p = 0.007) and between the knowledge and practice domains (r = 0.289, p < 0.001). However, the attitude and practice domains showed no significant correlation (r = 0.015, p = 0.702) as shown in Table 11. Table 11: Spearman's Correlations between KAP Domains KAP Domains r p Knowledge-Attitude 0.156** 0.007 Knowledge-Practice 0.289 0.000 Attitude-Practice 0.015 0.702 Note N = 678, p < 0.01 (**) 2-tailed Discussions This study reveals significant urban-rural disparities in solid waste management knowledge and practices among middle-stage students in Halol taluka, Gujarat. Urban students exhibited higher knowledge (M = 37.25, SD = 11.76) and better practices (M = 47.60, SD = 11.27) than rural students (Knowledge: M = 26.89, SD = 7.72; Practices: M = 41.60, SD = 6.46), with large (Cohen's d = 1.30) and small (Cohen's d = 0.30) effect sizes, respectively. Attitudes showed no significant urban-rural differences (Urban: M = 53.98, SD = 5.15; Rural: M = 52.03, SD = 4.01; p = 0.575), aligning with Ajzen's (1991) theory of planned behaviour, where social influences shape attitudes uniformly across contexts. These findings resonate with Yadav and Medhavi ( 2024 ) and Dolipas et al. ( 2018 ), who highlight urban advantages due to better access to educational resources and infrastructure. Rural knowledge gaps, particularly in composting and 3R (Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle) principles (weighted means: 0.16–0.26), echo Mkhonto and Mnguni ( 2021 ) and Richard ( 2020 ) , reflecting limited practical exposure. Gender differences were notable, with females showing more positive attitudes (p = 0.006, Cohen's d = 0.33) and better practices (p < 0.001, Cohen's d = 0.10) than males, consistent with Yadav and Medhavi ( 2024 ) an d Marín et al. ( 2024 ). Age and grade influenced outcomes, with older students (14–15 years) showing higher knowledge (p = 0.026, η²=0.011) and attitudes (p = 0.012, η²=0.013), and 8th graders outperforming others in knowledge (p < 0.001, η²=0.075) and practices (p < 0.001), supporting Liu et al. ( 2024 ) and Ali et al. ( 2022 ). Weak positive correlations between knowledge-attitude (r = 0.156, p = 0.007) and knowledge-practice (r = 0.289, p < 0.001), but none between attitude-practice (r = 0.015, p = 0.702), indicate a knowledge-practice gap, consistent with Ahmad et al. ( 2015 ) and Fenitra et al. ( 2025 ). This supports Hungerford and Volk ( 1990 ) , who argue that knowledge is a prerequisite for behavioural change, yet external factors like infrastructure, as noted by Meijer et al. ( 2015 ), are critical. The non-normal distribution of practice scores (p < 0.001) highlights variability in rural areas, underscoring the need for practical training in composting and recycling to bridge KAP gaps. Conclusion This study applies the KAP model to waste management among middle-stage students in Gujarat, highlighting urban-rural disparities. The non-normal distribution of practice scores in rural areas indicates heterogeneous behaviours, necessitating tailored interventions. Weak KAP correlations highlight that knowledge alone is insufficient for behavioural change, necessitating holistic educational strategies integrating practical training, such as composting and recycling programs. Targeted interventions in rural schools and infrastructure to model eco-conscious behaviours are essential to foster sustainable practices. This study advances the KAP model by identifying demographic variables shaping waste management behaviours in a developing-world context. Future longitudinal research should evaluate the sustained impact of such interventions, contributing to sustainable waste management practices and a sustainable future. Limitations This study, while providing valuable insights into urban-rural disparities in solid waste management KAP among middle-stage students, has several limitations that should be considered when interpreting the results. First, the cross-sectional design precludes the establishment of causal relationships between demographic variables (e.g., age, gender, grade, and area) and KAP outcomes; longitudinal studies would be needed to track changes over time and assess the impact of interventions. Second, reliance on self-reported data via questionnaires may introduce social desirability bias, where participants overreport positive attitudes or practices to align with perceived expectations. Third, the sample was limited to 678 students from six schools in Halol taluka, Gujarat, which restricts generalizability to other regions, cultural contexts, or socioeconomic groups in India. Additionally, the study did not control for confounding factors such as family income, parental education, or access to external environmental education resources, which could influence KAP scores. Declarations Funding Declaration This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors . Ethics Approval and Consent The study was approved by the Institutional Ethics Committee for Human Research (IECHR), Faculty of Family and Community Sciences, The Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, India (Approval No. IECHR/FCSc/P.hd./10/2023/03). Informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to their inclusion in the study. For participants under the age of 18 years, consent was obtained from their parents/guardians and school administrators. The study was conducted in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Author Contribution A.G.- wrotethe original manuscript, and Urvashi Mishra guide it References Ahmad, J., Noor, S. M., & Ismail, N. (2015). Investigating students' environmental knowledge, attitudes, practices, and communication. Asian Social Science, 11 (16), 284–293. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v11n16p284 Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behaviour. Organisational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 50 (2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T Ali, S. A., Bekela, N., & Mengistu, M. (2022). Attitude, awareness, concern, and practice (AACP) towards solid waste management among university students: A case study in Kotebe Education University, Addis Ababa. International Journal of Waste Resources , 12 (2), 461. https://doi.org/10.35248/2252-5211.22.12.461 Andrade, C., Menon, V., Ameen, S., & Kumar Praharaj, S. (2020). Designing and conducting knowledge, attitude, and practice surveys in psychiatry: Practical guidance. Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine, 42 (5), 478–481. https://doi.org/10.1177/0253717620946111 Bandura, A. (1976). Self-reinforcement: Theoretical and methodological considerations. Behaviourism, 4 (2), 135–155. https://philpapers.org/rec/BANSTA Bui, T. D., Tsai, F. M., Tseng, M.-L., Wu, K.-J., & Chiu, A. S. F. (2020). Effective municipal solid waste management capability under uncertainty in Vietnam: Utilising economic efficiency and technology to foster social mobilisation and environmental integrity. Journal of Cleaner Production, 259 , 120981. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120981 Dolipas, B., Ramos, J. L., Alimondo, M., & Madinno, C. (2018). Waste handling practices and values of university students. Athens Journal of Health , 5 (3), 213–232. https://doi.org/10.30958/ajh.5-3-3 Fenitra, R. M., Sembiring, E., Dangkua, A. R., & Al Khoeriyah, Z. (2025). Examining the impact of visual prompts and intervention campaign materials on waste sorting: Knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) and a mixed-methods approach. Cleaner Waste Systems, 12, 100390. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clwas.2025.100390 Hungerford, H. R., & Volk, T. L. (1990). Changing learner behaviour through environmental education. The Journal of Environmental Education, 21 (3), 8–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958964.1990.10753743 Liu S, Liu X, Li Y, Yang D, Li F and Yang J (2024). College students' knowledge, attitudes, and practices of garbage sorting and their associations: a cross-sectional study of several universities in Beijing, China. Front. Public Health 12:1328583 . doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1328583 Marín D, Calle N, Arango V, Betancur P, Pérez M, Orozco LY, Marín-Ochoa B, Ceballos JC, López L and Rueda ZV (2024). Knowledge, attitudes and practices about air pollution and its health effects in 6th to 11th-grade students in Colombia: a cross-sectional study. Front. Public Health 12:1390780 . doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1390780 Meijer, S. S., Catacutan, D., Ajayi, O. C., Sileshi, G. W., & Nieuwenhuis, M. (2015). The role of knowledge, attitudes and perceptions in the uptake of agricultural and agroforestry innovations among smallholder farmers in sub-Saharan Africa. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 13 (1), 40–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/14735903.2014.912493 Mkhonto, B., & Mnguni, L. (2021). The impact of a Rural School-Based Solid Waste Management Project on learners' perceptions, attitudes and understanding of recycling. Recycling , 6 (4), 71. https://doi.org/10.3390/recycling6040071 Nabor, A. P., Jr., & Ortega-Dela Cruz, R. A. (2022). Pupils' awareness, knowledge, attitude and practice of school-based solid waste management in a public elementary school in the Philippines. UW Journal of Social Sciences, 5 (1), 1–14. Richard, A. K. (2020). Possibility of improving solid waste management in senior high schools in the Ashanti region of Ghana. African Journal of Environmental Science and Technology , 14 (8), 231–240. https://doi.org/10.5897/ajest2020.2859 Yadav, U., & Medhavi, S. (2024). Exploring the knowledge, attitude, and practice (KAP) among youth towards circular economy practices in Lucknow. South Indian Journal of Social Sciences , 22 (4), 217–230. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-7513492","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":513086498,"identity":"ac467013-7d34-4572-99d8-e6a8fab715fd","order_by":0,"name":"Astha Garg astha","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Astha","middleName":"Garg","lastName":"astha","suffix":""},{"id":513086499,"identity":"30401b54-2f0b-4b82-917d-bb0481ea0edd","order_by":1,"name":"Dr. Urvashi Mishra urvashi","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"Dr.","firstName":"Urvashi","middleName":"Mishra","lastName":"urvashi","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-09-02 05:31:42","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7513492/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7513492/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":91512859,"identity":"3a1f21c5-e36b-4198-9b7f-05fdda8d867e","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-17 08:54:15","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":54181,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eSee image above for figure legend\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7513492/v1/01a1574d4de171d7f4c3016e.png"},{"id":91513442,"identity":"249ac4d0-2e18-41a2-98f7-ac01555b4de2","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-17 09:02:14","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":123735,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData Collection Tool\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7513492/v1/a3f92dc9bbfe707a24662082.png"},{"id":91512865,"identity":"32af2ad4-bb87-4b42-a081-cb1f3812a990","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-17 08:54:16","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":115425,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSchematic Diagram of Conceptual Framework\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7513492/v1/d3718d34246343a476148a1a.png"},{"id":91512851,"identity":"80ce9f3b-94e2-49c7-9842-5c4805fb0cc1","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-17 08:54:14","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":40439,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eSee image above for figure legend\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"4.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7513492/v1/79d2618d054fc414469c26ff.png"},{"id":105365319,"identity":"80495b47-ce6f-4c26-a0ed-e4fc3a010efb","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-03-25 08:29:24","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1801406,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7513492/v1/69927d05-2702-4878-8e58-0fed2fd58f78.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Application of KAP Model in Waste Management Education: A case study of Gujarat","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eEnvironmental education is critical for fostering awareness and shaping students' perspectives toward sustainable development (Stevenson et al., 2013). Schools play a pivotal role in promoting eco-conscious behaviours from an early age, contributing significantly to building a sustainable future (Hungerford \u0026amp; Volk, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1990\u003c/span\u003e). Conservation, resource management, and environmental sustainability ideals are instilled when sustainability is incorporated into the school curriculum. Teaching students sustainable living practices prioritising recycling, resource reuse, and waste reduction is a key strategy for fostering responsible behaviours (Nabor \u0026amp; Ortega-Dela Cruz, 2022). Schools must set an example of sustainable behaviour by implementing waste reduction plans, renewable energy systems, and recycling efforts (Bui et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Integrating environmental education into the curriculum prepares students to be responsible citizens, equipping the next generation to tackle urgent ecological issues and contribute to a sustainable future (Hungerford \u0026amp; Volk, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1990\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Theoretical framework: The Knowledge, Attitude, and Practices (KAP) model","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice (KAP) model is a widely used framework in social research to assess what individuals know, believe, and do regarding a specific issue (Ahmad et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). Rooted in Bandura's (1976) social learning theory, Ajzen's (1991) theory of planned behaviour, and Rogers' (1995) diffusion of innovation theory, the KAP model informs this study's examination of solid waste management behaviours. Bandura (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1976\u003c/span\u003e) posits that behaviours are learned through social contexts, such as school environments, which shape students' waste management practices. (Ajzen \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1991\u003c/span\u003e) theory links knowledge and attitudes to behavioural intentions, supporting the hypothesis that knowledge influences waste management practices. (Rogers 1995) diffusion of innovation theory suggests that knowledge acquisition precedes attitude formation and practice adoption, guiding the study's exploration of KAP correlations.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe KAP model uses structured questionnaires to quantify knowledge, attitudes, and practices, identifying gaps that inform interventions (Andrade et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). In this study, the KAP model evaluates students' understanding of waste types, disposal methods, and recycling (knowledge), their beliefs about waste management (attitudes), and their engagement in sustainable practices (practices). By applying this framework, the study identifies urban-rural disparities and demographic influences on waste management behaviours, contributing to the design of targeted educational programs (Hungerford \u0026amp; Volk, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1990\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eA KAP survey should be conducted before an intervention or awareness campaign. The survey results will provide baseline data for future program success evaluations and the inputs required to develop an effective program. After the intervention, the same surveys should be conducted again to assess its effectiveness. If required, interim KAP assessments may also be planned to ascertain whether the program meets expectations and to implement adjustments as needed.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eObjectives\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003col\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo assess the extent of knowledge, attitudes, and practices scores regarding solid waste management among rural and urban, middle-stage school students.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo assess the effect size of the independent variables (age, grade, gender, and area) on KAP scores.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e\u003ch2\u003eHypotheses\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cul\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eH1\u003c/b\u003e: Significant variations in KAP scores exist among students based on selected independent variables (age, gender, grade, and area).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eH2\u003c/b\u003e: A correlation exists between knowledge, attitude, and practices\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ul\u003e"},{"header":"Methodology","content":"\u003cp\u003eA descriptive and cross-sectional research design examined the knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) regarding solid waste management among middle-stage students in rural and urban schools. Six schools were purposively selected for the study: three urban and three rural schools. Within each selected school, stratified random sampling was used to ensure a proportional representation across all grades (6th, 7th, and 8th ). Approximately 30 students were selected through stratified random sampling from each grade, targeting 90 students in each school. The sample size was determined using Cochran's formula. 384 students were calculated with a 95% confidence level and 5% margin of error. However, a larger sample was collected to ensure robust representation across grades and areas. 720 questionnaires were distributed, and 678 complete responses were obtained (response rate: 94.2%), which exceeded the minimum required sample size and ensured the statistical validity of the findings.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePost-hoc power analysis using G*Power 3.1.9.4 confirmed that this sample provided strong statistical power (\u0026gt; 99%) for detecting medium effect sizes (f = 0.25) in planned ANOVA comparisons across grade levels (α = 0.05), well above the conventional threshold of 0.80 \u003cb\u003e(Cohen, 1988).\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eData Collection Tool\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA structured questionnaire was developed to assess the students' knowledge, attitudes, and practices. The data collection tool was divided into four sections: Demographic information, knowledge scale, attitude scale, and practices scale. The Delphi method was used to validate the questionnaire, and out of 197 generated items, 128 were finally selected. The reliability of the questionnaire was determined using JAMOVI 2.6.44. software. Knowledge scale (α = 0.88), Attitude scale (α = 0.86) and Practice scale (α = 0.91) as shown in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eStatistical Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eDescriptive statistics (means, median, and standard deviations) were calculated. Inferential statistics were used to test hypotheses regarding the effects of demographic variables on students' KAP using SPSS software (ANOVA, t-tests, correlation analysis).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eHypothetical Relationship between Variables:\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe schematic diagram in Fig.\u0026nbsp;3 shows the hypothetical relationship between selected independent and dependent variables.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Findings","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe findings were obtained by analysing the data collected through a questionnaire. The questionnaire was divided into four sections:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSection 1: Demographic Profile of Students\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFigure 4\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eshows that (56.34%) of the students were male and the rest were females, followed by the majority of the students aged 12-13 (68.14%). (35.25%) of the students were from grade 8\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e, one-third from grade 7th, and 50% belonged to urban area schools.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch3\u003eSection 2: Knowledge scale\u003c/h3\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe solid waste management knowledge assessment comprised 85 statements on waste types, disposal methods, and waste management methods. The data showed disparities between rural and urban school students' performance. Urban students demonstrated significantly superior knowledge levels, with 70.20% of urban students achieving moderate knowledge scores, compared to only 41.00% of rural students. Conversely, 58.99% of rural students exhibited low knowledge levels, as compared to 25.36% of urban students as shown in \u003cstrong\u003eTable 1.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe mean knowledge scores further substantiated these disparities, with urban students achieving significantly higher scores (M = 37.25, SD = 11.76) than their rural counterparts (M = 26.89, SD = 7.72). When normalised to a 0-1 scale, urban students achieved 0.42 compared to rural students' 0.33, as shown in \u003cstrong\u003eTable 4.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"4\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 504px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 1: Distribution of Knowledge Scores by Area\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eArea\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHigh\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eKnowledge (%)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eModera\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003et\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ee Knowledge (%)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLow\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eKnowledge (%)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eUrban\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e04.42\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e70.20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e25.36\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRural\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e41.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e58.99\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSection 3: Attitude Scale\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAttitude assessment revealed more homogeneous patterns, with most students demonstrating a neutral attitude towards solid waste management. Rural students showed 93.51% neutral attitudes compared to 77.87% among urban students. As shown in \u003cstrong\u003eTable 2,\u003c/strong\u003e 21.53% showed positive attitudes as compared to 05.89% in rural students.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe mean attitude score was between urban (M = 53.98, SD = 5.15) and rural (M = 52.03, SD = 4.01). On the normalised 0-3 scale, urban students scored 2.15 compared to rural students 2.06, as shown in \u003cstrong\u003eTable 4.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"4\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 504px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 2: Distribution of A\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ettitude\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;Scores by Area\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eArea\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePosi\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003etive\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eA\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ettitude\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(%)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNeutral\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eA\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ettitude\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(%)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNegative\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eA\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ettitude\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(%)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eUrban\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21.53\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e77.87\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.58\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRural\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e05.89\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e93.51\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.58\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSection 4: Practice Scale\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePractice assessment demonstrated significant differences among area. Urban students exhibited better waste management practices, with 53.39% achieving neutral practice and 6.19% showing good practice. In contrast, 70.79% of rural students displayed poor practices, with none of them achieving good practice levels \u003cstrong\u003eTable 3.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe mean difference between urban (M = 47.60, SD = 11.27) and rural (M = 41.60, SD = 6.46) areas was significant. On the normalised 0-5 scale, urban students achieved 2.68 compared to rural students 2.33, as shown in \u003cstrong\u003eTable 4.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"7\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 491px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 3: Distribution of Practices Scores by Area\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eArea\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGood\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePractices (%)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNeutral\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePractices (%)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eBad\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePractices (%)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eUrban\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e06.19\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e53.39\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e40.41\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRural\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e29.20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e70.79\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"7\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 99.8004%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 4: Comparison of KAP scores between Urban and Rural\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 158px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eKAP Domain\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eUrban\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMean Score\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRural\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMean Score\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 158px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eKnowledge (Out of 1)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.42\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.33\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 158px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAttitude (Out of 3)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.15\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.06\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 158px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePractice (Out of 5)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.68\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.33\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStatistical Significance Testing\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNormality Assessment and Test Selection\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eNormality testing was performed. Skewness and Kurtosis were analysed, revealing highly positive skewness and kurtosis for practice scores \u003cstrong\u003eTable 5,\u003c/strong\u003e which showed that knowledge and attitude scores were normally distributed, and practice scores were not. High skewness of practice scores could suggest inconsistent adoption of waste management behaviours in rural students, likely due to limited infrastructure, education, awareness, and resources.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"8\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 557px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 5: Descriptive Statistics Test of KAP Scores and Normality\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 132px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eKAP Domain\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 66px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eArea\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 66px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMean\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eScore\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSD\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;Skewness\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;Kurtosis\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 71px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStatistics\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eS.E.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 66px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStatistic\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eS.E.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 132px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eKnowledge Score\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 66px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUrban\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 66px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e37.25\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11.76\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 71px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.42\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.94\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 66px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.27\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.18\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 66px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRural\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 66px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e26.89\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.72\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 132px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAttitude Score\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 66px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUrban\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 66px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e53.98\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.15\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 71px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.94\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 66px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.87\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.18\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 66px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRural\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 66px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e52.03\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.01\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 132px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePractice Score\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 66px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUrban\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 66px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e47.60\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11.27\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 71px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.86\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.94\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 66px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.52\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.18\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 66px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRural\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 66px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e41.60\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 53px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6.46\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTesting of Research Hypotheses\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eH01:\u003c/strong\u003e There exists no variation in the extent of knowledge, attitude, and practices regarding solid waste management among the students of selected schools of Halol, Gujarat, due to their selected independent variables.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo assess the gender and area-based differences among students regarding\u0026nbsp;their\u0026nbsp;knowledge and attitude t-test was applied, and a Mann-Whitney U test for practices\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGender-based Differences\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 6\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003erevealed differential patterns across the three KAP domains by gender. For knowledge scores, males showed slightly higher means, but the difference was not statistically significant (t = 1.68, df = 584.92, p = 0.093, Cohen's d = 0.20). However, significant gender differences emerged in attitude scores, with females demonstrating more positive attitudes toward solid waste management compared to males (t = -2.77, df = 587.93, p = 0.006, Cohen's d = 0.33), representing a medium effect size. Practice scores exhibited a highly significant gender disparity. The Mann-Whitney U test revealed females significantly outperformed males in waste management practices (U = 50,109.50, Z = -2.56, p = 0.011, Cohen's d = 0.10), with females achieving higher mean ranks (398.53) compared to males (280.47), with small effect sizes\u0026nbsp;as shown in \u003cstrong\u003eTable 7.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eArea-based disparity\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 6\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003et-test analysis revealed that urban students had substantially superior knowledge scores compared to rural school students (t = -13.51, df = 591.20, p \u0026lt; 0.001, Cohen's d = 1.30), with a mean difference of 10.45 points with\u0026nbsp;large effect size. However, attitude scores showed no significant variation between urban and rural students (t = -0.56, df = 676, p = 0.575, Cohen's d = 0.04). Practice scores also revealed a significant difference favouring urban students (U = 37,451.00, Z = -7.90, p \u0026lt; 0.001, Cohen's d = 0.30), although with a small effect size \u003cstrong\u003eTable 7.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"567\"\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"12\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 491px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 6: t-Test for Gender-Area-based Differences in Knowledge and Attitude Scores\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eVariable\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eM.D.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003et-value\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003edf\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ep-value\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCohen's d\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGender\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;Male\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;Female\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.50\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.68\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e584.92\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.093\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-1.03\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-2.77\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e587.93\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.006\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.33\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eArea\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRural\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUrban\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-10.45\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-13.51\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e591.20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt; 0.001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.30\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRural\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUrban\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.204\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 57px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.56\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e676\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.575\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.04\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"13\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 100%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNOTE:\u003c/em\u003e M.D. = Mean Difference, df = Degree of Freedom, Variance Assumption = Equal Variance Not assumed\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 7: Mann-Whitney U test for Gender and Area-Based Differences in Practice Scores\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 83px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eVariable\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 41px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eN\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMean Rank\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSum of Ranks\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;U\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 55px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eZ\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ep-value\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCohen's d\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"12\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 491px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGender\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 83px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 41px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e382\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e322.68\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e123,262.50\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e50109.50\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 55px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-2.56\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 83px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 41px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e296\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e361.21\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e106,918.50\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 83px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eArea\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 41px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 55px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 83px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRural\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 41px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e339\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e280.47\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e95,081.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e37451.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 55px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-7.90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.30\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 83px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUrban\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 41px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e339\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 62px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e398.53\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e135,100.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 55px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo assess the grade and age influence on knowledge and attitude, ANOVA was applied, and the Kruskal-Wallis H test for practices.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGrade and Age Influences\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOne-way ANOVA results \u003cstrong\u003eTable 8\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003edemonstrated significantly better knowledge scores Students in higher grades (F = 27.49, df = 2,675, p \u0026lt; 0.001, η² = 0.075), with 8\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e grade students outperforming both 6\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e (mean difference = 7.214, p \u0026lt; 0.001) and 7\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e grade students (mean difference = 5.458, p \u0026lt; 0.001) with medium effect size\u0026nbsp;However, attitude scores remained consistent across academic levels (F = 1.092, df = 2,675, p = 0.336). \u003cstrong\u003eTable 8\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eshowed significant age-related variations in both knowledge (F = 3.68, df = 2,675, p = 0.026, η² = 0.011) and attitude (F = 4.49, df = 2, 675, p = 0.012, η² = 0.013) scores with small size effect. Post-hoc analyses using Tukey HSD revealed that 8th-grade students performed better than 7th and 6th-grade students in knowledge. Older students (14-15 years) significantly outperformed younger students (10-11 years) in both knowledge (mean difference = 4.211, p = 0.022) and attitude components (mean difference = 1.922, p = 0.010), as shown in \u003cstrong\u003eTable 9.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePractice scores varied significantly by grade (χ² = 26.53, df = 2, p \u0026lt; 0.001), with progressive improvement from 6\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e grade (mean rank = 285.93) to 8\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e grade (mean rank = 376.75). However, age did not show significant results (χ² = 0.466, df = 2, p = 0.792) as shown in\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eTable 10.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"601\"\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"15\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 601px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 8: One-way ANOVA Results for Age and Grade Influence on Knowledge and Attitude Scores\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eVariable\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.5035%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSource\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 16.2819%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSS\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 42px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003edf\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 82px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMS\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 55px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eF\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ep\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 73px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eη²\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"15\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 601px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eKnowledge Scores\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;Grade\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.5035%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBetween\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGroups\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 16.2819%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6562.123\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 42px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 82px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3281.061\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 55px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e27.49\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt; 0.001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 73px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.075\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.5035%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWithin Groups\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 16.2819%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e80553.854\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 42px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e675\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 82px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e119.339\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; Age\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.5035%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBetween\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGroups\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 16.2819%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e939.50\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 42px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 82px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e469.75\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 55px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.68\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.026\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 73px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.011\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.5035%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWithin Groups\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 16.2819%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e86176.47\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 42px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e675\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 82px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e127.68\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"15\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 601px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAttitude Scores\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;Grade\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.5035%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBetween\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGroups\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 16.2819%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e48.552\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 43px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 81px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e24.276\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 55px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.092\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.336\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 73px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.003\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.5035%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWithin Groups\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 16.2819%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15008.376\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 43px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e675\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 81px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e22.235\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;Age\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.5035%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBetween\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGroups\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 16.2819%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e197.47\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 43px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 81px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e98.73\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 55px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.49\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.012\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 73px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.013\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.5035%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWithin Groups\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 16.2819%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14859.46\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 43px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e675\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 81px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e22.014\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.5035%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 16.2819%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 43px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 81px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 55px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 73px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"15\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 601px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 10: Kruskal-Wallis H Test for Grade and Age Influence on Practice Scores\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"15\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 601px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePractice Scores\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eVariable\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGroup\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 51px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eN\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"4\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 94px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMean Rank\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 73px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eX\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 73px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003edf\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 93px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ep\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGrade\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e Grade\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 51px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e221\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"4\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 94px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e285.93\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 73px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e26.53\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 73px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 93px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e Grade\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 51px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e218\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"4\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 94px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e352.97\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e Grade\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 51px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e239\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"4\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 94px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e376.75\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAge\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(In years)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10-11 years\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 51px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e132\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"4\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 94px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e329.20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 73px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.466\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 73px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 93px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.79\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12-13 years\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 51px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e463\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"4\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 94px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e341.70\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 113px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14-15 years\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 51px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e83\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"4\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 94px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e343.60\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"526\"\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"5\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 526px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 9: Tukey HSD Post-Hoc Test for Grade and Age influence on Knowledge and a\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ettitude\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 92px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDomains\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 173px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGroup Comparison\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMean Diff\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSig. (p)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 86px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSignificant\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"5\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 526px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;Grade\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 92px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eKnowledge\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 173px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e vs 8\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e Grade\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-7.214\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 86px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e0.05\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 173px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e vs 8\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e Grade\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-5.458\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 86px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e0.05\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"5\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 526px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; Age\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 92px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eKnowledge\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 173px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10-11 years vs 14-15 years\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-4.211\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.022\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 86px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e0.05\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 92px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAttitude\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 173px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10-11 years vs 14-15 years\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-1.922\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.010\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 86px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e0.05\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 173px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12-13 years vs 14-15 years\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-1.431\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.029\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 86px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e0.05\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eH2:\u003c/strong\u003e A correlation exists between knowledge, attitude, and practices of dependent variables.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo test H2, Spearman's correlation coefficients were calculated for the KAP scores. The analysis revealed significant but weak positive associations between the knowledge and attitude domains (r = 0.156, p = 0.007) and between the knowledge and practice domains (r = 0.289, p \u0026lt; 0.001). However, the attitude and practice domains showed no significant correlation (r = 0.015, p = 0.702) as shown in \u003cstrong\u003eTable 11.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" class=\"fr-table-selection-hover\"\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"4\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 99.7429%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 11:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSpearman's Correlations between KAP Domains\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 227px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eKAP Domains\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003er\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 82px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ep\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 227px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eKnowledge-Attitude\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.156**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 82px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.007\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 227px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eKnowledge-Practice\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.289\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 82px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 227px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAttitude-Practice\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.015\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 82px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.702\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"4\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 100%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNote \u003cem\u003eN = 678, p \u0026lt; 0.01 (**) 2-tailed\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/table\u003e"},{"header":"Discussions","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study reveals significant urban-rural disparities in solid waste management knowledge and practices among middle-stage students in Halol taluka, Gujarat. Urban students exhibited higher knowledge (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;37.25, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;11.76) and better practices (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;47.60, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;11.27) than rural students (Knowledge: M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;26.89, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;7.72; Practices: M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;41.60, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;6.46), with large (Cohen's d\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.30) and small (Cohen's d\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.30) effect sizes, respectively. Attitudes showed no significant urban-rural differences (Urban: M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;53.98, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;5.15; Rural: M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;52.03, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4.01; p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.575), aligning with \u003cb\u003eAjzen's (1991)\u003c/b\u003e theory of planned behaviour, where social influences shape attitudes uniformly across contexts. These findings resonate with Yadav and Medhavi (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e\u003cb\u003e)\u003c/b\u003e and Dolipas et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e), who highlight urban advantages due to better access to educational resources and infrastructure. Rural knowledge gaps, particularly in composting and 3R (Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle) principles (weighted means: 0.16\u0026ndash;0.26), echo Mkhonto and Mnguni (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e\u003cb\u003e)\u003c/b\u003e and Richard (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e\u003cb\u003e)\u003c/b\u003e, reflecting limited practical exposure.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eGender differences were notable, with females showing more positive attitudes (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.006, Cohen's d\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.33) and better practices (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001, Cohen's d\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.10) than males, consistent with Yadav and Medhavi (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e\u003cb\u003e) an\u003c/b\u003ed Mar\u0026iacute;n et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Age and grade influenced outcomes, with older students (14\u0026ndash;15 years) showing higher knowledge (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.026, η\u0026sup2;=0.011) and attitudes (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.012, η\u0026sup2;=0.013), and 8th graders outperforming others in knowledge (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001, η\u0026sup2;=0.075) and practices (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), supporting Liu et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e) \u003cb\u003eand\u003c/b\u003e Ali et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWeak positive correlations between knowledge-attitude (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.156, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.007) and knowledge-practice (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.289, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), but none between attitude-practice (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.015, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.702), indicate a knowledge-practice gap, consistent with Ahmad et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e) \u003cb\u003eand\u003c/b\u003e Fenitra et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). This supports Hungerford and Volk (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1990\u003c/span\u003e\u003cb\u003e)\u003c/b\u003e, who argue that knowledge is a prerequisite for behavioural change, yet external factors like infrastructure, as noted by Meijer et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e), are critical. The non-normal distribution of practice scores (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) highlights variability in rural areas, underscoring the need for practical training in composting and recycling to bridge KAP gaps.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study applies the KAP model to waste management among middle-stage students in Gujarat, highlighting urban-rural disparities. The non-normal distribution of practice scores in rural areas indicates heterogeneous behaviours, necessitating tailored interventions. Weak KAP correlations highlight that knowledge alone is insufficient for behavioural change, necessitating holistic educational strategies integrating practical training, such as composting and recycling programs. Targeted interventions in rural schools and infrastructure to model eco-conscious behaviours are essential to foster sustainable practices. This study advances the KAP model by identifying demographic variables shaping waste management behaviours in a developing-world context. Future longitudinal research should evaluate the sustained impact of such interventions, contributing to sustainable waste management practices and a sustainable future.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec21\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eLimitations\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThis study, while providing valuable insights into urban-rural disparities in solid waste management KAP among middle-stage students, has several limitations that should be considered when interpreting the results. First, the cross-sectional design precludes the establishment of causal relationships between demographic variables (e.g., age, gender, grade, and area) and KAP outcomes; longitudinal studies would be needed to track changes over time and assess the impact of interventions. Second, reliance on self-reported data via questionnaires may introduce social desirability bias, where participants overreport positive attitudes or practices to align with perceived expectations. Third, the sample was limited to 678 students from six schools in Halol taluka, Gujarat, which restricts generalizability to other regions, cultural contexts, or socioeconomic groups in India. Additionally, the study did not control for confounding factors such as family income, parental education, or access to external environmental education resources, which could influence KAP scores.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding Declaration\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthics Approval and Consent\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe study was approved by the Institutional Ethics Committee for Human Research (IECHR), Faculty of Family and Community Sciences, The Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, India (Approval No. IECHR/FCSc/P.hd./10/2023/03). Informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to their inclusion in the study. For participants under the age of 18 years, consent was obtained from their parents/guardians and school administrators. The study was conducted in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eA.G.- wrotethe original manuscript, and Urvashi Mishra guide it\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAhmad, J., Noor, S. M., \u0026amp; Ismail, N. (2015). Investigating students\u0026apos; environmental knowledge, attitudes, practices, and communication. \u003cem\u003eAsian Social Science, 11\u003c/em\u003e(16), 284\u0026ndash;293. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v11n16p284\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAjzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behaviour. \u003cem\u003eOrganisational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 50\u003c/em\u003e(2), 179\u0026ndash;211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAli, S. A., Bekela, N., \u0026amp; Mengistu, M. (2022). Attitude, awareness, concern, and practice (AACP) towards solid waste management among university students: A case study in Kotebe Education University, Addis Ababa. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Waste Resources\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e12\u003c/em\u003e(2), 461. https://doi.org/10.35248/2252-5211.22.12.461\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAndrade, C., Menon, V., Ameen, S., \u0026amp; Kumar Praharaj, S. (2020). Designing and conducting knowledge, attitude, and practice surveys in psychiatry: Practical guidance. \u003cem\u003eIndian Journal of Psychological Medicine, 42\u003c/em\u003e(5), 478\u0026ndash;481. https://doi.org/10.1177/0253717620946111\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBandura, A. (1976). Self-reinforcement: Theoretical and methodological considerations. \u003cem\u003eBehaviourism, 4\u003c/em\u003e(2), 135\u0026ndash;155. https://philpapers.org/rec/BANSTA\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBui, T. D., Tsai, F. M., Tseng, M.-L., Wu, K.-J., \u0026amp; Chiu, A. S. F. (2020). Effective municipal solid waste management capability under uncertainty in Vietnam: Utilising economic efficiency and technology to foster social mobilisation and environmental integrity. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Cleaner Production, 259\u003c/em\u003e, 120981. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120981\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDolipas, B., Ramos, J. L., Alimondo, M., \u0026amp; Madinno, C. (2018). Waste handling practices and values of university students. \u003cem\u003eAthens Journal of Health\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e5\u003c/em\u003e(3), 213\u0026ndash;232. https://doi.org/10.30958/ajh.5-3-3\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFenitra, R. M., Sembiring, E., Dangkua, A. R., \u0026amp; Al Khoeriyah, Z. (2025). Examining the impact of visual prompts and intervention campaign materials on waste sorting: Knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) and a mixed-methods approach. \u003cem\u003eCleaner Waste Systems, 12,\u003c/em\u003e 100390. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clwas.2025.100390\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHungerford, H. R., \u0026amp; Volk, T. L. (1990). Changing learner behaviour through environmental education. \u003cem\u003eThe Journal of Environmental Education, 21\u003c/em\u003e(3), 8\u0026ndash;21. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958964.1990.10753743\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLiu S, Liu X, Li Y, Yang D, Li F and Yang J (2024). College students\u0026apos; knowledge, attitudes, and practices of garbage sorting and their associations: a cross-sectional study of several universities in Beijing, China. \u003cem\u003eFront.\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003ePublic Health 12:1328583\u003c/em\u003e. doi: \u003cu\u003e10.3389/fpubh.2024.1328583\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMar\u0026iacute;n D, Calle N, Arango V, Betancur P, P\u0026eacute;rez M, Orozco LY, Mar\u0026iacute;n-Ochoa B, Ceballos JC, L\u0026oacute;pez L and Rueda ZV (2024). Knowledge, attitudes and practices about air pollution and its health effects in 6th to 11th-grade students in Colombia: a cross-sectional study. \u003cem\u003eFront. Public Health 12:1390780\u003c/em\u003e. doi: \u003cu\u003e10.3389/fpubh.2024.1390780\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMeijer, S. S., Catacutan, D., Ajayi, O. C., Sileshi, G. W., \u0026amp; Nieuwenhuis, M. (2015). The role of knowledge, attitudes and perceptions in the uptake of agricultural and agroforestry innovations among smallholder farmers in sub-Saharan Africa. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 13\u003c/em\u003e(1), 40\u0026ndash;54. https://doi.org/10.1080/14735903.2014.912493\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMkhonto, B., \u0026amp; Mnguni, L. (2021). The impact of a Rural School-Based Solid Waste Management Project on learners\u0026apos; perceptions, attitudes and understanding of recycling. \u003cem\u003eRecycling\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e6\u003c/em\u003e(4), 71. https://doi.org/10.3390/recycling6040071\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNabor, A. P., Jr., \u0026amp; Ortega-Dela Cruz, R. A. (2022). Pupils\u0026apos; awareness, knowledge, attitude and practice of school-based solid waste management in a public elementary school in the Philippines. \u003cem\u003eUW Journal of Social Sciences, 5\u003c/em\u003e(1), 1\u0026ndash;14.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRichard, A. K. (2020). Possibility of improving solid waste management in senior high schools in the Ashanti region of Ghana. \u003cem\u003eAfrican Journal of Environmental Science and Technology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e14\u003c/em\u003e(8), 231\u0026ndash;240. https://doi.org/10.5897/ajest2020.2859\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eYadav, U., \u0026amp; Medhavi, S. (2024). Exploring the knowledge, attitude, and practice (KAP) among youth towards circular economy practices in Lucknow. \u003cem\u003eSouth Indian Journal of Social Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, 22 (4), 217\u0026ndash;230.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":true,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Environmental Education, KAP model, middle-stage, rural, urban, waste management","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7513492/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7513492/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePurpose\u003c/strong\u003e: This study aims to assess the knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) regarding waste management among middle-stage students (6\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e to 8\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e grade in rural and urban schools of Halol taluka, Gujarat, and to examine the influence of demographic variables on these domains.\u003cbr\u003e\n\u003cstrong\u003eMethods\u003c/strong\u003e: A descriptive research design was employed, using a stratified random sampling to select 678 students from six purposively chosen schools. A structured questionnaire was validated through pilot testing, expert validation, and reliability to assess knowledge (85 statements), attitudes (25 statements), and practices (18 questions) related to solid waste management. Data were analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics with IBM SPSS version 20 and JAMOVI 2.6.44.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResults\u003c/strong\u003e: Urban students demonstrated significantly higher knowledge (M=37.25, SD=11.76) and better practices (M=47.60, SD=11.27), compared to rural students' knowledge (M=26.89, = SD=7.72) and practices (M=41.60, SD=6.46), with large effect size (Cohen's d = 1.30) and small effect size (Cohen's d = 0.30) in knowledge and practices, respectively. Attitude scores were similar across area (Urban: M=53.98, SD=5.15; Rural: M=52.03, SD=4.01). Females exhibited more positive attitudes (p=0.006) and better practices (p\u0026lt;0.001) than males. Knowledge and practices improved with age and grade, but attitudes remained consistent. Weak positive correlations were found between knowledge and attitude (r=0.156, p=0.007) and between knowledge and practice (r=0.289, p\u0026lt;0.001).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConclusion\u003c/strong\u003e: This study reveals significant urban-rural disparities in knowledge and practices, influenced by age, gender, and grade. Social-learning theory-based educational intervention programs are needed to bridge these gaps, particularly in rural schools, to foster sustainable waste-management behaviours.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Application of KAP Model in Waste Management Education: A case study of Gujarat","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-09-17 08:53:42","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7513492/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"ce3c0a9a-3211-4572-82a3-2d6e2dfe70d3","owner":[],"postedDate":"September 17th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[{"id":54505650,"name":"Health sciences/Health care"},{"id":54505651,"name":"Health sciences/Medical research"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-03-25T08:27:15+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-09-17 08:53:42","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-7513492","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-7513492","identity":"rs-7513492","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}