Spiritual_Wellness_Holistic_Health_and_the_Practic

Health Education and Health Promotion 75
WHY HEALTH EDUCATION THEORY?
Theory is essential to any profession. It provides direction and organizes knowledge
into a pattern so that facts, information, data, observed activities, and learnings are
interconnected in a manner which takes on meaning that would not exist in isolation.
Thus interconnected learnings provide a basis, foundation, reason, and direction for
process activities and research endeavors. Health education has struggled to find
recognition as a separate discipline (Kreuter, 1979). The profession has focused on
“ process, ” taking learnings from other professions and fields and incorporating these
into health education methods and health promotion activities. Process is as much a
part of health education as theory ought to be. Unfortunately, process is picked as the
major area of focus because it is more fun and exciting than theory. However, without
a clear theoretical basis for the process, research and process methods become isolated
and fragmented activities. Health education/health promotion, of all professions, is
in a position to grasp and organize learning from the various fields it relies upon. Theory
sheds light on similarities in knowledge and processes which appear dissimilar and
disjointed, yet are heavily depended upon. Thus theory would be the machete which
would cut through and organize the jungle currently experienced by the field (Organ &
Hamner, 1982). When a diverse and fragmented body of knowledge exists, as in health
education and health promotion, sound theory becomes useful as a means of summarizing
diverse information into a body of knowledge. Theory allows a profession to
gather and handle large amounts of information and empirical data having a limited
number of propositions (Shaw, 1970). If health education were to be based theoretically,
it would have quick and easy approaches to presenting what we have learned
and believe about health education. This, in turn, would change the focus from so
much attention paid to process aspects of health education to turning the jungle of
fragmented information into useful data (Lipnickey, 1985; Lorig, 1985). In national
conferences, professional publications, textbooks, and in the classroom, health education
professionals cry out for more research. They plead “ to be recognized as a profession.
” “ We must justify and verify our credibility through research, ” is the cry. “ The
only way the medical profession and others will accept and recognize health education
as a separate profession is to demonstrate our worth through hard research. ” With an
element of truth in this cry, it is a mere echo in the classroom as the broader prayer
rings empty, for the research is fragmented and provides little direction for the profession
as a whole since it is not based on a solid organized theoretical health education
foundation. For clarification, it is not to say that much of the research is not based in a
recognized theoretical basis from another field, as it often is. A theoretical direction is
the basis for any solid research project. If a clearer health education theoretical base
became available, we would be prompted to do research which furthered the field
instead of conducting research which is done out of personal or committee interest, an
approach to be tolerated in a new and developing field (Oberteuffer, 1985).
If health education research could be done from a health education theoretical
base, research would be prompted which would cut through the thicket of mimicking