Virginia AHPERD_SpringSummer2026

ing/functioning philosophy where the individual decides based on what is best for them, a differentiated approach could be utilized. Offering options and different pathways preserves individual choice and allows for autonomous decision-making. Providing health-enhancing possibili ties with a plethora of variations and alternatives ensures that a spectrum of individuals can be accommodated and accounts for cultural backgrounds. Having students value the process is critical to long-term sustainability. With an instant response to most questions at our fin gertips today, content knowledge is no longer at the head of the list when prioritizing time and resources. Though, one may argue that trying to navigate the endless sea of information to ascertain credibility is necessary. However, a more efficient use of time for the health educator may be to learn about students on an individual level to determine their culturally related preferences. This has the potential to gain buy-in and theoretically improve the likelihood of sustained health-enhancing behavior. In addition, a health educator who is entuned with their students on a cultural level may lead to building a foundation of trust where then choice from health-enhancing behavior lists can occur with better odds of success. Advocating for a health-education philosophy that fo cuses on individuality may lead to benefits and improve ment for one’s community and thus, positive social change can occur. Consider the following example on the role an individual has on a population. If polling a random group in the USA, ask them to list everything they know about James Buchanan. Most likely limited responses would be collected with many not knowing the individual. If asked the same question but instead replace Buchanan with Abraham Lincoln, most likely a longer list would result with nearly everyone knowing this individual. Why do so few people know who the 15th president of the USA is but nearly 100% know 16th president? This and many other ex amples illustrate the power an individual can have when impacting positive social change on a population or com munity. Conclusion A well-developed teaching philosophy that is student centered, refined, and continuously self-reflected upon can guide the health educator in their pursuit toward facil itating learning, improved health, and ultimately a higher quality of life for students. Utilizing seminal research on health education philosophies provides a framework and foundation to build one’s own personal approach. Staying current in the health field is critical when guiding students while using the latest science and data, especially when aiming to improve and sustain healthy behaviors. Account ing for student’s culture and gearing planning, instructing, and assessing on an individual level ensures everyone can have choice, autonomy, and relevant guidance on one’s quest toward a health-enhancing lifestyle. A focus on in

dividuality has the potential to intrinsically empower one person that may then lead to uplifting the community in which they reside. An Independent Autonomous Behavior Change Philosophy may be one approach to achieve this ob jective. References Anderson, A. & Ronson, B. (2005). Democracy- The first principle of health promoting schools. The International Electronic Journal of Health Education, 8, 24-35. Black, J. M., Furney, S., Graf, H. M., & Nolte, A. E. (2010). Philosophical foundations of health education. Jossey-Bass. Campbell, T. C. & Campbell, T. M. (2016). The China study: Revised and expanded edition: The most comprehensive study of nutrition ever conducted and the startling implications for diet, weight loss, and long-term health. BenBella Books. Campbell, T. C. (2026). T. Colin Campbell center for nutrition studies. https://nutritionstudies.org/ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2024). Hand washing in communities: Clean hands save lives. https://www. cdc.gov/handwashing/index.html#:~:text=Keeping%20 hands%20clean%20can%20prevent,a%20cold%20 or%20the%20flu. Deci, E. L. (1971). Effects of externally mediated rewards on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 18 (1), 105–15. Dietrich, C. (2010). Decision making: Factors that influ ence decision making, heuristics used, and decision out comes. Inquiries Journal/Student Pulse, 2 (02), 1-3. Falk, S. (2023). Understanding the power of intrinsic motiva tion. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2023/03/ understand-the-power-of-intrinsic-motivation Fertman, C. I. (2002). Behavioral health and health educa tion: An emerging opportunity. Journal of Health Educa tion, 33 (2), 115-117. Freudenberg, N. (1982). Health education for social change: A strategy for public health in the US. International Jour nal of Health Education, 24 (3), 138-145. Gambescia, S. (2007). Discovering a philosophy of health education. Health Education & Behavior, 34 (5), 718-722. Gold, R. S. & Kelly, M. A. (1988). Is knowledge really power? Health Education, 19 (3), 43–49. Governali, J. F., Hodges, B. C. & Videto, D. M. (2005). Health education and behavior: Are school health educators in denial? American Journal of Health Education, 36 (4), 210 214. Greenberg, J. S. (1972). A theory of health education. New York State Journal of Health, Physical Education and Rec reation, 25 (1), 50–52. Greenberg, J. S. (1978). Health education as freeing. Health Education, 9 (2), 20–21. Green, L. W. & Kreuter, M. W. (1999). Health promotion planning: An educational and ecological approach. (3rd ed.). Mayfield Publishing Company.

SPRING/SUMMER 2026 • Virginia AHPERD • 5