Health Education Journal, Ahead of Print.
Objective:With growing international interest in youth mental health as well as the other health issues faced by young people, school health education draws the attention of scholars from both East and West. However, what stands for health education in the context of a ‘health and physical education’ (HPE) curriculum varies widely between locations internationally. This article considers how we might understand what counts as health education as part of HPE in different policy contexts.Method:Informed by Foucauldian concepts of discourse, knowledge/power, and truth, we used Fairclough’s textually oriented discourse analysis to conduct a critical discourse analysis of official HPE curriculum policy in three different nation states (Aotearoa New Zealand, China and Japan).Findings:In Aotearoa New Zealand, curriculum discourse reflects a socio-critical approach to health education within HPE. In China, physical fitness dominates discourse on health education in HPE. In Japan, health education in HPE is directly connected to notions of safety and disease.Conclusion:In each of these three countries’ HPE curricula, we can see how global policy discourses construct particular ‘truths’ about the place and purpose of health education in schools. It is important to understand why different perspectives exist, because these different ‘truths’ are not just variations in policy content, but also reflect each country’s approach to health education as a response to unique challenges and priorities, shaping how health is understood and practised.