A Critical Analysis of the CHES Credentialing Issue: Bridging the Gap between Vision and Outcomes

Abstract

While many in the health education profession have heartily embraced individual credentialing, some remain reluctant to become Certified Health Education Specialists (CHES). The purpose of this study was to address directly the CHES credentialing barriers discussed in the literature and examine them in light of existing empirical evidence. A four-dimensional critical analysis paradigm was applied to a review of 52 published articles which relate to this voluntary individual professional certification issue. Application of the paradigm involved (a) observational thinking to outline and clarify expected benefits of and concerns about CHES credentialing, (b) insightful thinking strategies to embed these expectations within historical and futuristic perspectives, (c) logical/rational thinking to link each expectation to supporting or dispelling empirical evidence, and (d) evaluative thinking which weighs empirical evidence in light of personal values and experience. This article summarizes expected benefits and expressed concerns about individual credentialing, matches each to published evidence supporting or dispelling that expectation, and provides suggested future research questions that will help clarify the issue.